HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/23/1996COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
s *'mi-
A
PLACE : Ci ty Council Chambers
TIME: 7:30 P.M.
2 DATE: , r .. oz 1nor
ROLL
CALL
•
Motion
All Ayes
0
INDEX
All Commissioners were present
•s+
EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT:
Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager,
Community and Economic Development
Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney
Patricia L. Temple, Planning Manager
Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineer
Darleen Kuhlmann, Planning Secretary
t *�
Minutes ofAnri118 1996:
Minutes of
4/18/96
Motion was made and voted on to approve as written, the May 9, 1996,
Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED - 7 Ayes
Approved
st*
Public Comments: None
Public
Comments
•a*
None
Postine of the Agenda: Posting of
the Agenda
Ms. Temple stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on
Friday, May 17,1996, outside of City Hall.
COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 23,1996
ROLL
INDEX
CALL
SUBJECT The Allred Residence (Robert G. Jenkins,
item Do. i
applicant)
19 San Sebastian
• ModificationNo. 4433
Mod; No. 4433
.Ms. Temple reported that this application is for construction of a
Denied
retaining wall and related guard rail with an overall height of 11 feet 10
inches, which would encroach 4 feet into the required S foot rear yard
setback, where the zoning code limits such construction to 6 feet in
height. The exhibit on the wall was referenced during the report.
Chairman Ridgeway ascertained that there were five Commissioners who
had visited the site adjacent to the Allred residence.
Discussion ensued as to distances between the residences, and the
.
location of on -site improvements.
Commissioners Gifford and Adams stated that they had viewed the area
in question, both from the Allred residence and the Tong residence
(immediately adjoining).
Public Hearing was opened.
Mr. Bob Jenkins, 1231 Sand Key, Corona del Mar, architect and
applicant - spoke to. the Commission regarding the cement culvert on
property, the similarity of a neighbor's wall, and the fact that a glass
fence is part of the 11 feet 10 inch improvement requested. He also
described the landscaping improvements proposed as part of the project.
Chairman Ridgeway stated that the Planning Commission has received
three letters in opposition to the applicant's proposal and one letter from
the Association stating they have not approved the revised plans.
Discussion continued regarding the letters, when received and when the
applicant was notified of their availability at the Planning Department.
•
2
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 23, 1996
ROLL
CALL
INDEX
Chairperson Ridgeway asked the applicant to point out the Tong
residence and where it lies in relation to the proposed wall.
Mrs. Allred, 19 San Sebastian, homeowner - spoke to the Commission
about the extension of her back yard over the cement culvert. She
explained her intention to beautify her back yard.
Mrs. May Lee Tong, 16 . Narbonne, (directly beneath the Allred
residence) - spoke to the Commission referencing a letter dated October
2, 1995 that she sent to the architect. She produced and referenced
pictures that were taken of the existing wall. Discussion continued about
her main objections against this application; esthetic appearance and
property value, safety factor and privacy.
Commissioner Ridgeway asked if he could read the letter that was sent
on October 2, 1995. The original letter was copied for the
Commissioners.
Dr. Pilest, 17 San Sebastian - spoke to the Commission stating that Mrs.
Allred could have gone back to the setback and raised it up six feet. This
has been done by himself and many of the neighbors on the street.
Mrs. Allred approached the podium again and stated that she does not
want to block anyone's view because the lots are very expensive. What
she is proposing to do would not be any higher than it is today, which is
several feet below Dr. Pilest's yard. He has a retaining wall there in
order to have a swimming pool. She referenced the exhibit to show the
locations of a solid cement wall, an iron fence and the retaining wall.
Commissioner Thomson asked staff about the retaining wall and another
wall that is by the pool. He stated that upon his inspection of the area, the
retaining wall appears to be right on the property line.
Dr. Pilest was asked about the location and height of his retaining wall.
He ascertained that the retaining wall (built for his swimming pool) was
3
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
May 23, 1996
ROLL
CALL
INDEX
approximately 2 -3 feet high and his railing is behind that retaining wall
and is six feet from normal ground level.
Commissioner Kranzley asked Mr. Jenkins if Mrs. Allred could cover the
drainage ditch similar to what has been done by Dr. Pilest, within the
guidelines and rules of the community.
Mr. Jenkins responded that it would be six feet high which is slightly
higher than the present wall.. He then continued by describing the
measurements of this wall explaining that Mrs. Allred wants to be eight
feet above the top of the berm instead of six feet due to the slope of her
property.
Commissioners Pomeroy and Adams spoke in opposition to the
application citing no ruling on the plans by the Association, no
compelling reason to grant variance and that the neighbors had built their
homes within the city's guidelines.
Public Hearing was closed.
Chairman Ridgeway stated that since the affected neighbor is in
opposition to this proposed development, this application should not be
approved.
Motion was made to deny ModificationNo. 4433 with findings for denial
motion
as shown on Exhibit `B ". MOTION CARRIED, 6 Ayes, l No.
Ayes
*
*
*
*
No
1. That, in this particular case, the proposal would be detrimental to
persons, property and improvements in the neighborhood, and that
the applicants request would not be consistent with the legislative
intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code because
the proposed retaining wall and guard rail would affect the flow of
air or light to adjoining residential property to the rear.
