Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE$I I M I N U T E S CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS December 5, 1973 3:00'P.M. Newport Beach City Council Chambers Roll Call: Committee Members: Stephen Barnard Margo Skilling Stewart Woodard Gordon Glass Richard Spooner Alternate Committee Members: Goldie Joseph Frank Spangler Jerry Hill Elaine Linhoff Tom Houston Staff: William Foley, Senior Planner Richard Hogan, Community Development Director Shirley Harbeck, Secretary Bob Fowler; Assistant Director - Building Others Present: John Hamilton Carol Martin Harry Kamph Item No. 1 - Discussion of the recommendation to delete the control on the number of stories in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. Community Development Director Hogan reviewed this matter with the Committee and advised of the problems involved in the interpretation of the term "story". In discussing the matter, it was felt that if the term "story" was to be left in the R-1 and R-2 Districts, it should be re -defined. The Committee discussed in detail the number of stories directly above each other which could be obtained under the height limitation of 24 feet. They also discussed the matter of subterranean parking and which floor would be considered the first floor; density; interior design; and the definition of "story" as it is presently stated in the Municipal Code. Paqe 1. Motion was made by Mr. Woodard, and seconded by M'r. Glass that the Development Standards Committee recommend that any reference to the term "story" in the R-1 and R-2'Districts be eliminated from the development standards. Following discussion, the motion was voted on as follows: Ayes: Houston, Joseph, Barnard, Woodard, Glass, Spooner Noes: Skilling Following further discussion, motion was made by Mr. Glass and seconded by Ms. Joseph that the reasons for eliminating reference to the term "story" in the R-1 and R-2 Districts are as follows: 1. There is a control through the floor area ratio on total amount of living space which is a control over density. 2. There is a control on height as it effects the neighbors, neighborhood, and the City as a whole. 3. The law of the land which supersedes the law of the city states "a person is innocent until proven guilty" and the City should concern itself with "bootleg" units after the crime has been committed, and not be placing additional burdens on people who have no intention of,breaking the law. 4. There is less burden of interpretation by the Building Department. Ayes: Houston, Joseph, Barnard, Woodard, Glass, Spooner Noes: Skilling Item No. 2 - Discussion of the recommendation to limit the open space option to the front 12' of the structure. Community Development Director Hogan reviewed this matter with the Committee and the alternatives of placing the open space option in locations other than the front 12 feet of the structure. Following a discussion of the alternatives and the possibility of enclosing the open space at a latter date should it be allowed in the interior of the building, motion was made by Mr. Houston and seconded by Mr. Glass that the open space option remain in the development standards as recommended by the Planning Commission (i.e., that the formula should be buildable width times allowable height times 6 feet in all areas and that this additional open space should be limited to the front 12 feet of the structure). Ayes: Houston, Joseph, Barnard, Skilling, Woodard, Glass, Spooner Noes: None Page 2. Item No. 3 - Discussion of the recommendation concerning parking requirements in the R-3 and R-4 Districts. Community Development Director Hogan advised of City Council's concern over the effect of the parking standards on larger develop- ments which severely restricts the size of the units, Senior Planner Foley presented a chart to the Committee indicating parking requirements for various sized units and reviewed same with the Committee. The Committee discussed the various parking requirements and whether the parking should be in relation to the square footage of the structure or to the number of units on the property. They also discussed parking in relation to the number of bedrooms in a unit and life styles which may not necessarily generate a large parking requirement even though there•are more bedrooms. Frank Spangler suggested another alternative whereby 2 parking spaces per unit would be required up to 2,000 sq. ft. and 3 spaces per unit over 2,000 sq. ft.; and in no case should the requirements be more restrictive than in the R-1 District. Following discussion, motion was made by Ms. Joseph and seconded by Mr. Spooner to recommend that 2 parking spaces per unit be required for units up to 2,000 sq. ft. and 3 parking spaces per unit be required for units over 2,000 sq. ft. in the R-3 and R-4 Districts of West Newport, Balboa Peninsula, and Corona del Mar. The Committee discussed the motion and its relationship to the larger parcels of property rather than the typical smaller lots. There was also much discussion on the relationship of parking per unit rather than square footage of the structure. A substitute motion was made by Mr. Glass and seconded by Mr. Houston that in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 Districts, parking requirements be 3 spaces for each structure up to 2,400 sq. ft. plus 1 additional space for each additional 600 sq. ft. There was further discussion on whether parking should be required on a per unit basis or per structure basis; the burden of larger parcels being required -to obtain a variance or use permit in order to have an equitable amount of parking for a larger sized unit; and the inequity of placing greater restrictions on larger parcels or combination of smaller lots into larger parcels. The substitute motion was voted on and carried as follows: Ayes: Houston, Barnard, Skilling, Glass Noes: Joseph, Woodard, Spooner Following a short general discussion as to the Coastal Commission's policies and the disposition of the Committee's actions taken this date, the meeting was adjourned. Time: 6:05 P.M. Page 3. l STRUCTURE PARKING FORMULA SIZE UNIT SIZE (NO.UNITS) (SQ. FT.) 1000 1200 1500 1800 3 Spaces for each structure up to. 2400 sq. ft. plus 5 2.0 2.4 3.2 3.9 1 additional space for each additional 10 2.2 2.7 3.5 4.2 400 sq. ft, __. _ _ 20 2.4 2.9 3.6 4.4 3 Spaces for each 5 1.4 1.8 2.4 2.8 structure up to 2400 sq. ft. plus 10 = 1.6 1.9 2.4 2.9 1 additional space for each additional 20 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.0 600 sq. ft. One Space for each 5 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 700 sq. ft. 10 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 20 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 One Space for each 5 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 600 sq. ft. 10 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 20 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 Item No. Date o n Yes No Abstain Absent Cl uca/Hous jI ton Forgit Joseph Barryard i/ Spang:l er Skilling Ba1alis Wood Hi 11 G1'ass Lin, off Spoo er i Bethel Item No. Date /�/��� M 0 t i 0 n Yes No jAbstain Absent Cfucas Houston Forgi t Joseph Barnard Spangler Skill ing Balalis Woodard �-- Hill _ Gras ,✓� u Linhoff Spooner Bethel Item No. Date Re M 0 t i o n Yes No jAbstain — Absent Clucas Houston Forgit X Joseph Barnard Spangler Skilling Balalis Woodard Hill 61'a s s • Linhoff Spooner Bethel Item No. Date r Re M 0 t i n Yes No Abstain Absent Cluca/�Ouston F o r g i Josep� �.. j Barnard i Spangler Ski 11ing Balalis Woodard � Hill � BI'ass Linhoff Spooner Bethel Item No. Q),, Date Re li M 0 t u n Yes No Abstain Absent V,uca/CHo ston Forgit Joseph Barnard Spangler Skilling Baialis Woodard Hill 1'a s s Linhoff ,i- Spooner r� Bethel Item No, 0 Date Re — u: M 0 t i 0 n Yes No Abstain Absent C1•Ucas Houston 'Forgit Joseph Barnard Spangler Skilling Balalis Woodard Hi11 _ i G1•ass Linhoff Spooner Item No. Date Re M 0 t i p- - 2 , /Z - s -4- /c - a n Yes No Abstain I Absent i Cl ucas Houston Forgi t Joseph DarnahxS j pang;l er �— ' Ski11ing BalaTis , Woodard H111 1� Glass Linhgff !� Spooner Bethel Item No.. Date o Yes No Abstain Absent —In Clucas HOUSi'�on t Forgit Joseph 4 a N n a r d Spangl er Ski 11ing Dalas Woodard Hill G1•ass i Linhdff Spooner Bethel ' Date Item No. o n Yes No Abstain Absent Clucas Houston Forgi oseph �/O I Barnard Spangler � Skilling Balal`is Woodard Hi11 Grass Linhoff i Spooner Bethel u n� Yes No Abstain Absent Clucas Houston Forgit Joseph i Barnard Spangl er Skilling lialalis ' Woodard Hill G1'ass Linh off Spooner Betheil Q �gWORT \ em Department of Community Development "aLfFOF�P 0 DATE: November 30, 1973 TO: Members of the Citizen's Advisory Committee for Development Standards FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: COMMITTEE,MEETING, December 5, 1973 The committee meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, December 5, 1973, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. The agenda will be: 1. Discussion of the recommendation to delete the control on the number of stories in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. 2. Discussion of the recommendation to limit the open space option to the front 12' of the structure. 3. Discussion of the recommendation concerning parking requirements in the R-3 and R-4 Districts. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVE40-PMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR B y � .� P J�AU _ William R. Fole Senior Planner RVH-WRF:jb r s N_ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS and ALTERNATES: BARNARD, Stephen N. Frank Spangler Address & Telephone: 1100 West Bay Avenue Balboa, Ca. 92661 673-0194 (h) 1000 West Ocean Front Balboa, Ca. 92661 675-1901 (h) 4403 Seashore Drive Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 673-3762 (h) Tom Houston 206 Ruby Balboa IslaDd., Ca. 92662 673-2544 ('h) FORGIT, Al 22052 West Balboa Boulevard Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 673-5965 (h) Ms. Goldie Joseph 515 Via Lido Saud Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 673-5729 (h) GLASS, Gordon 2562 Waverly Drive Vice Chairman Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 646-5430 (h) None SKILLING, Margo (Mrs. Merrill) 6610 West Ocean Front Chairman Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 Paul Balalis 5309 River Avenue Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 645-0280 (h 673-6210 (o SPOONER, Richard Mrs. Patience Bethel (Mrs. George F.) 1327 Seacrest Corona del Mar, Ca. 92625 546-8030 (a) 1515 Seacrest Drive Corona del Mar, Ca. 92625 644-2405 (h) APPOINTED BY: Rogers Ryckoff Kymla Dostal McInnis Store Page 1 of 2 le 0* MEMBERS and ALTERNATES: WOODARD, Stewart Jerry C. Hill LIAISON MEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL: Richard D. Croul Paul Ryckoff PLANNING COMMISSION: Don A. Beckley James Parker /ddb 7-12-73 Address & Telephone: 3709 Ocean Corona del Mar, Ca. 92625 546-5441 (o) 673-1535 h) ' 404 Iris Corona del Mar, Ca. 92625 673-3121 (h) 427 Fernleaf Corona del Mar, Ca. 92625 545-0433 (o) 673-5609 (h) 1200 South Bayfront Balboa Island, Ca. 92662 673-3111 (h) 675-1011 (o) 225 Canal Street Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 549-1101 (o) 548-8360 h) 2327 Arbutus Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 540-2550 (o) APPOINTED BY: Croul Page 2 of 2 PARKING FORMULA STRUCTURE SIZE UNIT SIZE (NO.UNITS) (SQ. FT.) 1000 1200 1500 1800 3 Spaces for each k structure up to 2400 sq. ft. plus 5 2.0 2.4 3.2 3.9 1 additional space for each additional 10 2.2 2.7 3.5 4.2 400 sq. ft. i 20 2.4 2.9 3.6 4.4 3 Spaces for each (•structure up to 2400 sq. ft. plus 1 additional space for each additional 600 sq. ft. N One Space for each 700 sq. ft.,' 5 1.4 1.8 2.4 2.8 10 1.6 i.9 2.4 2.9 20 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.0 5 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 10 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 20 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.6 One Space -for each 5 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 600 sq. ft. 10 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 20 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 City Council Meeting F November 8, 1973 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INITIATED BY: RECOMMENDATION: Council Agenda No. CITY OF NENPORT BEACH City Council 0 Department of Community Development Amendment No. 394 Request to consider amending portions,of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to Residential Development Standards. The.City of Newport Beach . If desired, introduce ordinance. and set for public hearing on November 26, 1973. DISCUSSION: On October 25, 1973, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the recommendations of the Citizens' Development Standards Advisory Committee and the additional s.uggestions.subm.itted by individual members of the Committee and members of the City Council. The Com- mission adopted the Citizens' Committee recommendations with the following changes: 1. Parking in the R-2 District: The Citizens'' Committee recommended -that the parking requirements should be as follow: A) In West Newport and on Balboa Peninsula, the requirements should be: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional 600 square feet or portion thereof." B) -In Corona del Mar, the requirements should be: 114 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 3,000 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 600 square,.feetMor ;w, „ 4• _ _,_ portion thereof.•" The Planning Commission felt that the standards should be uniform for all three areas and,that there should - be three spaces for any structure containing less than 2400 square feet and one additional space for each additional 400 square feet. L. TO: City Council - 2. 2. Open Space Options: The Citizens' Committee had recommended that the Open Space Option should equal the buildable width of the lot times the allowable height times 5' (72' in Corona del Mar). The Planning Commission felt that the formula should be buildable width times allowable height times 6' in all areas. The Planning Commission further felt that this additional open space should be limited to the front twelve feet of the structure. These changes are contained in the attached recommendations of the Planning Commission. Respectfully submitted, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, Director, By tj F WILLIAM R. •OLEY-�- Senior Planner WRF/kk Attachments Recommendation of Planning Commission Memo to Planning Commission from Staff. r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Area Code 714 ADOPTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION - October 25, 1973 673-2110 The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach has adopted the following Development Standards for the R-1, R-29 R-3, and R-4 Districts in Corona del Mar, West Newport, and on the Balboa Peninsula. 1. The R-1 District A) Height: The Height Limit shall remain at 24'/28'. B) Parking: The parking requirements shall be amended as follow: "Two spaces for any structure containing less than 2,000 square feet; Three spaces for any structure containing 2,000 square feet or more." (See general notes below.) C) Number of Stories: All reference to the number of stories shall be deleted, and the existing floor area ratio be retained. D) Open Space Options: In addition to the required front yard, there shall be additional open space in the front 12 ft. of the structure 2 - required. This additional open space shall be a volume of space equal to the buildable width of the lot times the basic height limit times 6 ft. This open space shall be open on at least two sides and may be used for outdoor living area. Roofs, bal- conies, decks, patios., cornices and architectural features may project into this area. This addi- tional open space may be provided in any of the ways illustrated on the attached sheet, or in any combination thereof. 2. The R-2 District A) Height: The Height Limit shall remain at 241/281. 6) Parking: The parking requirements shall be amended as follow: "Three spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each 400 square feet or portion thereof." C) Number of Stories: All reference to the number of stories shall be deleted and the existing floor area ratio be retained. D) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. - 3 - 3. The R-3 District A) Height: The Height Limit shall be amended as follows: 11241/28' on the front one-half of the lot; 281/32' on the rear one-half of the lot, except where differences in grade warrant individual considerations." B) Parking• The parking requirement shall be amended as follows: "Three spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 400 square feet or portion thereof; provided that in no event shall there be less than one independently accessible space per unit." C) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. 4. The R-4 District A) Height: The Height Limit shall remain at 28'/32'. B) Parking: The parking requirement shall be amended as follows: "Three spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional - 4 - space for each additional 400 square feet or portion thereof, provided that in no event shall there be less than one independently accessible space per unit." C) Open Space Options: Same as the R-1 District above. 5. General Notes A) The R-1 parking standards shall apply to single-family homes in the R-2, R-3, and R=4 Districts. B) Square footage figures in parking requirements exclude parking areas and open space areas. C) For each dwelling unit there shall be a minimum of one covered space. The additional space may be open or covered. D) Tandem parking spaces shall be allowed for not more than two cars in depth. E) Side yard parking (but not structural encroachments) shall be allowed. F) Tandem parking and side yard parking shall not both be allowed on the same lot. G) The floor area ratio would include all areas within the exterior walls and all covered parking areas, but not balconies, decks, or patios which are open on two sides. PURPOSE: TO PROVIDE FOR FLEXIBLE BUILDING DESIGN IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF EACH LOT. PROPOSAL: IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK THERE BE PROVIDED A VOLUME OF SPACE EQUAL TO THE WIDTH OF THE LOT (MINUS REQUIRED SETBACKS) X ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT X V-O". ALLOWABLE PROJECTIONS INTO THIS SPACE: ROOFS, BALCONIES, DECKS, CORNICES AND ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS FROM POINT OF CANTILEVER. FIREPLACES MAY ALSO PROJECT INTO PROPOSED VOLUME OF SPACE. 'e h P \v/ '� i —V = W • H • 5' POOR QUALITY ORI t Gl:NAL (S) CITY OF NFWPORT- BZACi3 Y1© _^ Fro4cministrative-Assistant to the City Manager SD---- C07munity Development Director - --November- 27 73 SJBJPCi : AGuNDA• ITIE S' H 3(d,6>r,9)- On the:-November26_ Gonsarrt Calendar, the: attached letters were referred to staff�farFinclusion in ongairng studies_ regarding Iha. General Plan;;;; The iet+Er 7rOftt:t} NgWgq R cf entc ilM _P was else rnf rrn ?-n...,+l.m flvsrmi rin�.e..+-=c+•�;;.i�-,..ice- r.:—..s+,.7:t,...�,, .. +1...:.�,.....�. r... -., 2552 Vista Drive Newport Beach, California November 6, 1973 City Council City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Dear Sirs: Some weeks ago, when the Planning Commission was asked to re- consider some aspects of the Residential Growth Element of•the General Plan, they passed a resolution which stated that this element as now written is not consistent with the General Plan Policy of the city as it pertained to statistical areas B,C,D,E and F. They resolved this since it appeared obvious to them that the increase in population of 30% allowed by this element was not in the best interests of.the city or its citizens. One thing that•the Planning Commission did not do, though it was a topic of long discussion, was to propose what they did believe would be consistent with the policy. At present the Residential -Growth Element stands as it was originally approved in March 1973 as pertains to those statistical, areas, which are the developed and older areas of -Newport -Beach, We of Newport Residents United feel that some -resolution to this question must be made by the City Council and made quite soon. We�;do not _behieke Atha thesca'Gcas: cait✓svpjaort in any.'ssatsonahbe maapac, I S- any- i ncceas�:nr�.chfhe�iopirfiapFon�as-'dwcPf r rtg--umi• ts--fromvtfta�vktfiC�`=-..-.-.