Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/04/1975COMMISSIONERS YC l p P Z U �.l, Present Absent 0 Motion Ayes Absent CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Regular Planning Commission Meeting Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:00 P.M. na +P' naramhar a_1975 MINUTES u,nev 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 Item #1 Request to approve the installation of a 55 foot FLAG POLE high flag pole on the Bank of Newport site in the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District. NE P RT Location: At the southwesterly corner of 32nd APPROVED Street and Lafayette Avenue in Cannery Village. Zone: C -O -Z Applicant: Bank of Newport, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Community Development Director Hogan advised of the circumstances under which the requested.flag pole had been installed and reviewed other flag pole requests which have recently been approved by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission discussed the matter and felt that had the original request been for a 55 foot high flag pole, it would have probably been approved because of the scale of the high -rise . building on adjacent property. x Motion was made that Planning Commission approve X X X X X the request for an additional height of 11 feet X to the flag pole (total of 55 feet), subject to the following conditions: 1. That a separate flag displaying the name or logo of the bank use shall not be permitted. Page 1. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH � G Rk CALL N 0 Motion Ayes Absent E MINUTES neremher a_ 1975 - - -- - - 2. That all applicable building permits shall be obtained for the existing development. Item #2 Request to create two parcels of land for residen- RESUB- tial development where two lots, a portion of a DIVISION third lot, and a portion of an abandoned alley now N0. 505 exist. APPROVED Location: Portion of Lot 12, and Lots 13 and CONDI- 14, Block 4, East Newport, and a TTSNW—ELY portion of an abandoned alley., located on the northeasterly corner of 6th Street and West Balboa Boulevard, on the Balboa Peninsula. Zone: R -3 Applicant: David Manookian, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Engineer: Valley Consultants, Inc., Hunting- ton Beach Staff answered questions of the Commission rela- tive to the setbacks and the condition requiring dedication of a 10 -foot corner cutoff at the intersection. Public hearing was opened in connection with. this matter. David Manookian, 6900 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff report and recommended conditions. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X X X X X following findings: X x 1. That the proposed map is.consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2: That the design or improvement of the pro - posed subdivision is consistent with appli- cable general and specific plans. Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y� M T D NT T �njc p P Z PAI1 flone..J... .. A ln7C MINUTES T, 1 JI J 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. . 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed • subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. That a 6 foot yard setback along West Balboa Boulevard is adequate, and is consistent with other residentially zoned property on the southerly side of West Balboa Boulevard. and approve Resubdivision No. 505, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That a ten -foot radius corner cutoff at Balboa Boulevard and 6th Street be dedicated for street purposes. 3. That each new parcel be served by individual water and sewer connections in a manner approved by the Public Works Department. Arrangements for the water and sewer services as well as the underground connections for • gas, telephone, and electrical power shall be made so that such work is completed prior to the alley paving project scheduled for construction in January, 1976. Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 7S m Incp p ` Z3 Rik CALL N 0 9 MINUTES December 4, 1975 117VCA 4. That the existing cracked and displaced side- walk along Balboa Boulevard and along 6th Street be removed and replaced. 5. That a minimum 6 foot front yard setback shall be observed along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage and said setback shall be reflected on Districting Map No. 10. Item #3 Request to permit the construction of a single family dwelling in the R -1 District that exceeds VARIANCE 052 the height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limita- tion District. CONT. TO J N_�. 22' Location: Lot 54, Tract No. 673, located at 336 Hazel Drive, on the southeast- erly side of Hazel Drive, southerly of East Coast Highway, in Corona del Mar. Zone: R -1 Applicant: Walter E. LaForce, Cypress Owner: Norman N. Tillner, Corona del Mar Staff distributed a letter received prior to the meeting from Murton H. Willson, expressing his concurrence with the staff recommendation and requesting that markers be placed on the site indicating the height and depth from the street which would result from any proposed construction. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Walter LaForce, 9304 Fleetwood Drive, Cypress, applicant, appeared before the Commission and commented that this was the only vacant lot on the street and construction would not differ much from that of other dwellings on the street built under prior ordinances. He advised that no investigation had been made to stepping the pro- posed house down the hill because of the view which he would like to retain in its entirety if possible. The floor plan and circulation pattern through the house was questioned and Mr. LaForce reviewed the plans and answered question in connection therewith. As to the height of the Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH rm�y T as PAI, p Z N December 4. 