HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/05/1985COMMISSIONLRS REGULAR"PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PLACE,: City Council Chambers MINUTES
X o e TIME: 7:30 p.m.
i o °v m DATE: December 5, 1985
z c m a m =
M z a a T
01
Cit of Newport Beach
= W O r O
M
ROLL CALL INDEX
Present ix 11 xlxjxlxlx` All Commissioners Present.
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT:
James D. Hewicker, Planning Director
Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator
Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator
Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator
Donald Webb, City Engineer
Dee Edwards, Secretary
• Minutes of November 21, 1985: Minutes
of
Motion x Motion was made for approval of the November 21, 1985, 11 -21 -85
All Ayes Planning Commission Minutes. Motion voted on, MOTION
CARRIED.
General Plan Amendment 85 -3 (Public Hearing) I Item No.l
Request to consider an amendment to the Land Use GPA 85 -3
Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to
allow an additional 9,500 sq.ft, of office development Approved
in Block 700 of Newport Center (Pacific Mutual); and
the acceptance of an environmental document.
INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item, and Mr. Bill Ficker, Ficker and Ruffing
Architects, 522 West Ocean Front, appeared on behalf of
the applicant. Mr. Ficker stated that the additional
office space will be constructed within the basement
area of the existing headquarters building and that
there will be adequate parking spaces within the
existing parking facilities.
The public hearing was closed at this time.
Motion Motion was made to approve General Plan Amendment 85 -3
All Ayes (Resolution No. 1134). Motion was voted on, MOTION
CARRIED.
* * x
A. Final Map of Tract No. 12212 (Discussion) I Item No.2
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12212 FTM12212
(being a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract No. FTM12362
12212), subdividing 7.96 acres of land into 50 numbered FTM12528
lots for single family residential development, 1 FTM12529
numbered lot for public park purposes, 4 lettered lots FTM12530
for private street and access purposes and 1 lettered
lot for private landscape and open space purposes. Approved
Ms,
I I I I I I I I B. Final Map of Tract No. 12362 (Discussion)
• Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12362
subdividing 6.05 acres of land into 2 lots for residen-
tial condominium purposes and 1 lot for related private
recreational purposes.
AND
C. Final Map of Tract No. 12528 (Discussion)
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12528
(being a portion of the Tentative Tract No. 12212),
subdividing 24.88 acres of land into l numbered lot for
restaurant or office purposes, 2 numbered lots for
office purposes, 1 numbered lot for hotel purposes, 2
numbered lots for related parking structure purposes, 1
numbered lot for private health club and commercial
purposes, 1 lettered lot for private street purposes
and 1 lettered lot for public open space purposes.
AND
D. Final Map of Tract No. 12529 (Discussion)
COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES
c o
December 5, 1985
x
m
z c m y m z
(being a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract .No.
•
m M D z r G) x
0 p Z r m
I City of
Newport Beach
W
12212), subdividing 7.05 acres of land into 52 numbered
lots for single family residential purposes, 1 numbered
ROLL CALL
I
lot for private recreational purposes, 7 lettered lots
INDEX
Motion Motion was made to approve General Plan Amendment 85 -3
All Ayes (Resolution No. 1134). Motion was voted on, MOTION
CARRIED.
* * x
A. Final Map of Tract No. 12212 (Discussion) I Item No.2
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12212 FTM12212
(being a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract No. FTM12362
12212), subdividing 7.96 acres of land into 50 numbered FTM12528
lots for single family residential development, 1 FTM12529
numbered lot for public park purposes, 4 lettered lots FTM12530
for private street and access purposes and 1 lettered
lot for private landscape and open space purposes. Approved
Ms,
I I I I I I I I B. Final Map of Tract No. 12362 (Discussion)
• Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12362
subdividing 6.05 acres of land into 2 lots for residen-
tial condominium purposes and 1 lot for related private
recreational purposes.
AND
C. Final Map of Tract No. 12528 (Discussion)
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12528
(being a portion of the Tentative Tract No. 12212),
subdividing 24.88 acres of land into l numbered lot for
restaurant or office purposes, 2 numbered lots for
office purposes, 1 numbered lot for hotel purposes, 2
numbered lots for related parking structure purposes, 1
numbered lot for private health club and commercial
purposes, 1 lettered lot for private street purposes
and 1 lettered lot for public open space purposes.
AND
D. Final Map of Tract No. 12529 (Discussion)
-2-
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12529
(being a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract .No.
•
12212), subdividing 7.05 acres of land into 52 numbered
lots for single family residential purposes, 1 numbered
lot for private recreational purposes, 7 lettered lots
-2-
MISSIONERS
A x
C o
f z a
C c r v
z c m s m
W a S z r 0
M m O m> r
z 9 z S E T
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
for private street and access purposes and 2 lettered
lots for private landscape and open space purposes.
=2
E. Final Map of Tract No. 12530 (Discussion)
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12530
(being a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract No.
12212), subdividing 5.45 acres of land into 43 numbered
lots for single family residential purposes, 5 lettered
lots for private street and access purposes and 4
lettered lots for private landscape and open space
purposes.
LOCATION: A portion of Block 51, Irvine's Sub-
division, located at the southwesterly
corner of Jamboree Road and Bristol
Street.
• ZONE: P -C (Prezoned)
APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
ENGINEER: Morse Consulting Group, Irvine
William Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated
that the Fire Department has recommended a street name
change in conjunction with Tract No. 12529: that Heron
Way be changed to Egret Court because there is
currently a Heron Way in Harbor View Hills.
The discussion period opened at this time, and because
there was no one present representing the applicant, a
Motion x motion was made to approve the Final Maps of Tract No.
All Ayes 12212, Tract No. 12362, Tract No. 12528, Tract No.
12529 and Tract No. 12530, subject to the findings and
condition in Exhibit "A ", including the modification of
the street name change. Motion voted on, MOTION
CARRIED.
FINDINGS:
• 1. That the Final Maps of Tract No. 12212, Tract No.
12528, Tract No. 12529 and Tract No. 12530, being
portions of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 12212,
substantially conform to said Tentative Map and
-3-
COMMISSIONERS
with all changes permitted and all requirements
imposed as conditions to their acceptance.
2. That the Final Map of Tract No. 12362, substan-
tially conforms to the Tentative Map of said Tract
and with all changes permitted and all require-
ments imposed as conditions to its acceptance.
CONDITION:
1. That all remaining conditions imposed by the
Orange County Board of Supervisors in conjunction
with their approval of the Tentative Maps of Tract
No. 12212 and Tract No. 12362 shall be fulfilled.
f I I( I x
Variance No. 1126 (Continued Public Hearing)
• Request to permit alterations and additions to an
existing single family dwelling which exceeds the
maximum allowable height within the 24/28 Foot Height
Limitation District. All development will be below the
top of the curb along Ocean Boulevard. The proposal
also includes a request to exceed the maximum 1.5 times
the buildable area of the site and a modification to
the Zoning Code so as to allow portions of a proposed
elevator and vestibule area and a second level deck, to
encroach 1 foot, 4 inches into a required 4 foot side
yard setback.
