Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
507-519 ORANGE ST
11111111 ICI 111111111111111111111111111111111 *NEW FILE* 507-519 Orange St y. PLANTING NOTES . PLANT LEGEND ,--. - 1 Clear all planting areas from weeds, debris, rocks 1" diameter (bB a 0 p- e{u)k„ WW ' and, -,.larger, and all chemicals. Any evidence of chemicals (paint �(� Ol000 G thinner. paint,''etc.) 'shall be removed from site. PINUS ELDERICA IS al o� 0 52 0 1 • l�- g 2. After grading' operations have been completed, the contractor o "I Eldarica Pine shall obtain a onomi-st's soils report to determine type and 2-s'bxld quantity o sol amen ments. or ading purposes'only: .Mix into top 6" of soil by rototilling or approved equal: �* ,} EUCALYPTUS TORQUATA �} - IS gal A o 4 cu ds nitrolized shavings / s, • • Coral Gum � Y g per 1000 sq- f t , 200 lbs GRO-POWER w _." I00 lbs AGRICULTURAL GYPSUM, O ,, 50 lbs IRON SULFATE - iIFl 00 MELALEUCA QUINQUENERVIA 24" box / - Cajeput Tree „' m� 3. Dig planter stoles .for all shrubs and trees per details. Back-' 'L -.36 box fill mix shall consist of the following: / (STREET TREFS' F FLANTED TN 7vRf " 70% site soil / �, ��. f� SHALL ZnuvoE • RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA "MAJESTIC BEAUTY" y 15 gal 2 30% NITROHUMUS or approved equal / U 3 0.Eo RA AT' Indian Hawthorne ,� A R vv A tree f.RO-POWER planter tablets, 7 grams each, slow release / il� `o ll�$ r / -ME TRONK BgSE) w 1 gal plant 2 tablets / �•1, 5 gas plant 6 tablets j , YYYY / O l' ADONIS FLEWOSA ' T 15 gal plant 12 tablets � �Y / �TIMF� �E1�tf T� � '' ' (0- 24" box Ds( boxed plant 6 tablets per 6" of box size. / �atp{Ne{z11 R3'94Tu }C�r� � ,., - Peppermint Tree (ALL STREET TRE6s ..� L+ • / =NCORFORA?£ OCEP kooT [� Street Tree designated by City 4. Stake and secure all trees per details for proper support. \ / t3ARR=ERi)DEEP Rear Pirogue? NvYING: TREES 4lTftlt,$". OF, SIDEWAIX / TREE STAKING / PLANTING (DOUBLE STAKED) 5.'-Fine grade lawn area to 1 below and •• - �•" g ground cover area to 1} O - below top of adjacent paving, curb or header. AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS 4G - . I gal E Lily -of -the -Nile 6. During the required 90 day maintenance period the contractor IS? L P C a D shall apply 25 lbs GRO-POWER 15 oQ 0 0 000 �7 O L, O pp y per 1000 sq ft of planting area on g2 - O / Og G 00 0 O0o G CISTUS PURPUREUS ?1f _ 5 gal the 45th and $9t'h day of said maintenance period. G ��]] fit.j Purple Rockrose 7. "+ A11 planting operations shall be performed in accordance to •• O O O � ^ O U X o 1•wT=F CAN w all local ,governmental standards.. 1iLll� 1:VrDA ay O a O COTO caster R HORIZONTALIS { Z- 5 gal FINKH c paw Cotoneaster ^ w , UNIT 2 # 519 GARAGE it I !l'a w A W O LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS ZO - 5 gal �x�' oo Trailing Lantana 4�N'S;• O �j. �1'•...'' O LIMONIUM PEREZII gal 2� 1 13 W v A { Sea Lanvender (StanGUEST PARKING (Stance)GUEST 2'1TrE5' - O'� ." ; •-" FLA+4r TAO NANDINA DOMESTICA I - - i colJlna to^Ix . O Jf Heavenly Bamboo Z�- 5 gal e Mai O j 1 O Z O o w a Z ^ Q PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA "WHEELER]" 5 gal9. Wheeler's Pittosporum Cyr SHRUB PLANTING t O ME" + / / UNIT 3 # 515 GARAGE 42- I i - RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA "SPRINGTI• 5 gal th� GQ. � � + Indian Haworne 7 h,A) WATER CONSERVATION CONCEPT STATEMENT IFJZJ _ 12-1 -916 (IS) h{ �IZJ. l2-f�-9a.CPIIaG.Tr>rm) \ Wojeet Site: Water Accaml Number: - X XYLOSMA CONGESTUM "COMPACTA" 2% 5 GAL 7 Qtn itnninjum Prulcv t Shiny Xylosma J O 507-519 Oranee Ave,. Nay for Honch, Ca. 7 / GAZANIA "MT1'SIWA TELLOW' flats @ 12" O. C. / \ UNIT 2 # 519 � J =I .Gazania • \ '_ Landscape ArehhectMigatlon Designer "^ project package ( ( ) tc indicate completion); ' - •• � \ _ MduBed In this ro <et submittal sole. a we Check ✓ x 1. ' Maximum Applied Water Allowance: 122.418 Gaflons%ycar _ GAZANIA "COPPER KING" 4"'liners 8" O. C.- Copper �x Z. Estimated Applied Water Use:' King Gazania @ / GQ`� 118,55z GaBonaryear.' -' O22. Estimated Amount of Water Expected from Effective precipitation: GaBentomr 9 "MARATI-ION"'or "WATERSAVER" FESCUE GRASS sodded o� h, PATIO PATIO PATIO Sodded Turf ech - 0 3. Estimated Tool water Use: v , ; 118.55canons/year ,.,.. , sl NOTE: *If the design assumes that a part of the Estimated Total Water Use mll be provided by precipitation, the Effective VIII- Precipitation Disclosure Statement In .3•S.DD shall be completed and submitted. The Estimated Amount of V Wata Expected from Effective precipitation shag not "mad ZS percent of the local annual mean precipitation _I (average rainfall). A4 ^i I\-u 4. Landscape Design Man • MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA. "SAMUEL SCiStElt" S - 24" box • /y1 I © S. Inigation Design Plan I Magnolia / G� \ a' EDG. Irrigation Schedule v�y Q•' \ �, Y I �x 7. Maintenance Schedule provided by landscape' maintenance contractor ��q __ _ -r" 's :-r '�` � 8. Landscape 4dgaUon Audit Schedule fib.. O� I UNIT 1 # 517 GARAGE 9. Grading Design Man by civil engineer 10. Sot Analysis" by landscape contractor after grading operations Description of Project: Briefly describe the planning and design actions that are intended to achieve conservation utd efficiency. h, In water me., \ \ h •f UNIT 3 # 515 1. Drought tolerant plant throughout. -t • • T - P1 OWN" III as or \ 3. Only 32 % lawn. C U 4. Low precipitation sprinkler heads. O -' ._ Z .. w f ' Prepued by: - �O \ - 1 • _ I • 'Peter C. Weisbrod, ASL,A Date May 2; 199G CAL(:IILA1•IONS I•t)N 507-519 ONAN(H AVE: 'NI:lJ1Y)RI• BNALTI MAMA .41.1 x 0.8 x 5,7f10 x 0.02 )22;418 nl/ r. O / - - - I O • 43.3 x 0.7 x 1,800 x 0.62 EAWU LA' 0.625 54,122 gal/yr.a [� q;ION 'IV 43 \ i 43.3 x 0.4 x 3 900 x 0.62 , O PATIO EAWU - SHRUB 0.6`A ,9 - 64,43Q gallyr V !'� 3 UNIT 1 # 517 TOTAL EAWU 110552 gal/yr a MONTHLY EAWU - LAWN ; - - •�\ i 1 r :�i �j O is 2.2 x 1,250 = 2,749 Jul 4.9 x 1,250 6,124 Feb 2.7:: 3,375 Aug 4.9 6,124 - 'Mar 3.4 - 4,250 Sep 4.4 - - 5,500 / •�O \ - _ Apr 3.8 4,750 Oct 3.4 - 4,250 • - _ - 4 ';, ,p o May 4.6 5,750 Nov 2.4 3,000 Jun 4.6 - 5,750 Dec 2.0 2.500 f +PA"n MONTHLY EAWU - SHRUB - ©MOW STRIP BETWEEN TURF, AND.�� NOTES• _ 1. 'e3 REBAR CONTINUOUS A.•_ PROVIDE SCORE JOINTS AT 10'-0" O.C. 2. 1/2" TOOLED RADIUS AND 3/8" BITUMINOUS FELT'EXPANSION- 3. FINISHED GRADE JOINTS AT 20'0- O.C. W/MAStIC SEALANT. 4. 9OX COMPACTED SUOCRADE B. APPLY A PRE -EMERGENT HERBICIDE BENEATH - - -MOW STRIPS WITHIN MEDIANS. - - m s , Jan 2.2 x 1,4a8 = 3,274 Jul 4.9 x 1.488 - 7,291 Feb 2.7 4,018 Aug 4.9 -- 7,291 •, _ " - Mar 3.4 5.059 Sep 4.4 - 6,547 Apr 3.8, 5,654 Oct 3.4 5,059 .May 4.6, 6,845 Nov 2.4 3,571 1un'4'.66,845 Dec 2.0 2,976' ` - - �WEEKLY IRRIGATION SCHEDULE _ - -- , Lawn Shrubs Lawn - Shrubs - 5 days/wk 3 da s wk 5 days/wk `- 3-days/wk ' Jan 3 min 3 min.-, Jul 8 min.- - 7 min. Feb 4 4 Aug 8 7 -' Mar 5. ^ 5 ^ Sep 7 ,• ra Apr '6 5 - Oct 5- May 7 ^ '"_- 7 Nov 4 Jun 7 ".. 7 Dec 3 -' 3 LANDSCAPE- IRRIGATION AUDIT SCHEDULE - 1. At a minimum, audits shall be in accordance with the State of Calif ornia•Land- scapeI Water Management Program as described in -the -most current version of. the Landscape Irrigation Auditor Handbood, the entire document, which is hereby-incor-- purated by reference. 2. The schedule shall provide for landscape' irrigation audits. to be -conducted," by a certified landscape irrigation auditor at the owner's cost at least, once: every five (5) years. - - CITY pl F NEWpORT RTMENT 0 cnu -. DaEs unt . B ACy CAI gaATi CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK VATHIN CITY EASEMENTS & NIGHTS OF VVAY 77����, ISSUANCE OP A BUILDING PER. HY 111G CPIY OF NGWPORT 11; L^ DOGS idOT 12HLIliV(; APPLICANT LEGAL REQUIR&Ku-, -To ORSH!{ COVENANTS, CONDITIONS A Rr-'S-IR1CT1ONS WIIICII MAY Rf?CORDG ACAINSI' 111F. Pi29PHR 08 TO OHTAIN CO1!tf' ASSOCIATTON 1%11PROVAL 01+ PLAI o LAND ARCHITECTURE landscape' archlleclure-.land plann'in$. N ,1620 Thurston ---Di, Laguna Beach; Ca. 9'2851�'_;;."�:l,,:;"'� PLA�ITNG PLAN v x t �tlsy�i� � t M m W V O ad C a. O2 a z °s (A ye V m r } V 2 a r W >A CL O sass Job t 195.010 sheet iF • Lr e a..y jr, ter*---� �;�-•-- , * IRRIGATION, NOTES N ` P.iC. vo3 v) IBC , ' '.1•'•'At is the intention of. these "specifications to accomplish the work FfCRh QG--" TN2" LL3mr of installing a sprinkler,. system which will operate efficiently and satis-: =)III _ tx�ic� t•Vc�s.� ula lul=uJ1- •factorilp. i =lllli=�I�=• %1115,N G�ap>;• , 2.. The• work shall consist of furnishing of all 'labor, materials, tools, =1I- _))I) I�)�� UI4154 tests, permits, etc. necessary for completion of work. = )))) Pj-gyp.' � ,> wc�rg �>; , cnr �1v. -n6 �. stagy t�Fft;f'I 3. The latest .standardsof all governing bodies relating to this "work- are hereby made part of these specifications. t/�tv�K.e14VE4 • �{z�kk�tazz / Y716� fi�-t}r� ttJr I I 4. The drawings are diagrammatic. All material shown in `paved .areas shall. gA` Fll{�1�'MIFi / O be installed in planting areas where possible. Avoid any conflicts between O ��, / s sprinkler system, planting and architectural features.. fhul1� - / I - - - 0 S. Do not willfully, install any equipment as shown on plans when it is obvious in the field; that- obstructions, grade- differences or differences "/ off. III IIII 1111- -, 'in area dimensions exist that might not have been considered in the engin-H1H�r4 - '� III- llll n` '�• ,.; eering. Such conditions _shall be brought to the attention of the owner. ,III) •e F 1�hR P�T'fK! I W/(z) / /� �'J'' In the event this notification is not given, the contractor shall assume �lrpl�lr�1. / / -� ,oe, atiTIFi •',��� full responsibility for"any revision necessary. E;MJrXg. 6. Contractor shall coordinate his work with the general contractor and QUICK COUPLER / iGl1,�-���--�{{�-Iak(�rR ,�Al- O +++��' other sub -contractors for location and installation of pipe sleeves through / W COH a • walls; under roads, structures, etc. 7. Testall main line piping under hydrostatic pressure for a period of ` / F+1 four (4) hours and check for leaks. 'Testing shall be verified by the Owner 'S / REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW PREVENTER before backfillift� of trenches. If leaks develope, replace joints and / gm repeat test until entire system is watertight, 8. Perform coverage test after completion of work to determine coverage 15yROe L IV t 14L1- f {Q1l1iCOF,,iII�� ~�j1. a V of all planting areas. Furnish materials and perform all work required r 6 1 " F•�i 4 O to correct any inadequacy of' coverage due to deviation from plans, or where • a/ j�i•�� the system has been willfully installed as indicated on plans, when it •=�OK(o�(d�G-nc7t1-rD ii01/fsG. O W O : is obviously inadequate, without bringing it to the attention of the Owner., �� ^ O The test'shall be accomplished before any ground cover is plantedF+� > 9. Contractor shall prepare AS -BUILT plans showing the main pressure piping, UNIT 2#519GARAGE a)t T:Ilil'i -- _ LI:KIt !• �I�Dtttl;t��f��f�T1G A control' valves, and quick coupling valves dimensioned from permanent points �0�0InI�� r�wi>z•. Z /�� r�, MCI of reference. AS -BUILT plans shall be delivered to the owner before comp- yL lO• ��j�f�' W O h�i �+■� letion of work. Al 10., Contractor shall prepare and install color -coded irrigation "chart�i11(.t7111(a- for each irrigation controller showing individual irrigation systems. GUEST PARKING -W A O Chart shall be mounted watertight between plastic sheets and placed inside controller door. Ilil - 11. Contractor shall guarantee entire sprinkler system as to workmanship F • IIIL 1 GewpCPUPl-44C.q O Z O 0 and materials for a period of one 1 I ^ p ( ) year from date of acceptance of work �100 by the Owner. + UNIT 3 # 515 GARAGE �r y l/Z LbL �IOLr(p! Co Igo 164 \ 'A \ � ELECTRIC. CONTROLLER / \ I UNIT 2 # 519 IRRIGATION LEGEND / 7� \ V ; 6" pop-up, low gal, flat Toro 5706P-8-Q, 30 PSI, 0.24 GPM, 7' red. / ,� „ �/ z 5706P-8-ii, 30 „ 0.50 „ 7, ��� PATIO PATIO PATIO ' p 4 low gal 5706P-12-Q, 30 0.50 121 11\ �1 5706P-12-11, 30 " 1.09 " 12' ?� fyll; „ "' S�Qp�Y-_f, .._... 30'„ 2-.14. „ 12: ;A4 O i 4" pop-up, low gal 5704P-12-Q,IT ..30 " 0.50 " 12' �•) / \ \��A5 _ I • I� L� 5704P-12-11, 30 " 1.09 " 12' � • Q 4 - „ 5704P-8-Q, 30 0.24 1P 7 t, 5700-8- T. ' 30 0.50 7,: n 3� C!� �4� \ UNIT i # 517 GARAGE ' control valve Hardie 700 Series, 1" size b ,fi4' r= electric controller RD-900-EX, 9 stations, wall mount ® backflow preventer Febco 825Y, A% size, or approved equal ~ • \ 3/� press. regulating valve Clayton 90C-01-AB, 14. size, or approved equal lateral sprinkler pipe PVC Class 200, bury min. 12" deep / Cyr \ \ \ \h UNIT 3 # 515 I �• main pressure pipe PVC Schedule_40, lk size, bury min. 18" deep 2 '^� indicates valve number indicates flow in GPM / �o^ \ I • . 2 M tt�wlt�: 1 Q � � I �-=-`moo �rifP�-"iy-`'�• �F>HiSH PRESSURE LOSS CALCS FOR VALVE 4, 22 GPM b UNIT 1 # 517 3 t ro �rlFa Water Meter, 1" size 1.0 PSI / flf^ wrtN95'1 t1S Backflow Preventer, I'" size 8.9 , \ \ }tip 15 �, > I K • Q eve �ag�r�tu { Main Line piping, 1?" size 2.6 " / / \ (Vµ p �lr�_* Km,IF`- -cart"clUc. Control valve, 1" size 2.5 \ 1 CD e `���y1 •. Tx9 Lateral line loss 5.8 / 1 \ d IN Fittings loss 0.5 LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE • l�o \ 2Z ❑ - 3/��� r-�Tt'�- Y Req d at sprinkler head 25.0 AND INSTALL 1" WATER METER AND SPRINKLER <� y Misc. loss 5.0 25 1• REQ'D,TO OPERATE SYSTEM 56.3 PSI CONNECT TOCITY WATER MAININ STREET: / 1lti CONTROLLER' { PATIO PATIO Pressure at wter meter is in excess of COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH THE ..WATER 1j� To cag7KTM I �- � a 0� DEPARTMENT. �rrF� Ham. ryyrtut+eRfTwtG.►+m+ 80 PSI. Set pressure regulating valve G rp t btt=�= for proper operation. / 2 �� %1 •I IrL t. v�P�f nClaen�Gt= R Wr�N- 2e'IKrEf�`9�-'S G 2 r'PovinaxUAtje4qN ccltsiT ri`_H "If'r_E cr=HNFCrICH IN Y°I Ems Information by: Loren Loge, Water Dept. 4Q.•Z 2� C�IP,^p 1�'�wlpp{touNDl• VZ"1�}a•.j'If�)_ " Tell: 644-3050 / l PATIO PATIO 1"!�.a ,, ..;.' ;: <• 1� _ .. V c r. _ ---_ -•� X •>. • ; ' 3(y / �� L REMOTE CONTROL VALVE (BELOW GRADE) / 4y n ^ 11i- :>_� r _ i. r I ! �r��� ��■r.r�.� FINI$'1 G31 34 �•V:� > • 4 A iV _ IZ '4 p'_ _ - V - - - - Q -�l`+ K �R-3� -µ •• lot,�� _ �---+•Q h_ _ • C� LF D• 0 • ..>, . �� .. . c • ,`�� . , •, . c . 3 /�, 0 f- Z •.._s - • r t ir`fctfX `ky TFJ` -=- . la'.TjeT ;4 ' F I 11ti 3 T�. CITY OIFDING NEW ORT BEACHTCA APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS DOES OT i� <WTHORIZATION TO CONSTp.UCT Vl-r UIUING IN VIOLATION OF, OR1 11VLIIS TENT WITH, THE ORDw;' :CES, ptANS Atif. FO%iClS OF r 'BEACH THIS APFROVAC pOES NOY"4A ' FO T HE CITY OF NEWPOR7 13iESPECTS, IV CO.,D[L, CF ViH CRY r F THAT THESE PLANS ARE, IN ALL ;SANS AHD POLIC!C° THE C;;; "• "%� 'G AND ZONING ORDINANCES, `AEOLIW ANY PER:I;TEt TO c" qP ,LE;,;.•,,• ill; P,ESERVES THE RIGHT TO ' "T AL' -� `'; STRUCTURE OR IMPROVE- - IECE'SED irY Tp,Eg;_ ; I ," _ ' ` TIO9, IF HECESSAPY TC p, 1 ,; GRAFTER CONSTRUE '�F ir.F r,ITY C'tl ".-4-CES, PLANS AND POLICIES _ 4FFlIC,.:i'S AC.:,i:aLC�,;_'.:iT 20 APPHOVALT ISSUE DATE. y J r , W [ c W V c N T • � ' r, ,TY s a, 3V • "8 A' � � '� r ' w a • e •� TLC' :n '�«� � C t '. • z 1 LLS''''}}}}yyyyppppyyyy� ' iih�V Yr k In a. M •' r'o O Q all C m C 0 u"'4 CL V O • Eiji a ; 1 ' o ' ;LAND ARCHITECTURE °e t 195-010_,,_ landscape arch!(ecture-land planning iCO, d ti-, 1620 Thurston- Do:- Lh@@t t „ 11: Laguna -Beach, Ca :92661 tRRIGATIO OLAN ,. F" ; 1rzEr3-t ur•t>= FrrnnU POP-UP SHRUB HEAD' I t LEGEND Onr err N• nN OI..e4'1P, L.MAdIn 1•. tlN lop 2 -a•r r.... nnncu nvtJ.vn vi.nrn n^ S• nd .V•.M...l.�a - p-r-r r.rx N •... Cl �:: iryi ul•:N :t.n�, O•.JV nnr vmmntun IE•sN GIN•1-A•1'_+M1II:D.LN i•J.J.J t_ 0 r J'• ni YR 'tS {N dam. .n 1.{I/I.NJA .F: a.t:3 42• SN v lam, ,-..L.r.. , . .., IH f1.Y .tz i.YN. . t•r .•.I.. [.N. ..[t. t' . «.« «« Sx.1�N M:.Ix1.) W �tN •.«w� I r Nt..t .MNY.�IN{Y i. IIN'VNI.D .NI«IN. Y.i tw tNrMN. • lI .N.« .«. 1IN,..r�Z R ;RIit T jai w GTI.N•T..1ltl— r.e I.. N<...NN ..... M IiD Y to xw LN . tu.tNtt 3eJ i.p1tT1.iRR Gt.TI - Of I- iJ 3a..Wt itY[R - ). i.. !'xa•. N.�. I.. Yl M. N. .N .«t N. MYir tN.• Si nl�arttti « • .w. ••I 3 tN »N< t lntm s a•3 »••< • .r u-i= .a. io.. «..e..w al ..«. M <N..N M >.•M .vM._ nYtVM l.« Yv N `' Nyr r1 ...•. Y .qd«l >YNt. m NNr. `S I4 GD-rG[t MI •IW • fa t liMlY . .il ;.1<:1 :«l{.�.r":' ::.� n N MMx. •. «N.4w. .. i ii`i v by x LMf.fnGaSS i +4 -�y iO I • ..e._n nt•.lr: L 0 U O F c �S_cU Z O N T C A 0 O > =t i L t' ! L Z O - Z C mV<0 O n:0> 25Z0oCJ L-1 ■ PANTING PLAN cullun19 ue{aRIUInNIt O. BOX i7EE �"'"'' Peerm'rt Counter`Pho NO (7141644-3288P3289 -8915 BUILDING PERMIT -n , � In YLYRIRNO. B9601109 ONTIQ4BUROEA DECLARATION '-' L In ' n Requests Phone No. 14 644-325INSP 5 I HEREBY AFFMM UNDER PENALTY OF PERIURYTHAT I AM•IXEMPT FROM THE uC ,qg ADDRESS; = . , ARP/A:. 501 Ofl�C6 dYE 3 ION ODF WOflK q PRG G OR�,YN„6'A EA= TO DG — ; i 6E81 IBL CONDO 1% SSH MHO ALTER IMPROVE. DEMDLI R OR REPAIR ANY ST„UCnIgE. PRIOR TO ITS 6511ANCE ALSO E$TIEAPPLICANTWHCOCHPEgMIrTORLEASM.NFDSTATEK.EI'ITTFNTKEORs11E BLDG: __ •' - FLOOR: - ---- _ CONST_ NEW MEW CONDO BLDG(10915$F TIES/2960SF Cdfl s( wmisE<TO•o�auTomPiONo om ro'NaDP su uw COOEE�, OR THAT HE OR SHE IS IXEMPT OwN�R: •" L�ORGH'DEYELOPHERT IN -`r - ;:, t_----?rPe _ --_Go _ VR $PR R1 ---_sNOr_6-R°FiFs--2— THEgEFROM ANp THE BASIS FOR THE. ALLEGm FXENPIpTLANY VIOIATIQF OFSECfIQV ]miseI APPU(,MIi FORAPETIMrSUBJECfS ISTRUCnON. AWED1NEw o r_- }. , : ♦�, .., , AdDRESR: "• - � 1H APRJGNrTOACMI.pEINLnOFNorMORETWWFNExMOnEDDOLWiS��5555mpp��}} �LASOWNEq OFTHEPgOPERIY,OR MYEMPLOYEES WRMWAGESASTHEIq SOtEtq,4 ----__--- _ n - •• p�Y------ so. Fr.eln� _- ADOEO/NEW 10975 _ __ _��- _ PEN54ipN,WIU-WTHEWORK, ANDTHESTRUCnInE 15 NOT PTIEIiDED Oq OFFEflED FOR SALE SEC TOR, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE THE CONTMCT_ LICENSE LAW ---- PHO_NE - —VELOPM6 NO.OF U�' `2_960 7 USE MFR()DU) PAfLKING 1B _____ U COESIIOf MR.Y TO AN OWNER OF PROPEJOY WIp BURA5 OR NIPRWES THEREON,AND WIq WES STILM WOPoLHWSOF Oq xERSEJFORTNAOUGf1lIAS Ofl HEROWNEABIDYEES PRONDEDTHgTSLK]11MPRWEMENTS ARENOTINTENDEDOq OEFERm WRSALE IF.HW4 EVER.THEBUIIDINO OR IMPgOVEMEM IS SOLOWRHINONE CONTflACTOR: �-- MORCB - ' •: - --- � SEIBACKG ..-_ _Z_ONE• _ _ _ SPACES __ FRONT REAR LEFT RIGFR 1____. - 1- )__ 1. _ ___ _ -N----- +_ - ADDRESS"• •• T p� ---`—`"`—'t'""�____ B6�D__, YEAR OFWMPLETION.THE._.-�_-_48D•OLDPEWPp.T THE BURDEN OFPgOWNOTHATHEOgSHEDIDNOTBNLDOq --�, _��-` 2D / D / S(6'1O) TT(" l IM VEAIROEJLWkIRMe IM VEFOWNEROFPOSEOFSAIE). I.lS FTHEPROPERWEC,J,CLUGNELYCONESS L " - PHONE, " REAPORT BEACM 92W _ N I 714/548-8048 DES RITON -" - 8 TR 443 LOT 8 u=r�io: •DARER/BLOB CUASS. • . ' . ,• NEWPOgT TR TO CONSUCIEN THE PROTECT (BEG ROREOENSEOQY,. TO 0014 AND BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS WOE IH - CONTRACTORS LICENSE LAW WES NOT APPLY TO AN OWNER OF PgOpEgry WHO MY BUILDS OR IMPROVES TMENEON. AND WIq - BUS LIG - ARCHITECT:' _ __- ' SCHOOLER TOD ALAI -' " BUS. LIC. LIS CONTgAO uFOR SULN PROJECTS WOHACON- TRAorofifS7 ucENSES PugsuAHrro TlEcoNTnAcroRsucENSEuw>. ❑ I AM EXEMPT UNDER SENC.•,'�----�-- �- - B.APG FOq'fH15 REASON -• -------- --- -- 'ADDRESS; 'S00 A. AEAEDP.T BLPD STE 206' Yes Bo , C A 831/$PR 1)3/EES08 -- ---- =,= NEWPORT •BEACH CA 92663 ' ' PTiorie• ' 714-646-4273 wGE7'25 •9� ''. ,off-• LIC.NO: C017323 -----Tp2T/k6DiFtC�TIpR FOR —^-- ENGINEER R ASHADI PARHAD" : CI �y ,' LICENSED CONTP'ACTOR$ DE:A SIDE YARD SETBbOB— -- `— li" o a N t evt IHEPETSYPFFlPMLNDERFE?LLLTYOFPERIIIRYTHgTIgM [10ET1$ED UNDEHPROVISpNS B(WA4A ADD1rss: r• . i19H-E: CARNEGIE'AVE•' 3J 1. w -' ' —'—�fb'j'4i111AY71TAN-$Q Fp)---- PRROCNAPiQi �E'OmRQV,TMIOFµDDBIE �,� FJHE,BUSINESSAND '-- 11� T. RC`.Ei��: 1 . "BE,,BLDR "'-^ -L ^ t> SARPA AAA•'CA 921OS'OOSS ' PHONE: " •' I14- 6i-1$T1 - n ' PR- ESSEDBY: • ----- ucENSEaASS.--! f - ,DGNd. n` LID. C-D368w0 * �. '. "-`-'—'. ' 2oNiNG PPROV AFl. OTHER DEPARTMENT DATE' 1' P oNi cTGd•,.`l - '1 i -a t� •-� D' T APPLICd 1.- - " OADDRPORT BL9'1WORKES•COMPENSATIONDECLAkARON SOHB RE APPROVAL r AP (PRi. v, •- I c ':i PLAN CHECK IHEntB'I.AFFWMUNpEfjPENALTVOEP Ri0NE0FTHEFOLLOWNGDECIARATION& er EACH cA PFIONE:•'•''• '� 76-4b`4273- _IHASEAND vmLT:wliraNncEFmFlCATEOF,WNSENf.TO SEtFrtLCIREFaTViJfa4 ERS COMPENSATION./S PAOVIUEDFOR By SECnON a)OBOFTHE�LABORCODF•FOq. 'THEPERTOMWNCEOFTHEWOm(FOR WHKSTTIBS SIGNATDREOF APPLICANT'; ,-.+ - ,.. GRADING �• •• t P VAL i t t NSU'RAjNjCE. NSURAJICE' �SECTIONOWRLMAIN LABOR IOOZ LOR"THS'PERFO AS REWIRED BY SECTION aNpOF•THELABORCODEFORlHE•PERFOgMANCEOFTHEWORKMR i •' APPROVAL ry �'„r L , T i SUE a MFP B L ENTER» ing PeraiL e ' Final Project Valenti 851000 , Payaent . 1,777.99 ANE,muC/NUP M11BETi�PAE�EO: MY WORKERS'WAfPENS4�lON IASURANLT;OpgWEli �' ��' CARRIER. - - - _- .-.Gf' >. If •�` _ Regular PLAN CHRCK FEES 2,010,13 ;Credit extended: 0.0D (THIS NEED BE---1 FTHEP I ERMIrIMMRONEHUNOREDD01.- BOILDIWG PEREIT PEE 3,092.50 ; Total Credits: 1,777.99 OR lAAS(Stm)OR lESS), • r Is a CLEAN-UP 1 DEPOSIT required (Y) 3,000.00 1 I Y J CERTIFY THAT IN THE PEFFORMANCE OETNE WORK FOR WHICH THIS PERMIT IS ISSUED ISIBll1 NOT EMPLOY ANY PERSON IN ANY MANNER SOAS TO BECOME SUe JECiRS THE WOgKEgS COMPENSATION LAWS OF Is B%GIBE TAX required? ired? 1 (Y) 9 , y , Balance 9,870.39 CPJJFORNIA AND AGREE TIIAT IF SHOULD BECOME SUWECT TO THE WOMERS'COMPENSgRON PROWSIONS OF SECTION a ND OF THE LABOR CODE. I SHALLFOgRBTT1H WMPLV WIIHTNOSE PgOVF ENTER SQ.FT. to coapate excise tax .21 13,935 2,926.35 ; Adjastnents 0.00 DATE' ----------------------------------- -- --_ _-- -- , �.,, _ I Ir' BenEe9,810.39 npPucANr WARNING FAILURE TO SECURE WORKERS WMPENSgTNN.I COVERAGE IS UNLAWRR, Subtotal MPP BUILDING PERMIT FREE 11,028.98 _ ---------— -------------------- ; AND OFALL. SUBJECTANEAwLOm1w. Rw ADDITIONTNeD STOFWES UPTOONE „UN - ORES 1H011SWD O011AgS TStm,Dml. W AWIIION TO 1HE COST OF WM1fPEA5ATpN, OAR4 AFEASPfl0V1OES FOR WSECIgN3MB JUL 2 51996 OFlHELABOfl WpE,pnERE5T5 AAm gTTORNEYS Is MICRDPILMIBG FEE required! (Y) 170.20 Y Is ENERGY , COMPLIANCE FEE needed?(Y) 100.OD _, Y CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY CALIFORNIA SEISMIC SAFETY PER CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ,xEgE9YAFngM ERPEw,L,YDPPEgR,gYT1aTTHERELSA WNs m,GRONLEe,o. ING gGENCY FOfl PEq CE TIE RK FOq > 85.10 _ NMI THIS R S ISSUED LLENDER�'SN ME� L � '--- •---------------------------- ___________________________________ FIRE DEPT:11 FIRE DBPfl3 __•__--______ of PLAN REVIEW FES?(Y) `of' INSPECTIGRi FEE? (Y) ' ' -' s'.4 20.10 E y LFNDERSAWRESS - o ICEmIFl•T"WTI""vERE"°TwG'Tp"JrAT'°"""°sr"TET"ATT"E"B°YEvuomM-.•.' TpNISCOPf1ECT.IAGREETOCOMPLY YATHALLpIYANp COUNIYOPDPMNCESANOSTATE R LAWS RATWB TO EURCMNG WNSIRUGTIMAND HEREBY ALnHIXi� PERRESENTATNEG oFTxmWIMTYTO ENTEq UPONTHEABOVE#IENRONED PROPERtt Fqi mSPEL•TION pUq. POSES ,PLARRIWC:ZORIBC'PLAN CRECHES ?(y) .=n•-;•:.` - ______--�_____ 213.01 Y it � — ____________ _--_ _ _ __- ______ ___ __ � TOTAL MFP BUILDING PERMIT FEES 11,648.38 c p EP1A DATE APPROVALS DATE BY : : iGOMIPJEMS ,p-i; FOUNDATION. RGUGH GRADE..A' 41, -SET—BACKS— FOOTINGS 'o�- Aau SLAB ON GRADE DECK SLAB -_-35=9(n 0%.fr .w w,.7- �_Lt �t3 " �/.{-- - 9t; •',�'', FRAMING. - - - — J--3p-4f� Ti�4/' -- , ._„�•-- n - SUBFLOOR ROOF S BUILDING_H7 _3-RL S..:,.. i.. t•J-''�(-'+L„��- - •• } EXT. -SHEAR i HOLD DOWNS GENERAL FRAMING D - - 1`^^'-fi-�"* •�w� 5. ' - _ —. _ ----- ------ •. _ 10.�6'`f6 1•-G"9b�C�r1_�W r,+/�+�t_S_ OOGytr-�._JPI. �l�S'�- `,7 —.lc INSULATION _p 4661riu eetr!�1cy.�.._/ic�_L._6�7��o-Jtia� — DRYWALL l0-t6-Oi� � :'1;3� 4` ,_` ' - - . t-d�• SUSPENDEDASTERING: P! ASTERItJG: IWTERIOR LATH /���� [/.n'iE� �c%,.3 •.1(/-/_ycJ'OIy O_� �_'s•'-�Y-`+�� ��µ EXTERIOR LATH _- _ /0-�E_R� LD�J'E}J}:_M.v_�_�z�3 �? `-�• SCRATCH - ' to-z1- tb BROWNMASONRY: PRE - FOOTING PRE -GROUT - - --�__ - - _. ,:, ;. n FIREPLACE - - --- - - - - --- - - - — --� . - 1 MISC. INSPECTIONS: - __ ________------- FINAL ------------ --- - -- 12.j} 97 _�_ A( _J �.•77h�L-1.