1975 MINUTES lunev structure, Mr. LaForce advised that the mansard roof was designed to hide any solar equipment which may be installed at.such time as it becomes viable to do so. He also advised that the plans had been designed expressly for their needs and have attempted to minimize effects on the adjacent . neighbors. George Finch, 344 Hazel, appeared before the Commission in favor of the proposed plans as stair stepping down the hill would block his view. . Ted Hales, Olympic Services, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Commission and commented on the design of the house and attempt to preserve the views. both for Mr. LaForce and his neighbors. Arleen Clark, 324 Poppy, appeared before the Commission in opposition and advised that the structure as proposed would block their view to the northeast and may set a precedent for future . room additions and alterations. She felt that any construction should be done under code without a • variance. She presented two letters in opposition to the request from Walter M. Rays, 332 Poppy Avenue and Grace Diliberto, 328 Poppy Avenue. Joe Phillips, 222 Poppy Avenue, appeared before the Commission and felt that approval of this variance would set a precedent in the area and that any construction should be done in compliance with the existing code. Norman Tillner, 324 Hazel, owner of the property in question, appeared before the Commission and advised that the sale of the property was contin- gent upon the approval of the variance. He questioned the staff's recommendation for denial, when less than six months ago, there was legis- lation proposed to restrict construction from intruding into Buck Gully and felt that the plan to go up rather than out was the best plan for preserving the gully and would have less impact. on the neighbors. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. In response to the question of redesign, staff • advised they had not explored the alternatives but felt it was possible to step down the hill without necessarily intruding further into the gully. However, in any event, this would have to Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A elk CALL Motion Ayes Absent 0 Motion Ayes Absent 0 MINUTES December 4, 1975 mvcn be done by the architect as the staff was only recommending that the alternatives be explored. In summary,. Commissioner Seely that .the.____ plans were nice and were obviously _ designed to meet the requirements of the applicant. However, the Planning Commission was being asked to review a variance and determine if criteria has been met which would justify the request. Since the appli- cant.had designed the structure with full know- ledge of the ordinances and without.exploring the alternatives, it would be diff-icult to establish that the variance was justified. Consideration must also be given to the matter of setting a precedent and the question of view obstruction. Commissioner Heather questioned the possibility of continuing this matter to allow the applicant the opportunity to consider alternative plans and X following discussion, motion was made to re -open X X X X N the public hearing for the purpose of obtaining X X the applicant's response.to the question of a continuance. Walter LaForce, applicant, appeared before the Commission in agreement to the continuance and requested that the matter be scheduled for the meeting of January 22, 1976. X Following discussion, motion was made to continue X X X X N the public hearing to the meeting of January 22, X X 1976. Item #4 Request to permit a detached garage on the front VARIANCE one -half of a lot in the R -1 District that exceeds the height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limita- 1053 tion District. APPROVED CONDI- Location: Lot 31, Block E, Tract 1219, 171UPLLV located at 1113 Kings Road, on the southerly side of Kings Road, easterly of St. Andrews Road in Cliff Haven. Zone: R -1 Applicant: J. D. Walling, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH II S x a� ~ Tp P Z N &A December 4. 1975 MINUTES Chairman Beckley pointed out that this request had previously been approved by the Planning Commission but because construction had not begun within the time limit of 18 months, the original request had lapsed, and therefore, the applicant was resubmitting the request for consideration. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. J. D. Walling, 1113 Kings Road, applicant, appear- ed before the Commission in connection with this request and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X following findings: Absent X X 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building . or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings and /or uses in the same district, because of the steep topo- graphy of the site. 2. That the granting of the application is neces- sary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, since the steep terrain of the site precludes the construction of the detached garage within the required 24 foot height limit. 3. That the proposed garage structure will maintain a one -story elevation along kings Road, similar to the other structures exist- ing along the southerly side of the street, and therefore will not, under the circumstance of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstance of the particular case be materially detrimental, to the public welfare or injurious to property or improve - ments in the neighborhood. 4. That the establishment, maintenance or opera- tion of the detached garage on the front one - half of the lot will not, under the circum- Page 7. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH y T T Y T a Rok CALL 0 Dacemher 4. 1975 MINUTES INDEX stances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. and approve Variance No. 1053, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations. 2. That the underside of the proposed structure shall be screened from West Coast Highway and along its easterly side; said screening to be approved by the Director of Community Develop - ment if building materials are utilized. The Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation shall approve said screening if trees or shrubs are proposed. 