•
LOCATION: Parcel "B" of Parcel Map 4545 -199
(Resubdivision No. 79) located at 2711
Ocean Boulevard, on the westerly side of
Ocean Boulevard, between Fernleaf Avenue
and Goldenrod Avenue, in Corona del Mar.
ZONE: R -1
APPLICANTS: Mr. and Mrs. Jack Caldwell, Corona del
Mar
OWNERS: Same as applicants .
-4-
MINUTES
Item No.3
V1126
Approved
December
5, 1985
a °v
c)
m
C
y
y
z c
m
y
z
Cz
C m
W
z
r
oroo
9 r
m
I City
of
Newport
Beach
z
with all changes permitted and all requirements
imposed as conditions to their acceptance.
2. That the Final Map of Tract No. 12362, substan-
tially conforms to the Tentative Map of said Tract
and with all changes permitted and all require-
ments imposed as conditions to its acceptance.
CONDITION:
1. That all remaining conditions imposed by the
Orange County Board of Supervisors in conjunction
with their approval of the Tentative Maps of Tract
No. 12212 and Tract No. 12362 shall be fulfilled.
f I I( I x
Variance No. 1126 (Continued Public Hearing)
• Request to permit alterations and additions to an
existing single family dwelling which exceeds the
maximum allowable height within the 24/28 Foot Height
Limitation District. All development will be below the
top of the curb along Ocean Boulevard. The proposal
also includes a request to exceed the maximum 1.5 times
the buildable area of the site and a modification to
the Zoning Code so as to allow portions of a proposed
elevator and vestibule area and a second level deck, to
encroach 1 foot, 4 inches into a required 4 foot side
yard setback.
•
LOCATION: Parcel "B" of Parcel Map 4545 -199
(Resubdivision No. 79) located at 2711
Ocean Boulevard, on the westerly side of
Ocean Boulevard, between Fernleaf Avenue
and Goldenrod Avenue, in Corona del Mar.
ZONE: R -1
APPLICANTS: Mr. and Mrs. Jack Caldwell, Corona del
Mar
OWNERS: Same as applicants .
-4-
MINUTES
Item No.3
V1126
Approved
COMMISSIONERS
0
•
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
William Laycock advised that the existing living space
on the site, excluding exterior walls and garages,
contains approximately 3,776 square feet, and the 1.5
times buildable area which is permitted in Old Corona
del Mar would allow approximately 4,509 square feet of
living space excluding the garages and exterior walls.
Mr. Laycock explained that if the Variance is approved
to exceed the 1.5 times buildable area, then
approximately 4,723 square feet of interior living
space would be permitted on the site. He compared the
subject Variance with two recently approved Variances
in the China Cove area, and the size of a typical lot
in Corona del Mar.
James Hewicker, Planning Director, commented that the
Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council
that the China Cove area be granted a Floor Area Ratio
of 2 times buildable area because of the smaller lots
in China Cove; however, he said that the City Council
rejected the idea.
Mr. Hewicker explained that there is no change in the
buildable area of a lot if a Variance is granted on a
particular parcel to allow an encroachment into a
front, side or rear yard setback.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Koppelman, Mr. Laycock explained that the existing
Floor Area Ratio is 1.31 times the buildable area and
that the proposed Floor Area Ratio is 1.56 times
the buildable area.
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item, and Mr. Dick Dodd, Architect, 201 Shipyard Way,
appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of
the applicants. Mr. Dodd commented that the project's
design was difficult because of the unique slope and
shape of the subject lot. He explained that the
proposed elevator no longer encroaches into the side
yard and does not visually increase the mass of the
building. Mr. Dodd opined that the 214 square feet over
the buildable area is 3.7% of the gross area of the
building. He commented that a substantial amount of
interior space will be built into the bluff area, and
that the additional square footage is visually less
than the permitted 1.5 times Floor Area Ratio.
Commissioner Koppelman asked Mr. Dodd if the Planning
Commission required that the 1.5 Floor Area Ratio be
retained, where would the additional 214 square feet be
-5-
MINUTES
X
c o
n x
v
y m
Z c
m
y m z
m s
A
z r m x
C 2
m
O 3 0 0
a m
o
m r T
Z 9
2
9 2 T M
Z
0
•
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
William Laycock advised that the existing living space
on the site, excluding exterior walls and garages,
contains approximately 3,776 square feet, and the 1.5
times buildable area which is permitted in Old Corona
del Mar would allow approximately 4,509 square feet of
living space excluding the garages and exterior walls.
Mr. Laycock explained that if the Variance is approved
to exceed the 1.5 times buildable area, then
approximately 4,723 square feet of interior living
space would be permitted on the site. He compared the
subject Variance with two recently approved Variances
in the China Cove area, and the size of a typical lot
in Corona del Mar.
James Hewicker, Planning Director, commented that the
Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council
that the China Cove area be granted a Floor Area Ratio
of 2 times buildable area because of the smaller lots
in China Cove; however, he said that the City Council
rejected the idea.
Mr. Hewicker explained that there is no change in the
buildable area of a lot if a Variance is granted on a
particular parcel to allow an encroachment into a
front, side or rear yard setback.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Koppelman, Mr. Laycock explained that the existing
Floor Area Ratio is 1.31 times the buildable area and
that the proposed Floor Area Ratio is 1.56 times
the buildable area.
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item, and Mr. Dick Dodd, Architect, 201 Shipyard Way,
appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of
the applicants. Mr. Dodd commented that the project's
design was difficult because of the unique slope and
shape of the subject lot. He explained that the
proposed elevator no longer encroaches into the side
yard and does not visually increase the mass of the
building. Mr. Dodd opined that the 214 square feet over
the buildable area is 3.7% of the gross area of the
building. He commented that a substantial amount of
interior space will be built into the bluff area, and
that the additional square footage is visually less
than the permitted 1.5 times Floor Area Ratio.
Commissioner Koppelman asked Mr. Dodd if the Planning
Commission required that the 1.5 Floor Area Ratio be
retained, where would the additional 214 square feet be
-5-
MINUTES
ROLL
removed? Mr. Dodd replied that the lobby on the lower
floor to the elevator could be reduced and the elevator
would open to a foyer, whereby the applicants would be
required to go outside to the garage area from the
elevator; or the galleria from the house to the game
room could be reduced and an open deck could be built,
but he explained that the living area of the house
would be reduced but not the mass of the house. Mr.
Dodd commented the house has.a large circulation area
that has.absorbed a large amount of the living area.
In response to Commissioner Turner, Mr. Dodd described
how the removal of the lower deck could become a
security problem from the house to the garage.
Mr. Jack Caldwell, applicant, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Caldwell submitted a letter
from Mr. John Gray, 2701 Ocean Boulevard, stating that
he supports the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B ",
and a letter signed by Ms. Esther Parant and Ms. Alice
COMMISSIONERS
Remer, stating their support of the findings and
MINUTES
T
" "
December 5, 1985
c o
conditions in Exhibit "B ".
r 9 m
z c m y m z
c Z N 0 3 O O
I= a= r
I City
of
Newport
Beach
9= m
removed? Mr. Dodd replied that the lobby on the lower
floor to the elevator could be reduced and the elevator
would open to a foyer, whereby the applicants would be
required to go outside to the garage area from the
elevator; or the galleria from the house to the game
room could be reduced and an open deck could be built,
but he explained that the living area of the house
would be reduced but not the mass of the house. Mr.