2. That there is no justification for allowing the proposed
encroachment, since adequate space exists within the buildable area
•
4
COMMISSIONERS
• 9L�
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 23,1996
ROLL
CALL
i
I
of the site for all new construction, and since the required rear
setback is minimal (5 feet).
3. That the adjoining property owner is opposed to the proposed
development.
4. That the topography of the subject lot and the adjoining lot below is
such that the adjoining property is already encumbered by a
substantial grade differential, the effect of which would be further
increased by the proposed construction.
r�s
SUBJECT: Donald Redfern - Owner stem No
435 Via Lido Soud
• Use Permit 3582 UP.: 3582
.
Staff reported that this item is a use permit required by the Municipal continu
Code to allow additions to an existing, legal, non - conforming triplex on to 6/6/
Lido Island. The triplex is non - conforming as to parking and as to the
number of dwelling units permitted on site. The actual additions are
expansions of existing rooms and no new rooms are being added.
Public Hearing was opened.
Mr. Tim Redfem, owner and occupant of 435 Via Lido Soud spoke to
the Commission. He stated that the Lido Island Community
Association has not received plans for the proposed construction and
that he has read and agrees the conditions and asks that the Commission
approve this Use Permit.
Chairperson Ridgeway stated that the Commission usually does not
approve anything that is not approved or known by the involved
homeowner's association.
5
2
w�
COMMISSIONERS
9
•1y ` q
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 23, 1996
ROLL
CALL
INDEX
Mr. Redfern stated that when he bought the property in January, it was
with the intention to fix it up to make it more livable and aesthetically
pleasing by replacing windows and new stucco. He wants to comply
with the regulations of the Community Association and will not add on
without its approval.
Mr. Willis Longyear, 215 Via San Remo - a member of the
Architectural Committee, spoke to the Commission. He described the
Lido Island Community. Association's procedures for architectural
review.
Chairperson Ridgeway asked Mr. Longyear if this item was postponed
until June 6th would the Architectural Committee have time to submit
their consideration of the plans.
Dr. R. Virgil Goley, 211 Via Ravenna - spoke to the Commission and
stated that the Architectural Committee meets at 5:00 p.m. every other
.
Monday and the next meeting would be June 10th.
Commissioner Adams stated that this appears to be a procedural issue
of the Homeowner's Association and has nothing to do with what is
before the Commission tonight. If the applicant has trouble with the
Homeowner's Association, that is a matter between the homeowner and
the association.
Commissioner Kranzley stated that in his short Commission tenure,
there have been instances where the homeowner's associations have
worked with the applicant.
Dave Kubley, general contractor for the applicant, asked that the
Commission consider and approve this application tonight with the
understanding that he will work with the Association.
In response to a question by Commissioner Selich, Mr. Kubley
indicated that the building permit includes the alterations for the
enclosure of the first floor patio and the small alcove.
6
COMMISSIONERS
091.9OL
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 23, 1996
ROLL
CALL
INDEX
Staff commented that from time to time, partial permits are issued with
the indication of areas that can not be constituted unless they achieve
their discretionary action.
Commissioner Gifford commented that when the structure was
originally constructed in 1949, it was permissible to have a triplex
there. Now the maximum density would be a duplex. Under density
requirement in the staff report, no change in the number of dwelling
units is proposed. What is being done is to make it a fully functional
triplex as opposed to making the property conform.
Staff commented that the MFR zone would allow any form of multi -
family but requires 1,200 feet of land for each unit. In this particular
case, due to changes in the Code subsequent to the original
construction, if built today, two units would be allowed on the site.
.
Public Hearing was closed.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that due to the circumstances, the
solution is to continue this action for the shortest possible period of
time the Commission can because the project is under construction.
Chairperson Ridgeway stated that the next Commission meeting is June
6th, the meeting after that is June 20th, and asks the Homeowner's
Association to meet with the applicant prior to discuss this situation.
Commissioner Adams stated that staff has made the finding that the
proposed improvement does not appear to have any detrimental effect
on the surrounding neighborhood. If this item is going to be continued,
the applicant may not return to the Commission if the Homeowner's
Association denies this application.
Chairperson Ridgeway stated that the Commission has discretion to
overrule or approve the project despite comments from the Association.
•
7
COMMISSIONERS
• 9� i
Mot.
All
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 23, 1996
ROLL
INDEX
CALL
Lon
*
Commissioner Selich made Motion to continue this item until the next
Ayes
Planning Commission•meeting on June 6, 1996. MOTION CARRIED,
All ayes.
: +a
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Addition
Business
a.) City Council Follow -up - A verbal report by the Assistant City
Manager, Community and Economic Development regarding
City Council actions related to planning - none.
b.) Verbal report by the Planning Department Manager regarding
Outdoor Dining Permits, Specialty Food Permits, Modification
Permits and Temporary Use Permit approvals - none
c.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the
Economic Development Committee - Mr. Selich reported that the
.
Economic Development Committee recommended approval of
the re -write of the Zoning Code with direction to staff to review
the square footage limits for small -scale eating establishments.
d.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the
Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee - none
e.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to
report on at a subsequent meeting - none
f.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a
future agenda for action and staff report - none
g.) Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Adams asked to
be excused on June 6th.
ADJOURNMENT: 9:20 p.m.
Adjournn
MICHAEL KRANZLEY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
8
al
lent