3. That the existing two car garage shall be maintained for vehicular storage. Items No. 5 and No. 6 were heard concurrently because of their relationship. Item #5 Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. AMENDMENT 53 and No. 64 from the "U" District to the "P -C" NO. 457 District, and to establish a Planned Community Development Plan and Development Standards for APPROVED "Broadmoor- Pacific View," and the acceptance of an environmental document. Location: Portion of Blocks 92 and.97, Irvine's Subdivision, located on the southeasterly side of New MacArthur Boulevard, adjacent to the Big Canyon Reservoir, in Harbor View Hills. Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH its CALL w 0 MINUTES December 4. 1975 Zone: Unclassified Applicant: Broadmoor Homes, Inc., Tustin Owner: Pacific View Memorial Park, Newport Beach Item #6 Request to subdivide 50.0 acres for single family TENTATIVE residential development in accordance with the MAP' TRACT Planned Community Development Standards for FUT7-- "Broadmoor- Pacific View." APPROVED Location: Portion of Blocks 92 and 97, C N� DI- Irvine's Subdivision, located on TITNILLLY the southeasterly side of New MacArthur Boulevard, adjacent to the Big Canyon Reservoir, in Harbor View Hills. Zone: Unclassified Applicant: Broadmoor Homes, Inc., Tustin Owner: Pacific View Memorial Park,. Newport Beach Engineer: Raub, Bein, Frost and Assoc., Newport Beach Community Development Director Hogan advised of the staff's concern that some of the grading was proposed outside the property line and although there was an indication that documents would be secured for the encroachment, there was always the problem of who would maintain the slopes in case of failure in the future. The reason for the grading outside the property line was to eliminate a sharp knoll and create a smooth rounded bank. It was pointed out that if the grading was per- formed up to the property line, a very steep and unstable slope would be created unless the grading were redesigned in this area. Environmental Coordinator Foley reviewed additional changes recommended in connection with the Planned Community Text as follows. One would give the Community Development Director the right to review Page 9. COMMISSIONERS T r = T < so Hsu CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES. uc cmuc Y 19/:J �ry yp� the setback map. The reason for this was to allow the developer an opportunity to rearrange some of the houses should it be determined in the future that some models were not selling as well as others. Another change was to allow for the construction of cantilevered decks in the view side setback area provided a modification request was approved in each case. At this point Planning Commission discussed the matter of decks. One point was made that the advertising should indicate that all decks would require specific City approval since people have a tendancy to rely on the advertising brochure rather than the legal documents. Another point that was discussed was the type of construction and staff advised that the decks would probably be of solid construction with drainage towards the structure, in order to prevent_ erosion_ of the slopes. One concern aas that the decks could become a collecting place for debris or home for little wild animals. . Mr. Foley commented on the location of sidewalks and advised that originally it was proposed to construct sidewalks on the slope side of the street, however, staff recommended that the side- walks be moved to the home side of the street and the developer has agreed. In addition, the. private streets will be widened in order that the sidewalks could be made a part of the street right -of -way rather than an easement. Setbacks in front of the garages were discussed and it was pointed out that the reason for either 5 feet or 20 feet was that 5 feet was clearly too short to park a car on the driveway apron without hanging over the sidewalk, whereas, 20 feet would accommodate a parked car with space for opening the garage door. The original proposal was for 3 feet or 18 feet, however staff felt that 20 feet was more appropriate. Guest parking was discussed and it was pointed out that all guest parking would be on- street because of the width of lots and the increased width of the private streets. . In connection with cul -de -sacs, Planning Commis- sion was advised that these have been reviewed by the Fire Department and were adequate in size, turning radius, and length. Mr. Foley also advis- ed the Commission that the staff was presently Page 10. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH � T q t P P Z N 0 PA nnrnmke.+ A 1070 MINUTES • , mvcn working on design standards for cul -de -sacs. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Larry Lizotte, Vice President of Broadmoor Homes, appeared before the Commission in connection with these matters. He was aware that some of his concerns were matters of City policy which could only be decided upon by the City Council, however, the concerns were being brought to the attention of the Planning Commission for their information. First, Broadmoor Homes recommends that the terms of the reimbursement agreement for the improvement of New MacArthur Boulevard be for no more than one year from the completion of the improvements. Second, that some back -up agreement with the City be made concerning the improvements on New Mac Arthur Boulevard in front of the Metropolitan Water District property in the event the MWD is not interested in providing the improvements at this time. However, they would be willing to enter into a 5 year agreement with the City for • reimbursement in this area. Third, that some reimbursement agreement with the City be made concerning the landscaping of the traffic median in New MacArthur Boulevard. Robert Bein of