Dodd commented the house has.a large circulation area
that has.absorbed a large amount of the living area.
In response to Commissioner Turner, Mr. Dodd described
how the removal of the lower deck could become a
security problem from the house to the garage.
Mr. Jack Caldwell, applicant, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Caldwell submitted a letter
from Mr. John Gray, 2701 Ocean Boulevard, stating that
he supports the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B ",
and a letter signed by Ms. Esther Parant and Ms. Alice
SL
Remer, stating their support of the findings and
•
conditions in Exhibit "B ".
Mr. Caldwell stated that the subject application will
not set a precedent and that this application is a
unique situation. Mr. Caldwell read an outline of
comments submitted by him to the Planning Commission
in support of the findings and conditions of approval
in Exhibit "B ": that Finding No. 4, Exhibit "A ", should
state that there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances regarding the buildable area of the site;
that the exterior wall thickness is repeated at each
level and exaggerates the building size; (Motion was
Motion
x
made to allow the applicant an additional 4 minutes to
All Ayes
submit his presentation. Motion voted on, MOTION
CARRIED); because of the multi -level design more
interior circulation is required; if the area were to
be calculated along the original slope or grade of the
lot the buildable area would fall below the 1.5 times
buildable area; if the City had modified setback
variances by an Ordinance bringing the lots along Ocean
Boulevard into conformity, then the issue of exceeding
the buildable area would not have been raised because
the area of the building would be well within the 1.5
times buildable area guideline; a substantial portion
of the building is excavated into the hillside and does
not contribute to the bulk appearance of the structure;
and the bulk appearance of the structure as viewed from
the bay will not change by the proposed construction.
SL
MISSIONERS
•
Motion
All Ayes
0
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
Mr. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, representing the
Corona del Mar Community Association, appeared before
the Planning Commission stating that if the Variance is
approved, the project's exceeding 1.5 times the
buildable area could set a precedent in other areas of
Old Corona del Mar.
The public hearing was closed at this time.
In regard to Commissioner Goff's reference to Mr.
Caldwell's comment, Mr. Hewicker stated that the
buildable area calculation of the lot is based upon the
interior boundaries of the setback area projected upon
a horizontal plane.
Motion was made to approve Variance No. 1126, subject
to the findings and conditions of approval in Exhibit
"B" (Revised) . Commissioner Koppelman explained that
there is support for the Variance in the neighborhood,
that there would be no view obstruction or increase in
bulk of the project, that the project is an exceptional
case, and is not a precedent setter for the bluff area.
Commissioner Turner stated that he supports
Commissioner Koppelman's motion based on her reasons,
and in addition, he reasoned that security could be a
problem, that the added bulk is at the base of the
building and does not affect the neighbors, and that
the project is unique and not precedent setting.
Commissioner Goff stated that he agrees with the
aforementioned reasons to .approve the Variance, and in
addition he commented that the 3% to 4% increase over
the 1.5 times buildable area justifies the loss of
livability and amenities in the logical areas that
would have to be redesigned.
Chairman Person stated that his vote is not based upon
any prior action of this Planning Commission or the
City Council.
Motion voted on to approve Variance No. 1126, subject
to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B"
(Revised). MOTION CARRIED.
-7-
MINUTES
x x
C o
�
9 9
x
m
2 C
m
D m
Z
m a
z r
S
C z
0 m
o i
COMMISSIONERS
FINDINGS:
December 5, 1985
Beach
1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applying to the land, building, and
use proposed in this application, which circum-
stances and conditions do not generally apply to
land, building, and /or uses in the same district
inasmuch as the subject property maintains a very
steep slope which is significantly different than
other lots on the upland side of Ocean Boulevard.
2. That the granting of a variance to exceed the
permitted building height and allowable gross
floor area is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights of the
applicant, inasmuch as the proposed building is of
comparable height and area to other buildings on
the bluff side of Ocean Boulevard.
3. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation
• of the use, property, and building at the proposed
height and area will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, peace, comfort, and general
welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of such proposed use or detrimental
or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or the general welfare of the City.
•
4. That the proposed development is consistent with
the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal
Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with
surrounding land uses.
CONDITIONS:
1. That the development .shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved revised plot plan,
floor plans; elevations and sections, except as
noted below.
2. That the gross floor area of the structure shall
not exceed 5,923 sq.ft. (1.56 x buildable area).
C
MINUTES
A A
c o
x
-
9
r 7
m
a c
C
m
Z m
z
m S
c a
s
x r
o S
0
0
x
0
City of
z
=
Z
y =
gy
m
Y v'
FINDINGS:
December 5, 1985
Beach
1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applying to the land, building, and
use proposed in this application, which circum-
stances and conditions do not generally apply to
land, building, and /or uses in the same district
inasmuch as the subject property maintains a very
steep slope which is significantly different than
other lots on the upland side of Ocean Boulevard.
2. That the granting of a variance to exceed the
permitted building height and allowable gross
floor area is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights of the
applicant, inasmuch as the proposed building is of
comparable height and area to other buildings on
the bluff side of Ocean Boulevard.
3. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation
• of the use, property, and building at the proposed
height and area will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, peace, comfort, and general
welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of such proposed use or detrimental
or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or the general welfare of the City.
•
4. That the proposed development is consistent with
the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal
Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with
surrounding land uses.
CONDITIONS:
1. That the development .shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved revised plot plan,
floor plans; elevations and sections, except as
noted below.
2. That the gross floor area of the structure shall
not exceed 5,923 sq.ft. (1.56 x buildable area).
C
MINUTES
MINUTES
c r
December 5, 1985
C 2 N a r 0 0
9 z = T m
City of Newport Beach
D
ROLL CALL
INDEX
A. Amendment No. 624 (Public Hearing)
Item No.4
A624
Request to establish Planned Community Development
Standards and adopt a Planned Community Development
TS
Plan for the development of the Corona del Mar Seniors
TTM11949
Project Planned Community. The proposal also includes
a request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 32
Approved
and 51, so as to reclassify said property from the
R -1 -B District to the Planned Community District; and
the acceptance of an environmental document.
AND
B. Traffic Study (Public Hearing)
Request to consider a Traffic Study for a 100 unit
condominium development.
AND
C. Tentative Map of Tract No. 11949 (Public Hearing)
Request to subdivide 15.07 acres of land into 5 num-
bered lots for residential condominium development, 2
lettered lots for private open space purposes, 1
lettered lot for private recreational purposes and 2
lettered lots for public recreational purposes.
LOCATION: Portions of Blocks 95 and 96, Irvine's
Subdivision, located at 3400 Fifth
Avenue, on the northeasterly side of
Fifth Avenue between Marguerite Avenue
and the Newport Beach City Limits, in
Corona del Mar.
