Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/02/1975COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACLI .Regular Planning Commission Meeting m i Place: City Council Chambers MINUTES z p A t; Time: 7:00 P.M. P'.,, T Date: January 2. 1975 Present Absent 0 Motion Ayes Noes Absent L_ J - - � - - - ...,.�.. X X X X X X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney .Benjamin B. Nolan, City Engineer STAFF MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning William R. Foley, Environmental Coordinator Shirley Harbeck, Secretary Revised Archaeology Guidelines (Discussion) Item #1 Planning Commission reviewed the proposed guide- lines dated September 30, 1974 as well as the alternate proposal dated November 21, 1974 and discussed implementation of the guidelines related to the preservation of the sites and the factors to be used in determining which sites would be preserved. They also discussed qualifications of consultants and responsibilities of public agencies. X Following discussion, motion was made recommending X X X to the City Council that the alternate proposal X X dated November 21, 1974 be adopted as the policy X for Archaeological Guidelines and Procedures for the City of Newport Beach. Commissioner Hazewinkel advised of his opposition to the establishment of these guidelines from the beginning. Item #2 Request to create four parcels for residential RESUB- development where two lots now exist. DIT ION 0777T_ Location: Portion of Lot 17, Newport Heights, located at 2420, 2426 and 2426k - APPROVED 15th Street, on the northeasterly f6VD — side of 15th Street between Gary _T7 Nii_LLY Place and Powell Place in Newport Heights. Zone: R -1 Page 1. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH eAl January 2, 1975 MINUTES auncv Applicant: Margie Maxine Andrews, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Community Development Director Hogan recommended_ that the words "including granting of the easement and improvement of the common drive." be added to the end of the first sentence of Condition No. 6 and clarified the intent of the condition in that the property owner would be able to subdivide the property as requested, however, they would only be able to improve Parcel 2 prior to removal of the two westerly structures on Parcel 1. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Tom Andrews, 1656 Corsica, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and advised that she was also the property owner. He also advised the Commission of the intent to construct homes on Parcels 2, 3 and 4 which would front on the private drive and the desire to allow • the two westerly structures to remain on Parcel 1 for approximately 5 years or until such time as the new homes were constructed because of the need for the income by his mother. He concurred with the setbacks as recommended for Parcels 2 and 3, however requested that the setbacks on Parcel 4 be reduced because of the configuration of the proposed development and placement of the garage at the end of the private drive. Mr. Andrews requested clarification of Condition No. 8 rela- tive to guest parking and Condition No. 10 regard- ing the C.C.& R.s. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker reviewed the tentative parcel map as to access and setbacks and agreed that the setbacks on Parcel 4 could be modified as requested. He pointed out that when the project was originally presented, it was anticipated that access to Parcel 4 might also include a driveway along the Westerly property line. The access drive adjacent to the rear of the • properties fronting on Margaret Drive was discussed. Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T F < MINUTES i A Z p N rwf I n! .lanuary 7_ 1Q75 ....�.. Al Nelson, 534 E1 Modena, appeared before the Commission and questioned why the nonconforming buildings were allowed to remain, why the alley adjacent to the properties fronting Margaret Drive was not improved, and felt that more guest parking should be provided. In answer to Mr. Nelson's questions, staff advised that under the conditions of the resubdivision, the nonconforming structures would be removed. Staff also advised that the alley adjacent to the rear of Margaret Drive properties was actually private property owned by the individual property owners and was being used by them as an access to their garages without benefit of easements, improv. - ments, etc.; and it would be very difficult for the City to proceed with alley improvements becaus of the problems involved in obtaining dedication of the necessary property. Roland.Landrigan, 535 E1 Modena appeared before the Commission in favor of the proposed resub- division, however, he felt development should be • within the R -1 regulations which provides that only one house be located on a lot and opposed any extended length of time which would allow the nonconforming structures to remain. Planning Commission discussed the possibility of resubdividing Parcel 1 at a later date. Margie Andrews, applicant and owner of the subject property appeared before the Commission in con- nection with this request and advised of the need to allow the rental structures to remain until development of the property was completed. Set- backs on Parcel 4 were also discussed. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed guest parking and staff pointed out that the proposed parking for the development meets or exceeds the highest standards required within the "Bluffs" or "Big Canyon" by the City. They also discussed the matter of improving the drive and the timing factors involved in the development of the pro- perty and removal of the nonconforming structures and setbacks required for development of Parcel 4. Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH n T January 9_ 1975 MINUTES unev r Motion X Following discussion, motion was made to approve Resubdivision No. 476, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a Parcel Map be filed. 2. That the common drive have a minimum width of 26 feet and a minimum paved improvement of 22 feet. The proposed fire hydrant shall not be placed within the required 22 feet of pave- ment. Plans for the common drive shall be approved and construction inspected by the Public Works Department. 3. An easement providing perpetual access to the owners of Parcels 2, 3 and 4 and for ingress, egress and ,public utility purposes shall be dedicated over the common drive. 4. That public water and sewer lines be provided as required by the Public Works Department. 5. That the plans for public improvements be . prepared on standard drawing sheets by a licensed civil engineer, and a standard inspection fee paid. 6. That a subdivision agreement and surety be provided if it is desired to record the Parcel Map or obtain building permits prior to completing the public improvements including granting of the easement and improvement of the common drive.. Said agreement shall contain special provisions for the removal of the two westerly structures on Parcel 1 and the widening and improvement of the easement proposed to burden the westerly 26 feet of Parcel 1 prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy on Parcels 3 or 4. 7. That a minimum setback of 46 feet be maintain- ed between the westerly property line and any structure on Parcels 2 and 3. That the com- .bined easterly and westerly yard setbacks on Parcel 4 shall be a minimum of 56 feet with no setback to be less than 10 feet. (Note: This condition was subsequently • revised - See below.) 8. That a minimum of two guest parking spaces be provided on Parcels 2, 3 and 4 in addition to any required garage spaces. Said guest spaces Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACLI January 2. 1975 MINUTES IYACY shall be located free and clear of the common drive. 9. That the private gate across the common drive shall be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the northerly 15th Street right -of -way line. 10. That there shall be submitted a declaration o covenants, conditions and restrictions settin forth an enforceable method of insuring the installation and continued maintenance of the private landscaping, gates, fencing, fire hydrant, paving, utilities and drainage facilities within the common drive. Said C.C.& R.s shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the City Attorney prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map. Motion X An amendment to the motion was made-adding a Ayes X X X X provision that a 10 foot setback be established Noes X along the northerly side of Parcel 4. Absent X • In view of the above amendment.establishing a 10 foot setback along the northerly side of Parcel 4, the Commission discussed Condition No. 7 and concurred that some credit should be given for the increased setback by reducing the easterly and westerly setbacks. Therefore Condition No. 7 was amended to read as follows: 7. That a minimum setback of 46 feet be maintain- ed between the westerly property line and any structure on Parcels 2 and 3. That the combined easterly and westerly yard setbacks on Parcel 4 shall be a minimum of 46 feet with no setback to be less than 10 feet. That a minimum setback of 10 feet be maintained between the northerly property line and any structure on Parcel 4. Ayes X X X X X The original motion was then voted on and carried. Absent Page 5. COMMISSIONERS . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACLI p T � L A P N January 2. 1975 MINUTES Item #3 Request to permit an amendment to a previously USE approved use permit that allowed the sale of beer PERMIT and wine in conjunction with a restaurant within 200 feet of a residential district, so as to TWENDED permit the expansion .of the subject restaurant. APPROVED Location: Portion of Lot D, Tract 919, locat- CONDI- ed at 215 -217 Riverside Avenue, on TINK the northwesterly corner of River- side Avenue and Avon Street, across Avon Street from the U. S. Post Office. Zone: C -1 -H Applicant: Stuft Noodle Restaurant, Newport Beach Owner: Riverside West - Marvin Hoover, Newport Beach Public Hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Charlene Parole, 3803 Seashore Drive, Newport Beach, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the staff report and recommended conditions. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed adding a condition which would require removal of the existing storage area and dumpster in order to provide the required parking as indicated on the plot plan. Following discussion, motion was made to approve X X X X the amendment to Use Permit No. 1677, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 2. That the original Use Permit No. 1677 shall expire with the approval of this application. 3. That this approval shall be for a period of two years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T D CgLI T January 2, 1975 MINUTES r INDEX 4. The restaurant facility shall not be open for business prior to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday (except on holidays) unless an off -site parking agreement is approved by the Planning Commission and City Council for additional parking spaces. 5_. That the capacity of the restaurant shall be limited to 66 persons (i.e. 3 persons for each of the 22 parking spaces that will remain on the site after street improvements are completed along Riverside Avenue). 6. That the existing parking lot shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide, in accordance with the attached parking layout. All twenty -seven parking spaces on the site shall be accessible and usable for vehicular parking at all times. 