--•---= are-.nowspr"ernt=i am attaching a copy of a letter which we sV3pjVrV,-j Ta: the Planning Commission, containing our resolution and the•reasgill1n,o, for i t .j 1um, re I hope that we will have the opportunity to discuss this s;jJeZt wwk, Wf W4 with you in the near future. uMdoc (� Ut11rr Yours truly, f Ellis R. Glazier, Chairman —� Newport Residents United .. f•" ;fir" Attachment (1) - ._}iy' _ 'Yin=i. 'Y ^�. •Y . ..I ♦•��w'r1^M. 4'• •ra �.'• .%hl`-.f v1• `�%i .i'ii id' - �,` '�. 2552 Vista Drive Newport Beach, California October 24, 1973 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Sir: Newport=Rtsidcnts'UniTed �a group of citizens concerne&tabotit deteriorating=oortdiattciii+6tr'ng tirovgheabout-by-•-i,ncreasang populationi-artd=housing densetjrM-iza4he p1dax developed, portion: of Mewport-Beach;--has-adopted-tha following resolu}•iorr;�`Frich they feel should be considered by the Planning Commission and eventually the City Council: Be it resolved that the City of Newport Beach shall adopt standards and ordinances designed to keep the population and number of dwelling units of the now developed parts of the city from ultimately•increasing beyond their present level. However, building a single unit dwelling on a presently -subdivided lot shall in no case be prohibited. Our reasons for requesting the passage of this resolution derive from the following: i. The present ordinances detailing zoning and allowing for increasing population and dwelling units are inconsistent with the General Plan Policies of the city as adopted in March 1972 in that the general objective calls for the assurance of the preservation and enhancement of all those present assets which provide for the high quality of life enjoyed by the citizens by means of positive controls over urban growth. Further, the policy states that the city shall set specific limits on population and dwelling unit densities for the general planning area as a whole; and for each individual planning area. , 2: The- oresent-•growth- rate- and its 'ul•timate-possibie"`I'eVel-oF"popul'9tion and dwelling unit density under present ordinances are inconsistent with the General Plan in that the adopted policy is to assure that all support systems, such as transportation, parking, recreation facilities, and fire and police protection are to be maintained at optimum levels. • 3• The objective of the General Plan for land use is to provide an orderly balance of land use to protect and enhance the character and image of the community as a low -density residential -recreational 7 .r v a 1 -• _ r f �� a C Planning Commission . Page Two October 24, 1973 area by maintaining the predominant one and two family residential character and density of the community within existing neighborhoods_ The present ordinances are inconsistent with this objective. They are also inconsistent with the policy which states that the village -like neighbor- hood atmosphere and identity of existing residential areas shall be preserved and encouraged. Finally, whatever the arguments to be marshalled to these points, it is the deep feeling of Newport Residents United that their chosen way of life as citizens of Newport Beach is being radically, changed and subverted, that what has and is happening to cause an increase .in population and -dwelling unit density will heave no one satisfied, either the present residents or those who will arrive in the future and that an enjoyable life-style will become for ail of us a mere existence to be endured- S i nceerreA Ellis R. Glazier Chairman Newport Residents United • � � _ _Tye � - A T' •'��, Yl .a •�5 to +'. '*!} Y .'�" _ - 1rf fir. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA November 13, 1973 Dear Members of the Citizen's Advisory Committee for Development Standards: City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 673-2110 The City Council, on November 12, 1973, voted to request the Committee to reconvene for one final meeting in order to reconsider certain portions of the recommended Development Standards. To bring you up to date, the Planning Commission, on October 25, 1973, adopted the Standards with some minor changes and forwarded them to the City Council. The City Council has introduced the Ordinance and set it for public hearing. However, the Council felt that the Committee should re-examine the following items: 1. The parking requirements in the R-3 and R-4 Districts, particularly as they relate to larger lots. 2. The deletion of the control on the number of stories in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. 3. The requirement that the open space option be limited to the front portion of the structure. In order to comply with the City Council's request, Margot Skilling, Chairman of the Committee, has called a Committee meeting on Wednesday, December 5, 1973, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. We have enclosed a copy of the standards as adopted by the Planning Commission and a staff report discussing the changes the Commission recommended. The staff will distribute some additional information on the three items listed above prior to the committee meeting on December 5, 1973. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR BY Lj I William R. Foley ---- Senior Planner Enclosures: Development Standards and Staff Report (11/12/73) NO RNINSUIfl POINT RSSON110N BOX S26 o BALBOA, CALIFORNIA December 3, 1973 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council City of Newport Beach City Hall Newport Beach, California 92660 Subject: Development Standards Gentlemen: At the time of first presentation to you in September 1973 of the Development Standards recommended by the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Balboa Peninsula Point Association was pleased to communicate its approval. In particular, we commended the R-2, R-3, and R-4 District proposals which related the number of required on -site parking spaces to the living area in any structure to be built on the Peninsula and in other designated areas. We understand that on November 12, 1973 the.City Council re- convened the Citizens Advisory Committee for the purpose of making specific recommendations on parking inequities in the R-3 and R-4 Districts and on matters not related to parking. May we urge you to retain in these Development Standards for all four Districts -- R-1, R-21 R-3 and R-4 -- the excellent concept of relating parking spaces to area of structure. Our reasons for urging this action are briefly: 1 - The Development Standards Advisory Committee deliberated for over two months before preparing its recommendations of September 13, 1973, closely supported by a City Council Advisor and the Department of Community Development. Input from citi- zens and community groups was encouraged. Conditions on the Balboa Peninsula, in West Newport and in Corona del -Mar were carefully weighed. The on -site parking space concept related to structure,_area.had. unanimous._Commit.tee-appr-awl.----•-•--•- 2 - Both the City Council in September 1973 and the Planning Commission in October 1973 approved of the on -site parking space concept proposed by the Advisory Committee. It appeared to be the most equitable and logical of all parking space concepts studied. It rewarded builders of smaller structures and required more on -site parking space as the structure size increased. Newport Beach City Council Page Two December 3, 1973 3 - The Planning Commission, in its latest consideration of the Residential Growth Element for older, developed Districts, approved a Resolution to the effect that the population growth, without new -controls, would have an undesirable impact on these areas which would be contrary to the City's General Plan Policies adopted in 1972. Since residential zone changes were not ap- proved as a means of population and structure size control, the planning Commission looked upon the new Development Standards as a partial step toward necessary control. 4 - The Balboa Peninsula has been recognized as the most severely impacted growth area in the City. Population growth projections for Statistical Subdivisions.D-1, D-2 and D-3 are shown by the Community Development Department to be at least 58.5% unless sub- stantial control is established. The largest structures and highest density are directly related to R-3 and R-4 developments. Thus, a departure from the concept of on -site parking relationship to structure area will defeat the last of the proposals advanced to give some measure of control to population growth,and life-style retention in the central areas of the city. Mayor McInnes was recently quoted to the effect that citizens of the city can and should rely on its elected officials to pro- vide appropriate safeguards in such emergencies as headlong population explosion. We feel that we can rely on the welfare of those of us who live in those central areas by approving the Development Standards without material change.. Sincerely yours, BALBOA PENINSULA POINT ASSOCIATION Doug Lynn; President DL/dp.... cc: Planning Commission;,/ Development Standards Citizens Advisory Committee ROUTE SLIP Date P)o -73 C O •r �� b a I= w E L. Initials •r o •r E � ++ '- > o 4+ U C: N U N r Director Assist.Dir. Adv. PI an BuiId.Div. Super. Admin. Director's Sprretary .-%— Craig V COMMENTS :� �� u 'C 1� o ,C From h�}6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA 92w city Hall 3800 Newport Blvd. (714) 678-2110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:30 P.M. Date,:. July 11, 1973 Present: Councilman Paul Ryckoff Commissioner Don A. Beckley Commissioner James Parker Paul Balalis Stephen N. Barnard Mrs. Patience Bethel Richard H. Clucas Al Forgit Gordon H. Glass Jerry C. Hill Tom Houston Ms. Goldie Joseph Mrs. Margo Skilling Frank Spangler Richard'Spooner Stewart Woodard Staff: R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director William R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Community Development Director Hogan thanked all for coming and stated -that the first item on the agenda was introduc- tion of members and that he would act in the capacity of chairman until one was elected. Mr. Hogan suggested that as he called members' names that they sit in the chair of Councilman that appointed them in order to.get the meeting started. Community Development Director Hogan introduced the members as follows: Mayor'McInnis' Appointment - Margo Skilling Alternate �- Paul Balalis Councilman Crou1's Appointmen' - Stewart Woodard Alternate - Jerry C. Hill • 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting held Wednesday, July 11, 1973 Vice Mayor Rogers' Appointment - Stephen N. Barnard Alternate - Frank Spangler Councilman Dostal's Appointment - Gordon Glass Mr. Hogan stated that Mr. Dostal has not yet appointed an alternate. Councilman Kymla's Appointment - Al Forgit Alternate Ms. Goldie Joseph Councilman Store's Appointment - Richard Spooner Alternate - Mrs. Patience Bethel Councilman Ryckoff's Appointment - Richard H. Clucas Alternate - Tom Houston Community Development Director Hogan then introduced the Councilmen and Commissioners appointed as Liaison Members: Councilman Paul Ryckoff; Councilman Richard D. Croul (who was absent); Commissioner Don A. Beckley; and Commissioner James Parker. Community Development Director Hogan turned the meeting over to the Committee for the second item on the agenda -- the selection of Chairman and Vice Chairman. In response to Mrs. Skilling, Community Development Director Hogan stated that the Councilmen and Commissioners were only liaison members, not voting members. Motion In response to Mrs. Skilling's request for nomination for Chairman•from voting members, Mr. Glass nominated Margo Skilling. Mr. Spooner moved nominations be closed. Following an All Ayes vote, Mrs. Skilling accepted the nomination. Motion In response to Chairman Skilling's request for nomination for Vice Chairman from voting members, Mr. Spooner nominated Gordon Glass. There being no other nominations, Chairman Skilling.moved that the Committee unanimously accept Mr. Glass as Vice Chairman. Motion carried with an All Ayes vote. Chairman Skilling stated that item 3 on the agenda was Review of the C,hargq and that she had just received the material. Other members indicated that they had received the materi-al previously. In response to Mr. Clucas regarding ultimate result of meetings Councilman Ryckoff stated that the intent of the Committee is to recommend development standards for the priority areas of Balboa Peninsula, West Newport, and Corona del Mar as defined 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting held Wednesday, July 11, 1973 in Resolution No. 8031. Discussion followed on defition of development, parking, impact of Committee's recommendations, consideration of specific areas, problems of particular areas, zoning ordinance, zoning requirements, commercial zones, residen- tial growth policy. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated that the staff would supply the Committee with material they would need within the constraints of the charge as set forth by the Council and within the time restraints as set forth by the Council. Mr. Hogan further stated that the zoning ordinance and zoning districts of the City have to conform with the General Plan no later than the first of the year and thus action has to be taken by the Committee in the next 3 months to allow time for action by the Planning Commission and City Council. Councilman Ryckoff commented that although the matter of downzoning was not discussed in the Resolution, it is possible that people in the City would like some improvements in the : area of density through other considerations. Discussion followed on different standards to apply to different areas, establishing meeting dates, meeting pro- cedure regarding public hearings, and zoning applicable to areas. In response to Chairman Skilling and following discussion among Committee members and staff, it was decided to have meetings on Tuesday, weekly from 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers with the next meeting to be held on July 17, 1973. Further discussion followed as to whether or not this would allow enough time and it was decided to try it for awhile to see what could be accomplished. In response to Chairman Skilling, Community Development Director Hogan stated that minutes of the meetings would be distributed to the members, alternates, and liaison members. Chairman Skilling asked if the alternates or liaison members would like to comment on goals or objectives of the Committee. Alternate Member Bethel raised the question of just how many areas would be involved in the recommendation of the Committee. 3. i z MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting held Wednesday, July 11, 1973 Along this line, Liaison Member Councilman Ryckoff commented that consideration should also be given to the undeveloped areas such as property along Jamboree Road. Councilman Ryckoff emphasized the importance of the undeveloped areas versus Balboa Island which has been rezoned. Committee Member Glass commented that types of controls toward the end of the study period could possibly apply to undeveloped areas but that the goal of applying ideal requirements to undeveloped land that has no constraints, no specific problems, and an unknown potential density was a separate long-term project. Liaison Member Commissioner Beckley stated that the Committee should consider the preservation of the quality of life in Newport Beach and pointed out that there may be some conflicts in the General Plan and existing zoning and requested that the staff compile the factors that are in conflict with all the backup material such as documents, charts, maps, and all other pertinent information. In response to Commissioner Beckley, Community Development Director Hogan stated that the staff would supply the Committee with required material and that it was his intent to invite the Chairman to the office to go over material that has been generated. Also, as soon as Committee's procedures are established, the staff will supply Committee with required material before meetings in adequate time for studying. Discussion followed on field work, research material, staff reports, field surveys, and area needs. Chairman Skilling requested that since at the meeting of July 17, 1973, the topic of discussion would be Balboa Peninsula (Stat Area D) that Mrs. Marshall Fields, President of Balboa Improvement Association; Mr. Doug Lynn of Balboa Peninsula Point Association; and Mr. Tom Hyans, President of Central Newport Beach Community Association be invited by the staff to attend. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan defined outdoor living space. Liaison Member Councilman Ryckoff stated that another inter- pretation of outdoor living space could be a patio where barbecuing or other activities could occur besides in the front yard. Liaison Member Commissioner Parker stated that people who were invited to meetings should be encouraged to participate 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting held Wednesday, July 11, 1973 in discussion and not be called upon to do a standup presen- tation and also that some of the six study items discussed in the Resolution could be combined. Following discussion, Liaison Member Commissioner Parker stated that he hoped that the individual Committee Members would not specialize in areas since then it would be individual opinions. ' Following discussion, Community Development Director Hogan stated that they would investigate initiating a matrix system of zoning to aid in comparing each area. Alternate Member Joseph stated that the survey done by the Common Sense Coalition should be helpful to the Committee. Motion Committee Member Woodard moved that the Committee review the information before them and also review the area that is under consideration for the next meeting. Committee Member Clucas seconded. Vote of All Ayes. Motion Committee Member Clucas moved that the first item on the agenda be procedural matters for action by the Committee. Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of All Ayes. Community Development Director Hogan stated that the Council requested that each member of the Committee file a Statement of Qualifications for Service on City Boards or Commissions for distribution now and to be returned to the City Clerk's office. Mr. Hogan then introduced Bill Foley of his staff who will be working for him and the Committee and available for questions and/or information. Chairman Skilling requested that if any Committee Member cannot attend meetings, that they notify their alternate who then become voting members. Motion Committee Member Clucas moved for adjournement at 9:00 P.M. and motion carried unanimously. 2474 .% f > MARGOiSKILLING Chairman, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach, California Approved as corrected: July 24,.1973_ 5. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA mo City Sall 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 373-2110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P.M. Date: July 17,, 1973 Present/Dais: Committee Member Clucas * Alternate Committee Member Spangler Chairman Skilling Committee Member Woodard Alternate Committee Member Linhoff/Committee Member Glass ** Committee Member Spooner * Committee Member For.git and Alternate Member Joseph Absent ** Committee Member Glass arrived at 4:24 P.M. Staff: R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director William R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Present: Commissioner James Parker Alternate Committee Member Houston Alternate Committee Member Bethel Rodney L. Gunn, Advance Planning Administrator * * * * * * Item 1 Chairman Skilling called the meeting to order, reviewed Committee Member Clucas' report, and opened discussion Procedural on'agenda item 1, procedural matters. Matters Following discussion, Committee Member Clucas moved that the time schedule be adopted. Committee Member Spooner Motion seconded. Motion carried with an All Ayes vote. The adopted time schedule is as follows: Week of July 16 Week of July_ 23 Study of Existing Situation - Peninsula Study of Planning Department Recommendation Make recommendations a. Majority Report - Designate 2 b. Minority Report - Designate 2 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 2973 Week of July 30 Study Existing Situation - West Newport Study Planning Department Recommendations Week of August 6 Make recommendations a. Majority Report - Designate 2 b. Minority Report - Designate 2 Week of August 13 Study Existing Situation - Corona del Mar Study Planning Commission Recommendation Week of August 20 'Make recommendations a. Majority Report - Designate 2 b. Minority Report - Designate 2 Week of'August 27 Study Existing Situation - Balance of City Study Planning Commission Recommendations Week of September 3 Study same material as week of August 27 Week of September 10 Recommendations - Balance of City a. Majority Report - Designate 2 b. Minority Report - Designate 2 Week of September 17 Review and Vote on Reports Week of September 20 Type Reports for Presentation on September 24 Community Development Director Hogan stated that no. 3 of the proposal for committee procedures should be considered carefully relative to public hearings which could extend time frame substantially. Motion Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard moved that Procedure No. 3 be modified to limit public input to those who are specifically requested. Seconded by Committee Member Clucas. Motion carried with 4 Ayes (Clucas, Spangler, Woodard, Spooner), 2 Noes (Skilling, Linhoff). Motion• Committee Member Clucas moved that the Committee adopt the procedures as modified. Committee Member Woodard seconded. Motion carried with an All Ayes vote. The adopted Committee procedures are: 1. Discussion shall be carefully limited to the specific subject noted on pre -delivered agendas. 