ZONE: R -1 -B
APPLICANT: The Bren Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
ENGINEER: Adams Streeter, Irvine
In response to Chairman Person's inquiry regarding the
revisions and additions to the Conditions of Approval
as submitted by staff, James Hewicker, Planning
•
Director, commented that revised Condition No. 17
emphasizes "that lots C, D, E, and F will be cared for
M MISSIONERS
-
December 5, 1985
x x
i ' ; x
C T Z
a c m z a
c a w p; 0 0
Z
City of
Newport
Beach
and maintained by the homeowners association so as to
protect the slopes from erosion and deterioration ";
Condition No. 50 revision states that "the final
grading plan shall reflect the elevations shown on the
plot plan which will, in combination with the design
concept of the structures insure the view preservation
required by the General Plan," and he said that this is
an effort to assure the Planning Commission, City
Council, and the neighboring residential community that
the elevations, the average roof heights, and ridge
heights shown on the plans, are the heights that will
be built and that they will be according to the finish
floor elevations to assure that the blue water views
will be protected; added Condition No. 61 states that
"all structures on the project site shall have
non - combustible roof coverings "..
In response to Commissioner Turner's question regarding
the development's roof peaks in relationship to the pad
elevations of the houses on Sandcastle Drive, Mr.
Hewicker replied that a view analysis has been done
from each of the home sites along Sandcastle Drive
using photographs and poles to measure the actual
height of the ridges. In respect to the elevations and
the finished floor elevations, Mr. Hewicker cited the
measurements that govern are the 22 foot average and
the 25 foot ridge in relationship to the finished floor
elevation on the drawing as opposed to the average 24
foot height limit shown on the specified Planned
Community document.
The public hearing was opened at this time, and Mr.
David Neish, Urban Assist, Inc., appeared before the
Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr.
Neish briefly reviewed the proposed development and the
previously proposed Corona del Mar Cottage Homes, a
detached single family residential development that was
withdrawn at the conclusion of the City Council hearing
on April 8, 1985.
Mr. Neish stated that on June 10, 1985, City Council
considered a General Plan Amendment relative to the
subject site and approved the change of land use
designation to a multi - family residential, specifically
for senior citizen housing. He pointed out two
conditions that were adopted by the City Council in
conjunction with the General Plan Amendment, by stating
that the proposed project would not exceed 115 units
even though the new land use designation would allow
-10-
MINUTES
INDEX
MISSIONERS
MINUTES
INDEX
150 units to occur on the site; and the City Council
required that no blue water views from the adjacent
lots on Sandcastle Drive would be obstructed by
implementation of the proposed project. He said the
measurement was required at -a point 30 inches above
rear pad elevations on Sandcastle Drive lots. Mr.
Neish cited that the City Council also removed from the
General Plan the residential alternative land use
designation from Buck Gully, which now stipulates
recreational and environmental open space use only.
Mr. Neish stated that the City Council directed the
applicant to provide a means of reducing traffic
generation from the project compared to the previously
proposed Corona del Mar Cottage Homes.
Mr. Neish highlighted the proposed project: that there
will be twenty -five four -plex condominium structures;
that the buildings will be two -story structures but
designed to provide access and elevation features; each
building is designed so that each of the units is
• directly accessible from street level accomplished by a
duel street frontage; that the entire subdivision would
appear as single story when viewed from the uphill side
for the Sandcastle Drive and Harbor View Hills
residents; that the streets in the subdivision are
oriented east -west; the units will be privately owned
and maintained; recreational facilities will be
provided for the development on one -half acre located
on the easterly side of the property immediately
adjacent to Buck Gully; each unit will include an
attached two car garage and the garage access is
provided through a combination of individual and shared
driveway access to allow varied building elevation and
maximizes on- street parking; that 150 guest parking
spaces will be available in addition to the off -site
parking spaces associated with each unit; the units
facing Harbor View Hills will appear to be single story
and they will be 14 feet high from pad elevation; and
that the maximum building heights from the lower
streets will conform to the adopted height which is
24/28 feet.
Mr. Neish responded to concerns that were previously
raised during meetings with residents in the community
and senior citizens. Regarding density, Mr. Neish
• answered why there are more units (100) in the proposed
project than the number of dwellings included in the
-11-
C o
December 5, 1985
F
m
I
y
A o
z c
M
m
y m
z
C z
z a
N
=
o;
a =
O
T
o
m
f
City
Y
f
Newport
Beach
INDEX
150 units to occur on the site; and the City Council
required that no blue water views from the adjacent
lots on Sandcastle Drive would be obstructed by
implementation of the proposed project. He said the
measurement was required at -a point 30 inches above
rear pad elevations on Sandcastle Drive lots. Mr.
Neish cited that the City Council also removed from the
General Plan the residential alternative land use
designation from Buck Gully, which now stipulates
recreational and environmental open space use only.
Mr. Neish stated that the City Council directed the
applicant to provide a means of reducing traffic
generation from the project compared to the previously
proposed Corona del Mar Cottage Homes.
Mr. Neish highlighted the proposed project: that there
will be twenty -five four -plex condominium structures;
that the buildings will be two -story structures but
designed to provide access and elevation features; each
building is designed so that each of the units is
• directly accessible from street level accomplished by a
duel street frontage; that the entire subdivision would
appear as single story when viewed from the uphill side
for the Sandcastle Drive and Harbor View Hills
residents; that the streets in the subdivision are
oriented east -west; the units will be privately owned
and maintained; recreational facilities will be
provided for the development on one -half acre located
on the easterly side of the property immediately
adjacent to Buck Gully; each unit will include an
attached two car garage and the garage access is
provided through a combination of individual and shared
driveway access to allow varied building elevation and
maximizes on- street parking; that 150 guest parking
spaces will be available in addition to the off -site
parking spaces associated with each unit; the units
facing Harbor View Hills will appear to be single story
and they will be 14 feet high from pad elevation; and
that the maximum building heights from the lower
streets will conform to the adopted height which is
24/28 feet.
Mr. Neish responded to concerns that were previously
raised during meetings with residents in the community
and senior citizens. Regarding density, Mr. Neish
• answered why there are more units (100) in the proposed
project than the number of dwellings included in the
-11-
MINUTES
Underground utilities: .Mr. Neish advised that all of
the project's utilities will be underground as well as
the existing power poles existing on the south side of
Fifth Avenue. Landscaping height: He commented that
the City will control the landscaping as contained in
the Conditions of Approval, and that the development's
landscaping will not impair any blue water views.
Project slippage of Sandcastle Drive lots and the
slopes below Sandcastle Drive lots: 'Mr. Neish cited
-12-
x x
c o �
x
- H 1 r 7 T
z c m > E
I z w p; 0 0
M = a = m m
x
December 5, 1985
.
City of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL
INDEX
previously proposed Corona del Mar Cottage homes (80):
that in order to keep the selling price as low as
possible, the applicant felt it appropriate to have
more units than the previously proposed 80 unit plan,
and, further, to satisfy the senior citizens' request
that enough dwellings be available for seniors. He
pointed out that the proposed 100 units is 15 units
less than the City Council had previously approved
under the General Plan designation. Traffic generation:
Mr. Neish advised that the previously proposed Corona
del Mar Cottage Homes would have generated 1,120 trips
per day, whereas the proposed project would generate
750 trips per day, a 370 generated trip reduction. Mr.