-:f-i'st�f-n�v_�• -- CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY - -- r ��}) TENANTNAId�E• _-• •; -. -- {$ EP_O ITALEASED._ -- - — - - - - - - -- ---------- FOR REF JND ON - TO � TYPE GP USt; RESIDENTIAL ZONING• CORRECTIONS" ��y"44` Telephone: (714) 644-3200 Plan Check No: BysGenia Garcia, Associate Planner By:Christy Teaaue, Associate Planner sMaYc Mvere, Assistant Plan By: Date: 5 •14"1( Address: n (P D,istricting Map No. 2 Jr Land Use Element Page No. Corrections Required: a.eL Legal Description: Lot. fi Block Section Tract 443 Alt/ Verify legal description with Public Works .� Covenant, required. Please have owner's signature notarized on the attached document and return to me. Ldt Size [513"O[ Z- t atl ZonQ No. of Units Allowed �. Proposed 'T Adt- Buildable Area 10iS2I s aximum• Structural Area (Area including exterior walls, �ixu.W.sEekJ+ 7w.., sb4u ar 3� x buildable area. +e ro sed Structural r�ea::) 9 4•31 x buildable area. e overfy,4 proposed s are footage. 'n a Open Space Area cu.ft. (Volume of space equal to buildable width x height, limit x six). This area must be at least six feet i any direction (6'x 6' x 61), and open on at least two or Fyne side a d nooneeca oend, unless otherwise specified in Zoning Code - qD� r •/:ur �gsyR. Required Setbacks titrt_ tM I w in,AA�n Front Zo [O:tan� _ ��,�� 1u an'<rt tn+tlill _AuC-tv dP�ti Rear a¢e4W4CX Yj A� e6 OY4� Right Side fin` 10' 5 �sxa.ti F)' °P • Cn>a.+K� 6� AI Left Side (i-la� """� 5• i" Note: The following may not be permitted to encroach into required setback: Balconies Fireplaces Deccks-- Bay/Garden Windows b� t6h o r 1 OF Remarks: .o. e_. Ai/ A♦ 1 r • ,. — I IAA AI/ VWq ,0. VAY1 w wsn O...Jrr A'1 A/lAJ 1. Pro de floor plan(s), fully dimensioned, showing all r ry��ges.a •sir V1`►Ia'w d+� 2. Provide plot plan, fully dimensioned, showing: location of all buildings, and distance to property line. A& distance from face of curb to front property line (verify with Public Works) Cf second and third floor footprints (if applicable) projections (i.e. fireplaces, bay windows), label distance(s) to PL(s) Height Limitation IMeasured from natural grade to mid -point of roof. Code allows an additional 5101, /f Ittoot g*peak of the ridge height. Dimension all elevations from natural grade to: A&** 4..�,tA.Z «� �►L.uLlnaMw : I 0 �'`b mi,�lId�-point(s)" of roof pllan/e(s)y 33 ridge(s) of -roof plane(s). finished grade on all elevations. 0 0 maximum Coverage ).. 34 Y, Rewired Parkins clear inside minimum dimension 9'-4" x 19' single space 17'-6" x 19' two spaces 6' x 161 third/fourth space(a) �P Label clear inside dimensions of provided parking space< ^1-so� ' Is demolition proposed?_(q8A_ _ N> f units to be demolished Zr k �►`'' / n\ a Ban Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor TN Dedication SPECIAL APPROVAL REOUIRZO THAOUGHt lt � �.( Y /�_ r•� Please indicate any discretionary a pro3il� rs on the plans and incorporate the attachadl � excerpt of minute and list of findings and conditions into the biu lino drawings ,14 3'r LO approval 1*4sr into the blueline drawings Modifications Committees Indicate Approval No. on Plans Modification required for planninc Coamission/City Councils Ure Permits No. Variances No. Assubdivision/Tracts No. Site Plan Reviews No. Amendments No. Other f?, EYsement Perm dc./.�+'� subdivision Engineer Traffic Engineers lJw�►�fr' Approval of Landscape Plans Significant Links building Departments Grading Engineer pas �oay4ffis..t s Appproval of and -cape Pl,tha coart-1 ft2roval Reauiredt. As At 44 categorical Exclusion No.'(C.E.o.) Effective Date (Notes Building permits may be irsued 10 days following issuance of C.E.O.) Approval In Concept (AIC) No.. (Notes File 3 sett of plant: site# floor, and elevations) Waiver Effective Data Coastal Development Permit No. Effective Dats -21 � -12 Notr � Q 3. Chimne (and c imney caps etc.) heights permitted only as require$ by U.H.C. or manufacturer specifications. �r / s,a$Past wells, fences, patio covers and other freestanding structures e iro-separate reviews -and pwrmiter- S. Association Approval (Advisory). Issuance of a Building Permit by the City does not relieve applicant of legal requirement to observe covenants# condi- tions and restrictions which may be recorded against the property or to obtain community association approval of_plana. _ It is thQ responsibility of the applicant to circulate their plans and obtain the y approvals from the departments checked above. If you have questions regarding your ion, please contact me at (714) 644-3200. F0RM8\k11•20k.COk f4withro -jp " vi-, P"�t - �d-"4 �-�j Vzou) COMMISSIONERS \\�\��� MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL 10. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions o approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general of the community. welfare 11. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 12. That prior to the issuance of building permits for the proposed enclosure, all applicable conditions on approval of Use Permit No. 3516 be satisfied including all conditions related to directional signage. SUBJECT: Morgan Development 507-521 Orange Avenue Item a, it, De4 • General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E) GPA No 95-3E Amen . No a • Amendment ITo. 937 • Site Plan Review No. 75 ' • Resubdivision No. 1021 • a modification to the Zoning Code to allow a 1 foot 10 inch encroachment into the •'SPR' No' 75 Resub'No 102 Modification to zone Code required 6 foot 10 inch side yard setback adjacent to 15th Street. A General Plan Amendment to redesignate the property for Multi Famil Approved Residential use and to establish the permitted density of development rezone the property from the "R 2" District (Two -Family Residential) tc `%IFR @du)[1.5 x BAT District (Multi -Family Residential) and the approvalof a site plan review for the proposed development. C' -39- . 4" COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 9 IN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Staff reported that this is a series of applications which would allow th construction of an eight (8) unit townhouse, condominium type project o Orange Avenue near 15th Street in Newport Heights. The true effect of tlu changes would be to alter the density for the site in question which currentl wouldallow 4 dwelling and double that density to 8 dwelling units. The applicant has provided colored site plans that are posted on the wall fo Commission consideration. Staff was available for Commission questions. Chairman Ridgeway stated that they had received two letters tonight ir opposition and wanted to verify that the applicant has been given a copy o them. Public Hearing was Opened. Mr. Tod Schooler, 500 North Newport Boulevard representing th applicant and project architect spoke to the Commission. He began b speaking of the history of this particular parcel and continued by explainin how his client started and met with the City representatives on ideas, s and scale of plan. His building is below the FAR to allow for design o smaller scale, in the concept of an R2 project. This project has one setbac modification for a garage facing onto 15th Street resulting from th suggestions of the development review.committee. In response to Commission inquiry, Mr. Schooler stated that he had reac the staff report and agrees to the terms and conditions attached to each o the items. Ms. Stacey Weis, 3233 Broad Street spoke in opposition to thi development expressing concerns with a multi -family residence in thi location. She then compared the lot sizes to other property sizes stator that if 8 units are allowed for this parcel, then this may set a precedence fo larger lots to be granted 8+ units. Her expressed concerns were that ther appears to be a different standard applied to that area of Newport Height than for the Santa Ana side. This area is R2 and she lives in there, now yot are talking about 8 units. The average size of those condos will be 1,60( square feet with prices lower than the condos in the area are going for now -40- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX She concluded by comparing this proposed project unit size to others that currently exist. Mr. Jerry Tucker, 466 Flower Street, Costa Mesa owner of property at 50 Old Newport Boulevard spoke to the Commission supporting this proposal He questioned the rear elevation of this project. He asked for additio landscaping in the rear, to disallow the allocation for an increase of th property by 11% for future modest additions and trash enclosures should Ix placed on the project. Mrs. Carol Tucker, 466 Flower, Costa Mesa, co-owner of building at 50 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke in opposition to this project citing higb density, setting a precedent and the look of the unit with 8 houses instead o 4. Mrs. Dolores Boroles, 510 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke to the Commission in opposition to this project citing parking problems. She the questioned Commission about Old Newport businesses. She was assured by Commission that Old Newport is in transition and this will be continued. Commissioner Adams asked Mr. Schooler what the trash receptacl provisions were and provisions allowing for additional square footage for minor modifications. Mr. Schooler stated that each unit will have their own trash can. However, there is space for a trash enclosure and if Commission wants, this can Ix done. Staff commented that in the City of Newport Beach residential projects o this nature do have the option to elect for normal trash services as availabl in residential areas. Or, in an association of this nature, they can hav commercial trash pick-up which would be paid for separately. If you do pu out trash cans, there is no extra cost. There are codes being enforced by th General Services Dept. governing the hours which trash cans can be placed and also must be taken back in to a closed door or non -visual area -41- COMMISSIONERS �1\011o0\61P\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX The nature of the provision for additional square footage allowing for mino modifications was to allow for flexibility in the design process but, given th site design, staff felt it was possible that an individual may be interested ' enclosing a patio with a possible living room addition that could bc accommodated within the site plans and setbacks. However, this could bc omitted within the context of the site plan review. This patio enclosur would be subject to normal zoning and building department review. If th requested any encroachment into the setbacks or any other diversions froff the zoning code, then they would have to go through the appropriat process which could involve Planning Commission review. Mr. Schooler added that there were some slight modification changes tha amount to approximately 200 square feet to the entire project. If they ar limited to a building permit issued to that final square footage, then tha would preclude anyone from coming in and deciding to do any additions o change building characteristics. He concluded by saying that the Associatio and the CCR's will not allow any addition to these units under an condition. Chairman Ridgeway concluded that then this condition could be deleted. Mr. Schooler then proceeded to the exhibits showing where the landscalx will be going in and gave anexplanation to address Mr. Tucker's concerns. Public Hearing was Closed. Comtnissioner Selich stated that this is a well designed complex. Th benefits would be new construction to the area with public improvements ' the alley way. The zoning issue, however, is a concern as it appears to spot zoning. With the approval of the concept, it would set the precedencA in the area. This would send a message that perhaps the rest of the properties should be considered for increased zoning density. Anoth concern is the interface with the commercial and residential looking tc intensify the use of residential use potentially in the future creating mor points of conflict. It would be bad policy to take one parcel like this t create a type of zoning density that is out of scale and out of character in th neighborhood even though it is a nice project and well designed. If th -42- 4 � COMMISSIONERS 'p`°ti�``2`gy```� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Commission does approve this tonight, it would be important to make statement that the approval of the zoning on this site does not indicate that i is something that Commission would be in favor for the rest of the parcels. Commissioner Adams observed that from the physical lay out of this area ' different as it stands out in the end of the neighborhood. The lot shape an some of the other discussed considerations reduce the likelihood that precedence would be set for the rest of the area. There are uniqu characteristics present that are not on the other R2 lots. The positioning o the residential next to commercial, although the relative intensity is onl marginally different than the other R2 lots, is not going to create much more of a problem than if it were developed under current zoning. He askec about the uses on the other side ofthe alley. Chairman Ridgeway answered at the corner of Orange and Old Newport i an office building, directly behind that is a SCE sub -station, moving up Ol Newport at 15th there is an optometrist then W. Tucker then Mrs. Bowles (the only residential). Commissioner Adams stated that the land uses appear to be as compatible as possible for that type of interface between business and residential. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that it appears that the Planning Department Public Works, everybody has worked out something they feel is ar appropriate use for this site. It is quite common to buffer commercial an lower density residential with multi -family. He does not see it as being b planning, certainly there is no precedence being set here for the rest of th R2 properties. He would support this item. Chairman Ridgeway reaffirmed Commissioner Selich's comments about no setting precedence and would like to see put in the Findings within this unique situation wording relating to this not being a precedence. Commissioner Gifford stated that she is in agreement that this is no intended to be a precedent, it is generally accepted that no individual zoning decision that is specific to a particular parcel necessarily sets a precedence. -43- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Her concern is making a finding and putting into the record that this d not set a precedent would be the implication of all the times we do not sal that. This parcel clearly has some unique characteristics. Assistant City Attorney Clauson verified that in agreement Witt Commissioner Gifford's statement that factors can be clearly established ir the record that are unique to this property, that would be sufficient. Thi would not be precedence setting for any other application. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that in making this motion it is not hi intention to make any type of precedence setting regarding the PU properties in the same general area. Commissioner Thomson stated this area is too dense. It is nice to have buffer between the commercial and the residential, but 8 units on thi property (15,000 square feet) or 22 units per acre is too dense. These wil be small units of 1,400 square feet, the plan is terrific and it is a great use o the property, but he believes that this is too much. He would suppo cutting this back and not worrying about setting a precedence, he would lik it to be less dense. Motion * Motion was made for approval of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E) adopting Resolution No. 95-1417 and for approval of Amendment No. 83 and adopt Resolution No. 95-1418 and for approval of Site Plan No. 75 an Resubdivision No. 1021 in accordance with the findings and condition - removing the 11% which will be recalculated and adjusted accordingly b staff. Commissioner Gifford stated she will be supporting the motion, bu expressed a commitment to maintaining lower density zoning and th upgrade of the neighborhood. She has driven the property in reviewing thi project and as everyone has commented, this is an excellent project. It ba the potential to take care of a piece of property that does have some uniqu characteristics in terms of location, pre-school and what will be abandoned sub -station and other properties behind it. It can do for neighborhood in the context of that piece of property what she would lik -44- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES �9oc CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX to see for it in what otherwise might be low density zoning. She expressed her support of this motion. Ayes * * * * MOTION CARRIED - 5 Ayes, 2 Noes foes * * A General Plan Amendment No. 95-3(E): Adopt Resolution No. 1417 (attached) recommending to the City Council the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), amending th e Lan Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignat property located at 507-521 Orange Avenue, from "Two Family Residential" use to "Multi -Family Residential" use and requiring site plan review of the initial development of the property. B. Amendment No. 837: Adopt Resolution No. 1418 approving Amendment No. 837, amending portion of Districting Map No. 25, to rezone the property from the "R-2" District (Two -Family Residential) to "IviFR (8du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District (Multi -Family Residential); C. Site Plan Review No. 75. Approve the site plan review, making the following findings and with the following conditions of approval: F 1. That development of the subject properly will not preclude implementation of specific General Plan objectives and policies. • 2. That the value of property is protected by preventing development characterized by inadequate and poorly planned landscaping, excessive building bulk, inappropriate placement of structures an failure to preserve where feasible natural landscape features, open spaces, and the like, resulting in the impairment of the benefits o occupancy and use of existing properties in such area. -45- COMMISSIONERS �0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES'., December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That benefits derived from expenditures of public funds fo improvement, acquisition and beautification of streets, parks, an other public facilities are maximized by the exercise of reasonabl controls over the layout and site location characteristics of th proposed development. 4. That unique site characteristics are protected in order to ensure,tha the community may benefit from the natural ten* harbor an ocean, to preserve and stabilize the natural terrain, and to protec the environmental resources of the City. 5. That the proposed development fully conforms to the establish development standards for the WR District, with the exception o the proposed modification to the Zoning Code, as recommended fo City Council approval by the Planning Commission in Amendmen No. 837 and Site Plan Review No. 75. 6. That the development is compatible with the character of the neighborhood and will contribute to the orderly and harmonious development of surrounding properties and the City. 7. That the development has been designed to minimize impacts o public views from existing public streets and sidewalks. S. That there are no known archeological or Historical resources on site.' 9. That there are no environmentally sensitive areas on -site. 10. The property does not contain any areas of unique geologt hazards. 11. That the proposed project will meet City noise standards for th development. 12. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas and pedestriar and vehicular access are functional in that the project has -46- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX designed so as to limit' vehicular access to the site from the alley with the exception of a two car garage, accessing from 15th Street. 13. The development is consistent with surrounding land uses and witb the goals and policies of the General Plan as recommended for Ci Council approval by the Planning Commission in GPA 95-3 (E). 14. That mechanical equipment and trash areas will be screened froir view of neighboring properties and public streets. 15. That the Districting Map No. 25 has incorporated density an intensity requirements which limit the allowable construction to maximum of 1.37 x the Buildable Area- of the site (approximate) 14,139 sq.ft. of gross floor area, this figure excludes the 200 sq.ft credit for each enclosed parldng space). 16. That the approval of the proposed project will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing an working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious t property and improvements in the neighborhood or the genera welfare of the City. That the approval of the modification to th Zoning Code is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 0 the Municipal Code. 17. That Site Plan Review No. 75 will not become effective unless an until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 83 are approved by the City Council. Conditions: That the proposed development shall be in substantial compliance with the approved site plan, floor plans and elevations, except noted below. �rThat all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 1021 shall fulfilled. -47- t& COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and ped circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic 0 Engineer. � �t the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee I ov'"" paid. 4�That both buildings shall be equipped with a fire protection sYsten UL list fIV66 yr *00 (sprinklered) acceptable to the Fire Department with a B ` p , a `"� Central Station, and tested by the Fire Department. the fire sprinkler system shall be properly maintained at al *00�That times and shall undergo a state Fire Marshal Certification inspectio every five years. That any interior alterations to the structures shall be subject to th issuance of a building permit reviewed by the Building Departmen and Fire Department. 8. Any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be sounc in such a manner as to achieve a maximum soun guiW'F'& o."41 attenuated level as specified in the Noise Ordinance Regulations of th /..t Newport Beach Municipal Code. That trash shall not be stored outside of any structure excep 9110 for the regular refuse collection day. cC when placed pick-up on trash enclosure shall a required if receptacles areto be stor outside of a buildin(Wid 9" AA0M1 V 60. That Site Plan Review No. 75 shall not become effective unless an Amendment No. 83 11,E until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and t are approved by the City Council. z�u( _ this Site Plan Review shall expire unless exercised within 2� from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.07 7K on ths of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2` 2L' . -48- M a 6 I i8 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX B.. Resubdivision No.1021: Findings: 1. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for acres through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer pe Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 0 the Subdivision Map Act. 3. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 4. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from planning standpoint. Conditions: OThat a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of Buildin tu'o't4 O- PA � o� � >J COMMISSIONERS %181,, MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (on inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unles otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monument shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion o construction project. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinancea and the Public Works Department. 4. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying sure h""' 1 be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the Public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map oi 4V W obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual Ovate /yh service and sewer lateral connection to the public water an sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Wor Department and the Building Department. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and peclestriar circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic0►�� Engineer. 7. That the intersections of the streets at the alley be designed t provide sight distance for a speed of 30 miles per hour. Slopes landscape, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the—T sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line, shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may a mo ffiia at non -critical locations, subject t approval of the Traffic Engineer. VVI-That a 15 foot radius comer cutoff at the corner of 15th Stree _ be dedicated to the / and Orange Avenue public. -50- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL r � INDEX `That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance o ��""����� @ pl^� .000 any building permits. AJA 10. That street improvements be constructed along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages. The improvements shall4��'' asphal ,,��,,�� 4hv " include curbs, gutters, sidewalks, curb access ramps and street paving. That the existing fire hydrant and power pole p 1 u- located along the Orange Avenue frontage be relocated necessary in order to construct the required stree UAw improvements. That standard City street lighting be constructed along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. That the proposed landscaping be removed from the alley right-of-way a Orange Avenue and that full width concrete alley improvement be constructed to City standards between Orange Avenue an 15th Street. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. hat street, drainage and utility improvements be shown ori .00 standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed ci ' engineer. hat a drama a stud be prepared by the applicant and approv by the Public orks—Department for the on -site improvement prior to recording of the parcel map. hat the Public Works Department plan check and inspection f �. �G24a 40 be paid. �flisruption caused by construction work along roadways and b movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of •equipment and materials shall b conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. Y'fhat overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to th IN•" nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.14 -51- a lM MIT S" COMMISSIONERS soy �iy�oh�� ,s h CITY OF NEWPOT " TT A ! T T ROLL CALL of the Municipal Code unle: Engineer that such underl impractical. 16. That an encroachment Agree standard improvements to be o of -way. 1 t a park dedication fee for accordance with Chapter 19.5( recordation of the parcel map. Pursuant to the City ofNewpo 10.28.040, construction ad development shall be limited t p.m. Monday through Friday, on Saturday. Construction shi hours Monday through Saturd federal holidays. Verification Planning Department. The C Ume limits are ern orc for th on the project�site„_ 19. That this resubdivision shall exp within 3 years of the date of app by the Planning Commission -52 MINUTES w ,;'. C,"OMMISSIONERS . MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL INDEX CALL 10. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions o approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety,. peace, morals, comfort, or generaJ welfare of the community. 11. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 mon from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090) of th Newport Beach Municipal Code. 12. That prior to the issuance of building permits for the propo enclosure, all applicable conditions on approval of Use Permit No. 3516 be satisfied including all conditions related to directio signage. SUBJECT': Morgan Development %Item e, 507-521 Orange Avenue • Genial Plait Amendment No. 95.3 (E) . • GPA, No 95-3E • AmendmenYNo. 837 • Amen : No - a '•SPR' NO' 75, • Site Plan Review -No. 75 Resubd"' ion,NO.1021 ltesub-No 102 • a modification to,the Zoning Code to allow a Modification 1 foot 10 inch,edcroachment into the to zone Code required 6 foot 10.inch side yard setback adjacent,to 15th-Street. A General Plan Amendment to redesignate the property for Multi-Famil Approvea Residential use and to establish the .permitted_ density of development rezone the property from the ,R 2" District (Two -Family Residential) t 17AFR (8du)[1.5 x B.AJ' District (Multi -Family Residential) and th approval of a site plan review for the proposed development. -39- COMMISSIONERS A g� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December ?, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Staff reported that this is a series of applications which would allow th construction of an eight (8) unit townhouse; condominium,type project o Orange Avenue near 15th Street in Newport -Heights. The true effect of th changes would be to alter the density for the site in question which c=entl would allow 4 dwelling and double that density to 8 dwelling units. Th applicant has provided colored site plans that are posted on the wall fo Commission consideration. Staffwas available for Commission questions. Chairman Ridgeway stated that they had received two letters tonight ' opposition and wanted to verify that the applicant has been given a copy o them. Public Hearing was Opened. Mr. Tod Schooler, 5oo North Newport Boulevard representing th applicant and project architect spoke to the Commission. He began b speaking of the history of this particular parcel and continued by explamin how his client started and met with the City representatives on ideas, s and scale of plan. Its building is below the FAR to allow for design o smaller scale, in the concept of an R2 project. This project lias one=setbac modification for a garage facing onto 15th Street resulting from th suggestions of the developnrient review:coinmittee. In response to Commission inquiry, -Mr. Schooler_stated that -he-had-r- the staffieport and -agrees to the terms and- conditions attached to each o the items. I& Stacey Weis, 3233 Broad •Street spoke in opposition to thi development expressing concerns with a multi -family residence in thi location. She then compared the lot'sizes to other property sizes statiq that if 8 units are allowed for this parcel, then this may set a precedence fo larger lots to be granted 8+ units. - Her expressed -concerns were that then appears to be a_differeat:standW applied to thavarea of Newport i1eight,. than for the Santa And side. Tliis"area'is R2" and she lives in there; now qoi are talking about 8 units. 'The average size of those condos will be 1, square feet with pricesdower than the condos in the area are going for now -40- COMMISSIONERS 1VIINUTFS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX ,She concluded by comparing this proposed project unit size to others tha currently ewst. Mr. Jerry Tucker, 466 Flower Street, Costa Mesa owner of property at 50 Old Newport Boulevard spoke to the Commission supporting this proposal He questioned the rear elevation of this project. He asked for additio landscaping in the rear, to disallow the allocation for an increase of th by 11% for future modest additions and trash enclosures should Ix property placed on the project. Mrs. Carol Tucker, 466 Flower, Costa Mesa, co-owner of building at 50 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke in opposition to this project citing hri density, setting a precedent and the look of the unit with 8 houses instead o 4. Mrs. Dolores Boroles, 510 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke to the Commission in opposition to this project citing parking problems. She the questioned Commission about Old Newport businesses. She was assured by Commission that Old Newport is in transition and this will be continued. Commissioner_ Adams asked Mr. Schooler what the trash receptacl provisions were and provisions allowing for additional square footage for minor modifications. Mr. Schooler stated that each unit will have their own trash can. However, - there is space for a trash enclosure and if Commission wants, this can done. Staff commented that in the City of Newport Beach residential projects o this nature do have the option to elect for normal trash services as availabl in residential areas. Or, in an association of this nature, they can hiav commercial trash pick-up which would be paid for separately. If you do -p out trash cans; theie.is no extra cost. There are•codes being.enforced by th " General Services Dept: governing the hours which trash cans can be place( and also must be taken back in to a closed door or non -visual area -41- COMMISSIONERS :MINUTES.' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL INDEX The nature ofthe provision for additional square footage allowing for n1mo modifications was to allow for flexibility in the design process bnt; given the- site design, staff felt it was possible that an individual may be_ interested it enclosing a patio with a possible living room addition 'that could' bc accommodated within the site plans and setbacks. However, this could bc omitted within the context of the site plan -review. This patio enclosun would be subject to normal zoning and building department review. If th requested any encroachment into the setbacks or any other diversions fro the zoning code, then they would have to go through the appropriat process which could involve Planning Commission review. Mr. Schooler added that there were some slight modification changes tha amount to approximately 200 square feet to the entire project. If they ar limited to a building permit issued to that final square footage, then tha would preclude anyone from coming in and deciding to do any additions o change building characteristics. He concluded by saying that the Associatio and the CCR's will not allow any addition to these units under an condition. Chairman Ridgeway concluded that then this condition could be deleted. Mr. Schooler then proceeded to the exhibits%showingwfierie_tl.fi an • will be going in and gave an explanation to address Mr. Tucker's concerns. Public Hearing was Closed. Commissioner Selich stated that this is a well designed complex. 'Th benefits would be new construction to the. area with public improvements it the alley way. The zoning issue, however,, is a concern as it. appears to spot zoning. With the approval of the concept, it would set the preceden in the area. This would send a message. that .perhaps the rest of the properties should be considered for increaser zoning density. Anoth concern is the interface -with -the eommercial and xesidential.,looking intensify the use of residential use potentially in'the future"creatrirg-mor points of conflict. It would be bad policy to take one parcel like this t create a type of zoning density that is out of scale and out of cl>iu der in th neighborhood even though it is a nice project and well designed. If th -42- = 1. VI COMMISSIONERS \ AO MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL r � INDEX Commission does approve this tonight, it would be important to make statement that the approval ofthe zoning on this site does not indicate that i is something that Commission would be in favor for the rest of the parcels. Commissioner Adams observed that from the physical lay out of this area ' different as it stands out in the end of the neighborhood. The lot shape an some of the other discussed considerations reduce the likelihood that precedence would be set for the rest of the area. There are uniqu characteristics present that are not on the other R2 lots. The positioning o the residential next to commercial, although the relative intensity is onl marginally different than the other R2 lots, is not going to create much mor of a problem than if it were developed under current zoning. He ask about the uses on the other side of the alley. Chairman Ridgeway answered at the corner of Orange and Old Newport i an office building, directly behind that is a SCE sub -station, moving up Old Newport at 15th there is an optometrist then Mr. Tucker then Mrs. Bowl (the only residential). - - • _ , Commissioner Adams stated that the land uses appear to•be:as compatibl as possible for that -type of interface between b'nsmess'anil iesiden ial.'' Commissionei Pomeroy -stated thabit appears that the -Planning Departmen Public Works, everybody has worked out something they feel .is appropriate use for this site. - It is quite common io buffer commercial an lower density residential with multi -family. He does not see,it as'bemg'b planning, certainly there is no precedence being set -here for the rest of R2 properties. He would support this item. Chairman Ridgeway reaffirmed Commissioner Selicifs comments about no setting precedence an& would like to -see • put in the Fm&gs within ' unique situation wording relating to -this not,6i ig,a-precedence. - Commissioner Gifford stated that she is in agreement that this is no intended to be a precedent, it is generally accepted that no individual zonin decision that is specific to a particular parcel necessarily sets a precedence. -43- .I i ~a•le• - COMMISSIONERS •:Fl. hat 41C�1{ew4'n y=4• M.,,°.TzFW: ._...:r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL \ INDEX Her concern is making a finding and putting into the record that this doe not set a precedent would be the implication of all the times we do not sa that. This parcel clearly has some unique characteristics. Assistant City Attorney Clauson verified that in agreement witl Commissioner Gifford's statement_ that factors can be clearly established ' the record that are unique to this property, that would be sufficient. Thi would not be precedence setting for any other application. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that in making this motion it is not hi intention to make any type of precedence setting regarding the properties in the same general area. Commissioner Thomson stated this area is too dense. It is nice to have buffer between the commercial and the residential, but 8 units on thi property (15,000 square feet) or 22 units per acre is too dense. These wil be small units of 1,400 square feet, the plan is terrific and it is a great use o the property, but he believes that this is too much. He would suppo cutting this back and not worrying about setting a precedence, he would lik it to be less dense. Motion * Mot iodwas made for approval -of Gei ecal Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (l3) adopting ResolutionNo. 95-1417 and forapproval of Amendment No: 83 and adopt Resolution No. 95-1418'aha for'approval of Site--Plan-No. 75 an Resubdivision No. 1021 in accordance with the 'findings and'conch`tio removing the 11% which will be recalculated and adjusted accordingly b stafE,- Commissioner Gifford stated,, she Will, be supporting the motion, b expressed a commitment to -mamtaming -lower density zoning and th upgrade of the neigliborhood.'She_has°driven the property in reviewing thl- projectand as everyone Iras,ca' imente— 4- this is -an -excellent project. It 1129 •the potential to take acre of a p.iece-of property that does -have some uni p characteristics 'in teems: of _locati_or,;. Pre-school" and what will be . abandoned sub -station_ and other properties behind it. It can do for neighborhood in the context of that piece of property what she would lik - :-44- CO�M_MI8SIONERS A, J t;.i �� i`r'�2"si"�iv,.t' WIN is R y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX to see for it in what otherwise might be low density zoning. She expressed her support ofthis motion. ,i es * * * * MOTION CARRIED - 5 Ayes, 2Noes �s A General Plan Amendment No. 95-3(E): Adopt Resolution No. 1417 (attached) recommending to the City Councu the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), amending the Lan Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignate property located at 507-521 Orange Avenue, from "Two Famil Residential" use to "Multi -Family Residential" use and requiring site plar review of the initial development of the property. B. Amendment No. 837: Adopt Resolution No. 1418 approving Amendment No. 837, amending portion of Districting Map No. 25, to rezone the property from the "R 2" District (Two -Family Residential) to 'WR (8du)[1.37 x B.A]" District (Multi-FamilyResidentialX - C. Site Plan Review No: 75. Approve the site plan •review, -making-the following findings and' with=-th following conditions of approyal: F 1. That development .of the subject property will not preclud implementation, -of specific General Plan objectives and policies. 2. That the value of property is. -protected by preventing developmeni cbamcteriied by inadequate"- and . pooiiy planned landscaping, excessive building bulk,, inappropriate placement of structuresand failure to preserve where feasible natural` landscape -features, o spaces, and the like, resulting in the impairment of the benefits o occupancy and use of existing properties in such area. -45- COMMISSIONERS NIIIVUT+ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 3,. That benefits derived from expenditures of public funds fo improvement, acquisition and beautification of:streets, parks, And other public facilities are maximized by the exercise of reasonabl controls over the layout and site location characteristics of th proposed development. 4. That unique site characteristics are protected in order to ensure tha the community may benefit from the natural temah harbor an ocean, to preserve and stabilize the natural terrain, and to protec the environmental resources of the City. 5. That the proposed development fully conforms to the establish development standards for the WR District, with the exception o the proposed modification to the Zoning Code, as recommended fo City Council approval by the Planning Commission in Amendmen No. 837 and SitePlanReviewNo. 75. 6. That the development is compatible with the character of neighborhood and will contribute to the_ orderly _and hannoniou development of surrounding properties and the City: • 7. That the development has been -designed to'n'u"nimiip itnpaots d public views from existing public streets and sidewalks:. 8. That there are no known archeological orTustorical resources on site. 9. That there are no environmentally sensitive areas on site 10. The ,property does not contain any areas of unique- geologi hazards. 11. - That the proposed project will meet City noise standards ,for th development. 12. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas and ' estri and vehicular access are functional in that the project has -46- TO COMMISSIONERS \vc2F'��' 4�90i�Y.iy.`" \ i'. «,, ii. �' '.c'!" :'�. 'Nv _ 4. '..�i ': t(.; :�c'�'ri-r1v^'.'.'",.��:• ..� V���fr��'v�f _ _ MINLYTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX designed so as to limit vehicular access to the site from the alley with the exception of a two car garage, accessing from 15th Street. 13. The development is consistent with surrounding land uses and wi the goals and policies of the General Plan as recommended for Ci Council approval by the Planning Commission in GPA 95-3 (E). 14. That mechanical equipment and trash areas will be screened froly view of neighboring properties and public streets. 15. That the Districting Map No. 25 has incorporated density an intensity requirements which limit the allowable construction to maximum of 1.37 x the Buildable Area -of the site (approximatel 14,139 sq.11. of gross floor area, this figure excludes the 200 sq.fl credit for each enclosed parking space). 16. That the approval of the proposed project will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing an working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious t property and improvements in the neighborhood:or_the gem. welfare of the City. That the approval of the'modification to th Zoning Code is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 o the Municipal'Code: 17. That Site Plan Review No. 75 will not become effective unless an until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E)• and Amendment No. 83 are approved by the City Council. Conditions: 1. That the proposed development shall'be in -substantial complian with the approved,site plan, floor plans and elevations, except noted below. 2. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 1021 shall fulfilled. -47- COIVIIVIISSIONERS • - ='a: 'i�� :,�lS.�'Y :. - i i {`� t ��;-:-� � .ii.:; � ,"a��`.s� "7Aj ,'•i�" ' MINtFTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL \ 'INDEX 3. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestriar circulation systems be subject to further -review by the Traffi Engineer. 4. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee Ix paid. S. That both buildings shall be equipped with a fire protection syste (sprinklered) acceptable to the Fire Department with a UI, list Central Station, and tested by the Fire Department. 6. That the fire sprinkler ,system shall be properly maintained at al times and shall undergo a State Fire Marshal Certification inspectio every five years. 7. That any interior alterations to the structures shall be subject to th issuance of a building permit reviewed by the Building Departmen and Fire Department. 8. Any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be soun attenuated in such a -manner as to achieve -'a maximum soun level as specified in -the Noise Ordinance -Regulations of th Newport Beach -Municipal Code. 9. That trash shall not be. stored outside of.any structure excel?when placed for pick-up on the regular refuse collection day. trash enclosure shall be required if receptacles are to be stor outside of a building. 10. That Site Plan Review No. 75 shall not become effective unless n until General plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 83- are approved by the City Council. 11. That this Site Plan -Review shall expire -unless exercised within months from the date of approval as specified -in Section 20.01.07 K ofthe Newport Beach Municipal Code. -48- 41 ..iJtw�,•,�h _v._" �„ — • try' • t- CO�`MWS`SIONERS °,1\011` •YYL a,.,t . 1Y111V 1;,7rrES . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX B.. Resubdivision No.1021: Findings: 1. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflic with any easements acquired by the public at large for acces through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer pe Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 0 the Subdivision Map Act. 3. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newpori Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicabl general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 4. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from planning "standpoint. Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of Buildinj. Permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works an Planning Departments. The parcel map shall be prepared on th ' California coordinate system (NAD83) and that ,prior t recordation of the parcel map, the.surveyor/engineer preparin the map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City o Newport Beach a digital -graphic file of,said map in a manner described in Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-33T of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manuat Subarticle 18. - 2. That prior to recordation 'of the parcel map, th surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary o the map into the Horizontal Control System established by th County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7-9-330 an -49- COMMISSIONERS ' :. _ - _ .