2. Presentations of advocacy of particular points of view of Committee members shall be limited and should 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 1973 be preceded by a written summary, if possible. Public participation shall be limited to those re- quested by the Committee to appear; presentations need not necessarily be in writing. 4. "Study Sessions" as noted in the Time Schedule shall be intended specifically for obtaining technical in- formation and testimony -- not for presentation of positions. Positions on various subjects are to be presented at the "Recommendation" meetings. Chairman Skilling stated that she objected to Majority Report with 2 Designees as she felt it was staff's function to compile Committee's majority opinion in written report. Chairman Skilling,further stated that staff's time should not be utilized for Minority Reports. Motion Chairman Skilling moved that there not be 2 Designees to a Majority Report, that the staff write the Majority Report which will then be voted on by the Committee, that staff's .time should not be used for Minority Reports, and that Minority Reports can be submitted by an individual. Seconded by Committee Member Spooner. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated there would be minutes of meetings. Motion Committee Member Clucas amended motion so that the staff Amended will prepare the reports of the majority and a minority of at least 3 members. Chairman Skilling accepted amendment. Vote of 5 Ayes (Clucas, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Linhoff, Spooner), 1 No (Spangler). Motion carried. Item 2 Chairman Skilling stated that Item 2 on the agenda was a general overview of development on the Balboa Peninsula Peninsula - to be presented by the staff. Gen. Overview of Dev. by Community Development Director Hogan stated that the Staff Committee has been given data including a chart indicating existing zoning regulations and Mr. Hogan reviewed this with the Committee. 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 1973 Mr. Hogan also reviewed setbacks on districting maps re- ceived by the Committee.and explained buildable area while Senior Planner Foley drew diagrams on blackboard. Discussion followed on districting maps, setbacks, definition of yards while Community Development Director Hogan answered questions of the Committee. Committee Member Spooner stepped down from the dais and was absent from the Chambers. ' In response to the Committee, Senior Planner Foley stated that R-4 zoning on Peninsulais primarily on Ocean Front between 19th and 15th Streets and on Bay Front, indicating same on zoning map. Community Development Director Hogan stated that the Regional Commission has been approving duplexes in Newport Beach with the requirement that there be a minimum of two parking spaces per dwelling unit after the Mayor made a presentation on density and parking. Mr. Hogan further stated that as a result of Commission's decision, the Council has directed staff to prepare an amendment to the ordinance for their consideration having 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit as a minimum. Committee Member Woodard requested a copy of the Mayor's report. Committee Member Spooner returned and took his place on dais. Discussion followed on tandem parking. Community Development Director Hogan reviewed Tables A through E indicating lot sizes on Balboa Peninsula with the Committee and answered questions relative to same. Alternate Committee Member Lynhoff stepped down from dais. Committee Member Glass arrived and took his place on dais. 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 1973 Item 3 Chairman Skilling stated that Item 3 on the agenda we're comments from representatives of homeowners and business - Comments - mens' associations. Rep. of H/O Assocs. Thomas E. Hyans, President of Central Newport Community Association, appeared before the Committee and stated the Association contains most of the multi -residential districts on the Peninsula and that the official position of the Association is that it is opposed to any change in zoning. In response to the Committee and speaking as an individual, Mr. Hyans stated that eliminating one side yard for parking was acceptable to the Association but he had reservations where there was no alley; that he can accept tandem parking although he didn't understand reason for requiring front 2 spaces be enclosed and the outer 2 spaces in carports; that he would accept excluding garage space from floor area ratio going to whatever height is necessary for subterra- nean parking within height limitation and with maximum number of parking spaces per number of bedrooms required; that the Association has been opposed to the development of Fun Zone as condominium strictly on basis of population increase; that before he would accept mandatory outdoor living area that it would have to be well defined, location specified, and uses required; that rules on open space should be uniform; that membership in Association is volun- tary and about 1/3 of the area is represented; that most of the people who came to the "downzoning" meetings had a financial interest in keeping things as is and not con- cerned with quality of life; that no matter what is done with garages or parking that during the summer there will continue to be heavy tourist parking and traffic; that he would favor landscaping on Balboa Boulevard; that the Association is not in favor of enlarging the oceanfront sidewalk. Mrs. Marshall Fields, President of Balboa Improvement Association, appeared before the Committee and stated their primary purpose is to promote business in the area and there is• no problem with residential units over commercial., In response to the Committee, Mrs. Fields stated that street trees were put in on Main Street but in some areas sidewalks are not wide enough; that Association is opposed to downzoning; that individually she has no objection to tandem parking. 5. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 1973 Harry N. Kamph, in charge of community liaison of the Peninsula Point Association, appeared before the Committee and stated the Association is working on possi.ble sideyard encroachment to get more parking, requested that he be allowed to return and offer statement with respect to development standards and requested whether zoning in the Peninsula and perhaps in Statistical Area B-1 should be considered in combination with other areas. Chairman Skilling stated that the Peninsula Point Association could appear the week of August 27.and if the Association needs clarification to write before then. Item 4 Discussion followed on time factor, procedures, and techniques of approach. Discussion Committee Member Glass stated that landscaping requirement should be considered. Chairman Skilling requested that Alternate Committee Member Spangler prepare an outline of development standards for the Peninsula and other members may submit written reports. Community Development Director Hogan stated that if re- ports are in the office by Thursday, the staff will dis- tribute to the Committee. Motion Committee Member Clucas moved that the Chairman send proposed letter to Council for their reply. Committee Member Spooner seconded. Following discussion, Mr. Spooner withdrew second. Motion fails for lack of second. Community Development Director Hogan stated that parking permits will be issued to Committee members and are to be picked up at Personnel office. Chairman Skilling requested the staff to obtain copies of Mayor's report for Committee members. 6. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 17, 1973 Motion/Clucas There being no further business, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee adjourned the meeting to All Ayes July 24, 1973, at 3:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. Time: 6:15 P.M. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA sneo city Hau 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 673-2110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P.M. Date: July 24, 1973 Present/Dais: Alternate Committee Member Houston Alternate Committee Member Joseph Alternate Committee Member Spangler Chairman Skilling * Committee Member Woodard Committee Member Glass **Committee Member Spooner * Committee Member Woodard arrived at 3:30 P.M. **Committee Member Spooner arrived at 4:15 P.M. Staff: R.V. Hogan, Community Development Director William R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Present: Liaison•Member Councilman Richard D. Croul Liaison Member Councilman Paul Ryckoff Alternate Committee Member Balalis Alternate Committee Member Linhoff Rodney L. Gunn, Advance Planning Administrator * * * * * * Item 1 Chairman Skilling called the meeting to order and stated that Item i on the agenda was approval of Minutes of Minutes meeting of July 11, 1973 with corrections by Councilman 7-11-73 Ryckoff offered at study session of Council. APPROVED Community Development Director Hogan stated that the AS CORRECTED staff contacted Councilman Ryckoff for corrected wording. Senior Planner Foley read the corrections as follow: Page 3, Paragraph 3: At the end of the sentence beginning with the words, "along that line and", to the end of the sentence to be deleted and replaced by, "in the area of density through other considerations." 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Page 4, Paragraph 8: At the end of the sentence beginning with the words, "is taking place in", to the end of the sentence to be deleted and replaced by, "or other activities could occur besides in the front yard." In response to Committee Member Glass, Senior Planner Foley stated that minutes were taken from the tape but that -micro- phone was not placed in the audience and comments from the audience were not picked up clearly by tape. Motion Alternate Committee Member Spangler moved that the Committee approve Minutes of July 11, 1973 as corrected, seconded by Alternate Committee Member Houston. Vote of 4 Ayes (Houston, Joseph, Spangler,. Skilling, 1 Abstain (Glass), 2 Absent (Woodard, Spooner.). Motion carried. Item 2 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 2 on the agenda, Mayor McInnis' presentation to South Coast Regional Conser- Mayor vation Commission. McInnis' Presentation Alternate Committee Member Joseph commented that presentation to Reg. Comm. was pertinent to goal. Item 3 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 3 on the agenda, Proposed Objectives and Policies for the South Coast Regional Proposed Commission. Objectives & Policies for In response to Committee Member Glass as to whether or not Reg. Comm. this was an official document, Community Development Hogan stated this was a copy of proposed policies drafted by Executive Director Carpenter of South Coast Regional Commission, which have been submitted to the Commission for their consid- eration. These policies are based on the Commission's recom- mendation to date and public hearings probably will be held on proposed policies. Mr. Hogan reviewed Policies (6)(A) thru (6)(E). Discussion followed on standards relative to blockage of view, 50% open ground space, and aesthetic design. Chairman Skilling commented that interim proposed policies were totally unrealistic, non -viable, and unenforceab"le. Community Development Director Hogan stated that if the Regional Commission decides on public hearings on proposed policies that consideration should be given to preparation for hearings along with alternatives. 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Chairman Skilling commented that she would favor our City Council taking a position of repeal on Proposition 20. Chairman Skilling stated that prior to Item 4 she would like to open discussion on letter from Newport Residents United with copies to the Planning Commission and City Council which the Committee has received. Chairman Skilling commented that if the Committee did not desire to respond that for the record she objected to the means of implementation of the objectives. Elaine Linhoff, Chairman of Newport Residents United, appeared before the Committee to answer questions relative to the pro- posed development standards attached to said letter. In re- sponse to the Committee, Mrs. Linhoff stated that standards were developed primarily for Peninsula and West Newport. Committee Member Glass commented on building height standards affecting character of the area and that consideration should be given to the.reasonable lot area per unit requirements. In response to the Committee, Mrs. Linhoff stated that N.R.U. did not discuss zero side yards and in her opinion, it is unworkable. Committee Member Woodard arrived and took his place on dais. Discussion followed on height restriction of 24/28 feet, variation of setbacks, maximum use of lots, concern for tomorrow's development, penetration of height.restrictions for parapets, staircase shafts, or fireplaces, parking re- quirements, and traffic. LiaisonMember Councilman Croul appeared before the Committee and asked Mrs.-Linhoff, who is active in the Peninsula Point Association and the Newport Residents United, if it was the goal of the two groups to downzone to R-1 in Mrs. Linhoff's opinion. Mrs. Linhoff responded to Councilman Croul by stating that downzoning was not to be discussed. Councilman Croul stated that the recommendation of the N.R.U. would imply R-1. 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Councilman Croul in response to the Committee stated that one of the major problems the Committee has is the require- ment of the Regional Commission that two parking spaces are required for each unit and tandem parking seems the logical solution. Chairman Skilling commented that the requirement for two parking spaces per unit will increase density, bulk, and buildable area. Community Development Hogan stated that the Regional Commission required two parking spaces per unit after the Mayor's presentation but they have not taken a position on SO.% open space. Discussion followed on Regional Commission's stand on parking. In response to the Committee, Mrs. Linhoff stated that the Newport Residents United had no due -paying members, are represented by a sizeable number of people, anTdo not have a list of membership. Item 4 Chairman Skilling openeddiscussion on Item 4 on the agenda, Barnard and Spangler's report on Balboa Peninsula. Barnard & Spangler's Alternate Committee Member Spangler reviewed the report Report on with the Committee and answered questions. Mr. Spangler Balboa stated that the following revisions should be added to Peninsula his recommendations: ACCEPTED 1. Tandem parking be counted as 1/2 car per tandem AS REVISED space. 2. Would not 'allow parking in side yard in addition to tandem parking. 3. In R-4 zone no less than one car parking space per unit and no -tandem parking unless assigned to same unit. Chairman Skilling stated that if it was agreeable with the Committee, they would work from this proposal item by item. In response to Chairman Skilling, Community Development Director Hogan stated the staff would take the Committee's recommended proposals and write them in ordinance form. 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Committee Member Spooner arrived and took his place on dais. Following discussion, the Committee accepted the recommended building standards as revised in Barnard/Spangler's report as follows: R-1 ZONE R-1 Single -Family Height - Accepted Parking- Add: Sideyard encroachment uncovered, on one side of building. Motion Committee Member Glass moved to delete "Stories" in the R-1 zone. Seconded by Committee Member Woodard. Vote of 4 Ayes (Joseph, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 3 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling). Motion carried. Stories- Deleted Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that since it was a 4/3 vote that a minority report could be made and he would do it. Committee Member Spooner stepped down from the dais and was absent from the Chambers. Motion Alternate Committee Member Spangler moved that "Volume Added Requirement" in the R-1 zone be accepted. Seconded by Committee Member Glass. Vote of 5 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilli'ng, Woodard, Glass), 1 No (Joseph), 1 Absent (Spooner). Volume Added Requirement - Accepted Alternate Committee Member Linhoff stated that on diagrams of Volume Added Requirement under "Proposal" it reads, "in addition to the required front yard setback there be provided a volume of space" and "in the front" should be added. 5. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 R-2 ZONE R-2 Duplex Height - Accepted Committee Member Spooner returned and took his place on dais. Motion Committee Member Woodard moved to accept "Parking" in R-2 zone. Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Houston. Motion Committee Member Glass made a substitute motion that the "400 square feet" in "Parking" in R-2 zone be changed to "600 square feet". Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Joseph. Vote of 2 Ayes (Joseph, Glass), 5 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Spooner). Motion failed. Motion Committee voted on original motion. Vote of 5 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Spooner), 2 Noes (Joseph, Glass). Motion carried. Parking - Accepted Motion Committee Member Woodard moved to determine that the dimension to be use for tandem parking would be 38 feet. Committee Member Glass seconded. Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that before a de- termination was made that he felt some research should be done. Discussion followed on dimensions of small foreign and compact cars. Committe Member Woodard withdrew his motion and requested that Chairman Skilling request the staff to report on recom- mended dimension on tandem parking and dimension of cars. Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that he would also like to request staff for a report and diagram and recommendations for turning radius for sideyard area when you have 3 cars abreast. Motion Committee Member Glass moved to delete "Stories" in the R-2 zone. Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Joseph. Councilman Croul appeared before the Committee and stated that by eliminating "Stories" livable footage is attained. Committee Member Glass commented that the least restrictive restriction is Floor Area Ratio --difficult to abuse, easily calculated, easily checked, and flexible. Mr. Glass further commented that with the limitation of a small lot being an .6. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 inside lot or not on the waterfront, an owner cannot go horizontally only up within height limitation and that the only way to achieve interest and space is to go ver- tically which is why so many choose 12' ceilings. Since it was agreeable with the Committee, Chairman Skilling extended the meeting at 6:00 P.M. to 6:30 P.M. Motion The Committee then voted on Committee Member Glass's motion which Mr. Glass amended to read as follows: Delete "Stories" limitation in all zones retaining Floor Area Ratio. Seconded by Committee Member Woodard. Vote of 3 Ayes (Joseph, Woodard, Glass), 4 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Spooner). Motion fails. Following discussion, Community Development Director Hogan stated that when the City had two stories above parking, there were many problems and at the present time with the height limitation and floor area ratio, they both are working extremely well in limiting bulk and height of structures while allowing flexibility to builder. Mr. Hogan further stated the Council and Planning Commission grant variances for additional parking over and above required parking by increasing floor area ratio. Motion Chairman Skilling moved that the word "Stories" be deleted from the definition if floor area ratio is retained, exempting from the floor area ratio the parking requirement of Regional Commission. Committee Member Glass seconded. Vote of all Ayes. Motion carried unanimously 7/0. Stories - Deleted Motion Committee Member Glass moved that the Volume Added Requirement in R-2 zone be accepted. Chairman Skilling seconded. Vote of 6 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 1 No (Joseph). Motion carried. Volume Added Requirement - Accepted R-3 ZONE R-3 Triplex Motion Committee Member Woodard moved that height limit in the in the R-3 zone be 24-28 feet in the Peninsula only. After discussion, Committee Member Woodard withdrew motion. Height - 24-28 ft. front - 50% 28-32 ft. rear - 50% Parking- Accepted Stories- Deleted 7. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 2973 Vote on "Volume Added Requirement" in the R-3 zone was 6 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 1 No (Joseph). Volume Added Requirement - Accepted R-4 ZONE R-4 Apartment Height - Accepted Hotel Parking- Accepted Motel Stories- Deleted Volume Added Requirement: Delete "3 stories at front." Add "building is above 24 ft. Chairman Skilling requested staff to forward Committee's recommendation to Planning Commission on August 2, 1973 on Amendment Application No. 382 as it pertains to off- street parking requirements for residential uses. Committee Member Glass requested to be excused from the next two meetings of July 31, 1973 and August.7, 1973 and was granted permission by the Committee. Motion: Houston There being no further business, Development Standards All Ayes Citizens' Advisory Committee adjourned the meeting to July 31, 1973 at 3:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. Time: 6:30 P.M. Approved: MARGO SKILLING Chairman, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach, California go NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA city MU 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 678.2110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P.M. Date: July 31, 1973 Present/Dais: Committee Member Clucas Alternate Committee Member Joseph * Committee Member Barnard Chairman Skilling Alternate Committee Member Hill Alternate Committee Member Linhoff ** Committee Member Spooner * Committee Member Barnard arrived at 4:10 P.M. ** Committee Member Spooner arrived at 4:58 P.M. Staff: R. V. Hogan,'Community Development Director William R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Present: Councilman Paul Ryckoff Alternate Committee Member Balalis Rodney L. Gunn, Advance Planning Administrator * * * * * * AMENDMENT Chairman Skilling called the meeting to order and asked APPLICATION if all had received a copy of staff report to Planning NO. 382 Commission on Amendment Application No. 382. In response to Chairman Skilling's request for explana— tion of "categorically exempt under Class 8 from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act", Community Development Director Hogan stated that an E.I.R. is not required as the amendment to the Code is not detrimental to the environment. Mr. Hogan further stated that the report reflects recommendations of Committee at last meeting and staff desired confirmation by Committee. In response to the Committee, Senior Planner Foley reviewed said report. Mr. Foley stated that the staff questioned whether the Committee's recommendations at their last meeting for 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 31, 1973 R-1 requirements should apply only to R-1 District or single-family development in any district. Community Development Director Hogan stated that although this was discussed by Committee that no vote was taken and staff wanted confirmation that it was.consensus of Committee that R-1 requirements would apply to a single family dwelling in any district. In response to Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated that in compliance with present ordinance, a single family house in any district requires 2 parking spaces regardless of size or district it is located in. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling entertained a motion to accept staff report. Committee Member Clucas and Alternate Committee Members Hill and Linhoff stated they could not accept staff's report with Committee recommendations. Alternate Committee Member Balalis appeared before the Committee and stated he was at last meeting and remembers Committee's discussion of the South Coast Regional Commission•'s decision on requiring 2 parking spaces. He further stated that a person could have a large single family dwelling approved by the Commission and later apply through the City for conversion to.a duplex and comply with all City regulations. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated that the City at the present time is not re- quired to enforce the laws of the Regional Commission. Mr. Hogan further stated that the Council has authorized increasing enforcement staff by one man to police bootleg units. Following discussion, Committee Member Clucas stated he wanted to go on record as opposed to accepting, approving, or recommending parking, proposals for the following reasons: (1) that the basis for Commission's requirements for additional parking space is to make beach area accessi- ble to public and would like Commission to check beach usage on weekends to determine if it is restricted to the public currently; (2) that the current parking limitations are only available systems limiting beach usage to make beaches desirable to anyone; (3) that it is wrong to com- ply with the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commis- sion, South Coast Region's parking space requirement and feel City should make more attempts to rescind said re- quirement weekly, if necessary, since it will not reduce density and ultimately will increase density.and that it 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 31, 1973 is absolutely critical to determine whether parking re- quirement is included or excluded from buildable area; and (4) that tandem parking has severe problems in West Newport area. In response to Committee Member Clucas, Community Development Director Hogan stated that this was discussed at the last meeting; and at the direction of Chairman Skilling and for the benefit of members who were not present last week, Mr. Hogan reviewed and explained action taken at the Committee's last meeting. Following discussion, Councilman Ryckoff appeared before the Committee and suggested that they consider different parts of the City and not take one ordinance and apply it to the whole City. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated the Committee's. recommendations apply only to the Balboa Peninsula. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling,•reviewed dis- cussion a-nd action o-f�Comm•ittee at prior meetings. Following discussion, Councilman Ryckoff again appeared before the Committee and stated if same formula is applied to all areas that it goes against intent of ordinance. In res:ponse-to. A.l.ternate Committee Member Linhoff,. Chairman Skilling stated.'the deletion of°stories"•-and the adoption of the "floor area ratio" was passed unanimously by Committee on July 24, 1973. Motion Committee Member Clucas moved that Committee oppose parking requirements set forth by staff -to Planning Commission as it will (1) increase density, (2) increase bulk, (3) encourage a 3 story structure having an unenforce- able expansion into a larger living unit. Community Development Director Hogan stated that parking recommendations are not by staff but by Committee. Motion failed for lack of second. Committee Member Barnard arrived and took his place on dais. 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 31, 1973 Following discussion, Councilman Ryckoff again appeared before the Committee and stated that by deleting "stories" requirement is to get into unknown areas as "stories" is another control on what is built and, therefore, increasing possibility of 3 story structures. Item 2 Stating that they would go back to Amendment Application No. 382, Chairman Skilling invited Mrs. Rudd and Mr. Balais Comments to address the Committee in view of their other commitments. Reps. H/O Assocs. Mrs. Suzanne Rudd, member of the board of the Newport Shores Community Association, and Paul Balalis, President of West Newport Beach Improvement Association, appeared before the Committee and answered questions. Mr. Balalis stated that their board has gone on record as opposed to any downzoning and tandem parking.and at last meeting decided to write to Regional Commission that their plan is unreasonable. Mrs. Rudd stated that 12 members of the board in a unani- mous decision approved 4 parking spaces for duplex and liked concept of tandem parking. Discussion followed on mandatory landscaping requirement, open space, use of garages for cars, setbacks, bootleg units, tourist parking. Item 1 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 1, general overview of development in West Newport. Gen. Overview of Dev. in Community Development Director Hogan reviewed Lot Size W. N. B. Study of West Newport Beach indicating lots vacant, developed as single family, duplex, or multi -family, some of which are non -conforming. Committee Member Spooner arrived and took his place on dais. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling turned discussion 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 31, 1973 Amend. back to Amendment Application No. 382. Applic. No. 382 Chairman Skilling moved that in R-1 District the Require- ment be changed to "3 spaces per unit less than 2400 Motion square feet and 1 additional space per each additional 400 square feet or portion thereof." Motion Following discussion, Chairman Skilling amended motion Amended that in R-1 District the Requirement be changed to "3 spaces per unit greater than 2000 square feet up to 2400 square feet and 1 additional space thereafter." Motion Following discussion by the Committee concerning Amended various alternatives, Chairman Skilling amended motion that in R-1 District the Requirement be changed to: "2 spaces per structure up to 1600 square feet; ,3 spaces per structure in the 1600 to 2400 square feet; 4 spaces per structure over 2400 square feet". Alternate Committee Member Joseph seconded. Councilman Ryckoff again appeared before the Committee and stated that motion would require 4 garages for a single house on a large lot in Dover Shores and also Corona del Mar has varying sized lots which with this motion will require 4 parking spaces for a large house. Following discussion, Committee voted on final amended motion. Vote was 2 Ayes (Joseph, Skilling), 5 Noes (Clucas, Barnard, Hill, Linhoff, Spooner). Motion failed for lack of majority. Committee Member Clucas stated that all action on staff report should be deferred and transmit this information to Planning Commission. Community Development Director Hogan stated that action taken by this Committee at their last meeting is in staff report and the only question that exists in staff report is how to treat a single family house in other districts other than R-1 zone; also, that action Committee 5. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 31, 1973 took applies to Peninsula area only. Chairman Skilling stated that she is concerned that if the Committee reconsiders its action at every meeting when alternates appear instead of regulars, the Committee backsteps and no progress is made. She further stated that the Committee cannot take different action at every meeting because a different member is in attendance. Following discussion, Councilman Ryckoff again appeared before the Committe and stated that the job the Committee was given was to take the City on a priority sequence and that he doesn't understand how Committee recommended action on a City. -wide basis on Amendment Application No. 382. Chairman Skilling responded by reading Resolution No. 8031 establishing Committee, Paragraph A which states, " These recommendations regarding development standards shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 6. Other related special considerations." Councilman Ryckoff stated that was correct but added within special priority areas. Committee Member Spooner stated that it was his under- standing that the Committee voted against what we voted on last week; that is, changing vote of last week. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling stated that her amended motion applied development standards without many exceptions across the board. Motion Alternate Committee Member Linhoff moved that the R-1 Requirements apply to single family residences in R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 zones in Balboa Peninsula. Committee Member Clucas seconded. Vote was 4 Ayes (Clucas, Barnard, Linhoff, Spooner), 3 Noes (Joseph, Skilling, Hill). Motion carried. Motion Following discussion, Chairman Skilling moved for adjourn- ment. Committee Member Barnard seconded. Vote of all Ayes. Time: 6:00 P.M. MARGOT SKILLING Chairman, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach, California Approved: 6. CITY OF, NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA reeao city Hau 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 673-2110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P. M. Date: August 7, 1973 Present/Dais: Alternate Committee Member Houston Alternate Committee Member Joseph **Committee Member Barnard/Alternate Chairman Skilling Committee Member Woodard Alternate Committee Member Linhoff Committee Member Spooner Committee Member Spangler* * Alternate Committee Member Spangler arrived at 3:10 P.M. **Committee Member Barnard arrived at 3:25 P.M. Staff: William R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Present: Liaison Member Councilman Paul Ryckoff Liaison Member Commissioner Don A. Beckley Alternate Committee Member Spangler * Alternate Committee Member Hill Alternate Committee Member Bethel * Alternate Committee Member Hill arrived at 4:23 P.M. Item 1 Chairman Skilling called the meeting to order and stated that Item 1 on the agenda was approval of Minutes of Minutes meetings of July 17, 1973, July 24, 1973, and July 31, 7-17-73 1973 and asked if there were any,corrections or deletions. 7-24-73 There being none, Alternate Committee Member Houston 7-31-73 moved that minutes be approved as written. Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of All Ayes. APPROVED AS WRITTEN In response to Senior Planner Foley as to whether a member who was absent at meeting could approve minutes, 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, August 7, 1973 Chairman Skilling stated that in accordance with proce- dures adopted at first meeting, the substitute takes over in total and votes without restriction. Chairman Skilling stated that a letter of resignation had been received from Committee Member Clucas and that now Mr. Houston is Committee Member and Councilman Ryckoff has not appointed an Alternate as yet. u Alternate Committee Member Spangler arrived and took his place on dais. Item 2 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 2, Continued Discussion of West Newport and Adoption of Recommendation. Cont. Disc. W. Newport Discussion followed on parking alternatives, tandem parking as one-half space, small size of lots, dimen- sions of lots, setbacks, buildable area, square footage of area, and volume added requirement. Alternate Committee Member Spangler stepped down from dais. Committee Member Barnard arrived and took his place on dais. Discussion followed on building density, people density, quality of life, impact of'number of bedrooms in struc- ture, and rent determined by cost,of structure. Senior Planner Foley stated that our current procedures are that if deck is covered we will calculate it as buildable area. 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, August 7, 1973 Alternate Committee Member Spangler appeared before Committee and commented on Volume Added Requirement concept. Commissioner Beckley appeared before the Committee and with the aid of blackboard demonstrated the effect of different parking configurations on the buildable area of structures on different lot sizes. Chairman Skilling requested that Senior Planner Foley incorporate Mr. Beckley's report in written form for distribution. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling stated that when ordinance is written, it will be stated tandem parking or sideyard encroachment but not both. Following discussion, Alternate Committee Member Spangler joined Commissioner Beckley•at blackboard explaining one-half credit for tandem and stated that based on initial premise, the volume or the floor space is related to the parking. Further discussion followed on tandem parking and angled parking. Alternate Committee Member Bethel appeared before the Committee and commented on the fact that subterranean parking is very impractical since the area experiences flooding two or three times a year. Following discussion, Chairman Skilling stated that if the Coastal Conservation Commission does not accept 3 parking spaces but insists on 4 parking spaces for a duplex, that the alternative is subterranean parking. Discussion followed on pros and cons of subterranean parking. Committee Member Barnard commented that the concept of Volume Added Requirement was not to dictate certain designs but rather to establish an overall control allowing more interesting architectural design. Discussion followed on number of permanent residents, parking problems, and character and density of area. 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, August 7, 1973 Alternate Committee Member Spangler appeared before the Committee and stated this is a unique area and Committee should consider maximum parking that can be obtained with lot size available and how much should the property owner be penalized to park cars. Alternate Committee Member Joseph commented that most garages are not utilized for cars but for storage. Commissioner Beckley appeared before the Committee and stated tha.t present density is 10 dwelling units per acre in Peninsula Point and Newport Shores area which are basically R-1 and parking is bumper to bumper on street and many garages used for storage; however, future parking must be considered since density will be 20+ dwelling units per acre --double the units and double the parking problems. Discussion followed on size of units, number of bedrooms, number of residents, and number of parking spaces. Committee Member Woodard stated that he felt there should be a minimum of 2 parking spaces for 800 square foot unit. Motion Following discussion, Chairman Skilling moved that the development standards applied to Balboa Peninsula be adopted for West Newport area including_Floor Area Ratio and garages unless Coastal Commission does not accept 3 parking spaces. Alternate Committee Member Joseph seconded. Following discussion, vote was 3 Ayes (Joseph, Skillin , Spooner), 4 Noes (Houston, Barnard, Woodard, Linhoffl. Motion failed for lack.of majority. Motion Committee Member Woodard moved that the Committee adopt all of the recommendations of Peninsula for the West Newport Area with the exception that there be 4 parking spaces per structure less than 2400 square feet. Following discussion, Mr. Woodard tabled his motion since second was not recorded. Alternate Committee Member Spangler appeared before the Committee and stated that there should be incentives for people to underbuild. Following discussion, Committee Member Houston stated that people tend to build to the nth degree. Following discussion, Senior Planner Foley stated that by counting tandem spaces as one-half space you are in 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, August 7, 1973 effect saying that the maximum number of spaces you can put on a lot is 3 spaces and the maximum size duplex is 2400 square feet according to Mr. Spangler's formula. Motion Following discussion, Chairman Skilling moved that the Committee incorporate concept of sideyard parking or tandem parking but not both. Committee Member Spooner seconded. Vote of 4 Ayes (Houston, Joseph, Skilling, Spooner), 3 Noes (Barnard, Woodard, Linhoff). Motion carried. Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard reopened the matter for further discussion that was previously tabled. Amended Following discussion by the Committee concerning various Motion alternatives, Committee Member Woodard amended his motion as follows: that the Committee adopt all of the recom- mendations of Peninsula for the West Newport Area with the exception that there be 3 parking spaces up to 2,000 square feet and one space for each increment of 400 square feet above that. Following discussion, Committee Member Spooner suggested amending motion to 2800 square feet. Following discus- sion, Alternate Committee Member Joseph suggested amend- ing motion to 2200 square feet. Mr. Woodard would not accept change to his motion. Vote on Motion as Amended by Mr. Woodard was 5 Ayes (Houston, Barnard, Woodard, Linhoff, Spooner), 2 Noes (Joseph, Skilling). Amended Motion carried. Motion Chairman Skilling moved that full credit be given to each tandem space. Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of 5 Ayes (Joseph, Barnard, Skilling, Woodard, Spooner), 2 Noes (Houston, Spooner). Motion carried. Following discussion, Committee Member Spooner stated that the Committee should try to come up with guidelines that are workable in majority of cases and for the exception, there is the'variance. Motion Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard moved that the Committee not submit any findings until the final report. Committee Member Prnard seconded. Vote of All Ayes. Motion carried. 5. Motion , Item 3 Adjournment MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, August 7, 1973 Committee Member Houston moved for adjournment at 6:23 P.M. and motion carried unanimously. e - '4 COUNCILMEN ROLL CALIr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Aueust 27. 1973 MINUTES INDEX e�ol�uti_on No. 8085 establishing a bus stop zone on the southerly e of 16th Street from Irvine Avenue to Seagull Lane be ours of 6:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. on certain dates. (re r- om the Public Works Director was presented.) Bus Stops R-8085 _ 2. The following communications were referred as (p indicated: Referred to Development Standards Citizens Advisory Encroach - Committee, letter from Balboa Peninsula -Point ments/ Association regarding side yard enc oachments_for Garages garages. Referred to the Transportation Plan Citizens Advisory Committee, letters from Mrs. W. A. Kiener and ;)rking Walter A. Kiener opposing the elimination of curb parking along coast highway in Corona del Mar. Referred to staff for reply, letter from Edwar Boat Garlick proposing a hard -surfaced boat laun ing Launching ramp on a portion of the beach at 15th Str t. Referred to staff for reply, letter fr Mrs. Joan Dev Stand Bernatz regarding selection of re esentatives for Citizens Development Standards Citizens dvisory Committee. Cmte Referred to Planning Com ssion for appropriate P.E. action, letter from Wes ewport Improvement R-O-W Association recomme ing that the City take imme- diate steps to rezo the P. E. Right -of -Way property from R-2 to Ope Space. Referred to ending Legislation Committee, letter Public from Se or Helms regarding Public School Juris- Schools dictio Act of 1973 (S. 2336). 3. a following communications were referred to the City Clerk for filing and inclusion in the records: Letter from Dale W. Wullner, Santa Ana Heights, objecting to noise from the Police helicopter. Copy of letter to Orange County Division, League of California Cities, from City of Garden Grove stating its opposition to any resolution calling for a subsidy of coastal zone cities having regional public beaches. Resolution of Local Agency Formation Commission HB Sphere approving a sphere of influence for the City of of Influence i I Huntington Beach and attaching a map of same. Resolution of the City of La Habra expressing op- position to public employer -employee relations legislation. Volume 27 - Page 212 c August 9, 1973 Balboa Peninsula Point Assoc. 1585 E.•Ocean Boulevard Balboa, California Members of the City Council City of Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Subject: Side Yard Encroachments for Garages. Gentlemen: At the suggestion of Mayor McGinnis at the Council's Study Session of July 9, 1973, we discussed our questions related to the proposed policy with Mr. James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director of the Department of Community Development. From this discussion, we understand that: 1. The proposed policy, if adopted, will become a part of the Policy Manual and will not be part of the Building Code for the R-1.51'R-2, R-3, and R-4 Districts., Each case will be subject to Modification Committee review, after notifying all property owners,within a 300 foot radius,of the review hearing date. 2. The encroachment may only be applicable to garage or open parking space which is entered into from an alley. Garages fronting a street are not affected by this policy proposal. Likewise,'a side yard in a corner lot adjacent to a side street or to an alley intersection cannot be encroached. 3. The encroachment may be only into one side yard of a lot - not into both side yards. 4. Written approval (paragraph 9 of the proposal) need be ob- tained only from the property owner adjacent to the side yard into which there is an encroachment. 5. The phrase "not detrimental to the adjacent property" in paragraph 6 probably can be determined by the attitude of the adjacent property owner and other neighbors. Will the 1 Modification Committee make the decision in the case of a neighborhood difference? Page Two Members of the City Council August 91 1973 6. Paragraph'5 provides that the property owner adjacent to a side -yard encroachment is not restricted in any way in the legal development of his property. If his lot is undeveloped, or is to be redeveloped, he may find himself with a legally habitable room no more than three feet from an adjacent garage wall. We recognize the need for a reasonably flexible policy in building under current conditions in the Coastal Zone. May we suggest, therefore, if the encroachment policy is adopted, that it be confined: 1. To affected properties only in the Coastal Zone. 2. To lot sizes of limited width, preferrably no more than 30 feet. We appreciate the opportunity of offering these comments. Sincerely yours, i, BALBOA PENINSULA POINT ASSOCIATION I J. Douglas Lynn - President Harry Kamph - Community Liaison Chairman Norma Dill Carolyn Shea Joanne Snyder Dorothy Hutchison William Campbell Hal Ewing Bruce Asper Gilbert Mitchell Steve Kenney Al Smith cc: Department of Community Development 0 rJ b� �Z BOARD OF DIRECTORS Don Beckley 225 Canal 548.3123 President .............Paul Balalis James ck $309 River Avenue 645.0280 ashore 3 Seashore 675.OBS4 Vice President...... Margot Skiliin9 :•'; anne Rudd SuzanneR 6610 West Ocean Front 642.3214 — 62ntl 642.1999 Treasurer..............Pat Foster - �' Richard Taylor Richard ' 127 — 35th Street 675.3927 t� ashore Seashore 646-5407 Secretary........... Mike Johnson _ Woo Hollis Wood Hollis S112 River 642.3125 4307 Seashore 673.9266 d'ili:ST W EVI]PORT BEACH Improvement Assaaiation NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA August 23, 1973 c •; A� South Coast Regional Commissioners p�GGt�oEPc� State Coastal Zone Conservation Commission �Evye cv Long Beach Harbor District Headquarters yl 666 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 3107 Long Beach, California ' Subject: Two Garages per Unit, West Newport Gentlemen: The West Newport Beach Improvement Association wishes to go on record against the arbitrary requirement of two tandem garages per unit in R-2 developments in West Newport for the following reasons: 1. Current City heighth limits (241) require subterranean construction, which creates special building problems, due to water table level, small lot size, potential health hazard, as well as unreasonable expense. 2. Due to our narrow, congested streets, dangerous problems of moving cars in and out of these'tandem garages will be created, and the result will be severe safety hazards. 3. The use of garages for car storage is difficult to enforce and may be converted for other uses. We believe other solutions can provide a more satisfactory and less expensive solution to this problem of parking as it relates to public access to our beaches. The heavy attendance to the beaches in our City by non-residents attests to the fact that even under the current circumstances, the residents of California are not shut off from enjoying our section 4 r - page two - of the coastline. We believe the West Newport area has a saturation limit, which must be considered. The best solutions to this problem of the automobile, as it affects the older developed areas of our City, should remain the final responsibility of the City of Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach has appointed a Citizens Advisory Committee to develop standards for the City's future growth. This Committee will present its recommendations to the City by September 23, 1973. We believe this approach to the over-all problems of the City is far superior to the simplistic solution of two garages per unit being currently endorsed by your Commission. Sincerely, Paul Balalis President PB:dm Blind copies: Newport Beach City Council Newport Beach Planning Commission ✓� a i BOARD OF DIRECTORS „�,..:,'-�?` Don Beckley 225 Canal 546.3123 President .............Paul Balalis t&P James 5300 River Avenue 645-0280 Seashore 3 Seask 675.OII84 Vice President ......Margot Skillin9 L anne Rudd Suzanne 6610 West Ocean Front 642-3274 —62or 642-3949 Treasurer..............Pat Foster har Rlc510 TeashSecretary..........-Mike 127 — 35th Street 675.3927 5eashora 646.5407 Johnson lis W Hollis Wood 5112 River 642.3125 4307 Seashore 673.9266 WEST N EWPORT BEACH Improvement Association NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA August 23, 1973 %X'9 +�� S v 4 atEo ill ' �a.; r R Cat„s•% int pev pe?t. £�GY,ct� r South Coast Regional commissioners State Coastal Zone conservation commission I Long Beach Harbor District Headquarters 666 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 3107 - Long Beach, California Gentlemen: with the approval of the Board of the West Newport Beach Improvement Association; we urge that your Commission devote its prime energies to establishing an acceptable, practical plan for public beach access for the entire State coastline. we object to the diversion of your time to local zoning matters, venich result in arbitrary decisions on a piece meal basis, and, usurps the authority of local government. we are concerned with the deprivation of property rights evidenced by recent commission decisions. Sincerely, Paul Balalis President PB:dm Blind copies: Newport Beach City Council Newport Beach Planning Commission 111f a8�"/PORT �4i lr_ r J C—, P j Department of Community Development CSC/FORN�p DATE: September 14, 1973 T0: Members, Development Standard Citizen's Advisory Committee FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT Attached is a copy of the final Committee report which will be presented to the City Council on September 24, 1973. The staff has incorporated all of the changes suggested by the members of the Committee. If there are any further changes which you feel are necessary, please contact the Chairman or myself prior to Wednesday, September 19, 1973. Very truly yours, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By:1,.1.x�'GL./ William R. Foley _. Senior Planner RVH-WRF/ib CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 673-Z110 M I N U T E S DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P.M. Date: September 4, 1973 Present/Dais: Committee Member Houston Alternate Committee Member Joseph Committee Member Barnard Chairman Skilling Committee Member Woodard * Committee Member Glass/Alternate Committee Member Linhoff Alternate Committee Member Bethel * Committee Member Glass left at 4:55 P.M. Staff: R.-V. Hogan, Community Development Director William.R. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie"Banks, Secretary Present: Councilman Paul Ryckoff Commissioner Don A. Beckley Alternate Committee Member Spangler Alternate Committee Member Hill * * * * * * Item 2 Chairman Skilling called the meeting to o-rder at 3:00 P.M. and opened discussion on Item 2 on the cover letter for - Review and warding Committee's Recommendations for Development Standards Discussion to City Council. of Summary of Recom- In response to the Committee, Senior Planner Foley reviewed mendations the cover letter and answered questions thereto. Mr. Folev MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS•CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1973 stated on page 2 of cover letter under S. Additional Recommendations, that the last sentence should read: "However, the Committee feels that no structural en- croachments should be allowed in the side yard and side yard parking should be allowed only where there is no tandem parking." Discussion followed on height limit in Corona del Mar, scale of City, consistency in lot size in Corona del Mar, character of Corona del Mar, one story scale in Corona• del Mar-. Alternate Committee Member Hill appeared before the Committee and stated that remaining R-3 lots left in Corona del Mar drop off from 0 to 751. Alternate Committee Member Spangler appeared before the Committee and stated that Volume Added will give some variation to height. Discussion followed on uniqueness of Corona del Mar, pros and cons of heights on lots, and sloping lots. Committee Member Woodard stated that the height limit of 24'/28' on a sloping 450 l.ot presents astronomical problems and rigidity of this control standardizes to the point that uniqueness is ignored. Motion Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard moved• that Corona del Mar height restriction in R-3 District only be at the original 281/32' limit. Committee Member Glass seconded. Committee Member Houston questioned whether there weren't special committees to review special considerations. Motion Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard amended Amended motio.nso that any lots in all 3 areas that exceed a slope of 15% should be allowed to go to original height limit of 28'/32'. Committee Member Woodard withdrew motion as amended. Discussion followed on definition of yard. Alternate Committee Member Bethel stated it was her under- standing that staff would give copies of existing regula- tions on setbacks to the Committee and she is very con- cerned with setbacks and cited examples on San Joaquin Hills Road. Councilman Ryckoff appeared before the Committee and 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1973 requested clarification of Volume Added concept and tandem parking. Community Development Director Hogan read definitions on "yard" and "front yard" and stated that nowhere in the ordinance is front of the lot defined and the usual procedure is to take narrower•portion adjacent to the street - Motion Following discussion on setbacks from arterial streets, Alternate Committee Member Bethel moved that a paragraph be added under 5. Additional Recommendations of the cover letter as follows: "That in all areas and particu- larly in newly developed areas, that setbacks should be established for arterial streets." Chairman Skilling seconded. Committee Member Glass stated that there are many different ways to buffer residential uses from streets other than setbacks. Motion Following discussion and various alternatives suggested Amended by Committee members, Alternate Committee Member Bethel amended motion so that a paragraph be added under 5. Additional Recommendations of the cover letter as follows: "That the Committee requests that additional studies should be initiated and ail availabTe techniques should be taken into consideration on setbacks to establish residential development standards in newly developed areas for developments that will abut heavily traveled streets." Chairman Skilling seconded. Vote of All Ayes. Motion carried. Motion Following discussion of trash enclosures, Committee Member Glass moved that added to the first paragraph under 6. A) Additional Recommendations the foil -owing: "That Section 6.04.150 of the Municipal Code be amended to include 'private streets and public and private alleys'." Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of All Ayes. Motion carried. Committee Member Glass left and Alternate Committee Member Linhoff'took her place on the dais. Committee Member Woodard suggested that the first para- graph under 5. Additional Recommendations of the cover 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS• CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1973 letter be put under 2. Parking of the cover letter. Senior Planner Foley concurred and Committee so directed. Following discussion, the Committee directed the staff to add a paragraph under 5. Additional Recommendations of the cover letter that the Committee recommends that a program be established to implement tree planting. Following discussion, the Committee directed the staff to add a closing paragraph to the cover letter stating that the Committee would like the Planning Commission or City Council to take action on these recommendations. In response to the Committee, Community Development Director Hogan stated that the cover letter and develop- ment standards recommendations will be rewritten with all changes included for review by the Chairman, then sent to Committee members with time for comment before forwarding it to Council. In response to the Committee, Senior Planner Foley stated. that Additional Front Yard Setback referred to in recom- mendations was renaming of Volume Added. Discussion followed and the Committee recommended that where Addi- tional Front Yard Setback or Volume Added appear in the recommendations or cover letter that they be changed to Open Space Options (OSO). The Committee recommended that paragraph 4 of the cover letter read as follows: "4. Open Space Options OSO. The Committee feels that in order to provide a variety of facades and to encourage outdoor living areas, that an additional open space should be required in the front of the building as described in our recommendations." Commissioner Beckley appeared before the Committee and commented on open space, location of patios, etc. +tion Following discussion, Committee Member Woodard moved that 1. Height of the cover letter should read: "The Committee feels that the height limits should remain the same as the existing regulations with the exception that the height limit on the front half of an R-3 lot should be reduced to 24'/28' or 28' only throughout the total lot." Motion failed for lack of second. Following discussion, Alternate Committee Member Hill appeared before the Committee and commented on fronts and backs of houses, direction the front of house was 21 MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1973 facing, uniqueness of sloping lots and Corona del Mar lots. Motion Following discussion, Alternate Committee Member Joseph moved that 1. Height of cover letter will read: "The Committee feels that the height limits should remain the same as the existing regulations." Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of 2 Ayes (Joseph, Woodard); 5 Noes (Houston, Barnard, Skilling, Linhoff, Bethel). Motion fails for lack of majority. Motion Alternate Committee Member Joseph moved that 1. Height of the cover letter will read: "Height in the R-3 District shall be limited to 28' as an overall." Committee Member Woodard seconded. Vote of 2 Ayes (Joseph, Woodard); 5 Noes (Houston, Barnard, Skilling, Linhoff, Bethel). Motion fails for lack of majority. Motion Following discussion, Committee Member Houston using the wording supplied by Commissioner Beckley moved that in 1. Height of the cover letter be as follows with the addition of ", except where differences in grade warrant individual considerations": "The Committee feels that the. height limits should remain the same as the existing regulations with the exception that the height limit on the front half of an R-3 lot should be reduced to 24'/28', except where differences in grade warrant individual con- siderations. The Committee feels that this would help to reduce the visual impact of this structure, particularly along a major street such as Balboa Boulevard." Alternate Committee Member Bethel seconded. Vote o•f 6 Ayes (Houston, Barnard, Skilling, Woodard, Linhoff, Bethel); 1 Abstention (Joseph). Motion carried. In response to the Committee, Senior Planner Foley stated that the last sentence of page 2 of the report on recom mendations be changed as follows: "This additional Open Space Options may be provided i.n any of the ways illustrated on the attached Spangler's report (Exhibit A), or in any combination thereof." Following 'discussion, Chairman Skilling directed the staff to redo cover letter and report as modified and forward to Committee for review. Chairman SkiTling also stated that there would not be another meeting unless enough members re- quested one and then members would be notified by staff; if not, cover letter and report as modified would go to Council. 