Neish opined that the 750 generated trips is a
conservative figure because the 750 trips are based on
7 -1/2 trips per unit. He opined that senior projects
normally generate a much lower generated trip rate, and
after the project is built there won't be the 750
projected trips. He further, commented that seniors
generally avoid driving during the peak morning and
evening hours.
View preservation: Mr. Neish stated that City Council
adopted and approved the General Plan Amendment
requiring "blue, water preservation for a line of site
30 inches above pad elevation homes along Sandcastle
Drive ". He advised that a comprehensive view analysis
by a consulting company was taken at each affected
home, 15 lots, on Sandcastle Drive, and that Patricia
Temple, Environmental Coordinator, supervised the work
to assure that the locations that were used were the
most pertinent and to verify the results of the study.
He said that the results of the study indicate that the
proposed structures, when constructed, have shown that
the finished floor elevations will not obstruct any
blue water views from Sandcastle Drive residents. Mr.
Neish stated that the applicant concurs with modified
Condition No. 50 as submitted by staff.
Underground utilities: .Mr. Neish advised that all of
the project's utilities will be underground as well as
the existing power poles existing on the south side of
Fifth Avenue. Landscaping height: He commented that
the City will control the landscaping as contained in
the Conditions of Approval, and that the development's
landscaping will not impair any blue water views.
Project slippage of Sandcastle Drive lots and the
slopes below Sandcastle Drive lots: 'Mr. Neish cited
-12-
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
Beach
INDEX
that modified Condition No. 50 relates. to the soil
slippage as a result of the project, and during
construction and a short time after construction, the
applicant would be responsible, subsequently the
homeowner's association. Two story structures vs. one
story structures: Mr. Neish opined it is better to
have twenty -five two -story structures as compared to
one hundred one -story structures on the uphill side
where the views are a concern, and that these
structures will not exceed 14 feet in pad elevation.
Property values in Harbor View Hills and old Corona del
Mar: Mr. Neish opined that the proposed project is a
trend setter for senior citizen housing, that senior
citizens will be a compatible neighbor, and that senior
citizens will take care of their property. He stated
that the proposed project was not expected to cost as
much as the Harbor View Hills homes, and that the
proposed project lacks the views of the homes in Harbor
View Hills.
. Mr. Neish concluded his presentation by stating that
the applicant has met or exceeded all of the conditions
that City Council placed on the General Plan Amendment:
proposed 100 units . vs. the allowable 115 units;
preserved the .blue water views for residents on
Sandcastle Drive at the 30 inch level; and reduced
traffic generation compared to the previous Corona del
Mar Cottage homes by 370 generated trips. Mr. Neish
stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and
conditions of approval in Exhibit "A" in addition to
modified Conditions No. 17 and 50, and added Condition
No. 61.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner
Koppelman, Mr. Neish replied that the applicant would
agree ,to bonding the project to assure that soil'
slippage would not happen; that the affordable unit
requirement would be met at the Baywood Apartment
complex; and that the applicant is considering a unit
cost between $170,000.00 to $200,000.00.
Commissioner Turner and Mr. Neish discussed the
development's future landscaping controls over a long
period of time, and the responsibilities of the
homeowner's association to control the landscaping so
. as not to impair Harbor View Hills homeowners' views.
Mr. Neish commented that the applicant will plant
low -lying landscaping, and that the CC &R's will contain
landscaping requirements.
-13-
X s
...
c °
o
X
- C
o
V
m
z c
m
o m
z
m a
`_0
M m
a
o
z r °
° ; °°
m s
x
City of
Z a
z
s z*
m
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
Beach
INDEX
that modified Condition No. 50 relates. to the soil
slippage as a result of the project, and during
construction and a short time after construction, the
applicant would be responsible, subsequently the
homeowner's association. Two story structures vs. one
story structures: Mr. Neish opined it is better to
have twenty -five two -story structures as compared to
one hundred one -story structures on the uphill side
where the views are a concern, and that these
structures will not exceed 14 feet in pad elevation.
Property values in Harbor View Hills and old Corona del
Mar: Mr. Neish opined that the proposed project is a
trend setter for senior citizen housing, that senior
citizens will be a compatible neighbor, and that senior
citizens will take care of their property. He stated
that the proposed project was not expected to cost as
much as the Harbor View Hills homes, and that the
proposed project lacks the views of the homes in Harbor
View Hills.
. Mr. Neish concluded his presentation by stating that
the applicant has met or exceeded all of the conditions
that City Council placed on the General Plan Amendment:
proposed 100 units . vs. the allowable 115 units;
preserved the .blue water views for residents on
Sandcastle Drive at the 30 inch level; and reduced
traffic generation compared to the previous Corona del
Mar Cottage homes by 370 generated trips. Mr. Neish
stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and
conditions of approval in Exhibit "A" in addition to
modified Conditions No. 17 and 50, and added Condition
No. 61.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner
Koppelman, Mr. Neish replied that the applicant would
agree ,to bonding the project to assure that soil'
slippage would not happen; that the affordable unit
requirement would be met at the Baywood Apartment
complex; and that the applicant is considering a unit
cost between $170,000.00 to $200,000.00.
Commissioner Turner and Mr. Neish discussed the
development's future landscaping controls over a long
period of time, and the responsibilities of the
homeowner's association to control the landscaping so
. as not to impair Harbor View Hills homeowners' views.
Mr. Neish commented that the applicant will plant
low -lying landscaping, and that the CC &R's will contain
landscaping requirements.
-13-
MISSIONERS
MINUTES
x
December 5, 1985
H
z c
m v
y
m
m
z
c z
w
v! 0
r
0
m
a
=
a
City,
of
Newport
Beach
Commissioner Turner and Mr. Neish discussed subsidence,
how long the proposed bond would be in effect and the
responsibilities for bonding. In response to
Commissioner Turner's question regarding a soils
report, Mr. Webb explained that a Grading Consultant
will take tests prior to the issuance of a grading
permit and that the Grading Consultant will make
recommendations regarding what types of protection are
necessary, if protection is necessary.
Mr. Ed Williams, 105 North Bayfront, President of
OASIS, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr.
Williams stated his approval for the proposed
development, and the desire of 260 senior citizens to
purchase the proposed units adjacent to OASIS. He
described the manner in which the project will affect
Corona del Mar, how the development is being developed
for the comfort and convenience for senior citizens,
and the amenities for senior. citizens. Mr. Williams
further commented that Friends of OASIS, residents on
• 11111111 Sandcastle Drive, and The Bren Company have had many
meetings during the past six months to discuss and
resolve their differences.
Mr. Ken Wasmann, 944 Sandcastle Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission. Mr. Wasmann stated that he
supports the project; however, he cited several of his
concerns: on -site lighting will be eye level with his
windows, that the boundary fence remain between OASIS
and Sandcastle Drive homeowners so that the children
will not use the area as a passageway, that CC &R's
regulate recreational vehicles and trucks, a study of
the peak traffic at the intersection of Sandcastle
Drive and Marguerite Avenue, and the chimney stack
ridgeline. In response to questions posed by Chairman
Person, Mr. Wasmann replied that the aforementioned
fence is at the bottom of the slope, and that he would
like to have the fence constructed again after the
project is completed. Mr. Webb informed Mr. Wassman
that the the exterior street lighting fixtures proposed
have a pole top mounting with a lid that directs the
light down. He said that the height of the poles are
15 feet to 18 feet, and he commented that the street
lights will be designed so that the light will not be
in the site plane.