-i ; :11',i �� r� 1.,� �� ' 4, ,! �wri _ �_ .1c {#���' G'�h •21 t� ... r' - �`. -^- - 1�+: �^l^,,;;F�i:=.ti r�^`�:i"`. '+��•%m' >��,'r ;- � _PM�4�i;S':,�•r. � �e 3., t; CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orang County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (on inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unles otherwise approved by the'Subdivision:Engineer. Monument shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion o ,construction project. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinan and the Public Works Department. 4. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying sure be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the Public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map o obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 5. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual wate service and sewer lateral connection to the public water an sewer ,systems ,unless ;otherwise approved by the Public Wor Department and the. Building;Department.. • 6. That the on -site ,parking; vel'iculac61roulation and pedestii circulation systems be.subject to further review by the Traffi Engineer. 7. That the intersections, of the streets at the alley .be designed t provide -eight distance for a.speed of 30 miles per, hour. Slopes landscape, walls and other obstructions -shall be considered in th sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lin shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. The sight distan requirement may -be modified at non -critical locations, subject t approval of the Traff csEn&eer._ 8. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at:the corner of 15th Stree and orange Avenue be dedicated to the public. -50- ' ti• COMMISSIONERS MINUTES`. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 9. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance o any building permits. 10. That street improvements be constructed along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages. The improvements shall include curbs, gutters, sidewalks, curb access ramps and asphalt street paving. That the existing fire hydrant and power poless located along the Orange Avenue frontage be relocated necessary in order to construct the required st ree j improvements. That standard City street lighting be construct along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages unites otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. That proposed landscaping be removed from the alley right -of --way a Orange Avenue and that full width concrete alley improvement be constructed to City standards between Orange Avenue an 15th Street. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 11. That street, drainage _and utility improvements be shown ori standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed ci engineer. 12. That a drainage study be prepared by the applicant and approv by the Public Works Department for the on -site improvement • prior to recording -of the=parcel map: 13. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection f be paid. 14. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and b movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic controls equipment and flagmen. Traffic contrb and transportation • of ;equipment and materials shall b . conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 15. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to th nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.14 -51- i COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL \ INDEX of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the Ci Engineer that 'such undergrounding is unreasonable o impractical. 16. That an encroachment Agreement be executed for any non- standard improvements to be constructed within the Public right of -way. 17. That a park dedication fee for six dwelling units shall be paid it accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code prior t recordation of the parcel map. 18. Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance Sectio 10.28.040, construction adjacent to existing residents development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:3 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction shall not be allowed outside of thes hours Monday through Saturday or at any time on Sundays an federal holidays. Verification of this shall be -provided to the Planning Department. The City will ensure that constructio time limits are enforced for the duration of construction activi on the project site. 19. That this resubdivision shall -expire if the-map-has.not beensecord within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is -granted by the Planning Commission. -52- CITY OF NEV, - .'ART BEACHHearing Date:` February 26, 1996 b PLANNING\BUILDING DEPARTMENT o • � � Agenda Item No.: ! `I :g 33o NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: Javier S. Garcia, AICP NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 (714)644-3206 (714) 641-32�, FAX (ra) 644-V5- REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Morgan Development (Max Morgan, applicant) 507-519 Orange Avenue SUMMARY: A General Plan Amendment with related applications to allow the construction of an attached multi -family residential subdivision including: an increase in the permitted density of development from 4 units to 7 units, a limitation in the permitted floor area of 1.37 times the Buildable Area of the site, a 1 foot 10 inch encroachment into the required 6 foot 10 inch side yard setback on 15th Street SUGGESTED ACTIONS: Hold hearing, close hearing; if desired sustain, modify or reverse the decision of the Planning Commission of the following: 1. General PlanAnlendntent No. 95-3 (E), Adopt Resolution No. 96- ; 2. Resubdivision No.1021, 3. Site Plan Review No. 7S, 4. Mortification to the Zoning Code . Ordinance for Introduction - Introduce, pass to second reading on March 11, 1996: 1. Ordinance No, 96- (Anrendnrent No. 837): changes to Title 20 of the Municipal Code, to rezone the property from the "R-2" District (Two -Family Residential) to ' R (7du)[1:37. x B.A.]" District (Multi - Family Residential). Background At -its meeting of January 22, 1996, the City Council, at the request of the applicant, continued this item to the meeting of February 26, 1996, in order to allow the applicant additional time to consider reducing the number of units within the proposed project. The applicant has subsequently eliminated one of the units bringing the proposed project to seven units. The reduction was in response to concerns raised by members of the community. m GPA No. 95-3 (E), Amendment No. 837, Site Plan Review No. 75, 41 Resubdivision No. 1021,1 'no subject property is developod with two residential buildings and a detachod garage. To the north, across 15th Street, are commercial uses and a day care facility; to the east, across Orange Avenue, are two-family residential uses; to the south and west, across a 20 foot wide alley, are wnun=W uses. Maw Ikre�opman Feb{uuy26,1996 Page OVERVIEW OF KEY ISSUES 1. Appropriateness of the Proposed Use/Neighborhood Compatibility: Does the residential development proposed represent the most appropriate re -use of the property, and would the project be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods? 2. Density. Is the proposed density of 7 dwelling units (20 DU's per acre) appropriate in this case? ANALYSIS SUMMARY -KEY ISSUES: Compatibility Issue: Approval of these amendments will redesignate the subject property from "Two -Family Residential" use to "Multi Family Residential" use. The subject property is currently for sale and it is the intent to provide for entitlement to construct a -seven unit condominium project on the two existing lots which are to be combined by,the proposed resubdivision. Since the site is currently located in the R 2 District, the Municipal Code would allow the construction of two-family attached or two-family detached residential use on each lot, which is a permitted use within that district. In addition, the subject property is bounded by commercial uses located across the 20 foot alley at the rear (office building) and across 15thStreet (a nursery school). The properties across Orange Avenue are zoned R 2 and are developed with two-family residential uses. It should also be noted that the subject property as well as the properties located across Orange Avenue take'. vehicular access from alleys located at-the'cear- Staff is of the opinion that the proposed multi -family residential use would act as a logical transition between the commercial uses and the two-family residential uses across Orange Avenue and would be compatible with the surrounding residentialuses in the neighborhood. " -"I ° Density -Issue: - • � I Based on the land area of the parcel and the number of units proposed, the resulting density, is approximately 20 dwelling units per acre or one unit for each 2,256 sq.ft. of land area. It should be noted that, generally, the typical density for a multi -family property in the City of Newport Beach is approximately 20 dwelling units per acre or one unit for each 2,178 sq.ft. of land area. Application of this typical standard would yield a maximum of 7 dwelling units as proposed (15,792 sq.ft. = 2,178 sq.ft per unit =,7.25 or 7 units. The applicant proposes to construct 7 dwelling units (two buildings) which average approximately 1,500 sq.ft. in size, with the largest at 1,620 sq.ft. and the smallest at 1,460 sq.ft.. The applicant is of the opinion that the increase in the number of units is offset by the smaller size of the units and the limited size of the project as a whole (1.37 x B.A., where the MFR District would allow a maximum of 1.75). Staff concurs that the overall size of the project is compatible with the neighboring R-2 District and is comparable with regard to size and bulk. Staff has therefore included an FAR limit on the Districting Map Morppa Developnuxd Fekuwy 26,19% Page3 No. 25 which limits the project to a maximum of 14,140 sq.ft. (1.37 x B.A.) to insure that the offset of the increased density is maintained. At its meeting of December 11, 1995, the City Council, on its own motion, set the above matters for public hearing on January 22,1996. At its meeting of December 7,1995, the Planning Commission voted (5 ayes, 2 noes) to recommend to the City Council approval of the above mentioned applications, as originally proposed with eight units, with the findings and conditions as specified in the attached excerpt of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting o£December 7,1995. Staff had included an FAR limit on the Districting Map No. 25 which would have limited the project to a maximum of 15,481 sq.ft. (1.5 x B.A.), to allow for modest additions in the future (approximately 110/6), and to insure that the trade-off of the increased density for limited project size is maintained. However, during subsequent discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the project be limited to a maximum of 14,140 sq.ft. as originally proposed (an FAR of 1.37). Project Development Characteristics ' M17R District Requirements IyROPO5BD�; " O:lt ` " " Gross Land Area: 15,792 sq. ft. Buildable Area: 10,321t sq. ft. Gross Floor Area (x Buildable Area) 18,062t sq. ft. 14,14ft sq.fL (1.75 x B.A.) 1.37 x B.A. 14 garage spaces Required Parking: 14 spaces (one covered per unit) and 4 uncovered guest spaces and 4 open guest spaces Setbacks: Front: 20 feet 20 feet Sides (15th Street): 6 foot 10 inches 5 feet Rear: Zero 5 feet MOWnDav IOFW * FACUMY16,19% Psge4 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT CHANGES (As Revised) Proposed General Plan Amendment No. 95-38) The proposed amendment results in a net increase of three dwelling units within Statistical Area HI with a maximum allocation of seven dwelling units for the subject property. Therefore, the accompanying Table of Estimated Growth for Statistical Area HI must also be revised for projections of dwelling units and population. Land Use Element Page No. 50: 2. West Newport Heights. This area encompasses the residential areas westerly of Santa Ana Avenue. The area is allocated 400 3W dwelling units, and is designated for either Single Family Detached or Two Family Residential land use, except for that residentially designated property located on the southwesterly corner of Orange Avenue and 15th Street, which shall be designated for Multi -Family Residential land use with a maximum allocation of 7 dwelling annroval of a site plan review. No subdivision which will result in dwelling units is allowed.[GPA 89-3(D); GPA 91-1(D)] 1. Old Newport Blvd. 2. West Newport Ngts. TOTAL Population Amendment No.'837 ESTIMATED GROWTH FOR STATISTICAL AREA Hl Residential (in du's) Existing Gen.Plan Projected 1/1/87 Projection, Growth 12 38 26 374 J861 43R 42A 5 764 Commercial (in sqA) Existing Gen.Plan Projected 1/1/87 Projection Growth 184;821 325,410 140,589 -0- -0- -0- 184,821 325,410 140,589 The applicant has reduced the number of proposed dwelling units from 8 to 7 units. The amendment to rezone the subject property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District, also requires that the appropriate districting map be revised. A copy of the proposed change to Districting Map No. 25 is attached for the Council's information. Morgan Development Fetxuary26, 1996 Page Specific Findines and Recommendations The adoption and amendment of the General Plan is considered a legislative act on the part of the City, and State Planning Law does not set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of a General Plan Amendment. This also applies to amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Section 20.01.070(F) ofthe Newport Beach Municipal Code sets forth the standards by which the City is to evaluate a Site Plan Review. The project will be in full conformance with the provisions of the General Plan, if GPA 95-3 (E) add Amendment No. 837 are approved. In addition, Site Plan Review No. 75 is subject to final action by the Council in conjunction with GPA 95-3 (E), Amendment No. 837 and Resubdivision No. 1021. PLANNING/BUILDING DEPARTMENT By avier S. "a, AICP Senior Planner Attachnments: Districting Map No. 25 Staff Report to the City Council dated January 22,1996 Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 7,1995 Excerpt ofPlanning CommissionMinutes dated December 7,1995 Two Letters of Opposition Resolution No. 96- _ Draft Ordinance Site Plan (Revised),Landscape Plan (Revised), Floor Plans, Elevations and Tentative Parcel Map F.%WP5 iTLANNIN01ICC4tVrCCXOU6M7C C17MM MorimDe 4t ad FAruMy 26,19% Page 6 )r C�' a i c/Y,`c vi nvY)Fc cx •qS`q eE R 2 s R 2 R 2 R l R l ° R-1 > W G_2 �� .�. 2 • i . P . �C,• � y S p SS. � 3 CLAY 3'Y { • o R-/ l s1 S,J`2s1' M-I-A w DANA RD. A P F MFR MFR $Ix� PSD l9BDV/ >�IR I./LAR/A WAY w h UGi 0 v: d D� �(31i azR.ld�0' NOI APF•"' n c PR Psi o Osoo) Y;Y o ,Y F h VIA `A 'e y s i A P F APF-H U ,+ p � pV xOAO ti /9 4 r HOSP/TAc pi' � O, 9L. J z EEC APF-H :T Flfq eq �+��� Q '`•' w �¢FA tpE P C PP aD`� I, S ow ee.N•v \ Nuw Las V ANS'i21Y P-V/� /sx uttFtwvs/ e•!e•1y SUL MAP No. 22-A MCy 1.°.•DISTRICTING M A P NEW PORT BEACH — CALIFORNIA „tsyrf, QY I,K4r s , ! .^.n.t .A,r1 )S/ A M6 W.IffO S,y`L a 3xV Yr11R 6ReX, IY[Wr. p.f[-r. MOM 91) FM bMif.S,WnM q St�eR >Y6� M4T.[ JS i' M I.Cx.iT) x.M1 P.t.Awamc) onn n. farni.dr.ri vn�u, .sKNLt HONE RARKOVENUYEDVE a rx[ Lw 1a'"'ri'ii i.p wino[ a oirthei Seer. x µ✓n tiH riL,.ii ! i y � REST'D MULTiLE /AIIIIT flE51pENTAI. S,w.cvr a[sYxPioa•i x[xP+nc� vtn /Sn m�w..i, n y+esaeD (<m.n oum x>_J ' " R- !0:1e .-.•.,..•ur S.xL-rrPSINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL1AL� DUPLE%RESIGENTIAL � GENERAL COMMERCIAL ,iWwr,np,)rmrm�L. Yrwipl`rw ix [ o-o•n,-.u•.P3.b •5_ "S)' :u�I%pw'9e4 «':: '>yi n"�""•'L"^ST'wsl -iR'P O�r2ee �SVRLSOxf YILCI.�C M1fG3YNn[t NSC.Aif p)[•.21,5 YSMl,1.) qn. 3�o,.y LN �((tl•N/MM/A r S"r Lt [eL[[ er i[n MVL7IPLE FAMLY RFSroLMNAL MANUFACTURING Pmm�u "y' - uµ",)'N1: ...y rr7,.S LS) ++�� o Loo ♦oe Lw eoo �] QN COMBINING DISTRICTS UNCLASSIFIED 'yir'/� �l-V Ig'„{ m„yy /j; crrY or NEWPORT nEActt Bearing Date: January 22, 1096 a PuxNiNc\euccntxc uerAATMEN-r Agenda Item No.: t Ll .. Slao NEW'raRT aoH4EVARD Staff Person: Javier S. Garcia, AICP NEWPORT HACH, G 916,4 (714) 644-3206 (M) 644 32M; FAX (74) 644-3250 REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Morgan Development (Max Morgan, applicant) 507-521 Orange Avenue SUMMARY: A General Plan Amendment to redesignate the property for Multi -Family Residential use and to establish the permitted density of development; rezone the property from the "R-2" District (Two -Family Residential) to '%M (8du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District (Multi -Family Residential with a square footage limitation of 1.5 times the Buildable Area of the site) and the approval of a site plan review for the proposed development. SUGGESTED ACTIONS: Hold hearing, close heating; if desired sustain, modify or reverse the decision of the Planning Commission of the following: 1. General Plan A n tendn i dn t No. 9S-3 (B) (Public Hearing), Adopt Resolution No. 96- 2. ResubrlivisionNo. 1021 (Public Hearing), 3. Site Plan Retpimp No. 7S (Public Hearing), 4. Modification to the Zoning Cotle (Public Hearing), to allow a i foot 10 inch encroachment into the required 6 foot 10 inch side yard setback adjacent to 15th Street. Ordinance for Introduction - Introduce, pass to second reading on February 12, 1996: 1. Ordinance No, 96- (A►nendinent AV 83�: changes to Title 20 of the Municipal Code; to rezone the property from the "R-2" District (Two -Family Residential) to "NOR (8du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District (Multi Family Residential). Background At its meeting of December 11, 1995, the City Council, on its own motion, set the above matters for public hearing on January 22, 1996, At its meeting of December 7, 1995, the Planning Commission voted (5 ayes, 2 noes) to recommend to the City Council approval of the above mentioned applications with the findings and conditions as specified in the attached excerpt of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 7, 1995. [+i Staff had included an FAR limit on the Districting Map No. 25 which would have limited the project to a maximum of 15,481 sq.ft. (1.5 x B.A.), to allow for modest additions in the future (approximately 11%), and to insure that the trade-off of the increased density for limited project size is maintained. However, during subsequent discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the project be limited to 14,140 sq.ft. as proposed (with the exception of a modest increase in the size which is reflected in the figures in the table below but are not reflected in the architectural drawings submitted, which increased the project size by 214± sq.ft. for an overall total of 14,140) and an FAR of 1.37. Proiect Development Characteristics (Revised) • PERNETTED/REgD -: Proposed. Gross Land Area: 15,792 sq. ft. Buildable Area: 10,321± sq. ft. Gross Floor Area (x Buildable Area) 18,062± sq. ft. 14,140± sq.ft.' (1.75,x B;A) ..v. Q.37 x B A) .M. r PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT CAANGES (As Revised) The proposed changes will read as follows: Proposed General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 The proposed amendment results in a net increase of four dwelling units within Statistical Area Hl with a maximum allocation of eight dwelling ^units for the subject property. Therefore, the accompanying Table of Estimated Growth for Statistical Area Hl must also be revised for projections of dwelling units and population. Land Use Element Page No. 49 and 50: Old Newport Boulevard Area (Statistical Area HI) 1. Old Neltport Boulevard. This conil'nercial area is on the easterly side of Newport Boulevard between West Coast Highway and the City boundary. (see Map 12) The area is designated for Retail and Service Commercial land use, and has a maximum floor area ratio of 0.5/0.75. The area also includes Bolsa Park, a mini -park located between Old Newport Boulevard and Broad Street. [GPA 94- 1 This figure reflects a 214± sq.ft. increase in the overall size of the project. Gen== Plan Amendment No. 95.3 (E), Amendmnu No. 837, /y Site Plan Review No. 75, Resubdivision No. 1021, January 22, 1996 Page 2 2(A)]. The area has been designated for the preparation of a Specific Area Plan, to resolve problems of access and orientation created by the realignment of Newport Boulevard, and to encourage redevelopment of the existing uses to administrative and professional uses as well as service and retail uses. Residential uses may be permitted in conjunction with primary office or commercial uses up to a total floor area ratio of 1.25 in areas easterly of North Newport Boulevard. One unit is allowed in this block for each 2,375 sq.ft. of buildable lot area. 2. West Newport Heights. This area encompasses the residential areas westerly of Santa Ana Avenue. The area is allocated 401, M dwelling units, and is designated for either Single Family Detached or Two Family Residential land use, approval of a site plan review. No subdivision which will result in dwelling units is allowed.[GPA 89-3(D); GPA 91-1(D)] 1. Old Nmpon Blvd. 2. wcstNIm%ponNgts. TOTAL Population Amendment No. 837 ESTI TATED GROWTH FOR STATISTICAL AREA Ht Residential (in du's) Existing Gen,Plan Projected 1/1/87 Projcclion Grottth 12 38 26 374 1 4014W 27 241 3861 439 42A 93 41 7641 869 MA 101 471 Commercial (in sq.tt.) Existing Gcn.Plan Projcdcd 1/1/87 Projxdon Gromh 184.821 325,410 140,589 -0- -0• -0- 184,821 325,410 140,589 The proposed amendment to rezone the subject property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (8du)[1.37 x B.A]" District, also requires that the appropriate districting map be revised. A copy of the proposed change to Districting Map No. 25 is included in the Planning Commission staff report of December 7,1995 (attached), for the Council's information, Specific Tindings and Recommendations The adoption and amendment of the General Plan is considered a legislative act on the part ofthe City, and State Planning Law does not set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of a General Plan Amendment. This also applies to amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Qenersl Plan Amendment No. 93.3 (C), Amendnxnt No. 837, Site Plan Raiem No, 75, Rmbdivition No.1021, Jsnuuy22, l"6 Page 3 rrY Section 20.01.070(F) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code sets forth the standards by which the City is to evaluate a Site Plan Review. The project will be in full conformancewith the provisions of the General Plan, if GPA 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 837 are approved. In addition, Site Plan Review No. 75 is subject to final action by the Council in conjunction with GPA 95-3 (E), Amendment No. 837 and Resubdivision No. 1021. PLAINTNINGBUILDING DEPARTMENT By J vier S. Gar ia, AICP Senior Planner Attachments: Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 7, 1995 Excerpt of Planning Conunission Minutes dated December 7, 1995 Two Letters of Opposition Resolution No. 96- _ Draft Ordinance Tentative Parcel Map, Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations FAUTSIWL.X..M' GIICC•R",CC9601221A837CCI.130C Gmval Plan Amendment No. 95.3 (E), Amendment No. 837, 1\ Site Plan Reties• No. 75. Rmbdivision To. 1021, Janumy22, 1996 Page 4 aE� � MY OFNEWrORTBEACH hearing Date:` December7, 1995 PLAN?4rx0\5u11.D1N4 DFPARTMr%1r Agenda Item No.: 8 33o NLWPORTBOUL.EVARD Staff Person: Javier S. Garcia, AICP '•+4raFM`" NEWPORTMACIt CAgl" (714)644-3206 t7�f) bf9'ssar PAX t14) 6M'3=SQ REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: Morgan Development (Max Morgan, applicant) 507-521 Orange Avenue SUMMARY: A General Plan Amendment to redesignate the property for Multi -Family Residential use and to establish the permitted density of development; rezone the property from the "R2" District (Two -Family Residential) to'TAFR (8du)[1.5 x B.A.]" District (Multi -Family Residential) and the approval of a site plan review for the proposed development. REQUIRED APPROVALS: Hold hearing, close hearing; if desired, Adopt Resolutions (attached) recommending to the City Council the approval of • Generall'lan Amendment Na 95-3 (E) (Public Heating Adopt Resolution No. 95- • Anrendntent Na 837, (Public Heating), Adopt Resolution No. 95- • Site Plan Reviely Na 7S, (Public Hearing) • Resubdtrdsion Na 1021,(Public Hearing) • a modification to the Zoning Code to allow a 1 foot 10 inch encroachment into the required 6 foot 10 inch side yard setback adjacent to I Sth Street. 