61P MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1973 In response to the Commi-ttee, Community Development Director Hogan stated that when Alternate Committee Member Linhoff submits her minority report that the staff will distribute same to other members. Motion Committee Member Houston moved for adjournment at 6:00 P.M. Alternate Committee Member Bethel seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Approved: MARGOT SKILLING Chairman, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach, California b. P0 0�< e Deportment of Community Development CpClFO P�`P DATE: September 13, 1973 TO: City Council FROM: Development Standards Citizen's Advisory Committee SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The Residential Growth Element of the General Plan states that appropriate development standards should be formulated for each area to assure the preservation of the individual and unique character of the residential neighborhoods. In order to implement this policy, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8031 on June 25, 1973, creat- ing the Development Standards Citizen's Advisory Committee. Development Standards The Committee has held nine weekly meetings discussing many aspects of development in the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 Districts on Balboa Peninsula, in West Newport, and in Corona del Mar. Specifically the Committee discussed the following standards: 1. Height: The Committee feels that the height limits should remain the same as the existing regulations with the excep- tion that the height limit on the front half of an R-3 lot should be reduced to 24'/28' except where differences in grade warrant individual considerations. The Committee feels that this would help to reduce -the visual Impact of these structures, particularly along a major street such as Balboa Boulevard. 2. Parking: The Committee feels that the number of required parking spaces should be related to the size of the structure. We are aware that our recommendations are not'consistant with the philosophy of the South Coast Regional Commission (our recommendations would require less than two spaces per unit for small units and more than two spaces per unit for particu- larly large units). However, if the Planning Commission and - City Council concur with our philosophy, we would urge the City Council to present our recommendations to the South Coast Regional -Commission for their consideration. In order to provide adequate parking, the Committee feels that it will be necessary to allow tandem parking or sideyard park- ing. However the Committee feels that on any individual lot, TO: City. Council - 2. there should be either tandem or sideyard parking but not both. Further, the Committee feels that where sideyard parking is permitted, it should be limited to open or partially open parking, and that no structural encroachments should be allowed in the sideyard. 3. Story: The Committee feels that the height lim.it and the floor area ratio requirements provide adequate control of the height, size, and bulk of buildings and that the City should not impose unnecessary controls over the interior design of structures. Therefore, the Committee recommends that all reference to the number of stories should be deleted in the R-1, R-2 Districts. 4. Open Space Options: The Committee feels that in order to provide a variety of facades and to encourage outdoor living areas, that additional open space should be required in the front of the lot as described in the recommendations. Additional Considerations In addition to the above standards the Committee discussed the follow- ing general considerations: 1. Yards: The Committee feels that the staff should prepare new definitions for the required yard areas in order to relate setbacks to streets, bluffs, etc. and not merely to the front, side, or rear portions of the lot. In addition, the Committee recommends that additional studies be initiated to establish residential development standards along heavily traveled s.treets, particularly in regard to setbacks, landscaping and sound attenuation. 2. Trash Enclosures: The Committee feels that the provisions of Section 6.04.150 of the Municipal Code should apply to private streets and public and private alleys as well as to public streets. 3. Landscaping: The Committee feels that Section 13.09.010 of the Municipal Code should be implemented and the Parks, Beaches and Re-creation Commission should adopt appropriate criteria. 103 Specific Areas City Council - 3. The Committee strongly endorses the following proposals contained in the General Plan: 1. That the City -owned property north of Bayside Drive in Corona del Mar be developed for a linear park, and that it not be used for parking. 2. That the old Pacific Electric right-of-way in West Newport be rezoned to Open Space. Recommendations The detailed recommendations on Development Standards, are attached to this report. The Committee recommends that the City Council initiate the appropriate procedures to amend the Municipal Code to incorporate These standards, and to implement all of the recommendations of this Committee. Respectfully submitted, Margot Skilling, Chairman RECOMMENDATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee recommends that the development standards in the R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 Districts in Corona del Mar, West Newport, and on the Balboa Peninsula be amended as follows: 1. The R-1 District A) Height.: The Height Limit should remain at 24'/28' in all three areas. B) Parking: The parking requirements should be amended in all three areas to read: "2 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,000 square feet; 3 garage spaces for any structure containing 2,000 square feet or more." (see general notes below). C) Number of,Stories: All reference to the number of stories should be deleted, and the existing FAR be retained in all three areas. D) Open Space Options In addition to the required front yard, there should be additional open space in the front of the structure required in all three areas. For West Newport and Balboa Peninsula, this additional open space shall be a volume of space equal to the buildable width of the lot times the basic height o UR POSE=: .O PROVIDE FOR FLEXIOLE BUILDING ^'_SIGN IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF '=ACH LOT. (SRO P,O 9--A L: IT 13 R1=C0"MENDED THAT IN ADDITION T"O THC- REQUIRED FRONT YARD SrT'SACI< THERE OE PROVIDED A VOLUME OF SPACE EQUAL TO THE V/IOTH OF THE LOT (MINUS REQUIRED SC-Tr3-ACKSI X ALLOWABLE 13LJILDING -ALLOWAFSLE PROJECTIONS INTO THIS SPAC`_: ROOFS, EIALC-ONIES, DECKS, CORNICES AND ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS FROM POINT OF CANTILEVER. FIREPLACES MAY ALSO PROJECT INTO P.ZOPOr:,EO VOLUME OF SPACE. E X A Afl P L E S: � I \ a V f - V cW -H *5r i e 1 i= I r•' t/ ell- ; Vc W.H•G' limit times 5'. For Corona del Mar, the volume shall equal the buildable width times the basic height limit ti-mes 7z'• This open space shall be open on at least two sides and may be used for outdoor living area. Roofs, balconies, decks, patios, cornices and architectural feature may project into this area. This additional open space may be provided in any ways illustrated on the attached sheet, or in any combination thereof. 2. The R-2 District A) Height: The Height Limit should remain at 241/28' in all three areas. B) Parking: The parking requirements should be amended as follows: 1) In West Newport and on Balboa Peninsula, the requirements should be.: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional 600 square feet or portion thereof." 2) In Corona del Mar, the requirements should be: "4 'garage spaces for any structure containing less than 3,000 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 600 square feet or portion thereof." C) Number of Stories: All reference to the number of stories should be deleted and the existing FAR should be retained in all three areas. 2. D) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. 3. The R-3 District A) Height: The Height Limit should be amended in all three areas as follows: "24'/28' on the front one-half of the lot; 28'/32' on the rear one-half of the lot.41 JJ i B) Parking: The parking requirement should be amended in all three areas as follows: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 400 square -feet or portion thereof; provided that in no event shall there be less than one independantly accessible space per'unit." C) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. 4. The R-4 District A) Height: The Height, Limit should remain at 28'/32' in all three areas. B) Parking• The parking requirement should be amended in all three areas as follows: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each 3. additional 400 square feet or portion thereof; provided that in no event shall there be less than 1 independantly accessible space per unit." C) Open Space Options: Same as the R-1 District for structures which are 24' or less in height for the front one-half of the lot. For structures higher than 24' for the front one-half, the volume shall be the buildable width of the lot times the basic height limit times 8 feet. 5. General Notes A) The R-1 parking standards shall apply to single family homes in the R-2, R-3, and R-4 Districts. 8) Square footage figures in parking requirements exclude parking• areas and outdoor areas within the additional front yard setbacks. C) Tandem parking spaces shall be allowed. and shall be given full credit. D) Side yard parking (but not structural encroachments) shall be allowed. E) Tandem parking and side yard parking shall not both be allowed on the same lot. F) The FAR would include all areas within the exterior walls and all covered parking areas, but not balconies, decks, or patios which are open on two sides. Q a " 4. l2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA ,zero M I N U T E S City Hall 8800 Newport Blvd. (714) 078-2110 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Place: City Council Chambers Time: 3:00 P.M. Date: July 24, 1973 Present/Dais: Alternate Committee Member Houston Alternate Committee Member Joseph Alternate Committee Member Spangler Chairman Skilling * Committee Member Woodard Committee Member Glass **Committee Member Spooner * Committee Member Woodard arrived at 3:30 P.M. **Committee Member Spooner arrived at 4:15 P.M. Staff: R.V. Hogan, Community Development Director William R'. Foley, Senior Planner Dottie Banks, Secretary Present: Liaison•Member Councilman Richard D. Croul Liaison Member Councilman Paul Ryckoff Alternate Committee Member Balalis Alternate Committee Member Linhoff Rodney L. Gunn, Advance Planning Administrator * * * * * * Item 1 Chairman Skilling called the meeting to order and stated that Item 1 on the agenda was approval of Minutes of Minutes meeting of July 11, 1973 with corrections by Councilman 7-11-73 Ryckoff offered at study session of Council. APPROVED Community Development Director Hogan stated that the AS CORRECTED staff contacted Councilman Ryckoff for corrected wording. Senior Planner Foley read the corrections as follow: Page 3,,Paragraph 3: At the end of the sentence beginning with the words, "along that line and", to the end of the sentence to be deleted and replaced by, "in the area of density through other considerations." 1. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Page 4, Paragraph 8: At the end of the sentence beginning with the words, "is taking place in", to the end of the sentence to be deleted and replaced by, "or other activities could occur,besides in the front yard." In response to Committee Member Glass, Senior Planner Foley stated that minutes were taken from the tape but that micro- phone was not placed in the .audience and comments from the audience were not picked up clearly by tape. Motion Alternate Committee Member Spangler moved that the Committee a-pprove Minutes of July 11, 1973 as corrected, seconded by Alternate Committee Member Houston. Vote of 4 Ayes (Houston, Joseph, Spangler, Skilling, 1 Abstain (Glass), 2 Absent (Woodard, Spooner). Motion carried. Item 2 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 2 on the agenda, Mayor McInnis' presentation to South Coast Regional Conser- Mayor vation Commission. McInnis' Presentation Alternate Committee Member Joseph commented that presentation to Reg. Comm. was pertinent to goal. Item 3 Chairman Skilling opened discussion on Item 3 on the agenda, Proposed Objectives and Policies for the South Coast Regional Proposed Commission. Objectives & Policies for In response to Committee Member Glass as to whether or not Reg. Comm. this was an official document, Community Development Hogan stated this was a copy of proposed policies drafted by Executive Director Carpenter of South Coast Regional Commission, which have been submitted to the Commission for their consid-" eration. These policies are based on the Commission's recom- mendation to date and public hearings probably will be held on proposed policies. Mr. Hogan reviewed Policies (6)(A) thru (6)(E). Discussion -followed on standards relative to blockage of view, 50% open ground space, and aesthetic design. Chairman Skilling commented that interim proposed policies were totally unrealistic, non -viable, and unenforceable. Community Development Director Hogan stated .that if the Regional Commission decides on public hearings on proposed policies that consideration should be given to preparation for hearings along with alternatives. 2. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Chairman Skilling commented -that she would favor our City Council taking a position of repeal on Proposition 20. Chairman Skilling stated that prior to Item 4 she would like to open discussion on letter from Newport Residents United with copies to the Planning Commission and City Council which the Committee has received. Chairman Skilling commented that if the Committee did not desire to respond that for the record she objected to the means of implementation of the objectives. Elaine Linhoff, Chairman of Newport Residents United, appeared be -fore the Committee to answer questions relative to the pro- posed development standards attached to said letter. In re- sponse to the Committee,.Mrs. Linhoff stated that standards were developed primarily for Peninsula and West Newport. Committee Member Glass commented on building height standards affecting character of the area and that consideration should be given to the reasonable lot area per unit requirements. In response to the Committee, Mrs. Linhoff stated that N.R.U. did not discuss zero side yards and in her opinion, it is unworkable. Committee Member Woodard arrived and took his place on dais. Discussi-on followed on height restriction of 24/28 feet, variation of setbacks, maximum use of lots, concern for tomorrow's development, penetration of height,restrictions for parapets, staircase shafts, or fireplaces, parking re- quirements, and traffic. Liaison Member Councilman Croul appeared before the Committee and asked Mrs. Linhoff, who is active in the Peninsula Point Association and the Newport Residents United, if it was the goal of the two groups to downzone to R-1 in Mrs. Linhoff's opinion. Mrs. Linhoff responded to Councilman Croul by stating that downzoning was not to be discussed. Councilman Croul stated that the recommendation of the N.R.U. would imply R-1. 3. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Councilman Croul in response to the Committee stated that one of the major problems the Committee has is the require- ment of the Regional Commission that two parking spaces are required for each unit and tandem parking seems the logical solution. Chairman Skilling commented that the requirement for two parking spaces per unit will increase density, bulk, and buildable area. Community Development Hogan stated that the Regional Commission required two parking spaces per unit after the Mayor's presentation but they have not taken a position on •'50•% open space. Discussion followed on Regional Commission's stand on parking. In response to the Committee, Mrs. Linhoff stated that the Newport Residents United had no due -paying members, are represented by a sizeable number of people, and do not have a list of membership. Item 4 Chairman.Skilling openeddiscussion on Item 4 on the agenda, Barnard and Spangler's report on Balboa Peninsula. Barnard & Spangler's Alternate Committee Member Spangler reviewed the report Report on with the Committee and answered questions. Mr. Spangler Balboa stated that the following revisions should be added to Peninsula 'his recommendations: ACCEPTED 1. Tandem parking be counted as 1/2 car per tandem AS REVISED space. 2. Would not allow parking in side yard in addition to tandem parking. 3. In R-4 zone no less than one car parking space per unit and no•tandem parking unless assigned to same unit. Chairman Skilling stated that if it was agreeable with the Committee, they would work from this proposal item by item. In response to Chairman Skilling, Community Development Director Hogan stated the staff would take the Committee's recommended proposals and write them in ordinance form. 4. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 Committee Member Spooner arrived and took his place on dais. Following discussion, the Committee accepted the recommended building standards as revised in Barnard/Spangler's report as follows: R-1 ZONE R-1 Single -Family Height - Accepted Parking- Add: Sideyard encroachment uncovered, on one side of buildin-g. Motion Committee Member Glass moved to delete "Stories" in the R-1 zone. Seconded by Committee Member Woodard. Vote of 4 Ayes ('Joseph, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 3 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling). Motion carried. Stories- Deleted Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that since it was a 4/3 vote that a minority report could be made and he would do it. Committee Member Spooner stepped down from the dais and was absent from the Chambers. Motion Alternate Committee Member Spangler moved that "Volume Added Requirement" in the R-1 zone be accepted. Seconded by Committee Member Glass. Vote of 5 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Glass), 1 No (Joseph), 1 Absent (Spooner). Volume Added Requirement - Accepted Alternate Committee Member Linhoff stated that on diagrams of Volume Added Requirement under "Proposal" it reads, "in addition to the required front yard setback there be provided a volume of space" and "in the front" should be added. 5. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 R-2 ZONE R-2 Duplex Height - Accepted Committee Member Spooner returned and took his place on dais. Motion Committee Member Woodard moved to accept "Parking" in R-2 zone. Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Houston. Motion Committee Member Glass made a substitute motion that the "400 square feet" in "Parking" in R-2 zone be changed to "60.0 square feet". Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Joseph. Vote of 2 Ayes (Joseph, Glass), 5 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Spooner). Motion failed. Motion Committee voted on original motion. Vote of 5 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Spooner), 2 Noes (Joseph, Glass). Motion carried. Parking - Accepted Motion Committee Member Woodard moved to determine that the dimension'to be use for tandem parking would be 38 feet. Committee Member Glass seconded. Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that before a de- termination was made that he felt some research should be done. Discussion followed on dimensionsof small foreign and compact cars. Committe Member Woodard withdrew his motion and requested that Chairman Skilling request the staff to report on recom- mended dimension on tandem parking and dimension of cars. Alternate Committee Member Spangler stated that he would also like to request staff for a report and diagram and recommendations for turning radius for sideyard area when you have 3 cars -abreast. Motion Committee Member Glass moved to delete "Stories" in the R-2 zone. Seconded by Alternate Committee Member Joseph. Councilman Croul appeared before the Committee and stated that by eliminating "Stories" livable footage is attained. Committee Member Glass commented that the least restrictive restriction is Floor Area Ratio --difficult to abuse, easily calculated, easily checked, and flexible. Mr. Glass further commented that with the limitation of a small lot being an 6. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 1973 inside lot or not on the waterfront, an owner cannot go horizontally only up within height limitation and that the only way to achieve interest and space is to go ver- tically which is why so many choose 12' ceilings. Since it was agreeable with the Committee, Chairman Skilling extended the meeting at 6:00 P.M. to 6:30 P.M. Motion The Committee then voted on Committee Member Glass's motion which Mr. Glass amended to read as follows: Delete "Stories" limitation in all zones retaining Floor Area Ratio. Seconded by Committee Member Woodard. Vote of 3 Ayes (Joseph, Woodard, Glass), 4 Noes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Spooner). Motion fails. Following discussion, Community Development Director Hogan stated that when the City had two stories above parking, there were many problems and at the present time with the height limitation and floor area ratio, they both are working extremely well in limiting bulk and height of structures while allowing flexibility to builder. Mr. Hogan further stated the Council and Planning Commission grant variances for additional parking over and above required parking by increasing floor area ratio. Motion Chairman Skilling moved that the word "Stories" be deleted from the definition if floor area ratio is retained, exempting from the floor area ratio the parking requirement of Regional Commission. Committee Member Glass seconded. Vote of all Ayes. Motion carried unanimously 7/0. Stories - Deleted Motion Committee Member Glass moved that the Volume Added Requirement in R-2 zone be accepted. Chairman Skilling seconded. Vote of 6 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 1 No (Joseph). Motion carried. Volume Added Requirement - Accepted R-3 ZONE R-3 Triplex Motion Committee Member Woodard moved that height limit in the in the R-3 zone be 24-28 feet in the Pehinsula only. After discussion, Committee Member Woodard withdrew motion. Height - 24-28 ft. front - 50% 28-32 ft. rear - 50% Parking- Accepted Stories- Deleted 7. MINUTES - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting held Tuesday, July 24, 2973 Vote on "Volume Added Requirement" in the R-3 zone was 6 Ayes (Houston, Spangler, Skilling, Woodard, Glass, Spooner), 1 No (Joseph). Volume Added Requirement - Accepted R-4 ZONE R-4 Apartment Height - Accepted Hotel Parking- Accepted Motel Stories- Deleted Volume Added Requirement: Delete 113 stories at front." Add "building is above 24 ft. Chairman Skilling requested staff to forward Committee's recommendation to Planning Commission on August 2, 1973 on Amendment Application No. 382 as it pertains to off- street parking requirements for residential uses. Committee Member Glass requested to be excused from the next two meetings of July 31, 1973 and August 7, 1973 and was granted permission by the Committee. Motion: Houston There being no further business, Development Standards All Ayes Citizens' Advisory Committee adjourned the meeting to July 31, 1973 at 3:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. Time: 6:30 P.M. Approved: MARGO SKILLING Chairman, Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach, California Lin COUNCILMEN P� 'Fl O n O O N P �p 2. 'pin 2 O a� O ROLL CALL T v -PN a C T� m CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH September 24, 1973 MINUTES 2. A report was presented from the Development Dev Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee. Standards Adv Cmte A Minority Report from Goldie Joseph was received after the agenda was printed. Mayor Pro Tem Rogers stated that Elaine Linhoff had prepared a Minority Report which had apparently been lost. Goldic Joseph addressed the Council asking that the Committee report be amended as recommended in her Minority Report. The report from the Development Standards Citizens' Motion x Advisory Committee was referred to the Planning Ayes x x x x x x x Commission for necessary hearing and recom- mendations, and the Commission was asked to take into consideration the original recommendations of the Committee and suggested revisions by Council regarding open space, height and parking, as well as the suggestions contained in the Minority reports. esen a rom Recreation Commission regarding new nature park View being constructed in the area of Harbor View Hills Nat e between MacArthur Boulevard and New MacArthur P rk (Upper Big Canyon Nature Park). Motion x "Harbor View Nature Park" was adopted as the Ayes x x x x x official name for the new park. Abstain x x CONSENT CALENDAR: Motion x The following items were approved by on otion Ayes x x x x x x x affirming the actions on the Consent C ndar: 1. The following ordinance was i oduced and passed to second reading on Octobe 9, 1973: Proposed Ordinance No. 515, being, AN ORDINANCE Use Tax OF THE CITY OF NE ORT BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 3.04 OF E NEWPORT BEACH MUNICI- PAL CODE, ENTI LED "SALES AND USE TAX", to incorporate r ent changes in State legislation pertaining to s es and use tax to be administered by the State Bo d of Equalization. (A report from the Finance D' ector was presented.) Volume 2 - g.G-934 - ez Department .of Community Development I# UIN DATE: October 5, 1973 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Final Report of Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee The City Council, on September 24, 1973, after presentation by the Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee, recommended that the Committee's report be submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration and action, as well as minority reports submitted by members of the Committee and suggestions made by members of the Council. The following suggestions were made by minority reports from Committee members: ELAINE LINHOFF 1. Reduce the area requiring more than three parking spaces from 2400 sq.ft. to 2000 sq.ft. 2. In the provision regarding trash containers, amend it to read that such containers shall be housed or secured. (Her reasons for making this recommendation were to hide the containers from view and to assure that they could not -be tipped over by roaming dogs.) GOLDIE JOSEPH 1. Eliminate the provision in the R-3 District on Page 3, Section 3(A) which would reduce the height for R-3 buildings on the front half of the lot. The following suggestions'were made by members of Council: VICE -MAYOR ROGERS That instead of requiring a standard five foot setback in the Open Space option that a factor of'5% of the lot depth should be included which would require varying depths for different sized lots. (In Corona del Mar the factor would be seven percent rather than seven feet.) Also, that in the R-3 District, a height limit could be established of 24/32 ft. rather than 24/28 ft. on the front half and 28/32 ft. on the rear half of the lot. 0 TO: Planning Commission - 2. COUNCILMAN RYCKOFF That the Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee's report, Paragraphs 1(C) and 2 (C) should be eliminated and that the requirements as far as story should remain in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. He also suggested that language be added to the effect that when required, parking shall remain available for that use and may not be used for any other purpose. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RVH/kk Attachment: Final Report of Committee .,, aE�wP Rr ' Department of Community Development , t f.l p1 `r b� 9 F' V` n.`r.1- DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: September 13, 1973 City Council Development Standards Citizen's Advisory Committee REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The Residential Growth Element of the General Plan states that appropriate development standards.should be formulated for each area to assure the preservation of the individual and unique character of the residential neighborhoods. In order to implement this policy, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8031 on June 25, 1973, creat- ing the Development Standards Citizen's Advisory Committee. Development Standards The Committee has held nine weekly meetings.discussing many aspects of development in the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 Districts on Balboa Peninsula', in West Newport, and in Corona del Mar. Specifically the Committee discussed the following standards: Height: The Committee feels that the height limits should remain the same as the existing regulations with the excep- tion that the height limit on the front half of an R-3 lot should be. -reduced to 241/28' except where differences in grade warrant individual considerations. The Committee feels that.this would help to reduce the visual impact of these structures, particularly along a major street such as Balboa Boulevard. 2. Parking: The Committee feels that the number of required parking spaces should be related to the size of the structure. We are aware that our recommendations are not consistant with the philosophy of the South Coast Regional Commission (our recommendations would require less than two spaces per unit for small units and more than two spaces per unit for particu- larly large units). However, if the Planning Commission' and City Council concur with our philosophy, we would urge the City Council to present our recommendations to the South Coast Regional Commission for their consideration. . In order to provide adequate parking. -the Committee feels that it will be necessary to allow tandem parking or sideyard park- ing. However the Committee feels that on any individual lot, TO: City Council - 2. there should be either tandem or sideyard parking but not both. Further, the Committee feels that where sideyard parking is permitted, it should be limited to open or partially open parking, and that no structural encroachments should be allowed in the sideyard. Story: The Committee feels that the height limit and the floor area ratio requirements provide adequate control of the height, size, and bulk of buildings and that the City should not impose unnecessary controls over the interior design of structures. Therefore, the Committee recommends that all reference to the number of stories should be deleted in the R-1, R-2 Districts. 4. Open Space Options: The Committee feels that in order to provide a variety of facades and to encourage outdoor living areas, that additional open space should be required in the front of the lot as described in the recommendations. Additional Considerations In addition to the above standards the Committee discussed the follow- ing general considerations: 1. Yards: The Committee feels that the staff should prepare new definitions for the required yard areas in order to relate setbacks to streets, bluffs, etc. and not merely to the front, side, or rear portions of the lot. In addition, the Committee recommends that additional studies be initiated to establish residential development standards along heavily traveled s.treets, particularly in regard to.setbacks, landscaping and sound attenuation. Trash Enclosures: The Committee feels that the provisions of Section 6.04.150 of the Municipal Code should apply to private streets and public and private alleys as well as to public streets. 3. Landscaping: The Committee feels that Section 13.09.010 of the Municipal Code should be implemented and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission should adopt appropriate 'teria. 0/0 ,p �� o �91- V1� , r -C,T I u TO: Specific Areas City Council - 3. The Committee strongly endorses the following proposals contained in the General Plan: 1. That the City -owned property north of Bayside Drive in Corona del Mar be developed for a linear park, and that it not be used for parking. 2. That the old Pacific Electric right-of-way in West Newport be rezoned to Open Space. Recommendations The detailed recommendations on Development Standards are attached to this report. The Committee recommends that the City Council initiate the appropriate procedures to amend the Municipal Code to incorporate these standards, and to implement all of the recommendations of this Committee. Respectfully submitted, Margot Skilling, Chairman RECOMMENDATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Development Standards Citizens' Advisory Committee recommends that the development standards in the R-1, R-2, R-3, and. R-4 Districts in Corona del Mar, West Newport, and on the Balboa Peninsula be amended as follows: 1. The R-1 District A) Height: The Height Limit should remain at 24'/28' in all three areas. B) Parking: The parking requirements should be amended in all three areas "2 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2'400 square feet; 3 garage spaces for any structure containing 2 400 square feet or more." i (see general notes below). C) Number of.Stories: All reference to the number of stories should be deleted, and the existing FAR be retained in all three areas. D) open Space Options In addition to the required front yard, there should be additional open space in the front of the structure required in all three areas. For West Newport and Balboa Peninsula, this additional open space shall be a volume of space equal to the buildable width of the lot tomes the bas.i-c height i .1 PURPOGG: 0 PROVIOE FOR FLEXIMLE MUILDING O'_SIGN IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF CACH LOT. PROPOSAL: IT f3 RECOMMENDED THAT IN ADDITION TO THE R!3G?UlR-EO FRONT YARD SETBACK THI=RE ME PROVIDED A VOLUME OF SPACE EMUA1_ TO THE %R/IDTH OF THE LOT [MINUS RECtUIRED SETSACKS ) X ALLOWAELE 13UILDING 1-I r= I O H T X S'- O", AI_I_OWABLE PROJECTIONS INTO THIS SPACE: ROOFS, BALCONIES, DECKS, CORNICES AND ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS FROM POINT OF CANTILEVER, FIREPLACES MAY ALSO PROJECT INTO PROPOSED VOLUME OF SPACE. I \J -1.11' .i limit times 5'. For Corona del May, the volume shall equal the buildable width times the basic height limit times 7z'. This open space shall be open on at least two sides and may be used for outdoor living area. Roofs,) balconies, decks, patios, cornices and architectural feature may project into this area. This additional open space may be provided in any ways illustrated on the attached sheet, o•r in any combination thereof. I �. The R-2 District A) Height: The Height Limit should remain at 24'/28' in all three areas t i' B) Parking: The parking requirements should be amended as follows: 1) In West Newport and on Balboa Peninsula, the requirement should be: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional 600 square feet or portion thereof." 2) In Corona del Mar, the requirements should be: 1'4 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 3,000 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 600 square'feet or portion thereof." C) Number of Stories: IAll reference to the number of stories should be deleted and the existing FAR should be retained in all three area 2. D) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. 3. The R-3 District A) Height: 4 , The Height Limit should be amended in all three areas as follows: "24'/28' on the front one-half of the lot; 28'/32' on the rear one-half of the lot except where differences in grade warrant individual considerations." 8) Parkinq- The parking requirement should be amended in all three .areas as follows: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each additional 400 square feet or portion thereof; provided that in no event shall there be less than one independantly accessible space per unit." C) Open Space Options: Same as R-1 District above. 4- The R-4 District A) Height: The Height Limit should remain at 281/32' in all three areas. 8) Parking: The parking requirement should be amended in all three areas as follows: "3 garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2,400 square feet plus one additional space for each 3. additional 400 square feet or portion thereof; provided that in no event shall there be less than i independantly accessible space per unit." 4 C) Open Space Options: Same as the R-1 District for structures which are 24' or less in height for the front one-half of the lot. For structures higher than 24' for the front one-half, the volume shall be the buildable width of the lot times the basic height limit times 8 feet. i ' 5. General Notes A) The P,-1 parking -standards shall apply to single family homes in the R-2, R-3, and R-4 Districts. D) Square footage figures in parking requirements exclude parking areas and outdoor areas within the additional front yard setbacks. C) Tandem parking spaces shall be allowed !,_MWm..WMWM D) Side yard parking (but not structural encroachments) shall be allowed. E) Tandem parking and side yard parking shall not both be allowed on the same lot. F) The FAR would include all areas within the exterior walls and all covered parking areas, but not balconies, decks, or patios which are open on two sides. SPECIAL NOTE Where garage spaces are required, revisions will be made as necessary to assure that a minimum of one enclosed or covered space will be provided for each dwelling unit and that additional required spaces can be provided either in a side yard or in tandem in such manner as will be consistent with other development standards. 21 1� r?ECEtVED ll / co" , amity Devu�A�ienE £ OCT 2 61973s► OF October 23, 1973 MWPORT BEACH,_ CALIF, Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California Gentlemen: We are in receipt of your notice of October 18, 1973 wherein you are considering amending zoning on property under Amendment #412. As the owner of a large portion of property coming under your amendment I vigorously oppose such an action. Your City Planning Department advises me that on the approximate one acre in my possess- ion that an R-2 zoning would allow one duplex only on the whole acre. This property is my inheritance ,from my family who have owned this piece for the last 60 years. An R-2 zoning would make the property absolutely worthless to me or anyone else. We have multiple apartment units on the side and to the rear of us that have never been objectionable and I implore you not to take away the property rights of us as land owners. Since this is the only property left in this immediate area, and not a prestige area at that, why do you feel it necessary to take this action, where there are no views, no interference with traffic, a relatively small portion of land as compared to the monstrous "swinging singles" apartments at the corner of 16th & Irvine, to the high density buildings in Westcliff, etc., etc. Please help us in retaining what is rightfully ours. Sincerely, p Craig 2507 and 2525 E. 16th Street Newport Beach, California /_// OFFICE OF THE MAYOR �;' tf O Data 3- Lzz fl�E 900 Sea Lane COPIES SENT T0: — / Corona del Mar We)oyncilmon T'�•,? 0 Ca 92625 ' [y'Fiana9or ' �; ,�`Z? �9J3� WAttornay obtrorlorky�o \\_ 9 October 20, 1973 Dar Mayor McGinnis, In the October 18 issue of Irvine World News, I read in the Irvine Company Report by Associate Director Larry Moore, that the City of Newport.Beabh proposed revision of the Big Canyonts master - plan would futher curtail the development of apartment homes in that area. I think this is -most unfair and unreasonable. Unfair to the Irvine Company which has already planned and expended for roads and utilities to accomodate densities prevously allowed -- and unfair to those of us who would like to live in Big Canyon or similarly desire - able locations, but can't pay $500 per month for an apartment or $60,000 for a Condominium. Unreasonable, in that no where have we seen the esthetic beauty and gracious livability as developed in the projects of the Irvine Co. and still the City of Newport is seemingly -constantly at loggerheads over matters that could best be left in the hands of those who have clearly demonstrated their constructive aptitude and their social con- sciousness. Why doesn't City Council get busy with the upgrading of "old" Newport, for example, and leave alone one of the best things we have to grace this naturally fortuitous community, and make possible for more of us who can appreciate it, the chance to become a part of it. J pe 0ePt"nt OCT 2 g 19/3s NEWPoR o CA'.1 Respectfully, •1 A. F. Nelson a COMMISSIONERS CITY OF N EWPORT BEACH x A A A July 19, 1973 Motion Ayes Absent (. 