• I I I ! I I I I Mr. Boyd Stillings, 216 Dahlia Street, appeared before
1 the Planning Commission stating his support for the
proposed project.
-14-
ROLL
MINUTES
o
December 5, 1985
C
x
.
V
M
i s
c
m
49
z
a s
a
z r c
x
M
_
x = T
m
City
of
Newport
Beach
Mr. Al Tice, 912 Sandcastle Drive, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Tice stated his concerns
regarding the chimney stacks and the boundary fence.
Mr. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Street, President of the
Corona del Mar Community Association, appeared before
the Planning Commission. Mr. Nichols invited
representatives of The Bren Company to a meeting at
OASIS at 10:00 a.m., December 14, 1985, to present the
proposed project to residents of the community. Mr.
Nichols stated his opposition to the proposed project,
and he outlined why the previously proposed Corona del
Mar Cottage Homes project at a density of 90 units with
30 foot x 120 foot lots for senior citizens would be a
better use of the property than the proposed project:
property values would have a better appreciation; there
would be more open space for each of the dwellings; the
use of alleys for storage purposes; better access onto
Fifth Avenue without having curb cuts. He commented
that the proposed project will look like a huge fort on
the hill with block houses and walls; that there will
be five curb cuts onto Fifth Avenue that have not
previously been allowed; the Corona del Mar Cottage
Homes would have the.same street pattern as in Corona
del Mar; that the Corona del Mar Cottage Homes would
have more to offer to the residents and to the
residents of Harbor View Hills; and he said that the
proposed project has the sidewalk up to the garage
without any setbacks. Mr. Nichols stated that the
proposed project only satisfies a low profile. Chairman
Person reminded Mr. Nichols that Mr. Nichols had
testified against the previously proposed Corona del
Mar Cottage Homes. Mr. Nichols stated that the
previous project was not restricted to the elderly, and
there was high traffic generation. Mr. Nichols stated
that he did not dislike the Corona del Mar Cottage
Homes concept, but he believed that the previously
proposed Brisa del Mar, Jasmine Park, and Corona del
Mar Cottage Home projects along Fifth Avenue should
give adequate park donations.
Mr. Tyke Camaras, 932 Sandcastle Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission. Mr. Camaras stated that he
has a concern that if the boundary fence is.eliminated
there will be a continuity to the proposed project and
• Harbor View Hills, and he recommended that a wall or
fence be built for security purposes as well as to
divide the properties. He opined that the property
-15-
COMMISSIONERS
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
values in Harbor View Hills will diminish because the
structures have nothing in common. Mr. Camaras stated
that he believes that the proposed project will be good
for the senior citizens and that the senior housing is
needed. Mr. Camaras further stated his concern
regarding security of the senior citizen's project, the
increase in traffic, and that the Harbor View Hills
residents should be protected by an insurance guarantee
to protect their property.
Mr. Richard F. Russell, 888 Sandcastle Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Russell presented
pictures and a diagram describing views from Sandcastle
Drive to the proposed .projects roof line, and to the
blue water. Mr. Russell expressed the following
concerns regarding the proposed project and the affect
that the development will have on the Sandcastle Drive
homes: that dirt will be added to increase the present
site; the unsightly view planes will lower property
values; to limit rooflines and smokestacks to top of
grade; underground utilities should be required;
developers should provide Sandcastle Drive. homeowners
with slide insurance; and the environmental impact
report does not address possible slippage on Sandcastle
Drive slope or view impairment.
Mr. Russell recommended the following conditions for
granting any present or future zoning and construction
permits to develop the proposed project:
Any development on 5th Avenue, shall not extend
above the top of the Sandcastle slope. (This
specifically prohibits the proposed request that
would permit roofline and smokestacks to extend 30 .
inches or 2 1/2 feet above the Sandcastle slope).
All onsite and offsite utilities must be
underground.
A bond to protect against slippage or .earth
movement must be provided to protect Sandcastle
homeowners for any damage to Sandcastle lots and
improvements thereon due to excavation or
vibration any time in the future.
CC &R's must limit buildings, smokestacks, and
landscaping, not to exceed the top of Sandcastle
slope.
-16-
x �
c o
c
m
i
z
m a
a=
r m x
m
O
M
O
ro s
Z a
z
s= r
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
values in Harbor View Hills will diminish because the
structures have nothing in common. Mr. Camaras stated
that he believes that the proposed project will be good
for the senior citizens and that the senior housing is
needed. Mr. Camaras further stated his concern
regarding security of the senior citizen's project, the
increase in traffic, and that the Harbor View Hills
residents should be protected by an insurance guarantee
to protect their property.
Mr. Richard F. Russell, 888 Sandcastle Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Russell presented
pictures and a diagram describing views from Sandcastle
Drive to the proposed .projects roof line, and to the
blue water. Mr. Russell expressed the following
concerns regarding the proposed project and the affect
that the development will have on the Sandcastle Drive
homes: that dirt will be added to increase the present
site; the unsightly view planes will lower property
values; to limit rooflines and smokestacks to top of
grade; underground utilities should be required;
developers should provide Sandcastle Drive. homeowners
with slide insurance; and the environmental impact
report does not address possible slippage on Sandcastle
Drive slope or view impairment.
Mr. Russell recommended the following conditions for
granting any present or future zoning and construction
permits to develop the proposed project:
Any development on 5th Avenue, shall not extend
above the top of the Sandcastle slope. (This
specifically prohibits the proposed request that
would permit roofline and smokestacks to extend 30 .
inches or 2 1/2 feet above the Sandcastle slope).
All onsite and offsite utilities must be
underground.
A bond to protect against slippage or .earth
movement must be provided to protect Sandcastle
homeowners for any damage to Sandcastle lots and
improvements thereon due to excavation or
vibration any time in the future.
CC &R's must limit buildings, smokestacks, and
landscaping, not to exceed the top of Sandcastle
slope.
-16-
COMMISSIONERS
ROLL
•
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and
reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
Dr. James DeLamater, 2312 Pacific Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission supporting the proposed
project by stating that the development is the best
utilization of ground elevation, a distribution of
homes that will accommodate 100 families with a low
transportation index, and will best serve the senior
citizens in Corona del Mar.
Mr. Abe Etingen, Sandcastle Drive, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Etingen expressed his concern
regarding the drainage. ditch that originates in Buck
Gully into little Corona del Mar. Mr. Webb briefly
described the drainage system that runs through the
subject area of Buck Gully and Sandcastle Drive. He
replied that the City has done an initial study
regarding the drainage system, and will be,looking into
more of the details in the final plans regarding the
drainage ditch at the bottom of Buck Gully and the
storm drain pipe that runs through Sandcastle Drive.