1. Appropriateness of the Proposed Use/Neighborhood Compatibility: Does the residential development proposed represent the most appropriate re -use of the property, and would the project be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. 2. DenstX Is the proposed density of 8 dwelling units (22 du per acre) appropriate. �a n GPA No. 95=3 (E), Amendment No. 837, Site Plan Review No. 755 Resubdivision No. 1021,1 a .., W . The subject property is developed with two residential buildings and a detached garage. To lbe north, across I Sth Strut, are commercial uses and a day care facility; to the east, across Orange Avenue, are residential uses; to the south and west, across a 20 foot wide alley, are conmiercial. Ger aA Plan Amcndnunt No. 95.3 (EZ Amendmerd No. 837, 13 Site flan Reim No. 73, Rembdivision No. 1021, December 7,1995 t/ Pagpe /rC� ANALYSIS SUMMARY - KEY ISSUES: Compatibility I e• Approval of these amendments will redesignate the subject property from "Two -Family Residential" use to "Multi -Family Residential" use. The subject property is currently for sale and it is the intent to provide for entitlement to construct an eight unit condominium project on the two existing lots which are to be,combined by the proposed resubdivision. Since the site is currently located in the R 2 District, the Municipal Code would allow the construction of two-family attached or detached residential use, which is a permitted use within that district. In addition, the subject property is bounded by commercial uses located across the 20 foot alley at the rear and across 15th Street. The properties across Orange Avenue are zoned R-2 and are developed with two-family residential uses. 'Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed multi -family residential use would act as a logical transition zoning between the comrercial uses and the two family residential uses across Orange Avenue and thus would be compatible with the surrounding residential uses in the neighborhood. Density Issue• Based on the land area of the parcel and the number of units proposed, the resulting density is approximately 22 dwelling units per acre or one unit for each 1,975 sq.ft, of land area. It should be noted that, generally, the typical density for a multi -family property is approximately 20 dwelling units per acre or one unit for each 2,178 sq.ft. of land area. Application of this typical standard would yield a maximum of 7 dwelling units for the subject property (15,792 sq.ft. + 2078 sq.ft per unit = 7.25 or 7 units. The applicant proposes to construct 8 dwelling units (two buildings) which average approximately 1,360 sq.ft. in size, with the largest at 1,459 sq.ft. and the smallest at 1,300 sq.ft.. The applicant is of the opinion that the increase in the number of units is offset by the smaller size of the units and the limited size of the project as a whole (1.34 x B.A., where the WR District would allow a maximum of 1.75). Staff concurs that the overall size of the project is compatible with the neighboring R-2 District and is comparable with regard to size and bulk. Staff has therefore included an FAR limit on the Districting Map No. 25 which limits the project to a maximum of 15,481 sq.ft. (1.5 x B.A..) to allow for modest additions in the future (approximately 11%), and to insure that the offset of the increased density is maintained. bISCUSSiON OF REQUESTED APPROVALS A. General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (R) Proposed is an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element to redesignate the site from Two -Family Residential to Muld-Fandly Residential use and to allow the development of an eight unit residential condominium project, Ocmnl Plan NmminxM No 9$.3 (EJ Mind not No, 937, Site Plan Rtvkw No. 7$, RauWsion No.1021, t Dcatrka7, 1995 N Page�3� Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend to the City Council approval of this amendment, a draft resolution with the proposed Land Use Element Language has been provided and the complete text of the Land Use Element amendment is included in the attached Appendix'W'. B. Amendment No. 837 An amendment to the Districting Map No. 25 has been requested to rezone the property to the MFR [1.5 x B.A.](8du) consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment 95-3(E) to develop density and intensity requirements for the site, and require the approval of a site plan review. Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 837, the adoption of the attached draft resolution is suggested. C Site Plan Review No. 75 In conjunction with the proposed General'Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), language has also been included which requires the approval of a site plan review for the proposed project. Required Standards for Site Plan Review The review of site plans have specific standards of review as established in Section 20.01.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Each standard is listed below, Arith'a brief discussion of the project as it relates to each Sites subject to Site Plan Review muter the provisions of Section 20.01.070 of the Mimicipal Code shall be graded mil developed with due regard for the aesthetic rpialities of the natural terrain, harbor, mid landscape, giving special considerailloh to waterfront resources and unique knidforms such as coastal bluffs or other sloped areas, trees said shntbs shall not be indiscriminately destroyed.• No unique landfolms exist on site, since the site,is currently developed uith residential -uses: 2. Development shall be compatible with the character of the neighborhood and surroinrding sites and shall not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of the surroiailings and of the City: The proposed development is in keeping with the existing residential and commercial development along Orange Avenue and Old Newport Boulevard, respectively, and will not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of the surrounding area, including the neighboring Old Newport Boulevard Specific Plan Area Development shall be sited and designed to maximize protection of public views, with special consideration given to views from public parks and from roadways designated as Scenic HigIn+xo,s and Scenic Drives in the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plat: 'There are no significant public views available from Orange Avenue which are being adversely Gmen! Pim Amcn&ncM No. 95.3 (4 Amavl=g No. 937, Site Pim Roicw No. 75, RmbdiNicion No. 1021, D.,, a 7, 1995 Page fY impacted by the proposed development. There are no significant public views available from 15th Street. used on this information, it is stab's opinion that the proposed project has been sited so as to protect existing views from public parks and roadways and scenic drives. 4. Eirvirotunetntally setisitfve areas shall be preserved and protected No structures or k dform alteration shall be permitted in enviro menially sensitive areas unless spec fe mitigation measures are adopted which will redce adverse impacts to an acceptable level or the PImi ring Commission or City Council, on review or Wpeal, finds that the benefits outweigh the adverse impacts. The site does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas. S. No structures shall be permitted in areas of potential geologic hazard unless specific mitigation measures are adopted which will reduce adverse Impacts to mn acceptable level or the Plmuring Commission or City Council, on review or appeal, finds that the benefits outweigh the adverse Impacts. The site is not located in an area of particular geologic hazard, other than the seismic hazards commion to the Southern California area. 6. Residential development shall be permitted in areas subject to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL only where specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels in exterior areas to less than 65 CNEL mid reduce noise levels in the interior of resWences to 45 CNEC or less: The project is not located immediately adjacent to any high volume traffic road or highway and Newport Boulevard Is distant enough that the noise generated by the traffic is well under allowable limits. 7. Site plan and layiout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access ways, and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects of site development: The applicant has designed the project so as to provide vehicular access to the site from adjacent alley at the rear of the project, with the c4ception of a two cargarage which will take access from 15th Street. Such a design is an acceptable means of access to the site as determined by the Public Works Department and the Planning Department as conditioned by the attached Exhibit "A". $. Development shall be cousutent with specific Generall'!mn and applicable Specific Area Plan policies and objectives, and shall not preclude the implementation of those policies mitt objectives: As discussed in the General Plan Compliance section, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission in General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E). If approved by the Planning Commission, this Site Plan Review will not become effective unless GPA 95-3 (E) is approved by the City Council. 9. Development shall be physically compatible with the development site, taking into consideration site characteristics including, but not limited to, slopes, submerged areas, and sensitive resources: The site is relatively flat and only minimal grading will be necessary. 10. ff7wi feasible, electrical and similar mechanical equipment end hash and storage areas shall be concealed Conditions of approval have been imposed on the project which will mandate oeneesl Man AnxMned No.9s3 (EJ AmaAiwd No. 037, Silt Man Raiew No, 73, Reaubdisision No.1021, Dwmk&7,1993 Pagg� the screening of electrical and mechanical equipment, and to conceal trash areas within enclosures and undergrounding of utilities. 11. Archaeological mid historical resources shall be protected to the extent feasible: There are no known significant archeological or historical resources on -site. 12. Commercial development shall not hzie significant adverse effects on residences in art abutting residential district• The project is not a commercial project and is compatible with the neighboring residential and commercial properties. The Newport Beach Municipal Code also provides that if all of the applicable standards noted above are met, the Planning Commission shall approve the development. Further, that conditions may be applied when the development does not comply with the applicable standards and shall be such as to bring said development into conformity. Project Development Characteristics PERIv MEDlREQ'D ,: :.. ' •:' Proposed;•.. -- Gross Land Area: 15,792 sq. ft. Buildable Area: 10,321±sq. ft. Gross Floor Area (x Buildable Area) 18,062± sq. ft. 13,926± sq.ft: (1.75 x B A) 1.35 x B.A-) F Setbacks: Front: (Orange Avenue) 20 ft. 20 ft. Side (15th Street): 6 ft 10 in.. 10 ft. @ Building 5 ft. @ Garage.(2 garage spaces withaccess from 15th street) Rear: Zero 5 ft Parking Provided 16 covered and 4 guest 16 covered spaces and 4 (1 covered space/unit, guest spaces' plus 0.5 guest spacelunit) ' All but 2 spaces take access from the 20 foot wide alley at the rear or the property. Genml Plan An=dnx�t No. 95-3 (E) Amendnxnt No. 837, Site flan Review No. 75, Rembdivision No. 1021, Dec mbx 7, 1995 /ice PageX Building Height: Open Space: Proposal Modification 28 foot average roof height; and 33 to peak of pitched roof 61,926± cu. R, 24 foot average roof height; and 25 feet to peak of highest pitched roof, 28 feet to highest point N 1,926± cu. R. Also included in the application is a modification to the Zoning Code to allow a portion of a two car garage to encroach 1 feet 10 inches into the required 6 foot 10 inch side yard setback adjacent to 15th Street Since the property is triangular in shape and the frontage along Orange Avenue is extensive, the Municipal Code requires that the side yard setback for MFR properties in excess of 50 feet wide be a minimum of 8% of the average width. A simple numerical average of the frontage divided by 2 yields an average width of 85.1 feet, x 8% would generate a sideyard setback requirement of 6 R. 10± in.. The applicant is proposing to maintain a 10 foot setback with a majority of the project and is requesting that a portion of a two car garage be permitted to encroach to within 5 feet of the 15th Street property line. Staff has no objection to the proposed request, since the previous width of Lot No. 7, would have only required a 4 foot setback on that side. Staff is also of the opinion that the 5 foot setback would discourage parking in front of the garage which would impact pedestrian traffic on the public sidewalk. D. RexuhdUsion No. 1021 The proposed parcel map will combine the existing two lots into a single parcel of land for condominium purposes. Park Dedication Requirement In accordance with Section 19.50.020 of the Municipal Code, as a condition of approval of a parcel map, the subdivider is required to pay an in -lieu fee for each new dwelling unit to be created in conjunction with the parcel map. Inasmuch as the approval of this application would result in the creation of eight dwelling units, the proposed development will result in a net increase of six dwelling -units on the subject property. Therefore, the applicant will be required to pay an in -lieu park dedication fee for six dwelling units, prior to recordation of the parcel map. The fee is currently $6,894.37 per new dwelling unit. Oenenl Plm AftmAnent No. 95.3 (EJ Mmdnfm No. 937, ,1 Site Plan Review No. 71, ResuM ision No. 102 t, December7,1995 PageX Specific Findines and Recommendations, The adoption and amendment of the General Plan is considered a legislative act on the part of the City, and State Planning Law does not set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of a General Plan Amendment. This also applies to amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Section 20.01.070(F) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code sets forth the standards by which the Commission is to evaluate Site Plan Reviews. The project will be in full conformance with the provisions of the General Plan, if GPA 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 837 are approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. In addition, this Site PlanReview is subject to final action by the City Council in conjunction with GPA 95-3 (E), Amendment No. 837 and Resubdivlsion No. 1021. Section 19.12.040 (D) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that the Planning Commission shall make specific findings in order to approve or disapprove a resubdivision. Should the Planning Commission wish to approve this application, the findings and conditions set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" are suggested. In accordance with Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act, a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, if it makes any of the following findings: (a) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (See Appendix, "Conformance with the General Plan") (b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. (d) That the site is not physically suitable for the density of development. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (fj That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. (g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Grn l Plan Asxo>d,ncnt No. 95.3 (EJ Anxn&=t No. 837, 0 Sou Plan Rov No. 73, Rmbdivision No. 1021, Dou nb 7, 1995 Page,e Should the Planning Commission desire to approve this proposal, A Series of Resolutions must be adopted. Exhibit "A" defines the various actions for approval, Should the Commission desire to deny the General Plan Amendment and associated actions, a motion should be made to deny General Plan Amendment 95-3(E) and Amendment No. 837, and the findings in the attached Exhibit "B" are suggested. PLANNING DEPARTMENT By Javier S. CwAjMCP Senior Planner Attaclm,ents: Exhibit "A", Actions, Findings and Conditions of Approval Exhibit "B", Findings for Denial Appendix "A„ Districting Map No. 25 Resolution Recommending Approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment No, 95-3 (9) Strikeout and Underline of Revisions to the Land Use Element of the General Plan Resolution Recommending Approval to the City Council of Amendment No. 837 Tentative Parcel Map, Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations 1'9xT51'MAN'%7NOIPVnN07"951207,$PR75.DOC ornrnl Plm Amwdment No 0.3 (% Amendment No.137, 'ar) SAe Pim Rt%iew No, 75. Resubdivision No.10211 , X poumb,,7,1995 %' Pages EXHIBIT "A" ACTIONS, FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.95-3 (E), AMENDMENT NO.837, SITE PLAN REVIEW NO.75 AND RESUBDIVISION NO. 1021, A. General Plan Amendment No. 95-30r Adopt Resolution No._ (attached) recommending to the City Council the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), amending the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignate property located at 507-521 Orange Avenue, from "Two Family Residential" use to "Multi -Family Residential" use and requiring site plan review of the initial development of the property. B. Amendment No. 837.• Adopt Resolution No. approving Amendment No. 837, amending a portion of Districting Map No. 25, to rezone the property from the "R-2" District (Two -Family Residential) to "IviFR (8du)[1.5 x B.Aj" District (Multi -Family Residential); C Site Plan Reldew No. 7S, Approve the site plan review, making the following findings and with the following conditions of approval; Findings: That development -of the subject property will not preclude implementation of specific General Plan objectives and policies. 2. That the value of property is protected by preventing development characterized by inadequate and poorly planned landscaping, excessive building bulk, inappropriate placement of structures and failure to preserve where feasible natural landscape features, open spaces, and the like, resulting in the impairment "of the benefits of occupancy and use of existing properties in such area. 3. That benefits defived from expenditures of public funds for improvement, acquisition and beautification of streets, parks, and other public facilities are maximized by the exercise of reasonable controls over ,the layout and site location characteristics of the proposed development. 4. That unique site characteristics are protected in order to ensure that the community may benefit from the natural terrain, harbor and ocean, to preserve and stabilize the natural terrain, and to protect the environmental resources of the City. 0rn 1 Plan Amttdmrt No. 95.3 (E) Anw dms'"t No. 937, a1 Site Plan Rnins No. 75, R=bdMsion No. 1021, Dx bcr 7, 1995 PageX 5. That the proposed development fully conforms to the established development standards for the MFR District, with the exception of the proposed modification to the Zoning Code, as recommended for City Council approval by the Planning Commission in Amendment No. 837 and Site Plan Review No. 75. 6. That the development is compatible with the character of the neighborhood and will contribute to the orderly and harmonious development of surrounding properties and the City. 7. That the development has been designed to minimize impacts on public views from existing public streets and sidewalks. 8. That there are no known archeological or historical resources on -site. 9. That there are no environmentally sensitive areas on -site. 10. The property does not contain any areas of unique geologic hazards. 11. That the proposed project will meet City noise standards for the development. 12. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas and pedestrian and vehicular access are functional in that the project has been designed so as to limit vehicular access to the site from the alley, with the exception of a two car garage, accessing from 15th Street. 13. The development is consistent with surrounding land uses and Mth the goals and policies of the General Plan as recommended for City Council approval by the Planning Commission in GPA 95-3 (E). 14. ' That mechanical equipment and trash areas will be screened from view of neighboring properties and public streets. 15. That the Districting Map No. 25 has incorporated density and intensity requirements which limit the allowable construction to a maximum of 1.5 x the Buildable Area of the site (approximately 15,481 sq,ft. of gross floor area, this figure excludes the 200 sq.ft, credit for each enclosed parking space). 46. That the approval of the proposed project will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. That the approval of the modification to the Zoning Code is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 17. That Site Plan Renew No. 75 will not become effective unless and until General Plan Amendment 954 (E) and Amendment No. 837 are approved by the City Council. Gawd Pl+n AnwdnxM No. 95.3 (EJ Amm&xd No. 337. SikPlan Miew No. 75,ResubdivWwNo.1021, DWWOW 7,199! Page,e Conditions: 1. That the proposed'development shall be in substantial compliance with the approved site plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 1021 shall be fulfilled. 3. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 4. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 5. That both buildings shall be equipped with a fire protection system (sprinklered) acceptable to the Fire Department with a UL listed Central Station, and tested by the Fire Department. 6. That the fire sprinkler system shall be properly maintained at all times and shall undergo a State Fire Marshal Certification inspection every five years. 7. That any interior alterations to the structures shall be subject to the issuance of a building permit reviewed by the Building Department and Fire Department. 8. Any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated' in such" a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level as specified in the Noise Ordinance Regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. _ 9. That trash shall not be stored outside of any structure except when placed for pick-up on the regular refuse collection day., A trash enclosure shall be required if receptacles are to be stored outside ofa' building. 10. That Site Plan Review No. 75 shall not become effective unless and until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 837 are approved by the City,Council. " 11. That this Site Plan Review shall expire unless exercised within' 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 K of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, R Resu b dh fisioit Na 1021: Findings: 1. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. General Piro A= mcnt No. 95.3 (4 AmcodnK t No. 837, a� Site Plan Review No. 75, Raubd"ioe No. 1021, Dwanber 7,1995 PageX 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act. 3. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision 4. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. onditi ns' That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of Building Permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works and Planning Departments. The parcel map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD83) and that prior to recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital -graphic file of said map in a manner described in Section 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticie 18. 2. That prior to recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7.9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18, Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the Public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 5. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department, 6. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 7. That the intersections of the streets at the alley be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 30 miles per hour. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not Cenerd PUn Anw*w t No. 95.3 (El, Anxn&rw No. 837, AA Site hm Re%icw No. 75, ReabdivWon No.1021, Down e7,1995 Pagex exceed twenty-four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non -critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. 8. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at the comer of 15th Street and Orange Avenue be dedicated to the public. 9. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 10. That street improvements be constructed along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages. The improvements shall include curbs, gutters, sidewalks, curb access ramps and asphalt street paving. That the existing fire hydrant and power poles located along the Orange Avenue frontage be relocated as necessary in order to construct the required street improvements. That standard City street lighting be constructed along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. That the proposed landscaping be removed from the alley right-of-way at Orange Avenue and that full width concrete alley improvements be constructed to City standards between Orange Avenue and 15th Street. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 11. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 12. That a drainage study be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the parcel map. 13. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 14. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 15. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical. 16. That an encroachment Agreement be executed for any non-standard improvements to be constructed within the Public right-of-way. 17. That a park dedication fee for six dwelling units shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code prior to recordation of the parcel map. 18. Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance Section 10.28.040, construction adjacent to existing residential development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Con- Gmcral Plan AnxrAmd No. 93-3 (E� Anwndnxnt No. 837, a J Site Plan Rnim No 75, Raubdiv ion No. 1021, Dk bcr7, 1995 PageX struction shall not be allowed outside of these hours Monday through Saturday or at any time on Sundays and federal holidays. Verification of this shall be provided to the Planning Department. The City will ensure that construction time limits are enforced for the duration of construction activity on the project site. 19. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. P:\1tTS ITIANNW011 PUBNOY\PN9512071SPR7$.DOC Oamil flirt Amm& mt No. 94 (FJ An m.4nera No. 537, Silt Pltn Rc%iew No. 15, Rmb ii iiwn No. 1021, Dowiiber7,1995 PageJ6- �tO EXHIBIT "B" FINDINGS FOR DENIAL General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E) Amendment No. 837 Site Plan Review No. 75 Resubdivision No. 1021 A General Plan Amendment No. 9S-3 (E): Finding: 1. That the site is more appropriate for two-family residential use, given the location of the property on Orange Avenue. Is: Amendment No. 837: Findin : 1. That the site ismore appropriate for two-family residential use, given the location of the property on Orange Avenue. , C Site Plan Re)riewNo. 7S: Finding: 1. That the denial of the General Plan Amendment No., 95-3 (E), and Amendment No. 837, render Site Plan Review No. 75 inconsistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and therefore must also be denied. D. Resubdiiision No. 1021: Finding 1. That the denial of the General Plan Amendment No., 95-3 (E), and Amendment, No. 837, render Resubdivision No. 1021 inconsistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and therefore must also be denied. Gak I Pier .4nxnd=nt No. 95.3 (E), M nxlin l No. 837, Site Pim Review• No. 75, Mutdi%ision No. 1021. Do=bx 7, 1995 Page M - .1►10 0 LOCATION: Lots No. 7 and 8 of Tract No. 443, on the southwesterly comer of Orange Avenue and 15th Street; located at 507-521 Orange Avenue, ZONE: R-2 APPLICANT: Morgan Development (Max Morgan, applicant), Costa Mesa OWNER: Morgan Development, Costa Mesa • Environmental Compliance (California Environmental Quality Act) Determined that it is categorically exempt under Class 1 (Existing Facilities). Conformance with the General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site for "Two -Family Residential" use, the proposed General Plan Amendment will change that designation to "Multi -Family Residential" use. Background At its meeting of October 5, 1995, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to initiate General Plan Amendment No. 95.3 (E) and directed staff to proceed with the preparation of any necessary documents and set for public hearing before the Planning Commission. The applicant subsNuendy submitted the applications which are currentlyunder consideration. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT CHANGES The proposed changes will read as follows: Proposed General Plan Amendment No. 95.3(B) Land Use Element Page No. 49 and 50 Old Newport Boulevard Area (Statistical Area HI) 1. Old Newport Boulevard. This commercial area is on the easterly side of Newport Boulevard between West Coast Highway and the City boundary. (see Map 12) The area is designated for Retail and Service Commercial land use, and has a maximum floor area ratio of 0.5/0.75. The area also includes Bolsa Park, a mini -park located between Old Newport Boulevard and Broad Street. [GPA 94-2(A)]. The area has been designated for the preparation of a Specific Area Plan, to resolve problems of access and orientation created by the realignment of Newport Boulevard, and to encourage redevelopment of the @nml Plan Amidnwo No. 95.3 ft Anierk*w [ No. 237, Site Plan Review No 75. Rrtubdimim No. 1021, „y Deomk r7,1995 �t Page,Yi- a `� existing uses to administrative and professional uses as well as service and retail uses. Residential uses may be permitted in conjunction with primary office or commercial uses up to a total floor area ratio of 1.25 in areas easterly of North Newport Boulevard. One unit is allowed in this block for each 2,375 sq.ft. of buildable lot area. 2. West Newport Heights. This area encompasses the residential areas westerly of Santa Ana Avenue. The area is allocated 401 397dwelling units, and is designated for either Single Family Detached or Two Family Residential land use, except for that residentially designated twonerty located on the southwesterly -corner of Orange Avenue and 15th Street which shall be designated for Multi -Family Residential land use with a maximum allocation of 8 dwelling units. Development of any multi -family residential project shall be subject to approval of a site plan review. No subdivision which will result in additional dwelling units is allowed.[GPA 89-3(D); GPA 91-1(D)] ESTIMATED GROWTH FOR STATISTICAL AREA HI Residential (in du's) Existing Gen.Plan Projected 111/87 Projection Growth 1. Old Newport Blvd. 2. West Newport Hgts T07AL Population Amendment No. 837 CommemW Cm sq.ft.) Existing Gen.Plan Projected 1/1/87 Projection Growth 184,821 325,410 140,589 -0- -0- -0- 184; 8 21 325,410 140,589 The proposed amendment to rezone the subject property from the "R-2" District to the '%IF'R (8du)[1.5 x B.A.]" District, also requires that the appropriate districting map be revised. A copy of the proposed change to Districting Map No. 25 is attached for the Commission's information. Ger 1 Plan Amendment No. 95.3 (EZ AnwArrml No. 837, Site Ptah Rc%iew No. 75, Resubdivision No. 1021, December 7, 1993 Page a • {gE r � • Y ' R•2 � i <, ✓ cry d lM ,:iu.r e:'x.. Y 9'�: `fie R-'2 • Y R-2 R-2 R-! R / S R_/ nT 1 r� Y ••Y V � � w N A • n�N Y y� � • Y} fawY fr e,Y lo, a� .. R4 a � �'i A � Y a♦ le P %it IL i G SSC wDANA f. • A P F C \� 'LS rfe � rft a tl,J a i; Jw ti JCS, L c\ ~ "(lea�a !no\✓ A PF PF o (i000J '•�r e �,I? ry`7 y a = A P F Ql r• 'Y•ff. APF- H N I rF at may,. MIIIITi�L � SO �*-((d �*c, �t APF-x Arf �} MW IV /`1(MMr✓ Iw1 }lYt / idS h DISTRICTING MAP 1NPORT BEACH — CALIFORNIA (4.UY[IA}YfJINA p1fAUYjp(C IKt,44Vl7Mt[I�rLT IIUI 1NRL 7AYII.Y 11p0[Mi4t GPIT emmoKsm- pUPI[7( OlMT1AL ev"Al. CowsokISA. MlLTIPI[1MIL wOmn1l YAM-WACTU"M CCMNNNG OrMICT1 V10.ARSWED aY,�wFir YMI✓Y.(`,f_i1 MlLCf"i�• /MM IRS.YJ 1,YY4� NMu C.L.\ w • . P•Y 13 I} JI✓ /II✓Y.1� NL4 M4� A. Y, • RESOLUTION NO. i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE THE PROPERTY FOR MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE AND ESTABLISH THE PERMITTED DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT. [GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-3(E)] WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation of the Newport Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the City of Newport Beach; and . WHEREAS, the Land Use Element designates the general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land and building intensities in a number of ways, including residential land use categories and population projections, commercial floor area limitations, and the floor area ratio ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Land Use and Circulation Elements are correlated as required by California planning law; and WHEREAS, the provisions and policies of the Land Use and Circulation Elements are further implemented by the traffic analysis procedures of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the implementation programs of that Ordinance and the Fair Share Traffic Contribution Fee Ordinance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider Amendment No. 95-3(E) to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the consideration of the above referenced amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the project has been determined to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 5 (Nimor Alteration in Land Use), inasmuch as the site is currently zoned for residential use; and 3V WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires that the development of the subject property be subject to the approval of a site plan review. NOW, TI9EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment 95.3(E), which would redesignate the site from No -Family Residential to Mull -Family Reslde),dal land use, to increase the dwelling unit entitlement for an additional 4 dwelling units within Statistical Area No. I1-1(2) (where 4 dwelling units are Currently permitted) so as to allow the development of an eight unit residential condominium project, subject to the securing of a site plan review, is recommended for approval by the City Council as follows in the attached "Exhibit 1" of GPA 93.3 (E): ADOPTED this day of 1995, by the following cote, to wit: BY TOD W. RIDGEWAY CHAIRMAN BY MCHAEL C. ZR RZLEY SECRETARY Attachment: Exhibit 1 AYES NOES ABSENT K.tN P31N1.4\';.L\O1 pUaS0T9! 120TSPR7lLttK.RKS "EXHIBIT V of..GPA 95-3(E) Proposed General Plan Amendment No 95-3(E) Land Use Element Pages No. 49 and 50 Old'Newport Boulevard Area (Statistical Area III) 1. Old Nexport Boulevard. This commercial area is on the easterly side of Newport Boulevard between West Coast Highway and the City boundary. (see Map 12) The area is desig-nated for Retail and Service Commercial land use, and has a maximum floor area ratio of 0.5/0.75. The area also includes Bolsa Park, a mini -park located between Old Newport Boulevard and Broad Street. [GPA 94-2(A)). The area has been designated for the preparation of a Specific Area Plan, to resolve problems of access and orientation created by the realignment of Newport Boulevard, and to encourage redevelopment of the existing uses to administrative and professional uses as well as service and retail uses. Residential uses may be permitted in conjunction with primary office or commercial uses up to a total floor area ratio of 1.25 in areas easterly of North Newport Boulevard. One unit is allowed in this block for each 2,375 sq.ft. of buildable lot area. 2. West Neuport Heights. This area encompasses the residential areas westerly of Santa Ana Avenue. .'The area is allocated 401 397dwelling units, and is designated for either Single Family Detached or Two Family Residential land use, except for that residentially residential proiect shall be subject to approval of a site plan review. No suDcAlsion which will result in-idditional dwelling'units is allowed.[GPA 89-3(D); GPA 91-1(D)) 1. -Ord Nmport-8hd. 2. West Nc%%Port Hgts. TOTAL Population ESMATED GROWTH FOR STATISTICAL AREA III Rcsid=tial (n du's) Existing pen -Plan ProjWod l/1/87 Projection Gro%;1h 12 38 26, 374 386 764 g�21}i2_14 Comnxvcial (in sqA) Evsting Gen.Plan Projected UIB7 Projection Gro"Ih 184,821 325,410 140,589 184.821 325,410 140,589 F.\WPSINI.ANN''NG\IPUDNOT%PN95120TSPR75LUE DOC "EXHIBIT 1" GPA 95-3 (E) Page 1 of I P33 RESOLUTION NO. — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM NfENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A PORTION OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 25 REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM THE "R-2" DISTRICT TO THE "MFR (8du)(1.5 x S.A.]" DISTRICT (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 837) WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation of the Newport Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and WHEREAS, Section 20.84.010 of the Municipal Code of the City of Newport Beach provides that Title 20 (the Zoning Code) may be amended by changing the zoning designation of Districts and other provisions whenever the public necessity and convenience and the public welfare require such amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a public heating on December 7, 1995, at which time this amendment to rezone the property from the R-2 District to the MFR District was discussed and dctemuned to be in confomtance with the proposed changes to the Newport Beach General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 95.3(E) to redesignate the subject property from "Two - Family Residential" use to "MuhDFamily Residential" use; and WHEREAS, land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning; and WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach has detcmuned that the proposed amendment is exempt under Class 5 (minor changes iri land use limitations), from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 20.84.30, the Planning Conmtission has held a duly noticed public hearing to consider Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code amending a portion of Districting Map 25; and WHEREAS, the Planning Con rt ission desires to recommend that the City Council approve Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code amending Districtinga 3 Map No. 25, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 to the Newport Beach Municipal Code, rezoning the subject property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (8 du)" District and amending a portion of Districting Map No. 25 as -follows: m m That the property located in the 500 Block of Orange Avenue, between Clay Street and 15th Street on the westerly side of Orange Avenue (507-521 Orange Avenue), more particularly described as, Lots 7 and 8 of Tract No. 443, be reclassified from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (8du)[1.5 x B.A.]" District and that portion of Districting Map No. 25 be amended accordingly. ADOPTED this _ day of . 1995, by the following vote, to wit: Tod W. Ridgeway, CHAIRMAN Michael C. Kranzley, SECRETARY AYES NOES MTRUI F;1HR51T"','SIVG11PlilNON31107-SPR75.L.\SD RFS .3� COMMISSSIONERS 11\ �W 9� A \ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions off approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council tlx r on of this Use Parrrit upon a determination that ON oper ' which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or detrimen the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or Sam welfare of the unity. 11. That this Use Permits expire unless exercised within 24 men from the date of approval as ed in Suction 20.80.090A of lix Newport Beach Municipal Code. 12. That prior to the issuance of building its for the pro enclosure, all applicable conditions on approv of Use Permit No 3516 be satisfied including all conditions relat to directio signage. rrr SUBJECT. Morgan Development Item 8 507-521 Orange Avenue • General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E) • Amendment No. 931 • Site Plan Review No. 75 • Resubdivision No.1021 • a modification to theZ4ndng Code to allow a 1 foot 10 Inch encroachment into the bf 'No 95- emend. Flo sPR No 7s Resub No_ 1 Modificati to zone Cc required 6 foot 10 Inch side yard setback adjacent to 15th Strcet. A General Plan Amerrdment to redesignate the property for Multi-Pamil Residential use and to establish the permitted density of development rezone the property from the "R 2" District (Two-family Residentral) t '%TR (Sdu)[1.5 x B.A,p' District (A4ui6-family Residential) and tim approval of a site plan review for the proposed developnm t. Approved l- ��lo COMMISSIONERS MINUTES soy �F�99o��oq�ym CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Staff reported that this is a series of applications which would allow tlK construction of an eight (8) unit townhouse, condominium type project o Orange Avenue near 15th Street in Newport Heights. The true effect oftlx changes would be to alter the density for the site in question which would allow 4 dwelling and double that density to 8 dwelling units. Tim applicant -has provided colored site plans that are posted on the wall fo Commission consideration. Staff was available for Commission questions. Chairman Ridgeway stated that they had Ieceived two letters tonight ir opposition and wanted to verify that the applicant has been given a copy o them. Public Hearing was Opened. Mr. Tod Schooler, 500 North Newport Boulevard representing applicant and project architect spoke to the Commission He began b speaking of the history of this particular parcel and' continued by expun lau ' how his client started and met with the City representatives on ideas, and, scale of plan ' His building is below the FAR to allow for design o smaller scale, in the concept of an R2 projec L This project has one setbac modification for a garage facing onto 15th Street resulting from suggestions ofthe.development review committee. In response to Commission inquiry, W. Schooler stated that he had reac the staff report and agrees to the terms and conditions attached to each o the items. Ms. Stacey Weis, 3233 Broad Street spoke in opposition to W. development expressing concerns with a multi -family residence in thi location. She then compared the lot sizes to other property sizes statin that if 8 units are allowed for this parcel, then this may set a precedence.fo larger lots to be granted 8+ units. Her expressed concerns were that then appears to be a different standard applied to that area of Newport Heigh than for the Santa Ana side. This area is R2 and she lives in there, now yot are talking about 8 units. The average size of those condos will be 1, 60( square feet with prices lower than the condos in the area are going for now 3� COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Decem6er7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX She concluded by comparing this proposed project unit size to otlu" that currently exist. Mr. Jerry Tucker, 466 Flower Street, Costa Mesa owner of property at 50 Old Newport Boulevard spoke to the Commission supporting this proposal He questioned the rear elevation of this project. He asked for additia landscaping in the rear; to disallow the allocation for an increase of tim property by 11% for future modest additions and trash enclosures should placed on the project, Mrs. Carol Tucker, 466 Flower, Costa Mesa, co-owner of building at 50 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke in opposition to this project citing Ngb density, setting a precedent and the look of the unit with 8 houses instead o 4. Mrs. Dolores Boroles, 510 Old Newport Boulevard - spoke to Ox Commission in opposition to this project citing parking problems. She thet questioned Commission about Old Newport businesses. She was assur by Commission that Old Newport is in transition and this will be continued. Commissioner Adams asked W. Schools what the trash receptacle provisions were and provisions allowing for additional square footage for minor modifications. W Schooley stated that each unit will have their own trash can. Howev«• there is space for a trash enclosure and if Commission wants, this can bc done. Staff commented that in the City of Newport Beach residential projects o this nature do have the option to elect for normal trash services as availabl in residential areas. Or, in an association of this nature, they can hav, commercial trash pick-up which would be paid for separately. If you do out trash cans, there is no extra cost. There are codes being enforced by General Services Dept, governing the hours which trash cans can be pl and also must be taken back in to a closed door or non -visual area. 3� COMMISSIO\G+fNERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1u1101110t1�y December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL r INDEX The nature of the provision for additional square footage allowing for mine modifications was to allow for flexibility in the design process but, given tlx site design, staff felt it was possible that an individual may be interested ' enclosing a patio with a possible living room addition that could Ix accommodated within the site plans and setbacks. However, this could bc omitted within the context of the site plan review. This patio enclown would be subject to normal zoning and building department review. If th requested any encroachment into the setbacks or any other diversions fro the zoning code, then they would 'have to go through the appropriat process which could involve Planning Commission review. Mr. Schooler added that there were some slight modification changes amount to approximately 200.square feet to the entire project. If they ar limited to a building permit issued to that final square footage, then thal would preclude anyone from coming in and deciding to do any additions o change building characteristics. He concluded by saying that the Associatio and the CCR's will not allow any addition to these units under an condition. Chairman Ridgeway concluded that then" condition could be deleted. Mr. Schooley then proceeded toile eiilubit§'showing where the' will be going in and gave an explanation to address Mr. Tucker's concerns. Public Hearing was Closed. Commissioner Selioh stated that this is a welldesigned complex Tlx benefits would be new construction to the area with public improvements ' the alley way. The zoning me, however, is a concern as it appears to spot zoning. With the approval of the condept, it would set the precedes in the area. This would send a message that perhaps the rest of the should be considered for increased zoning density. Anoth ,Properties concern is -the interface with the comrnercial,and residential looking t intensify the use of residential use potentially 'in the future creating mo points of conflict. It would be, bad policy, to take one parcel lice this t create a type of zoning density that is out of scale and out of character in tIx neighborhood even though it is a nniic�eproject and well designed: If tlx r/ COMMISSIONERS MINUTES c��b\�'%, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH D 7 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL Commission does approve this tonight, it would be important to make statement that the approval of the zoning on this site does not indicate that is something that Commission would be in favor for the rest of the parcels. CommiWona Adams observed that from the physical lay out of this area ' dffi'erent as it stands out in the end of the neighborhood. The lot shape atx some of the other discussed considerations reduce the likelihood that precedence would be set for the rest of the area. There are uniqu characteristics present that are not on the other R2 lots. The positioning o the residential next to commercial, although the relative intensity is one marginally different than the other R2 lots, is not going to create much mor of a problem than if it were developed under current zoning. He ask about the uses on the other side of the alley. Chairman Ridgeway answered at the corner of Orange and Old Newport i an office building, directly behind that is a SCE sub -station, moving up Ol Newport at I Sth there is an optometrist than Mr. Tucker then Mra. Bowiet (the only residential). Commissioner Adams stated that the land uses appear to be as compittible as possible for that type ofinteiface between business and residential. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that it appears that the Planning Department Public Works, everybody has worked out something they fed is at appropriate use for this site. It is quite common to buffer commercial ark lower density residential with could -family. He does not see it as being bac per& certainly there is no precedence being set here for the rest of tlm R2 properties. He would support this item Chairman. Ridgeway reaffirmed Commissioner SelicWs comments about no setting precedence and would like to we put in the Findings within thb unique situation wording relating to this not being a precedence. Commissioner Gifford stated that she is in agreement that this is no intended to be a precedent, it is generally accepted that no individual zonin decision that is specific to a particular parcel necessarily sets a precedence 4b COMMISS\IONEaRS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 aoLL CALL INDEX Her concern is making a finding and putting into the record that this doa not seta precedent would be the implication of all the times we do not sa that. This parcel clearly has some unique characteristics. Assistant City Attorney Clauson verified that in agreement 'Aitl Commissioner Gifford's statement that factors can be clearly established ir the record that are unique to this property, that would be sufficient. Thi I would not be precedence setting for any other application. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that in making this motion it is not hi intention to make any type of precedence setting regarding the properties in the same general area. Commissioner Thomson stated this area is too dense. It is nice to have buffer between the commercial and the residential, but 8 units on thb Motion * property (15,000 square feet) or 22 units per acre is too dense. These wil be small units of 1,400 square feet; the plan is terrific and it is a great use o the property, but he believes that this is too much He would suppo cutting this back and not worrying about setting a precedence, he would lik it to be less dense. Motion was made for approval of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E) adopting Resolution No. 95-1417 and for approval of Amendment No. 83 and adopt Resolution No. 95-1418 and for approval of Site Plan No. 75 an itesubdivision No. 1021 in accordance with the findings and conditiorL removing the 11% which will be recalculated and adjusted accordingly staff. Commissioner Gifford stated she will be supporting the motion, b expressed a commitment to maintaining lower density zoning and th upgrade of the neighborhood. She has driven the property in reviewing thi project and as everyone has commented, this is an excellent project. It ha the potential to take care of a piece of property that does have some uniqu characteristics in terms of location, pre-school and what will be abandoned sub -station and other properties behind it. It can do fortlx neighborhood in the context of that piece of property what she would lik ;44- COMMISSIONERS h; Noq CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX to see for it in what otherwise might be low density zoning. She expressed her support of this motion. teS MOTION CARRIED - 5 Ayes, 2 Noes :s A. General Plan Amendment No. 9&3(E): Adopt Resolution No. 1417 (attached) recommending to the City Counci the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), amending the LUX Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignat property located at 507.521 Orange Avenue, from "Two Farril Residential" use to "Mold -Family Residential" use and requiring site plat review-oftheinitial development of the property. B. Amendment No. 937: Adopt Resolution No. 1418 approving Amendment No. $37, amending portion of Districting Map No. 25, to rezone the property from the "R 2' District (Two -Family Residential) to 'UM (8du)(1.37 x B.A.T' Distri (Multi -Family Residential); C, Siten Review No. 75. Approve the site plan review, making the following findings and with the following conditions of approval: md' 1. That development of the subject property will not predud implementation of specific General Plan objectives and policies. 2. That the value of property is protected by preventing develop characterized by inadequate and poorly planned landscapin . excessive building bulk, inappropriate placement of strictures failure to preserve where feasible nahual landscape features, o spaces, and the Me, resulting in the impaimxnt of the benefits o occupancy and use of existing properties in such area. COMMISSIONERS pf3 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL h {. INDEX 3. That benefits derived from expenditures of public funds fo improvement, acquisition and beautification of streets, parks, arm I other public facilities are maximized by the exercise of reasonable controls over the layout and site location characteristics of th proposed developmeaL 4. That unique site characteristics are protected in order to ensure tba the community may benefit from the natural terrain, harbor ocean, to preserve and stabilize the natural terrain, and to protec the environmental resources of the City. 5. That the proposed development fully conforms to the established development standards for the WR District, with the exception o the proposed modification to the Zoning Code, as recommended fo City Council approval by the Planning Commission in Amendmen No. 837 and Site Plan Review No.75. 6, That the development is compatible with the character of th neighborhood and will contribute to the orderly and ham»nio development of surrounding properties and the City. 7. That the development has been designed to minimize. impacts o public views from existing public streets and sidewalks. S. That there are no known archeological or historical resources o site. 9. That there are no environmentally sensitive areas on -site. 10. The property does not contain any areas of unique geologr hazards. 14. That the proposed project will meet City noise standards for tl development. 12. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas and pedestriar and vehicular access are functional in that the project has beet �3 COMMISSIONERS C17Y OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX designed so as to limit vehicular access to the site from The alley, with the exception of a two car garage, accessing from 15th StreeL 13. The development is consistent with surrounding land uses andwitt the goals and policies of the General Plan as recommended for C Council approval by the Planning Commission in GPA 95-3 (B). 14. That mechanical equipment and trash area will be screened froff view of neighboring properties and public streets. 15. That the Districting Map No. 25 has incorporated density and intensity requirements which limit the allowable construction to maximum of 1.37 x the Buildable Area of the site (approximate) 14,139 sq.ft. of gross floor area, this figure excludes the 200 sq.ft credit for each enclosed paddng space). 16. That the approval of the proposed project will not, under tIv circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing am working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injuious t property and improvements in the neighborhood or the genera welfare of the City. That the approval of the modification to th Zoning Code is consistent with the legislative intent of Trtie 20 0 the Municipal Code. 17. That Site Plan Review No. 75 will not become effective unless atx until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 83 are approved by the City Council. Conditions. 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial compliam with the approved site plan, floor plans and elevations, except noted below. 2. 'That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 1021 shall tk firlfillcd. COMMISSIONERS MINUTES y0cpC\�Cj so. Fey oy�o9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestriar circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 4. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee IX paid. 5. That both buildings shall be equipped with a fire protection systen (sprinklered) acceptable to the Fire Department with a UL Ustec Central Station, and tested by the Fire Department. 6. That the fire sprinkler system shall be properly maintained at al times and shall undergo a State Fire Marshal Certification inspectio every five years. 7. That any, interior alterations to the structures shall be subject to tIX issuance of a building permit reviewed by the Building Departmen and Fire Department. S. Any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be sour attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sour level as specified in the Noise Ordinance Regulations of th Newport Beach Municipal Code. 9. That trash shall not be stored outside of any structure excep when placed for pick-up on the regular refuse collection day. trash enclosure shall be required if receptacles are to be storec outside of a building. 10. That Site Plan Review No. 75 shall not become effective unless WX until General Plan Amendment 95-3 (E) and Amendment No. 83 are approved by the City Council:' 11. That this Site Plan Review shall expire unless exercised within 2 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 26.01.07 K of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. a5 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX JB, Resubdivision No.1021: Findings: 1. 'That the design of the subdivision improvements will not confli with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer pet Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 0 the Subdivision Map Act. 3. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newporl Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 4. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from planning standpoint. Conditions. That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of Buildin �1. Permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works an Planning Departments. 'Ac parcel map shall be prepared on th California coordinate system (NAD83) and that prior t recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparin the map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City o Newport Beach a digital -graphic file of said map in a marine described in Section 7-9.330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. ,2, That prior to recordation 'of the parcel map, the surveyor/engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary o the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7-9-330 an alo COMMISSIONERS tit ?i'nyn Fq.L p MINUTES CITY OF NEW'PORT BEACH December 7,1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (on inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monument shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion o construction project. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying sure the be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of Public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map o • ' obtain a building permit prior to completion of the publi improvements. 5. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual wate service and sewer lateral connection to the public water an sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Work., Department and the Building Department. 6. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestriar circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 6 7. That the intersections of the streets at the alley be designed t provide sight distance for a speed of 30 miles per hour. Slop landscape, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in th sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lin shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. The sight distan requirement may be modified at non -critical locations, subject t approval of the Traffic Engineer. 8. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner of 15th Str and Orange Avenue be dedicated to the public. 4 COMMISSIONERS ����� 9s /9P� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 MOLL CALL INDEX 9. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance o any building permits. 10. That street improvements be constructed along the Orang Avenue and 15th Street frontages. The improvements shal include curbs, gutters, sidewalks, curb access ramps and asphal street paving. That the existing fire hydrant and power pole located along the Orange Avenue frontage be relocated necessary in order to construct the required stree improvements. That standard City street lighting be constructec along the Orange Avenue and 15th Street frontages unles otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. That th proposed landscaping be removed from the alley right-of-way a Orange Avenue and that full width concrete alley improvement be constructed to City standards between Orange Avenue an 15th Street. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 11. That street, drainage and utility Improvements be shown ori standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 41,f� 12. That a drainage study be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department for the on -site improvement onbr tp o recording of the parcelp 13. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 14. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and b movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by prope use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 15. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24,14 �� D COMMISSIONERS �s�sr 90 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 7, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the Ci Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable o impractical. 16. That an encroachment Agreement be executed for any non- standard improvements to be constructed within the Public right of -way. ; 17. That a park dedication fee for six dwelling units shall be paid ' accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code prior t recordation of the parcel map. 18. Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance Sectio 10.28.040, construction adjacent to existing residenti development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:3 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m on Saturday. Construction shall not be allowed outside of th hours Monday through Saturday or at any time on Sundays an federal holidays. Verification of this shall be provided to the Planning Department.' The City will ensure that constructio time limits are enforced for the duration of construction activi on the project site. 19. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recordec within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. sst 52 DECEi iBER 7, 1995 PUNNING COMMISSSION CI TY OF NEWPORT BEACH RE MORGAN DEVELOPMENT FOP. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 95-3 (E). ADMENDMENT NO 83 .. 51TE PLAN REVIEW NO. 75 AND RESUBDI VI SIGN NO 102 i ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50?-521ORANGE AVENUE AS e RESIDENT OF 3216 CLAY STREET, I WANT TO REGISTER MY DISAPPROVAL OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT. AS A RESIDENT, I BELIEVE THIS AREA >HOULD pcMAIN CONED R2 WITH, MAXIMUM DEOTY OF TWO (2) UNITS PER LOT THE PPG.IECT BEFORE YOU IS REQUEST ING FOUR (4) UNITS PER LOT WHICH IS INCON5,15TANT WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS. I r'I!SAPDROVE OF THIS AVONING BECAUSE I BELIEVE THIS WILL CREATE A DENSITY PROBLEM AS WELL AS A TRAFFIC PROBLEM FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE ANY INCONSI5TANCY WITH DENSITY OR PLANNNING 5TI AINJARDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. r5iNCEFELY, 1 v4 %,1 9� VANCE COLLINS cd IJdLti:�O 5�5T LN '��1 rL99 mq v% : 'oN RNMd saoc.{aluj ljd-,H : I.M_q B R A D f ORD C SMITH A R C H I T E C T:' A. 1. A. Vdv ir,• rA i ry �" �� a`/0 livtr sV(6p") bra .'pe s0 Hor �!✓�� �� /� ��f�'"'��S� �/ /V ire-��►o r .'t` s �-lg�9 ISIS (AST COAST HIGHWAY CORONA DEL MAR. CAL11ORNIA 92625 17141 673.2482 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE THE PROPERTY FOR MULTI-FANALY RESIDENTIAL USE AND ESTABLISH THE PERMITTED DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT. [GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-3(E)j WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation ofthe, Newport Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element designates the general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land and building intensities in a number of ways, including residential land use categories and population projections and commercial floor area limitations; and WHEREAS, the Land Use and Circulation Elements are correlated as required by California planning law; and WHEREAS, the provisions and policies of the Land Use and Circulation Elements are further implemented by the traffic analysis procedures of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the implementation programs of that Ordinance and the Fair Share Traffic Contribution Fee Ordinance, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach, the City Council has held a public hearing to consider Amendment No. 95-3(E) to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the consideration of the above referenced amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the project has been determined to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) under Gass 5 (Minor Alteration in Land Use), inasmuch as the site is currently zoned for residential use, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the development of the subject property be subject to the approval of a site plan review. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of { Newport Beach that General Plan Amendment 95.3(E), which would redesignate the site from �j Twa' Family Residential to Multi -Family Residential land use, to increase the dwelling unit entitlement for an additional 3 dwelling units within Statistical Area No. H-1(2) (where 4 dwelling units are currently permitted) so as to allow the development of a seven unit residential condominium project, subject to the securing of a site plan review, is approved to read as follows: Land Use Element, Page 50 2. West Newport Heights. This area encompasses the residential areas westerly of Santa Ana Avenue. The area is allocated 401 dwelling units, and is designated for either Single Family Detached or Two Family Residential land use, except for that residentially designated property located on the southwesterly comer of Orange Avenue and 15th Street, which shall be designated for hlulti-Family Residential land use with a maximum allocation of 7 dwelling units. Development of any multi -family residential project shall be subject to approval of a site plan review. No subdivision which will result in additional dwelling units is allowed. ESTMIATED GRO'A7H FOR STATISTICAL AREA HI Residential (in du's) Commercial (in sq 0.) Existing Gen.Plan Projected Esssting Gen.Plan Projected 1/1/87 Projection Growth 1/l/87 'Projation Growth 1. Old Ncwport Blvd. 12 38 26 134.821 325,410 140,589 2. West Newport Hgls. 374 400 26 -0- -0- -0- TOTAL 386 438 52 184.821 325.410 140,589 Population 764 967 104 F.IK'P511PL1\'�I�G'ICC•RPTCC960i77•A839LU'E DOC ADOPTED this_th day of 1996: ATTEST: CITY CLERK hdAYOR F:KI'P51NL4S..TG,I CC-RPrICC960226:4837LUE.RES ORDINANCE NO. 96 = AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING PORTIONS OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 25 REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM THE "R-2" DISTRICT TO THE'WR (7du)(1.37 x B.A.]" DISTRICT (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.837) WHEREAS, Section 20.84.010 of the Municipal Code of the City of Newport Beach provides that Title 20 (the Zoning Code) may be amended by changing provisions whenever the public necessity and convenience and the public welfare require such amendment; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 7,1995, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, rezoning the subject property from the "R•2" District to the "DIFR (7du)(1 37 x B.A ' District and amending &-portion of Districting Map No. 25; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the subject amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations); and WHEREAS, on December 7, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held it duly noticed public heating regarding Amendment No. 837; and WHEREAS, on 1996, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The following described real property in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, more particularly described as, That property located in the 500 Block of Orange Avenue, between Clay Street and 15th Street on the westerly side of Orange Avenue (507-519 Orange Avenue), more particularly described as, Lots 7 and 8 of Tract No. 443. as shown on Districting Map No. 25, referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20 of said Code, is hereby amended so as to reclassify the property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (7du)(I.37 x B.A.]" District. SECTION 2. The Planning Director of the City ofNewport Beach is hereby instructed and directed to change Districting Map No. 25 referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the l Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20, to reflect the changes described in Section 1 above, and when said Districting Maps have been so amended, the same shall be in full force and effect and be part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Development of the property, which is rezoned to MFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.j pursuant to this Ordinance, shall be as specified in the MFR District Regulations of the Municipal Code and which specifies the permitted land uses and development standards and regulations for the property. SECTION4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Council shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. SECTIONS The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is also hereby instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said MFR District Regulations to the Property as described therein, the same shall be in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 6. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 26th day of February, 1996, and was adopted on the _day of 1996, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: CITY CLERK AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAYOR F:\..1PLANNINGt1 CGRP71CC9602261AE37-CC7.ORD 2 6-2s- 94 Cam-• �-i� 0 m MORGAN DEVELOPMENT 4le J�(�/ X4-L, I oe �wv 41) :: � MARINE WPO r, ���EVUPMARI El�CiI�CA 42fi63=� _ -8048 ORANGEAVFNUE_ I .cam' z 0 w W O b �O a�p�a =say o�W o"H 85zR w a0° zoaW eX:z m ORANGE—AMENUE, IOIIY a w w O n b a b Z0E- O�O4 OW m OAwF U Qa W Cd 0 Z O o W <Xvz ' Y '% :J , Y/ NNOt �pnN•> MG.Iv. 1� / tlNRI(1 a.• ]t11a10 NNlllt SLANT MIND 4V / • •[�I,AYM s MFNInrwWgUfNlivu ]r•w W • / _ i ..uuN•OtFen•mrw•YMITC•uVtY' up SY -��, W1b.•.r � ' / � • u]w.ua�•fn'•.u]{un••u{WILY ]fv O W Vzw // V 0 1Yr.u.NiauCmM iM V P ]p 0 ° a / p MON NV�FN p Nl01lAiN1N0•CMII.W Ip o Vi Ou%r�No%nvnutltl ]•'' C h Z ].=]v I'd �w Nuc•noa•sT%w ]p '\ © NTT•]1O•UMTo•uw-•irnnf 1p \ ru.tr..•.� \\ O Nly.•Wtltl Ngt•L•Mal•N' •p I< YYIbYACL•¢]tIM'tW.nT•' ]•'•'1—tl�l a T:.� ( •.�irnc t � f t �1 •vim wur� T" nv.TNn•cprus•+c fc..�ro c• Q���-vTosevu-nxveona +r+ n A. I . . ORDINANCE NO. 96 - 8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING PORTIONS OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 25 REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM THE "ii 2" DISTRICT TO THE "MFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.]" DISTRICT (Planning Commission Amendment No. 837) WHEREAS, Section 20.94.010 of the Municipal Code of the City of Newport Beach provides that Title 20 (the Zoning Code) may be amended by changing provisions whenever the public necessity and convenience and the public welfare require such amendment; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 7, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, rezoning the subject property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.]"'District and amending a portion of Districting Map No. 25; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the subject amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 5 (Ivfmor Alterations in Land Use Limitations); -and WHEREAS, on December 7, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a duly noticed public hearing regarding Amendment No. 837; and WHEREAS, on March 11. 1996, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The following described real property in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, more particularly described as, That property located in the 500 Block of Orange Avenue, between Clay Street and 15th Street on the westerly side of Orange Avenue (507-519 Orange Avenue), more particularly described as, Lots 7 and 8 of Tract No. 443. as shown on Districting Map No. 25, referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20 of said Code, is hereby amended so as to reclassify the property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.I" District. SECTION 2. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby instructed and directed to change Districting Map No. 25 referred to in Section 20,01.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20, to reflect the changes described in Section 1 above, and when said Districting Maps have been so amended, the same shall be in full force and effect and be part of Tide 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Development of the property, which is rezoned to MFR (7du)[I.37 x B.A.] pursuant to this Ordinance, shall be as specified in the MFR District Regulations of the Municipal Code and which specifies the permitted land uses and development standards and regulations for the property. SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Council shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. SECTION 5 The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is also hereby instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said MFR District Regulations to the Property as described therein, the same shall be in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 6. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 26th day of Febivarv. 1996, and was adopted on the I Ith day of March 1996, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: CITY CLERK AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS O'NFIL, WnJ S, D -:AY, NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ��NE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS NGNE MAYOR A,LL -t F:\WP51\PLANNING\1 CC-RPINCC960311\A837-CC7.ORD 2 wr A.B. A/C ACOUS. ADJ. ADJ. AL. AVG_ B0. BLOG. BLKG. BLT-IN B.S. CART. C.1. C.J. CLG. CNTR. CKTKT/. ANCHOR BOLT AIR CONDITIONING ACOUSTICAL ADJACENT ADJUSTABLE ALUMINUM AVERAGE, BOARD BUILDING, BLOCKING• MALT --IN BAR SINK CEILING -JOIST CEILING COUNTER COUNTERTOP ,-CASEDMO►ENING =tCONTIN000S'. •-iGMRTI,iltllNtR00 I.' MA VINO `:CERRNd ILE Unit 1 # 517 A.B. A/C ACOUS. ADJ. ADJ. AL. AVG_ B0. BLOG. BLKG. BLT-IN B.S. CART. C.1. C.J. CLG. CNTR. CKTKT/. ANCHOR BOLT AIR CONDITIONING ACOUSTICAL ADJACENT ADJUSTABLE ALUMINUM AVERAGE, BOARD BUILDING, BLOCKING• MALT --IN BAR SINK CEILING -JOIST CEILING COUNTER COUNTERTOP ,-CASEDMO►ENING =tCONTIN000S'. •-iGMRTI,iltllNtR00 I.' MA VINO `:CERRNd ILE Unit 1 # 517 Unit 2 1519 Unit 3 # 515 Livable 1500 sq-.ft. Livable. -1470-sq.ft. Livable 1660 sq.ft. Garage 460 sq.ft. Garage 415 sq.ft_ _.Garage 460 sq.ft. Total 1960 sq.ft. Total ' 1885 sq.ft.. Total 2120- sq.ft. h ' t LANDSCAPVRCHITECT _ GEOTECHN' LAND -ARCHITECTURE PACIFIC SOILS E 10653 PROGRES: 1620 THURSTON DRIVE P.O. BOX 249 LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92651 CYPRESS,, CALIF PHONE:' 714/497-7507 PHONE: 714/220• ARREVIAT•IONS FAU FORCED AIR UNIT INSUL. iHSULATIOR F.G. FINISH GRADE INT. INTERIOR F.G. FIXED GLASS JAL. JALOUSIE, F.G. FUEL GAS L. LAVATORY �. . FIN. FINISH LAN. LAMINATED ' LAM.PLAS. LAMINATED PLASTIC FIM.FLR. FINISH FLOOR L.F. LINEAL FEET/FOOT • ' F.J. FLOOR JOIST L.L. LOG LIGHTER FL, FLUSH L.T. LAUNDRY TRAY LUM. LUMINOUS FLUOR. FLUORESCENT LYR, LOUVER FMD. FOUNDATION F.O. FINISH OPENING MAR. MARBLE F.O.C. FACE OF CURB INS. WORRY .. - F.O.M. FACE OF MASONRY MAX. MAXIMUM F.O.S. FACE OF STUDS M.B. MACHINE BOLT- F.R.P. FIBEAGLAS REINF. - N.C. MEDICINE CABINET POLYESTER MAGR. MANOFACTURER FTC. FOOTING MIN. MINIMUM MIR. MIRROR �1- - M.O. • MASONRY OPENING, GA_ GAGE MID. -MOUNTED GALV. GALVANIZED MTL. METAL G.D. GARBAGE DISPOSAL ' G.O.O. GAR. DOOR OPERATOR N.G. NATURAL GRADS -• C.I. GALVANIZED IRON N.I.C. MOT IN CONTRACT=-. GL. GLASS MOM. NOMINAL •::�� SR. GRADE _ ,. Tn tt1ALE PLYWO. - PLYWOOD YIN. Y.PRF. VINYL VAPORPROOF S. S.C. S S PNLG. PANELING SEC. S POL. PPG. POLISHED POLISHED PLATE V. - WISHER - .' SCH. S SCRND, S PR. GLASS PAIR. W/ WITH SECT. 5 PSF POUNDS/SQUARE. M.C. WATER CLOSET SEL. • 5 S PSI FOOT POUNDS/SQUARE WD. W000 SEL.STR. SEN. 5' W. S P.T.O.F. INCH PRESSURE TREATED WOW WINDOW SHTHG• ' -S "DOUGLAS FIR M.H. HATER HEATER" SMMR. S PVC POLY VINYL CHLG- W/O WITHOUT - SL. •`- RIVE SL.AL.DR. S W/R WARDROBE SL.AL.WOW. ` VT. WEIGHT S►L• R. RISER S a P RAO. RADIAL/RADIUS - S.S. STD. R.A,G. RETURN AIR'GRILLE SW. RECPT. RECEPTACLE ROOM/AREA ABBREVIATIONS REF. REFERENCE, T. REFER. REFRIGERATOR B. BATH - T f B RE1NF. REINFORCING RR_ BEDIIOON- T.C. RE/S RE -SAWN BRPL BROON " TEL.- REO'0 REQUIRED CLO. CLOSET - TEM_GL. REV." REVERSE DIN_ DINING T R G REV. REVISION/REVISE DR. DRESSING TM.C. R.J.- ROOF JOIST ENT. . ENTRY T.O.C. - 10. ROUGH . FAN. FAMILY - AD -IN ROUGH -IN - GAR. 'GARAGE - - T.O.M. R.O. ROUGH OPENING KIT. KITCHEN- T.D.P. I... aanenev installed Editions). B. All fire sp contractor q.ft. q.ft. q.ft. E -. ':Total 3 d b�i.a fire sprinkk.r ' ppi j�CtOrS SialC LiCCILtG.'. rL"•r`'?(i`Y.` r C `3;�..}��: •.. -fir>� ;�YSAI/k' PACIFIC SOILS ENGINE-RIl7G, ;_:., -.a. 'a 19? a WAY -3` .•' a',l♦y�: ate. �i•=;Y,.:. 10653 PROGRESS ' O. BOX 2249 Cam,630' CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA,.CALff OR13I' . - _ 714/2 0 0770 PHONE: � _ = ' ° L S, SINK S.C. SOLID CORE SEC. SECOND - SCH. SCHEDULE SCgNO; SCREENED SECT. SECTION SEL• SELECT• SELECT STRUCTURAL SEL.STR. SER. SERVICE SKI. SHEET SHING. SHEATHIOG• SH MR- SIKIMER SL. -SLIDING ' SL.ALUM,DOOR. SL.AL.DR. SL.AL.NOM. SL.ALUR.MINOOM SPL. SPLASH SHELF AND POLE S B P SERVICE SINK . S.S. AAIDW, - STD. SMITCH SM. TREADIIQ• T. I I B BOTTOM. T.C. 'TOPtA TRASN tOHPA4TOR _ TtI FPNd1E ' yes}u-�•�;`•..nr• '- " ; �RO�sa.ft. Unit 6 # 509 Livable • 1575 sq.ft. Garage 420 sq.ft. Total 1995 sq.ft. JL_NT CIVIL CONSULTANT ENGINEERS SOUTH COAST SURVEYING UE„SUITE 3J 3214 CLAY STREET 92705 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 PHONE: 714/963-2511 or 714/631-8840 SYMBOLS '-' •- _ ,.z..:- r •ate : S6RlACE MOUNTED INCANDESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE ' :;+••'-� v RECESSED INCANDESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE INCANDESCENT PALL LIGHT FIXTURE "^•'"• SURFACE MOUNTED • '"�= FLUORESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE •, .-—��_� SURFACE MOUNTED - - •- -' r:�.,: SURFACE MOUNTED FLUORESCENT PALL LIGHT FIXTURE • TRACTIONAL-NP EXHAUST FAN, SWITCH CONTROLLED RECESSED • - {°^ ''•'"' ' ELECTRICAL CEILINGHEATER, SWITCH CONTROLLED - RECESSED • `- "' - RECESSED COYIIINATION Hp.ATER/EXHAUST TAN, SWITCH CONTROLLED • `.,� - - „.j- :{ter •o •. • ' � _q, 120V DUPLE X Cpt1VENIECB NECEPTACL.E AT 12"ABOVE t[OOR -- RECEPTACLE WITHIN CABINET vr'- +�':. K-; i- -• 170Y 011240Y, AS NOTED, CONVENIENCE , • ---•• "�ei-•�i3`" ._ > ' 140Y SINGLE CONVENIENCE NDCEPTIiCLE. ' VERIFY HEIGHT t-,,a-.. ♦�'`"=-y ,`` 120V DUPLEX CONVENIECE HECEPTACLS, SWITCH CONTROLLED-1/2 NOT - .• -.-_-•-E• -le-•,'r- 240V, AS NOTED. WATERPROOF DUPLEX RECEPTACLE •/CFI =s an 120V OR FLOOR TYPE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE. W/(.'OVER ..,nv M 2tOY_ AS NOTED, I THERMOSTAT h I a e SPEIIKBit OUTL 3.' SPEAKER VOLU O JUNCTION SO? O SMOKE OSTBC'{1 INTERCOM, El Tat�f 11 INTERCOM, R SJ�� LOOSE Oy I Ut NOSE BIBB �}. } w HOSE BIBBlt N'`B /UEL GIApi WOOD. MD. LIIJU)III1I1(tt1 MINSNAL� ARAMOUNT HAPI, CALIF is 800/400-57t LOCATION MITI t1FY HEIGHT LkaL OUTLET, .`COVER OR ADA F/ 'Bo APPROVED, JNIT. VERIFY 1 UNIT. VERIFY '• VALVE MEMBE IOU3 W AS BAT . 3/B. e E ALL V Unit 59511 Livable 1580 sq.ft. Garage 420 sq.ft. Total 2000 sq.ft. 1 N-IT Y M &P^ STRUCTURAL CONSULTANT -ILL) -)(q�,. Unit 6 # 509 Unit 7 # 507 rOr^ i` 13t,��. Livable - 1575 sq.ft. Livable 1510 sq.ft. 14AWAWA AtAoVJ. 'e-0.f*fl 1+11+0 Garage 420 sq.ft. Garage 395 sq.ft. Total 1995 sq.ft. Total .1905 sq.ft. i ESUFME, INC., STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 192-1 EAST CARNEGIE AVENUE, SUITE 3J SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705 PHONE: 714/261-1811 CIVIL CONSULTANT SOUTH COAST SURVEYING 3214 CLAY STREET NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 PHONE: 714/963-2511 or 714/631-8840 SYMBOLS SURFACE MOUNTED INCANDESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE RECESSED INCANDESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE - V SURFACE MOUNTED INCANDESCENT WALL LIGHT FIXTURE O SURFACE MOUNTED FLUORESCENT CEILING LIGHT FIXTURE SURFACE MOUNTED FLUORESCENT WALL LIGHT FIXTURE O RECESSED FRACTIONAL NP EXHAUST FAN, SWITCH CONTROLLED RECESSED ELECTRICAL CEILINGHEATER, SWITCH CONTROLLED RECESSED COMBINATION NEATER/EXHAUST FAN, SWITCH CONTROLLED 120V DUPLEX CONVENIECE RECEPTACLE AT 12"ABOVE FLOOR =09 120V OR24OV, AS NOTED, CONVENIENCE RECEPTACLE WITHIN CABINET �y�r M&2" 240V SINGLE CONVENIENCE RECEPTACLE, VERIFY HEIGHT �+/a 120V DUPLEX CONVENIECE RECEPTACLE, SWITCH CONTROLLED, 1/2 NOT =&Wp 120V OR 240V. AS NOTED, WATERPROOF DUPLEX RECEPTACLE ■/GFI =� 120V OR 240V, AS NOTED, FLOOR TYPE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE, W/COVER -�} TWO -POLE LIGHT SWITCH AT +42"MOTE FLOOR: *R" ABOVE COUNTER ENERGY CONSULTANT NED OLTHOFF 25461 PARAMOUNT DRIVE TEHACHAPI, CALIFORNIA 93561 PHONE: 800/400-5769 THERMOSTAT, VERIFY LOCATION WITH HEATING/AC LAYOUT SPEAKER OUTLET, VERIFY HEIGHT SPEAKER VOLUME CONTROL OUTLET, VERIFY HEIGHT JUNCTION BOX, WITH COVER OR ADAPTOR As REQUIRED BUILDING DEPARTMENT SMOKE DETECTOR, ICBO APPHOVED, CEILING •MOUNTED. UNLESS NOTE [CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CA - ------- 1, .. - ut<g m INS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE EXPRES INTERCOM, MASTER UNIT, VERIFY HEIGHT INTERCOM, REMOTE UNIT, VERIFY HEIGHT LOOSE KEY VALVE (KEY) HOSE BIBB (HB) HOSE BIBB WITH SHUT-0FF VALVE (HB/SOY) ihuu1Xt m1 rau.n........--.__ .. - AENT AUTHORIZED 3Y THEE-c PDANS, BEFORE. DUADM OR F TION, ; CRYNEWPORT ORi '.ICH. PIRH IRE ORDINANCES. PL+WS AND POUCIES O APPLICANT'S ACKNOW1ECGEUEPDT: (g9rumq FUEL GAS OUTLET (FG) OEFARTYENT SIGNATURE DATE WOOD, ROUGH. CONTINUOUS MEMBER. 3/6" OR LARGER WOOD, BOUGH. NON-COTTINUOU3 MEMBER, 3/8' OR LARGER � APPitOYAlTO SSUE MINERAL WOOL OR FIBERGLAS BATT INSULATION : BYDATE.-------�- STEEL MEMBER IN SECTION. 3/3" OR LARGER DETAIL , ' Ew CITY OF NW` ART BEACH Hearing Date: March 11, 1996 PLAWNnac\BU1M1NcDEPARTMENT, Agenda ItemNo.: •?l _ 33 o NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: Javier S. Garcia, AICP op ,� NEWPORT BFACK CA 92659_ (714) 644-3206 '(74) 644-32°O, FAX (74) 644-PSO REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Morgan Development (Max Morgan, applicant) 507-521 Orange Avenue SUMMARY: An amendment to Districting Map No. 25 in accordance with the previous approval of a General Plan Amendment with related applications to allow the construction of an attached multi -family residential subdivision including: • an increase in the permitted density of development from 4 units to 7 units; • a limitation in the permitted floor area of 1.37 times the Buildable Area of the site; SUGGESTED ACTION: Ordinance for Adoption; if desired, approve and adopt: 1. Ordinance No, 96- 8 (Anwndntent No. 837): changes to Title 20 (Districting Map No. 25) of the Municipal Code, to rezone the property from the "R-2' District (Two -Family Residential) to ' 11FR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District (Multi -Family, Residential). Background At its meeting of February 26, 1996, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 95-3 (E), Resubdivision No. 1021, Site Plan Review No. 75 and a modification to the Zoning Code. The Council also set for second reading Ordinance No. 96-8. A copy of the staff report to the Council and draft minutes dated February 26, 1996, are included in the council packet. PLANNING DEPARTMENT By — Javier S. GatUa, AICP Senior Planner Attachment: Ordinance No. 96-8 Items included in the Council Packet Only: Staff Report and Draft City Council Minutes dated February 26, 1996 F.1W P51TLANNINGI CC.RPr CC960311\M7CCLDOC My ORDINANCENO.96'1E AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING PORTIONS OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 25 REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM THE "R-2" DISTRICT TO THE `TBR (7du)(137 r BA]" DISTRICT (planning Commission Ameodment No. 837) WHEREAS, Section 20.84.010 of the IsLmicipal Code of the City of Newport Beach provides that Title 20 (the Zooing Code) may be wr4nded by changing provisions whenever the public necessity and convenience and the public welfare require Bach amendment; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 7, 1995, the Planing Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 837 to Title 20 of'the Newport Beach Municipal Code, rezoning the subject property from the "R-2" District to the "MFR (7du)(1.37 x B.A.)" District and amending a portion ofIY=ricting Map No. 25; and WHEREAS, the City Council has deter zned that the subject amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Q afity Act under Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use L:imitations); and WHEREAS, on December 7, 1995, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a duly noticed public hearing regarding Amendment No. 837; and WHEREAS, on 1996' the City Couoa7 of the City of Newport Beach held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this ord'utarx' NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION I. The following described real property in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, more par6w4rly described as, That property located in the 500 Block of Orange Avenue, between Clay Street and 15th Street on the westerly side of Orange AVeme p7-519 Orange Avenue), more particularly described as, Lots 7 and 8 of Tract No. 443. as shown on Districting Map No. 25, referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20 of said Code, is hereby amended so as to reclassify the property from the "R-2" District to the "\tFR (7du)[1.37 x B.A.]" District. SECTION 2. The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is hereby instructed and directed to change Districting Map No. 25 referred to in Section 20.01.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and by such reference made part of Title 20, to reflect the changes described in section 1 above, and when said Districting Map wve been so amended, the same shall be in full force and effect and be part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Development of the property, which is rezoned to MFR (7du)(1.37 x B.A.) pursuant to this Ordinance, shall be as specified in the MFR District Regulations of the Municipal Code and which specifies the permitted land uses and development standards and regulations for the property. SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Council shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. SECTIONS The Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach is also hereby instructed and directed to apply all of the provisions of said MFR District Regulations to the Property as described therein,, the same shall be in full force and effect and be a part of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION' 6. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 26th day of February. 1996, and was adopted on the _day of 1996, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: CITY CLERK AYES, COUNCIL MEABERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBFRS ABSENT COUNCB. W-MBERS MAYOR F.1wF511PLANNjNG11CC-FMC960311 W a37-M.ORD 2 3 S7-7- e 43 t spy x s,uX•� IA, ._ 1`- Flo'" Izi S i h JTr tiI4�.,t` G t !1 4 k h� � i 6• rn I(1 3 0, „r,r L c I �•� Z, �1 G- q 9•i 1) 4w�t.4b � G�tY'• FI I .rig � •; , i , �' q q G � �}„ •� 3-1 .i. (���xC r •lr) +x x I'K- y � 3Vv. I� 31,5 �.L3141) LZ-t. kr•s X��, � IUG •L +5 h z-Iu XX � - -4-7 it ` < GI�fJ.= S• ( l5';}, w r+ ,4 v C -- 47 Svy Y� i to23, vuj MpwePl 'WRG6diM14NNgLLanOLAYIOWWEttlGMtl 2-10 r � - 9 -f "L-3.(I — 4v��. �r T,t -f3 c. �a- 4= «�,u r• 2 _� u x-3 •--ter Z `.� - Z�ri : a4 q.p0•� LS- Lr'� l — r 4 Fi Lli, r it Wf 5rt&-:- 4.3-(, Kt3-6) — `t : 1 SDI ++(, 9114 a� j l— �;33, ry ' 4 c— a 5 (L8S • tr r t 2'0 a 3 Ks 1 t-- I O 'X I k- -L �Zz3 Cp i L -'I 440 4 3. New Construction Soils report is required for new construction. B. Rough Grading Report A rough grading report shall be required whenever a soils report is required by Section (A) of this guideline. C. Topographic Survey (Line and Grade) A topographic survey is required for the following types of projects: 1. For new construction. 2. For additions within 12" from the required setback. 3. Property corners must be located by a surveyor for the construction of fences. D. Slab Elevation and Setback Certificate Slab Elevation and Setback Certificate is required for new construction. E. Civil Certificate A Civil Certificate is required whenever a grading or drainage permit is issued for a new structure. For drainage permit in conjunction with minor work (small addition, swimming pool, etc.), a civil certificate is not required. F. Final Grading Report Typically, the final grading report is similar to the rough grading report but includes test results for grading work done after the pad has been graded such as retaining wall back fill, trench baekfill, subgrade compaction for flatwork and driveway, etc. To simplify the process, we plan to eliminate the final grading report and replace it by a certificate of miscellaneous site grading which is done subsequent to the rough grading. A new form is being drafted for this purpose. f fitL ZELP�G��.�� I647 77 �r �tizz y 5� Z5150 75q jqo - ,3�I '8( �7 bQ q2.+t t Y 62 '-7 �i 5 0 � i m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m UCISTIL NUWF-)CL)IIF cm . ��� t��j�f .&', �W-, Z1p ��mum \ � "`1j[ III.•. ' "'"� �, '`'H— \ice-- , YfYf 1 _•I _ � ?� is w"'^+,. �7���� 3�yar_•-.3 rs� ,. � �� y,��. 7 UNIT CCNUCMINIUM UUCJECT "W and MANCE NEWUCUT UUACti, CA BUILDING A Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 C m m m m TIMTr UNIT 3 Second Floor Unit 6 Unit 7 ,f, � i � fi fi, fiii fi fiiiii is � i� � � fi: � is i fii• am _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ULNIA O VLV11 D Second Floor MP"IL SIMUCUT 7 Unit Condominium Project 15th and Orange Newport Beach, CA I3UILUING A UNIT # 1 1500 Sq Ft UNIT # 2 1512 Sq Ft UNIT # 3 1660 Sq Ft DUILUING U UNIT # 4 1620 Sq Ft UNIT # 5 1580 Sq Ft UNIT # 6 1575 Sq Ft UNIT # 7 1510 Sq Ft 507 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 509 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 511 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 513 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 515 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 617 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 519 Orange Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' 15TH STREET i� i'GtOfi: S III -Riid_tuQ • , L��� aiFt 3 0�►� ifQfd :���'.!L : QQv Voirii�JllClt�lll��v.ft im::.: unnunuu mil!`ii!w�±�!!IW��I:::•::••�E;;:::::::: �ra - ado �o��� � �.. z •� r UCINTE NEWI)CIPT EXTMICES: Oversized two car garages with automatic door openers Sectional roll up garage door with windows Decorative Schlage entry door hardware Security dead bolt locks Concrete drives, walks & alleyway Gas outlet for barbecue INTE ICKS: 14 foot high vaulted ceilings Designer selected light fixtures Custom designed wood burning fireplaces Elegant ceramic or wood entry Spacious walk-in closets Sliding mirrored wardrobe doors Dimmer switches In various locations Rocker light switches At"I I2DAY": Full width glass mirrors over puliman top Price Pfister polished chrome faucets Flush mount space saving Zaca medicine cabinets M M COUVA41 f I ITCUENS: All appliances are G.E. Profile series and includes a spacious refrigerator Built In microwave with touch controls Energy saving dishwasher Luxury designer faucets Ceramic the countertops Maple cabinetry with concealed hinges and Cortron interiors Dramatic ceiling lighting QUALITY FF.ATUCES: Prewired for security systems Prewired for cable and telephone Firesprinklers throughout Smoke detectors 50 gallon water heater R 30 insulation in ceilings R-11 insulation in walls Dual pane vinyl clad windows All windows and doors exceed Title 24 Energy requirements Copper water plumbing Thermostat with set backs Gas and 220V in laundry area Insulated forced air furnace with Skylights in some units electronic ignition M= M M= M M M WEEL OP. CENTEa a . G P a Y' ''C a CO5ri Y / kf.9 , Q ccndr ° o deb _ •MESA' ¢ o� moo, /. �P 4 Cp° •�• P' NEWTON jy W1'1 TENMINAI g 13 ST PUNIC NEW CUTp� W _ FLD'S7a m OHMS WY .' 7 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT 'iN ' A" s sT a 16TH and ORANGE &CO i00 NEWPORT BEACH, CA _ �, aaooucTioN ci +Q c s .w CT y, GtyY%� 15TM ST IyJ °yxV �4•yyi4 YA dG� L 2. y y BP0 a I COAST! a �S'�`+cj 0 4xy a fnrG"f E'd AF i"Y.��ORei E y N f ���0ytbxxx�� Li% ESWME•'�A 0 1 .. 6i 4• 1. hyh a as a°' w" 470. a Llln... I . ' 2 Av( N .SPo c q a ' pvHOScJ1 N c rl. I PAQ.tV`� O q �CgfiC �65�aSS v� T �V ryA . ry� Ocean Views From Some Units `6- 0 V��P 4J J <" HEWrORT HARBOR '•Yi'-. �• / 1 O t '.HS, �. "IQ- }pVA1W A V 1PI.W01111 AV Vtt lG1.ORiA.F vcv y� sT AME Q � 6_wrt_oin� P r us �7 P I S/�S.77V� GNOA IJ/f EJ tLryff ; c rPO NE}Ny ' .•� A<f AjAY" COLLINS I$Lr�el CA LE Ig.t °C ORT I&WOORC B ICIITCLUB I/- Builder: Moroan Development, Inc. 714/54s-sws Sales By: posh properties, Inc. D.J. Helyer 714/971/-SICC