Raub, Bein, Frost & Associates, engineers for Broadmoor Homes, appeared before the Commission and commented further on the grading. He concurred with the staff's point of view, however, on the other hand the property line as designated did not take the topography into consideration and if grading is done only on the site, a sharp peak or "ship's bow" will result and project into the natural canyon area. He felt that grading over the property line would result in a more pleasing and natural effect. It was suggested that the extra land needed for grading be purchased by Broadmoor and Mr. Bein advised they had investigated this and were advised by The Irvine Company that a commitment had been made to offer the natural canyon to the City for dedication and any sale of land may cause some problem with the agreement. Planning Commission questioned the feasibility of landscaping the slopes as soon as possible after grading in order to prevent erosion and Mr. Bein advised there would be no objection to a condition requiring immediate planting of the slopes based on the rainy season. He further advised of their Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT REACH M � < Z 0.0 pp„ N December 4. 1975 MINUTES u,wev m vcn intent to landscape the slopes before the sales program got into high gear. Mr. Bein commented on the setbacks recommended by the staff in front of the garages and was partic- ularly concerned with their effect on the lots surrounding the cul -de -sac$. He advised that the 3 feet and 18 feet presently stated in the Planned Community Text were minimum setbacks and they would prefer these be left as is, especially since the setback map would be reviewed by the Director of Community Development. Community Developme.nt Director Hogan commented in this regard and pointed out that 18 feet was not enough room to park an automobile because the tendancy was not to pull up to the garage door and therefore the automobile would protrude into the sidewalk area. As to the 3 foot setback, it was questionable whether the garage door could be opened without projecting into the sidewalk area and since many garages have automatic door openers this could be a hazardous condition for pedestrian • or bicyclists using the sidewalks. Mr. Bein pointed out the areas of concern in connection with the setbacks and advised that 5 feet and 18 feet would be acceptable. Mr. Bein reviewed the site plan and pointed out the streets to be widened and location of the sidewalks. He also commented on the improvements to New MacArthur Boulevard and had no argument that the street had to be connected and improved. However, there was concern as to the extent of the improvements as they were not sure that curb and gutter were necessary without a reimbursement agreement. If there was a reimbursement agreement sidewalks could also be included. However, without a reimbursement agreement, they do not feel it is fair to require sidewalks as these should be required when the adjacent property is improved at some time in the future. Other points briefly discussed at this time were the matter of bicycle trails and access to the development, and signals on New MacArthur Boule- vard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Ford Road. The matter of decks was discussed and Mr. Bein advised that only certain property would require decking which must be approved by the City on an individual basis. He also commented on the Page 12. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Z 3 a& rAlI N Decemher 4. 1975 MINUTES various ways in which the question of water pressure could be handled to service the develop- ment. Commissioner Seely voiced concern that the project was planned as a private community and Larry Lizotte responded that since the development had no connection to any surrounding development, it was in essence an island already. Also, the only access was from New MacArthur Boulevard and reservoirs were located on two sides of the development. As to the private street system which allow narrower streets than public streets, this would allow more room for landscaping rather than asphalt and concrete. Also, private commun- ities are a merchandising tool and seems to be what people want. At this point, the concerns of the Planning Commis Sion were reviewed as they pertained to the Harbor View Hills Sector IV development which was planned as a private community. One concern was that of providing a guard gate which would preclude others • from entering the development and another concern was that of public view from the roadways. John Ballew, architect with Morris & Lohrbach, appeared before the Commission . to comment on the side yard setbacks and review the function of the zero lot line concept. He also commented on the patio and rear yard utility which was designed into each structure within the development and the need for decking on a portion of the struc- tures to accomplish this. He advised that decks were needed on approximately 25 to 30% of the houses. He also advised that esthetics were taken into consideration in the design and it was not their intent to provide decking on all properties, thus creating a solid wall effect. Planning Commission recessed at 9:25 P.M. and reconvened at 9:35 P.M. There being no others desiring to appear and be • heard, the public hearing was .closed. In connection with the contents of the Environ- mental Impact Report, Commissioner Seely advised of his disappointment that the document did not Page 13. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH YC M M 9 m m f December 4, 1975 MINUTES - mvcn direct itself to the issue of private communities vs. public communities and felt the pros and cons should have been reviewed. Motion X Motion was made that the Planning Commission Ayes X X X X X recommend to the City Council that the Environ- Absent X X mental Impact Report be certified as complete. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the following findings: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the proposed project will not be detri- mental to the peace, health, or general welfar of people working or residing in the surround- ing area. and recommend to the City Council that Amendment No. 457 be approved, reclassifying the property from the "U" District to the "P -C" District and establishing the Planned Community Development • Standards, with the following revisions: 1. Section IV D should be revised to provide _gar - a - gei.sAtbacks of 3 feet, provided opening and closing of the garage door will not protrude into the sidewalk area, or a minimum of 20 feet from back of sidewalk. 2. Add the following to Section IV D: "Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of the project, a final setback map shall be submitted to the Community Develop- ment Director indicating the setbacks to all building areas proposed in the development. The Community Development Director shall review said map and all future modifications of the setbacks shown on this map in view of setbacks listed in this ordinance and /or sound planning principles and shall either approve, modify, disapprove the setbacks shown, or refer the matter to the Planning Commission for a determination. In the case of modifica- tion or disapproval, the applicant may appeal to the Planning Commission for further con- . sideration." 3. A new provision be added as follows: "Uncovered balconies, decks, patios, walls or Page 14. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES neremhar a_ 10%5 railings to a height of four (4) feet above the pad elevation may project a maximum of eleven (11) feet into the view side setback and a maximum of eight (8) feet beyond the top of slope adjacent to the unit, subject to the review of an application by the Modifica- tion Committee, who may approve, disapprove, or modify each application. "All advertising shall clearly indicate the need for specific city approval for any decks or modification to the decks which may be required now or in the future." NOTE: Revision No. 3 was reworded by a subsequent motion which passed. 4. All reference to cluster housing and attached housing should be eliminated throughout the text, and the density should be changed from. low medium density to low density. Discussion of the motion ensued and the following • points were expressed. Commissioner Seely voiced concern with the close proximity of the houses, maintenance of the slopes, and ability of the individual property owners to preserve the intent of the developer relative to the slopes and decks. . Commissioner Beckley voiced concern with the unknown factors which have developed relative to the proposed cantilevered decks and the various designs which could result. Commissioner Parker felt there was sufficient controls . through the Department of Real Estate, the C.C. & R.s, the homeowners association, and the City by means of Modification Committee approval, to eliminate the likelihood of an abuse to the privilege of having cantilevered decks . and would at the same time provide the flexibility of individuality. Commissioner Seely advised of his agreement with the matter of flexibility once the tract was occupied in order that adjacent homeowners could • be made aware of what was proposed. Planning Commission discussed some alternate approach to the question of allowing cantilevered decks and at this point, the Chairman reopened Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 m Tn a T a f p A Z N DIM rA11 DeCBmhar 4_ 1475 MINUTES - - - - - - - iNMA the public hearing. Robert Bein appeared before the Commission and advised they would be willing to accept a condi- tion that prior to the issuance of building permits they have the approval of the Modification Commit- tee for the specific lots in need of decking and that no change be made to the P -C text which would allow decks over the entire project. He advised this would affect approximately 20% of the proposed houses. The public hearing was closed. Motion X Following discussion, Revision No. 3 was reworded Ayes X X X X X to read as follows: Absent X X 3. Paragraph K be added to Section His follows: Uncovered balconies, decks, patios, walls or railings to a•height of four (4) feet above the pad elevation may project a maximum of eleven (11) feet into the view side setback • and a maximum of eight (8) feet beyond the top of slope adjacent to the unit, only on approximately 20% of the lots as indicated on the Setback Map. Each balcony, deck, patio, .wall or railing shall be selected from one of three standard designs submitted by the developer and shall in each case be subject to the approval of the Modification Committee. Ayes X X X X X The original motion was then voted on and carried. Absent X X Relative to Tentative Map of Tract No. 9047, City Engineer Nolan recommended that Condition No. 7.b. be revised to read: "Lot L be increased from 32 feet to 36 feet in width on the portion with double frontage." Mr. Nolan commented on access to private communit- ies for the purpose of trash collection, police. and fire protection, etc. and recommended the following addition to condition No. 8: "e. That a right of access be granted to the City over the private streets for such purposes as police and fire protection, trash collection and utility maintenance." . With respect to Condition No. 9, Mr. Nolan advised that the fulfillment for the widening of New MacArthur Boulevard adjacent to Big Canyon Page 16. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 4, 1975 ,unev wv+c wnrr Reservoir could be met in one of several ways; either by the City under separate contract or through a cooperative agreement with the developer, Funds will be presented in next year's budget for this purpose and no problems are anticipated in this connection. The frontage adjacent to the Metropolitan Water District reservoir needs to be improved and the responsibility has been placed with the developer unless he is successful in negotiating an agreement whereby MWD.would assume a portion of the burden. However, the point regarding installation of sidewalks was well taken and there was no objection to indicating that the developer would not be responsible for sidewalks on the side of the frontage adjacent to the MWD reservoir. The shoulder of the. roadway will be available for bicycle use and if inade- quate, a temporary bicycle trail could be pro- vided.. In summary, Mr. Nolan recommended that Condition No: 9 be modified only to indicate that "The subdivider shall not be responsible for side- walks on the easterly side of New MacArthur Boule- vard, northerly of the projected northerly line • of the tract." Landscaping in the traffic median as required by Condition No. 26 was discussed. In connection with Condition No. 25, Commi sioner Williams recommended that a sentence be added that "Special attention shall be given in order to prevent siltation in the Harbor View Hills nature park." He also suggested a 32nd condition as follows: "That landscaping of slopes be accomplished as soon as appropriate after grading is completed." Commissioner Seely suggested an additional condition that "public access shall be maintained on the street system." In order to obtain a consensus of the conditions to be imposed on Tentative Tract Map No. 9047, the conditions as recommended and revised were again reviewed and the issues of private communi- ties and sidewalks along New MacArthur Boulevard were found to be controversial and were deferred for further discussion. 06 on X Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the following findings in connection with Tenta- tive Map of Tract 9047: Page 17. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T T P ^yT y Y90 r.,, P m Decemher 4. 1975 MINUTES �V ..Vii Mii "" In VG^ 1. That the proposed map and development includ- ing the proposed grading shown thereon is consistent with applicable general and speci- fic plans and the Planned Community Text. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in the tentative map. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development as set forth in the Planned Community Text. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. • 6. That the design of the subdivision of the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. and recommend to the City Council that Tentative Map of Tract No. 9047 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all public improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. • 2. That the boundary of the final map be checked by the County Surveyor before being submitted to the City for approval. 3. That the water capital improvement acreage Page 18. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T 00 CAII December 4,. 1975 MINUTES INDEX fee be paid. 4. That all vehicular access rights to New MacArthur Boulevard, except at the two private street intersections, shall be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. 5. That Section 19.16.030 of the Subdivision Ord- inance regarding map scale be waived provided maps drawn accurately to a scale of 1 ".= 100' are furnished to the Public Works Department. 6. That the Subdivision Ordinance requirement for maximum street grade of 7% be waived; with steeper grades allowed, subject to approval by the Public Works Department, where made necessary for topographical reasons. 7. That the subdivision Ordinance requirements for local street widths of sixty feet of right -of -way and forty feet of paved.su.r.face. be waived,.and that street widths be approved as shown on the tentative map, except for the • following: a. Lots C, K, and N be increased from 32' to 36' in width; b. Lot L be increased from 32' to 36' in width on the portion with double frontage. 8. That the following special conditions of. approval be applied to the private streets: a. The geometric and structural design shall be approved by the Public Works Department and shall be in conformance with the City's Private Street Policy. b. Circular planters proposed for cul -de -sac locations shall conform to Drawing No. STD - 130 -L. c. Construction shall be inspected by the Public Works Department and the standard plan check and inspection fees shall be paid. d. The California Vehicle Code shall be • enforced on the private street system. e. That a right of access be granted to the City over the private streets for such Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 4, 1975 MINUTES .0 wa .,wcw purposes as police and fire protection, trash collection and utility maintenance. NOTE: Paragraph f. was added by a subsequent motion which carried. 9. That the subdivider be responsible for the design and construction of the unimproved half width of New MacArthur Boulevard between the existing transitions which are located approx- imately 650 feet southwesterly and 700 feet northeasterly of this tract. A reimbursement agreement between the subdivider and the City of Newport Beach shall be provided to cover the New MacArthur Boulevard improvements south westerly of the tract which are adjacent to th City -owned Big Canyon Reservoir property. A similar reimbursement agreement between the subdivider and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, subject to Metropolita 's concurrence, may be provided to cover the New MacArthur Boulevard improvements northeasterly of the tract which are adjacent to the MWD- • owned reservoir property; however, the sub- divider has the responsibility for negotiating such a reimbursement agreement. NOTE: An additional sentence was added to this condition by a subsequent motion which carried. 10. That the improvement responsibility establish- ed for this project be considered as complete in itself; and thus no credits be separately allowed under the City's Capital Improvement Policy. 11. That easements to be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach have a minimum width of ten feet, with wider easements provided where show on the tentative map and where required by the Public Works Department. 