0/ MINUTES INDEX - Item A2 Proposal to amend the Planned Community Develop- ment Standards for "Big Canyon" by reducing the permitted densities in Areas 1, 6, 10, and 14. Location: Portion of Blocks 55, 56, 92 and 93 of Irvine's Subdivision, located north of'San Joaquin Hills Road, west of MacArthur Boulevard, south of Ford Road and east of Jamboree Road- Zone-• P-C Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach Assistant. Community Development Director Hewicker reviewed the staff report and statistics with the Pl-anning Commission. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Larry Moore, General Planning Administrator, with The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission to answer questions. W; There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Following discussion, motion was made to adopt X X X X Resolution No. 813, recommending to the City Counc 1 X X that Amendment No. 362 be approved. Request to establish a residential planned commun- ity district (Newporter Apartments Site), and•the acceptance of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR/NB 73-032). Location: Portion of Block 55, Irvine's Sub- division, bounded by Jamboree Road on the west, Irvine Coast Country Club Golf Course on the north and east, and north of a line coinciden with an easterly extension of Back Bay Drive. F1 Em Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES nn u1 nen m Saatemhpr fi_ 1973 iunvv Initiated by:. The City of Newport Beach ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Following a discussion on each matter, the follow-, ing resolutions were -adopted by the Planning Commission:. - Motion X Reso,lu,tio,n No. 819, setting a public hearing for Ayes X X X X X September 27, 1973, to consider amendments to Big Noes X Canyon Planned Community Development Standards by Absen-t X further reducing the density in Areas 1,,6, 10 and 14. Mo 'on X Resolution No. 820, setting a public hearing for Ayes X X X X September 27, 1973, to consider amendments to the Noes X X Residential Growth Element and the Land Use Elemen Absent X of the General Plan. Motion X Resolution No. 821, setting'a public hearing for Ayes X X X X X October 4, 1973, to consider amending portions of Absent X Districting Maps 1, 2, and 22A from the R-2, R-3, and "U" Districts to an Open Space (OS) District. Motion X solution No. 822, setting a public hearing for Ayes X X X X X X 'Oc ber 4, 19730 to consider amending portion of Absent X Dist 'cting Map 30 from the "U" District to an R-1 Dis rict. Motion X Resolution 823, setting a public hearing for Ayes X X X X X X October 4, 19 to consider amending portion of Absent X Districting Map o. 21 from the "I" District to an R-3 'District. Motion X Resolution No. 824, se ting a public hearing for Ayes X X X X X X October'4, 1973, to consider amending portion of Absent X Districting Map No. 22 fro the "U" and C-O-H Districts to an A-P District. Motion X Resolution No. 825, setting a pu is hearing for Ayes X X X X X X October 4, 1973, to consider amend g portion of Absent X Districting Map No. 5 from the C-1-H istrict to an A-P District. Motion X Resolution No. 826, setting a public hearin for Ayes X X X X X X October 4, 1973, to consider amending portion of Absent X Districting Map No. 5 from the C-1-H District t an R-2 District. Page 14. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing on Amendment No. 386 initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider amendments to Big Canyon Planned Community Development Standards by further reducing the density in Areas 1, 6, 10 and 14. Notice is hereby further given that said public hearing will be held on the 27th day of September, 1973, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Newport -Beach City Hall, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. JOSEPH ROSENER, JR., Secretary Planning Commisdion City of Newport Beach, California• PUBLICATION DATE: September 13, 1973 Received for Pub: 1 REA LTOR ,/� 325 NORTH NEWPORT BLVD. O., KJ / 1 NEWPORT BEACH. CALIF. ��/ TELEPHONE: 4714) 646.9205 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Gentlemen: October 18, 1973 RE: Proposed Amendment # 391 As an owner and user of property in subject area, I oppose the proposed zone change. Use of land on (Old) Newport Boulevard is now finally acheiving a sound, relatively stable status. It has been difficult attracting new users to this area. Four buildings were built on Newport Boulevard by or for doctors as exclusive Medical Centers, Laboratories and Doctors' Offices. They were used as such for some time. Abandoned by their former Medical oriented users, these four buildings have been converted to other use ... much of this new use would not be permitted under A-P. One medical building on Westminster Street houses the only Medical Doctors left in the area, and that th as about one-half capacity. Our one pharmacy is long gone. These buildings are now virtually 100% used, but not in the main by users who would be attracted by or permitted by A-P zoning. I do not know of owners and users in this area that do not share the hope that the current neighborhood improvement continue. Most of us have spent our own dollars to this end. We certainly could use help. In this case, I have not heard of an owner or user in the area being asked for any input into this proposed change. Why? Understanding the use -value of a developed and changing area needs more that looking at a map or driving by the area. MEMBER - MULTIPLE LISTING. NEWPORT HARBOR - COSTA MESA BOARD OF REALTORS a Planning Commission -2- October 18, 1973 Nowhere else on Newport Boulevard, from Palisades Road through Costa Mesa and then through Newport Beach is this C-P Handicap imposed. Why spot -zone this area? The Newport Boule- vard expressway has proven to effectively and properly insulate us from close Hoag Hospital influence. Arbitrary zoning will not change proven facts. Gentlemen, this area is finally improving! Please let us continue. If you want to give us a fair shake with the rest of Newport Boulevard, remove tj from the C-1-H of tract 1136 -- and C-2 the rest. This would be compatible with other parts of Newport Boulevard, and help us draw substantial investment improvement. cc: Thomas E. Cowell, Senior Planner Community Development Department f•'%r'� There is not one Medical Doctor or Laboratory left in the following: NEly Corner Broad Street SEly Corner Broad Street 320 N...Newport Blvd. 425 N. Newport Blvd. 419 N. Newport Blvd. 495 N. Newport Blvd. 444 N. Newport Blvd. 1st Medical Center in area. Build by & for Dr. Horace Hall. After several years sold to Dr. Neilson who together with 4 or 5 other MD's occupied it for a long time. Now re- modeled for other uses. Re -modeled for Dr. O'Brian who has left area. Now re -modeled for other uses. Built as Medical Building for Drs. Button & Scone, eye specialists; Dr. Gerrie, Urologist; Dr. Shore, Podiatrist. So used for years. Now re -modeled for other uses. Built by Dr. Neilson as Medical Building. Six units, all formerly rented to Doctors. Now re -modeled for other uses. Build by Dr. Gundrome for exclusive medical use. Used by him and other MD's. Now used by Marine Engine Services. Built (part re -modeled) by Dr. Stricker as his office. Now used by (in part) by Chiropractic Doctor. This modern office building qriginally had Dr. St. Angelo, Pediatrics and Dr. Nelson, Dentist. Both moved to other areas. Now used as general offices. Planning Commicslon city of Nc-drort Dc3ch 11criport Beach, California Ccntlemcnt Boulevard Area i represent John Vogel of Nov:port Beach, who has eleven parcels of land, nine buildings, accommodates over forty-noven tenants and pays over M0, 000 in property ta:-:00 Innuaally thereon in the immediate area under con^ideratio-a for rc-�anittu. The condemnation of lard ,'ed the threat of condemnation of land to this r,rcs for a proposed free,:=ay hap Arcady inflicted a heavy burden on the property owners hare, the propoecd coning change would create an arlditiowil burden upon them. Because of the proposed frocr•ay, building ovmcrs could not write long-term leases axad v%ero thus unable, to attract and hold the stable long-term tenant. This difficulty v:ao c:zpericnccd more accutely in profeadionai type land uses •:,here, for c::ample, more than two dozen medical doctors, left the area. Poor land management by the State, which condemned land for the fromvay, has rrnulted in unsightly housing units on Newport IBoulevard, than imposing an unfair image of "economic decline" to be borne by land owners on Newport Boulevard, who are beeping their promises presentable. The area to now coming out of the economic decline 1 prevailed for the last several, years and is experiencing growth the freeway issue has been resolved. This area is rclativclY loolttted by the NOITOrt Boulevard (alter-froevtay) from its adjacent areas. its parking space to limited# but it currently to not emoperioncing the par%ing problems manifest in most areas of Newport Beach. lJowever, accute parking problems wo be e::pected to evolve under the proposed zone change. The area in not suited to further density increase which %vould encourage. Plannirtt2 Caxxirriir ricn »2- OctoBer 10, 1173 shiv 1a one of Ox older areas of Newport Beacb. Vrom a historical pobt of virw, the distinctive character of this, pare of the ori�,ip;t1 should be allowed to evolve naturally and not forced into co]xf +rr,xity with cetxsplcxca ruch'as Fashion Island or Hoag Hospital. tt should' remIkin an alternative for small basinestanen and prof ettsWral€i, +:Jixo cannot burden their customern and client:; with the higlx ovi_rhtint v:tx.icl .,c°vld. ar�.pujt from a further lone re,-tricrion. "lours very truly, Donald Lewi�-z, McCarty ' cc; xhorXrar li;..0ov.+4jo ;:^valor Planner u 400 N. Newport Boulevard, Newport beach, California October Its, I Mi , PIannIng Comer lwJon. city of j4ewport 134cia riev,pork DCaah, California G aFiticdxd,: Via: net Zoning of Ole, Newporf Boulevard ,Area I rtrenuoasly object to any proposed rc-yonin;, of progerty us tiripiotce byy t'iup nambeza 5 and 25 fr )rra CA :tn0 C»I-1=, Zlt."ecictu to .'P 1?ibtr1Ct&4 I have: been a'lonA»time resident of this: i onxrnunity, first . craning to Orange County in 139, And have owned bL1JIdtng,a in th.r,area Ire ouestion since. W24. Xn the imoledlate area in gaesttoo I own rleVxn par:els Of land, l$a•.ludtx,& rri7ne balldings and pay to ex.- eF of ti,30. GRu.annualty In taxes thhro0n. ' Mr, Lf.nardss memorandum to the lxtanning Comrntaetan of October 11, I973$ states that the area "Is otavioaaly in it staate o£ economic decline, due mainly to the problems of poor orlentettioo and acrosa (treated with the realignmfmt of Newport Boule•vard)." It is not problems of orientation or A;.ccsar. but rather th:e threat of condemnation and taking for a freeway,"xhich Created ,hc major protsleme of this area. The long period of Indecision by the State, County and Local governments, regardLng the extension of the Newport Freeway a W its routing resulted in Local owners not being able to write long-term leases, and discouraged stable business concerns from.locating and remaining, In tear area., 41 I-Towever., with the abandonment of the proposed extension of the Newport Freer.ay* we have been moving into a period of stability and economic, resurgence. W,•. C Planninct Coaanllsrlon _2. October V, 11)73 Professional buildings have suffered more sevt;re financial log r and hardship that other Activities permLttsd under C-1 usage, For ae."Toplc,s multi -story professional buiidEng was sold for less than its appxaieal v:luc, and approximately two dozen doctors have left the axpa, Thus, the proposal that the property should be farther restricts d to a usss e which has already proven unprofitable seems harsh acid unrealistic to the'propekty fawner, Now that the freeways issue has been stabilized, we cosi'begin to attract the typt' of businesses and leasees which will be ,3 bent-W to the COCCSMitlattyr , " The prapYeed change to A-P coning will not be trheflcial'to the area, thtwvfurl^ x srcenuousiy object to any change In its zoning, a � Tours sCry truly, John "Vogrl , cc-, Thonmar -t-" t;,4tvfsll Frrlor L-''Laancr., C6MOs unity lif•`velopc lint l]apartment 1' 2552 Vista Drive R Newport Beach, California •r November 6, 1973 City Council City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Dear Sirs: r t i R5CE1. nn1J c069•^ d;Otli all. J Cpt 6gP`Ct41 N41PCEUP• l` Some weeks ago, when the Planning Commission was asked to re- consider some aspects of the Residential Growth Element of the General Plan, they passed a resolution which stated that this element as now written is not consistent with the General Plan Policy of the city as it pertained to statistical areas B,C,D,E and F. They resolved this since it appeared obvious to them that the increase in population of 30% allowed by this element was not in the best interests of the city or its citizens. One thing that the Planning Commission did not do, though it was a topic of long discussion, was to propose what they did believe would be consistent with the policy. At present the Residential Growth Element stands as it was originally approved in larch 1973 as pertains to those statistical areas, which are the developed and older areas of Newport Beach_ We of Newport Residents United feel that some resolution to this question must be made by the City Council and made quite soon. We do not believe that these areas can support, in any reasonable manner, y��� Q 1973 any increase in either population or dwelling units from that WJWcif••••••-••— are now present. 1 am attaching a copy of a letter which we sehM:,�b!;.,j the Planning Commission containing our resolution and the reasgrritt„,,,; for 1 t . ti •nay;cC ,�j rt.•nc� 1 hope that we will have the opportunity to discuss th i s svbj'ect ,va 3 nit toe frith you in the near future.n.,n:i�u[raroc Yours truly,? f Ellis R. Glazier, Chairman �.— ----}� Newport Residents United Attachment 4. 2552 Vista Drive Newport Beach, California b October 24, 1973 Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach Sir: Newport Residents United, a group of citizens concerned about deteriorating conditions being brought about by increasing population and housing density in the older developed portions of Newport Beach, has adopted the following resolution, which they feel should be considered by the Planning Commission and eventually the City Council: Be it resolved that the City of Newport Beach shall adopt standards and ordinances designed to keep the population and number of dwelling units of the now developed parts of the city from ultimately increasing beyond their present level. However, building a single unit dwelling on a presently —subdivided lot shall in no ease be prohibited. Our reasons for requesting the passage of this resolution derive from the following: i. The present ordinances detailing zoning and allowing for increasing population and dwelling units are inconsistent with the General Plan Policies of the city as adopted in March 1972 tn.that the general objective calls for the assurance of the preservatior. and enhancement of all those present assets which provide for the high quality of life enjoyed by the citizens by means of positive controls over urban growth. Further, the policy states that the city shall set specific limits on population and dwelling unit densities for the general planning area as a whole, and for each individual planning area. 2. The present growth rate and its ultimate possible level of population and dwelling unit density under present ordinances are inconsistent with the General Plan in that the adopted policy is to assure that all support systems, such as transportation, parking, recreation facilities, and fire and police protection are to be maintained at optimum levels. 3. The objective of the General Plan for land use is to provide an crderly balance of land use to protect and enhance the character and image of the community as a low -density residential -recreational ui Page Two October 24, 1973 area by maintaining the predominant one and two family residential character and density of the community within existing neighborhoods. The present ordinances are inconsistent with this objective. They are also inconsistent with the policy which states that the village -like neighbor- hood atmosphere and identity of existing residential areas shall be preserved and encouraged, Finally, whatever the arguments to be marshalled to these'poinks,• it is the deep feeling of Newport Residents United that their chosen way of life as citizens of Newport Beach is being radically changed and subverted, that what has and is happening to cause an increase in population and dwelling unit density will leave no one satisfied, either the present residents or those who will arrive in the future and that an enjoyable life-style will become for all of us a mere existence to be endured. Sincerely 45�� PA, - Ellis R. Glazier Chairman Newport Residents United r i a)3o e Cc •u,ity uepG c3 i1P7 2 61973mt. y1'.E'a'?C 4I' BE/G October 23, 1973 ACH, CALIF Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California Gentlemen: We are in receipt of your notice of October 18, 1973 wherein you are considering amending zoning on property under Amendment #412. As the owner of a large portion of property coming under your amendment I vigorously oppose such an action. Your City Planning Department advises one that on the approximate one acre in my possess- ion that an R-2 zoning would allow one duplex only on the whole acre. This property is my inheritance from my family who have awned this piece for the last 60 years. An R-2 zoning would make the property absolutely worthless to me or anyone else. We have multiple apartment units on the side and to the rear of us that have never been objectionable and I implore you not to take away the property rights of us as land owners. Since this is the only property left in this immediate area, and not a prestige area at that, why do you feel it necessary to take this action, Where there are no views, no interference with traffic, a relatively small portion of land as compared to the monstrous "swinging singles" apartments at the corner of 16th & Irvine, to the high density buildings in Westcliff, etc., etc. Please help us in retaining what is rightfully ours. Sincerely, , Craig E'. Phoenix 2507 and 2525 E. 16th Street Newport Beach, California 7 9 ' HIM PRIGIA JOINT ASSOCIATION BOX 826 • BALBOA, CALIFORNIA October 12, 1973 City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, California 92660 Gentlemen: NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The Balboa Penninsula Point Association as a concerned neighborhood organization has reviewed the recommendations for development standards as prepared -by the Development Standards Citizen's Advisory Committee. On October 11, 1973 our Board of Directors voted to accept the above described development standards with the following amend- ments: (1) That paragraph 1B under the R1 District read, "two garage spaces for any structure containing less than 2500 sq. ft.; three garage spaces for any structure containing 2500 sq. ft. or more." (2) That the standards be further amended to state that off -site parking be restricted to a specified schedule to allow for: (a) Required street cleaning and/or recognition of abandoned vehicles. (b) To strengthen the enforcement of the on -site parking standards covered in the recommendation. (c) To increase the efficiency of safety and emergency vehicles. We feel that the development standards with the amendments mentioned above will not only strengthen the proposed parking standards, but will enhance the quality of life in our and other neighborhoods. ,V¢ tp.,O �A City Council October 12 1973 City of Newport Beach - 2 - Your consideration of these amendments is greatly appreciated. A representative from the Board of Directors will be present at the public hearing to answer any questions that you may have related to this matter. Sincerely, J..'Douglas Lynn President Balboa Penninsula Point Association