Mr. William Kull, 950 Sandcastle Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission. He commented that the
aforementioned storm drain pipe and the water line run
through his property and he opined that the property
could be unstable.
Mr. Charles McCann, 3700 Seaview, appeared before the
Planning Commission supporting the proposed project.
Mr. McCann stated that retired senior citizens make a
contribution to the community, and that there is a need
senior housing.
Mr. Matt Hall, 1654 Westcliff Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission supporting the proposed
project. Mr. Hall stated ..that there is a unanimous
opinion that the proposed senior housing will be the
best in the area, that the area is very desirable, and
that the price is affordable for senior citizens. Mr.
Hall commented that senior citizens will keep the area
attractively landscaped.
Mr. William Nelson, 882 Sandcastle Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Nelson commented
is that he supports the previously stated conditions
presented by Mr. Russell, and he specifically pointed
out his concern regarding the height of the proposed
project roof line and the chimney stacks.
-17-
x x
c o �
x
m
z c
m)
m z
m a
a
z r o x
C 2
O; 0 0
a m
0
O
m) w T
Z a
z
a a w m
ROLL
•
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and
reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
Dr. James DeLamater, 2312 Pacific Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission supporting the proposed
project by stating that the development is the best
utilization of ground elevation, a distribution of
homes that will accommodate 100 families with a low
transportation index, and will best serve the senior
citizens in Corona del Mar.
Mr. Abe Etingen, Sandcastle Drive, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Etingen expressed his concern
regarding the drainage. ditch that originates in Buck
Gully into little Corona del Mar. Mr. Webb briefly
described the drainage system that runs through the
subject area of Buck Gully and Sandcastle Drive. He
replied that the City has done an initial study
regarding the drainage system, and will be,looking into
more of the details in the final plans regarding the
drainage ditch at the bottom of Buck Gully and the
storm drain pipe that runs through Sandcastle Drive.
Mr. William Kull, 950 Sandcastle Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission. He commented that the
aforementioned storm drain pipe and the water line run
through his property and he opined that the property
could be unstable.
Mr. Charles McCann, 3700 Seaview, appeared before the
Planning Commission supporting the proposed project.
Mr. McCann stated that retired senior citizens make a
contribution to the community, and that there is a need
senior housing.
Mr. Matt Hall, 1654 Westcliff Drive, appeared before
the Planning Commission supporting the proposed
project. Mr. Hall stated ..that there is a unanimous
opinion that the proposed senior housing will be the
best in the area, that the area is very desirable, and
that the price is affordable for senior citizens. Mr.
Hall commented that senior citizens will keep the area
attractively landscaped.
Mr. William Nelson, 882 Sandcastle Drive, appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Nelson commented
is that he supports the previously stated conditions
presented by Mr. Russell, and he specifically pointed
out his concern regarding the height of the proposed
project roof line and the chimney stacks.
-17-
MINUTES
INDEX
Mr. David Neish, reappeared before the Planning
Commission. Mr. Neish referred to the residents on
Sandcastle Drive's concern regarding the chimney stacks
impairing their views. He cited that City Council
previously adopted a condition of approval on the
subject General Plan Amendment requiring blue water
view preservation for a line -of -site 30 inches above
pad elevation of homes along Sandcastle Drive. He
opined that chimneys were not specified by the City
Council, and that chimney stacks could be considered an
architectural feature that can exceed the 30 inch
level. Mr. Neish advised that the applicant will do
everything possible to remedy any chimney stacks that
penetrate the 30 inch views.
Mr. Neish advised that the applicant will underground
utilities even though the applicant is not responsible
to underground the utilities. Mr. Neish commented that
the applicant will cooperate with the neighborhood to
diffuse the lighting. He said that the applicant will
• provide a quality barrier between the proposed project
and the Sandcastle Drive lots by a fence, wall or
landscaping. Mr. Neish stated that the applicant and
the City will work together so that a slippage does not
occur.
Chairman Person asked what is the chimney height
indicated on the present drawings? Mr. Hewicker
replied that at 10 feet of horizontal distance, the
chimney must be 2 feet above the ridge of the roof.
Commissioner Turner cited that the subject chimneys
will not show on the view plane without standing on the
edge of the patio looking straight down. He said that
the floor elevations on the street next to the toe of
the slope is approximately 30 feet higher than the
elevations on Fifth Avenue. Discussion followed
between Commissioner Turner and Mr. Neish regarding the
possibility of lowering the-grading plan.
In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr.
Neish replied that the finished floor elevation to the
ridge on the pad elevation is 14 feet. Mr. Hewicker
cited that there is a difference of between 16 feet and
19 feet pad elevation of the finished floor elevation
on the proposed project and the yard elevations on the
Sandcastle Drive lots, and he described how the
chimneys will not encroach into the blue water view.
The public hearing was closed at this time.
-18-
'7
x
T
December 5, 1985
C o
a
9
� y
m
i s
m
T
a
m a
a=
r 0
z
2 9=
O Z
City
of
Newport
Beach
OZ,.
_
INDEX
Mr. David Neish, reappeared before the Planning
Commission. Mr. Neish referred to the residents on
Sandcastle Drive's concern regarding the chimney stacks
impairing their views. He cited that City Council
previously adopted a condition of approval on the
subject General Plan Amendment requiring blue water
view preservation for a line -of -site 30 inches above
pad elevation of homes along Sandcastle Drive. He
opined that chimneys were not specified by the City
Council, and that chimney stacks could be considered an
architectural feature that can exceed the 30 inch
level. Mr. Neish advised that the applicant will do
everything possible to remedy any chimney stacks that
penetrate the 30 inch views.
Mr. Neish advised that the applicant will underground
utilities even though the applicant is not responsible
to underground the utilities. Mr. Neish commented that
the applicant will cooperate with the neighborhood to
diffuse the lighting. He said that the applicant will
• provide a quality barrier between the proposed project
and the Sandcastle Drive lots by a fence, wall or
landscaping. Mr. Neish stated that the applicant and
the City will work together so that a slippage does not
occur.
Chairman Person asked what is the chimney height
indicated on the present drawings? Mr. Hewicker
replied that at 10 feet of horizontal distance, the
chimney must be 2 feet above the ridge of the roof.
Commissioner Turner cited that the subject chimneys
will not show on the view plane without standing on the
edge of the patio looking straight down. He said that
the floor elevations on the street next to the toe of
the slope is approximately 30 feet higher than the
elevations on Fifth Avenue. Discussion followed
between Commissioner Turner and Mr. Neish regarding the
possibility of lowering the-grading plan.
In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr.
Neish replied that the finished floor elevation to the
ridge on the pad elevation is 14 feet. Mr. Hewicker
cited that there is a difference of between 16 feet and
19 feet pad elevation of the finished floor elevation
on the proposed project and the yard elevations on the
Sandcastle Drive lots, and he described how the
chimneys will not encroach into the blue water view.
The public hearing was closed at this time.