12. That the subdivider be responsible for acquir- ing the necessary off -site easements in con- junction with the alternate methods of provid- ing Pressure Zone IV water service to the tract. Such easements must have a minimum • width of ten feet, with greater width provided where more than one underground utility is to be located within the same easement. All private improvements shall be cleared from the surface of such easements and appropriate wall Page 20. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p P Z a's.A. naramhar d_ 1475 MINUTES or fences approved by the Public Works Depart ment shall be constructed on the sidelines of such easements. 13. That the grading plans take into consideratio the existing piezometer locations installed in connection with the Big Canyon Ground Water Study affecting the southwesterly portion of this tract, and that adequate provisions be made for existing and future ground water accumulations in thi.s area of the tract. 14. That the graded slopes at all intersections be designed to provide a minimum sight . distance for a speed of 25 mph. Landscaping, walls, and other physical obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance require- ments. 15. That the portion of Lot A between New Mac Arthur Boulevard and Lot B.be designed to provide two inbound and two outbound vehicula. • traffic lanes. 16. That the portion of Lot A between New Mac Arthur Boulevard and Lot T have a minimum paved width of 40 feet. 17. That any.proposed guard houses, gates, or other access controls to the tract from New MacArthur Boulevard be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. 18. That the five -foot wide pedestrian sidewalks along the private streets be located adjacent to the residential houses rather than adja- cent to the landscapted slopes and be includ- ed in and added to the private street right - of -way. 19. That the five -foot wide pedestrian sidewalk be constructed on both sides of the private streets designated as Lots A, B, C, I, K, L (double frontage portion), M (northeaster) of N), and N. 20. That all garages taking front access be located three feet from the back of sidewalk or a minimum,of twenty feet from the back of sidewalk. Page 21. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH y T t p P ? N n�..u. n.n .c 6."A 707r MINUTES nv>rc w.•.r.. a IA VCA 21. That the manner of providing water service for Pressure Zone IV be subject to further review and approval by the Public Works Department. 22. That the subdivider be responsible for replacing any existing downstream sewer lines to provide the additional capacity necessary to serve this tract. The basis for replace- ment is contained in the study prepared by the Consulting Civil Engineering firm of Simpson - Steppat dated March 28, 1975. 23. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer.and . based on the recommendations of a soil engineer . and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Grading plans, soil and engineering geologic reports and grading activities shall be prepared and conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Grading Code and to the satisfaction . of the Building Official. Permanent repro - ducible copies of the "Approved As Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Department of Community Development. The developer shall either acquire appropriate easements and maintenance agreements satisfactory to the City or acquir title to the property. 24. That groundwater studies of the property be conducted by the site soil engineer and engineering geologist to preclude adverse effects to the proposed development and to adjacent properties as a result of an ,increase in, or change in levels of, the ground water as a result of the development of this site. 25. That the grading plan shall include-a complet plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants and shall be approved by the Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. Special attention shall be given to avoid increased siltation from the site into the Harbor View Nature Park and no fill shall be placed in the natural canyon area. Page 22. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH YC' m T D T T^ a K r p r p F Z 3 December 4. 1975 MINUTES .wev 26.. That the developer install landscaping in the traffic median in New MacArthur in accordance with City specifications. 27. That landscape plans be reviewed and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recrea- tion. 28. That fire hydrant locations and water supply shall be approved by the Public Works and Fire Departments. 29. That Fire Department equipment access shall be approved by the Fire Department. 30. That building addressing shall conform to Section 13.12.020 of the Municipal Code. 31. That further archaeological and paleontologi- cal exploration be done in accordance with City Policy. 32. That landscaping of slopes be accomplished as soon as appropriate after grading is _complete. 33. That consideration be given to the establish- ment of volleyball and basketball courts in the recreation area. 34. That there shall be submitted a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions setting forth an enforceable method of insur- ing the installation and continued mainten- ance of the landscaping, walls, fencing and all physical features such as buildings, fire hydrants, utility facilities, open areas between dwelling groups, parking areas, drainage facilities and recreation facilities acceptable to the Department of Community Development, and in respect to legal enforce- ability, the City Attorney. The issue of private communities vs. public Motion X communities was discussed and motion was made that paragraph f. be added to Condition No. 8 as follow f. That public access shall be retained to • the streets within the development. In support of the motion, Commissioner Seely advised of his opposition to private communities Page 23. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m "nom a 4 D R *CALL, December 4, 1975 MINUTES INDEX and felt this property would be just as marketable because of the views. Commissioner Parker stated there was no public view access now, however, when the development is complete, there will be views to those families residing in the communities. He felt there was a market for private communities and the developer should have the option to choose the type of community desired. Also, this particular develop- ment lends itself to the private community concept because of its location and design. Commissioner Seely's rebuttal was that the houses would sell just as promptly at just as high a price whether the community was maintained as a public community or a private community. Commissioner Williams commented that there was no access at the present time, however, there were no people living there at the present time who would be coming out of their private community and be allowed access to other communities design- ated as public communities. Commissioner Heather felt that the issue of privat communities had been thoroughly reviewed when Sector IV of Harbor View Hills was approved and that the City Council had set a precedent with their policy to accept the private community concept and felt that what was fair for one developer was fair for others. Ayes X X X Following discussion, the motion was voted on and Noes X X carried. Absent X X The issue of sidewalks adjacent to the MWD pro- perty was discussed. Commissioner Parker commented that the matter of public works, i.e. sidewalks, curbs, gutters, etc. was the responsibility of the municipality or the county as the case may be and the implementation was passed on to the developer at such time as the property was improved but only to the extent that the public works were adjacent to his pro - perty. However, in this case some of the work being required was located adjacent to an adjoin- ing landowner's property, i.e. MWD property, and the requirement of sidewalks seems to be an inequitable burden on the developer. Page 24. Motion Ayes Noes Absent 0 Ayes Absent COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 4, 1975 MINUTES sunev Commissioner Beckley commented that the primary beneficiaries of the sidewalk will be the people in the proposed development traveling north on New MacArthur Boulevard and since the developer had indicated a willingness to improve the right - of -way with curbs and gutters, did not feel that the addition of sidewalks was too much of a burden. Commissioner Seely advised of his support of side- walks and felt that since the City Council had a better grasp of economics and because of certain City Policies, the issue might be resolved at the City Council level. X Following discussion, motion was made that an X X X additional sentence be added to Condition No. V x x as follows: X X "The subdivider shall be responsible for sidewalks on the easterly side of New MacArthur Boulevard adjacent to the MWD reservoir." X X X X X The original motion setting forth the findings X X and recommended conditions for Tentative Map of Tract 9047 was voted on and carried. Items No. 7 and No. 8 were heard concurrently because of their relationship. Item #7 Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 37 from the "U" District to the "P -C" District, AMENDMENT N 56 and to establish a Planned Community Development Plan and Development Standards for "Half -day Harbor•?! CONT. TO and the acceptance of an environmental document. DET. 1­11— Location: Portion of Blocks 55 and 94, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 800 -900 East Coast Highway on the northerly side of East Coast High- way, westerly of Jamboree Road, adjacent to Newport Dunes. Zone: Unclassified Page 25. 0 Motion Ayes Absent 0 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH n.. .......L .. A 1n Tf MINUTES Y CIIIYCI T 1214 Applicant: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Item #8 Request to subdivide 16.14± acres into 6 parcels RESUB- for commercial development in accordance with the DIVISION Planned Community Development Standards for NF _5_0C_ "Holiday Harbor." CONT. TO Location: Portion of Blocks 55 and 94, DEC. 1-V Irvine's Subdivision, located at 800 -900 East Coast Highway, on the northerly side of East Coast High - way, westerly of Jamboree Road, adjacent to Newport Dunes. Zone: Unclassified Applicant: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Engineer: Simpson - Steppat, Newport Beach Planning Commission discussed the continuance of these matters because of the lateness of the hour and the magnitude of the request. Public hearings were opened in connection with these requests. Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, and Al Auer, Vice President, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission and advised that unless it was the intent of the Planning Commission to hear the matters in their entirely, they should be continued; and following discussion, agreed to a continuance. X Motion was made that Items No. 7 and No. 8 be X X N X continued to the meeting of December 1.8, 1975, to X X be placed first on the agenda. Page 26. Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent • COMMISSIONERS P " Z 3LA CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 4, 1975 MINUTES INDEX Proposed revis.i.on of the land use designations for the Aeronutronic -Ford site, and resulting changes to the Land Use Element and, possibly, the Reside tial.Growth Element. (Requested by Aeronutronic- Item #9 GENERAL PIM AM WDMENT N0. 31 Ford.) CONT. TO X At the request of the applicant, Planning Commis- DEC -T8 X X X X X sion continued this matter to the meeting of X X December 18, 1975. X There being no further business, Planning Commis - X X X X X sion adjourned the meeting. Time: 11:30 P.M. X X JAMES P RKER, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Page 27.