7. That any new signs for the proposed develop - ment shall be approved by the Department of Community Development. 8. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjacent properties as well as from Riverside Avenue and Avon Street. 9. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed_ to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 50 of the Air Pollution Control District. 10. That the existing storage area and dumpster be removed to as to provide the minimum parking requirements on the site. Planning Commission recessed at 8:55 P.M. and reconvened at 9:05 P.M. Page 7. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P L CALL 0 MINUTES January 2. 1975 :Item #4 Request to permit the construction of third floor USE room additions and interior and exterior altera- tions to an existing single family dwelling that PERMIT 174'5— will exceed the basic height limit within the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. The pro- posed development also includes the construction of an elevator -vent shaft that will be approx- APPROVED DI- ALLY imately 28 feet above grade, and the construction of three parking spaces where two of the proposed arage spaces have depths of 18 feet 3 inches where the Ordinance requires 20 foot deep park- ing stalls }, Location: Lot 157, Block A, East Newport, located at 322 Buena Vista, on the southeasterly side of Buena Vista between 7th Street and Lindo Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula. Zone: R -1 Applicant: Bennett & Bennett, Architects, Pasadena Owner: Jean C. Bennett, Pasadena Four items of correspondence which had been received subsequent to transmittal of the staff report were distributed to the Commission for review. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Robert S. Barnes, Bayshore Drive, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the staff report and recommenda- tions except as stated in Condition No. 3. Robert Bennett, applicant, 322 Buena Vista, appeared before the Commission to comment on the request and advised that in order to increase the size of the carport, it would be necessary to reduce the size of the kitchen and he was very much opposed to that change. Charles E. Sutter appeared before the Commission on behalf of his wife who owns the adjacent property at 320 Buena Vista. He spoke in opposi- tion to allowing a three story structure on Buena Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT, BEACH n m �xT v� x iG nIS re,� m January 2, 1975. .MINUTES Milroy Vista for the following reasons: Buena Vista consists of only a 5 foot sidewalk and is not actually a street; access to garages is taken from a 10 foot wide alley to the rear; there are no 3 -story structures on Buena Vista; the proposed structure contains approximately 4,000 sq. ft. with 6� bathrooms which could effect the density of the area; the proposal may set a precedent. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Based on the fact that even though the proposed residence would be 3 stories high, it does comply in every respect with the City's ordinances with the exception of the depth of two of the three parking spaces and the 2 foot high variance and since the proposed construction was a substantial improvement over the existing structure and the variances requested were insubstantial, motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1745 subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations, except as noted in condition No. 2 below. 2. That any elevator shaft shall be no higher than the proposed mansard roof on the subject dwelling unit. Planning Commission discussed the motion, espe -, cially with respect to the substandard size of the parking spaces and access to the property. Ayes X X X Following discussion, motion was voted on and Noes X X X failed. Absent X Motion X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1745 Ayes X X X X X N subject to the following conditions: Absent 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the.approved plot plan and elevations, except as noted in conditions Nos. 2 and 3 below. 2. That any elevator shaft shall be no higher • than the proposed mansard roof on the subject dwelling unit. Page 9. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH G1 ^ D en Dp T 4 T D A Re CALL r 1J Motion Motion A es len t MINUTES January 2, 1975 luny 3. That all three carport spaces shall have minimum depths of 20 feet, measured from the existing structure to the required 5 foot rear yard setback line. Item #5 Request to construct a permanent community USE identification sign and three related flag poles PERMIT in "Koll Center Newport." T7 6 Location: Lot 5, Tract 7953, located on the APPROVED northeasterly corner of MacArthur CONDI- Boulevard and Von Karman Avenue in TIONKLLY "Koll Center Newport." Zone:. P -C Applicant: Koll Center Newport Owner: Same as Applicant Public hearing was opened in connection with this request. Planning Commission discussed the construction material of the sign and status of the temporary sign. There being no one desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1746 subject to the following condition: 1. The size and locatin of the subject identifi- cation sign and flag poles shall be according to the approved plot plan and elevation, except for minor modifications approved by the Department of Community Development. Discussion of the motion included corporate logo flags and their compliance with the sign ordinance X Following discussion motion was amended to provide that the corporate logo flag be subject to any regulations that may be adopted by the City as X X X X X part of the proposed uniform sign ordinance. The motion as amended was voted on and carried: Page 10. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACd m R� CALL 0 0 MINUTES January 2. 1975 unev Item #6 Request to annek 46 acres generally bounded by BAY Santa Isabel Avenue on the north, Tustin Avenue KNOLLS on the east, Twenty- second Street on the south and ANNEX. Santa Ana Avenue on the west. NO. 80 Zone: R -1 (County) RECOMMEND APPR V L Requested by: Erwin de Mocskonyi, Valerie B. Avellar, et al. Community Development Director Hogan advised that the Orange County General Plan included this area in its medium density residential district which allows development of 10 to 18 dwelling units per. acre or less and that the area in question includ- ed some undeveloped property which could be re- classified under County regulations. He also advised that a negative declaration was considered and approved by LAFCO in connection with the area proposed to be annexed in compliance with Califor- nia State Law. Planning Commission discussed the cost - revenue analysis as to its application to this area and it was pointed out that with the exception of the drainage problem, the cost - revenue was the same for this area as that for other similarly develop- ed areas within the City. City Engineer Nolan commented on the drainage problem which exists in the area and advised that the drainage problem was quite severe and was not typical of the type of problems which were ordin- arily anticipated in areas proposed for annexation. He advised that there were some similarities to th drainage problem which exists in the Iris /Jasmine gully of Corona del Mar. The possibility of establishing a special district to take care of the drainage problem was discussed and it was pointed out that it is difficult to accomplish a special assessment district because of the difficulty in assessing the costs in accord- ance with the benefits received. Planning Commission discussed the various costs of maintaining the channel, basis for the assessed valuation of the homes, and possibility of further annexations in the area which may or may not be desirable. Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T T 4 MINUTES p � A9 * p January 2, 1975 INDEX Environmental Coordinator Foley reviewed a map of the area indicating the County corridor as well as the existing boundaries of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. Erwin de Mocskonyi, 345 Cherry Tree Lane, appeared before the Commission and commented on the annexa- tion as it related to market value of the homes and advised that the homes in the area under consideration have Newport Beach mailing addresses whereas other areas in the County corridor have Costa Mesa mailing addresses. He also commented on the drainage situation and the interest of people in the area to annex to the City of Newport Beach. James Todd, resident of 2390 Redlands Drive and owner of 2 lots on Santa Isabel which are affect - ed by the storm drain appeared before the Commis - sion and advised that he was assured by Costa Mesa that the storm drain in question would be extended beyond the first two lots and prior to the time th • sphere of influence was changed they had planned to reconstruct the entire channel, however, they have since backed off the project. He advised that Costa Mesa had installed 88 feet of pipe for drainage on private property without obtaining an easement or right -of -way and were encroaching on his property. He advised of three letters receive from Costa Mesa regarding their intent to correct the problem, however nothing has been done to date and felt that possibly they could be persuaded to continue their plan to correct the situation. City Engineer Nolan commented further on the drainage problem and.advised that ordinarily public improvement problems were not significant enough to effect annexation-decisions, however,_ in this instance, a severe drainage problem exists and any recommendation regarding the annexation should be made with full knowledge of the magnitude of the drainage problem and the .pressure which may be made on Newport Beach by the property owners to correct the situation. Planning Commission discussed the possibility of soliciting the cooperation of Costa Mesa in connection with the drainage problem and staff pointed out that this may be difficult to obtain because of their opposition to the change in sphere of influence by LAFCO and proposed annexa- tion. Page 12. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH January 2, 1975 MINUTES „ancv r -- Erwin de Mocskonyi again appeared before the Commission and commented on the fact that storm water drains into Cherry Lake naturally, regard- less of whether the area is Orange County, Costa Mesa or Newport Beach. At this point there was a brief discussion relative to natural drainage and the laws governing same. Hugo Norr, 2285 Tustin Avenue, appeared before the Commission to comment on water generated upstream and the natural drainage of the area. Staff advised the Commission that final approval and acceptance of the annexation remained with the City Council even after the election and there was the possibility that the annexation may be denied should studies and investigation indicate that the drainage problem was either insoluble or too expensive for the City to undertake. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made recommending Ayes X X X X X to the City Council that they proceed with Bay Noes X Knolls Annexation No. 80 and at the same time pt X pursue further investigation of the drainage problem including any possible liability on the part of the City of Costa Mesa. Motion X There being no further business, motion was made Ayes X X X X X X to adjourn. Time: 10:20 P.M. Absent X a� Secretary JAMES . PARKER Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Page 13.