-18-
COMMISSIONERS
o
December 5, 1985
It
x
y
V
�
z c
m
Z m
z
C z
N
p 9 0
l
0
m
City
MM 9=
x
of
Newport
Beach
z
MINUTES
ROLL .CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INDEX
Mr. Webb cited that the CC &R's regulate the
enforcement of the recreational vehicles. Mr. Hewicker
pointed out that the proposed project's homeowners
association will be responsible to maintain the slope
area and, therefore, will have to penetrate the fenced
area. Mr. Hewicker stated that a condition will be
added to control the exterior street lighting system.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn
regarding the number of houses on Sandcastle Drive that
would be affected by the roof line no higher than the
existing grade of the proposed project, Ms. Temple
replied that all of the roof lines and chimneys of the
entire development will be below the elevation of any
house on Sandcastle Drive.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn
regarding the mitigation measure at the intersection of
Marguerite Avenue and East Coast Highway, Mr. Webb
replied that the proposed concept is that there will be
I I I I I I I three lanes going approximately one block easterly of
Marguerite Avenue, and transitioning into two lanes
during a portion of the next block.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Koppelman regarding off -site affordable housing and the
affordable unit breakdown at the Haywood Apartments,
Ms. Temple replied that approximately 12 affordable
housing agreements have been executed for the 68 unit
pool on the Baywood Apartment expansion site. Ms.
Temple stated that if the Planning Commission approves
the proposed condition of approval as worded, 10 units
would be included from this project, and there are
approved conditions in tentative tract maps to include
8 units from the Big Canyon Area 16 project. Discussion
followed between Commissioner Kurlander and Ms. Temple
regarding affordable housing requirements. Robert
Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator, advised that
the previously imposed 108 affordable housing
requirement for the proposed project included
consideration of the fact that the City previously
designated the adjacent Buck Gully parcel as open space
and that the City was attempting to balance its'
affordable housing goals and open space goals.
I ( I ( I I I ( In response to questions posed by Commissioner Goff,
Mr. Webb explained how the addition of an easterly
bound lane on East Coast Highway could alleviate the
-19-
CGM MISSIONERS
x 0
C o
E y v m
z c m s m z
Z A Z r 0 S
C
M Z 0 0 i
Substitute
Motion
is
MISSIONERS
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
mitigation measures to prevent soil slippage than the
applicant shall be required to install same."
Commissioner Koppelman agreed to the recommended
Condition as Condition No. 62. Mr. Webb replied that
the proposed Condition No. 62 would be agreeable to
staff.
Commissioner Koppelman requested Condition No. 63 be
added to the motion stating that the proposed project's
CCex's recommend that "the homeowner's association
shall maintain the landscaping to preserve the blue
water view of the Sandcastle Drive homeowners view
plane ". Commissioner Koppelman recommended Condition
No. 64 require underground utilities. In response to
Commissioner Koppelman's request regarding a condition
for on -site lighting, .Ms. Temple recommended that
Condition No. 65 state "on -site lighting shall be
designed so as to eliminate light glare and spillage in
adjacent residential areas. Light sources shall be
concealed from adjacent neighboring residential areas.
Compliance with this condition shall be verified by a
licensed electrial engineer ".
Commissioner Eichenhofer advised that she would accept
suggested Conditions No. 17, 50 and 61; however, she
would not accept Condition No. 62 because Condition No.
27 of Tentative. Map of Tract No. 11949 states that the
Grading Ordinance requires the Grading Engineer to
receive soils reports from engineers prior to grading.
Following a discussion period regarding the necessity
for Condition No. 62, Commissioner Koppelman withdrew
Condition No. 62, and Commissioner Eichenhofer
recommended that Condition No. 65 replace Condition No.
62.
Commissioner Eichenhofer advised that she would accept
Condition No. 64 regarding underground utilities, and
that she would not accept amended Condition No. 58
requesting 158 affordable housing instead of the
proposed condition requesting 108 affordable housing.
Commissioner Koppelman made a substitute motion to
x incorporate Conditions No. 1, 17, 50, 61, 62, 63, and
64 as set forth by Commissioner Eichenhofer with the
additional change of Condition No. 58 requiring 158
affordable housing to be provided off -site in the
Baywood Apartments. Commissioner Koppelman reasoned
that the 80 unit Corona del Mar Cottage Homes have
-21-
MINUTES
INDEX
�x
c o
�
x
_
� �
m
z c C
m
M
y m
z
m a
v
z r
x
C S
N
O T+
0
O O
M m
O
m D
T
z D
=
y z
r M m
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
mitigation measures to prevent soil slippage than the
applicant shall be required to install same."
Commissioner Koppelman agreed to the recommended
Condition as Condition No. 62. Mr. Webb replied that
the proposed Condition No. 62 would be agreeable to
staff.
Commissioner Koppelman requested Condition No. 63 be
added to the motion stating that the proposed project's
CCex's recommend that "the homeowner's association
shall maintain the landscaping to preserve the blue
water view of the Sandcastle Drive homeowners view
plane ". Commissioner Koppelman recommended Condition
No. 64 require underground utilities. In response to
Commissioner Koppelman's request regarding a condition
for on -site lighting, .Ms. Temple recommended that
Condition No. 65 state "on -site lighting shall be
designed so as to eliminate light glare and spillage in
adjacent residential areas. Light sources shall be
concealed from adjacent neighboring residential areas.
Compliance with this condition shall be verified by a
licensed electrial engineer ".
Commissioner Eichenhofer advised that she would accept
suggested Conditions No. 17, 50 and 61; however, she
would not accept Condition No. 62 because Condition No.
27 of Tentative. Map of Tract No. 11949 states that the
Grading Ordinance requires the Grading Engineer to
receive soils reports from engineers prior to grading.
Following a discussion period regarding the necessity
for Condition No. 62, Commissioner Koppelman withdrew
Condition No. 62, and Commissioner Eichenhofer
recommended that Condition No. 65 replace Condition No.
62.
Commissioner Eichenhofer advised that she would accept
Condition No. 64 regarding underground utilities, and
that she would not accept amended Condition No. 58
requesting 158 affordable housing instead of the
proposed condition requesting 108 affordable housing.
Commissioner Koppelman made a substitute motion to
x incorporate Conditions No. 1, 17, 50, 61, 62, 63, and
64 as set forth by Commissioner Eichenhofer with the
additional change of Condition No. 58 requiring 158
affordable housing to be provided off -site in the
Baywood Apartments. Commissioner Koppelman reasoned
that the 80 unit Corona del Mar Cottage Homes have
-21-
MINUTES
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
x x
December
5, 1985
c o �
x
z c m i
regarding her reasons for the change from 10% to 158,
C Z 0 O Z O O
i Z a Z a a m
City of
Newport
Beach
Commissioner Koppelman stated that the proposed project
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
increased in density to 100 homes, and she maintained
that it would be a responsible position to take to
require the additional 5 affordable housing units as
they are available in the Haywood Apartments.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Goff
regarding amended Condition No. 58 and the number of
units to County median- income families and the number
of units affordable to County low- income families, Ms.
Temple replied that the increase from 108 affordable
housing units to 15% affordable housing units in
Haywood Apartments would favor the low- income families,
4 median- income units and 11 low- income units.
Commissioner Kurlander opined that the applicant had
given some bonus on this property because the applicant
was relinquishing development rights on the Buck Gully
property, and that property went to recreational open
space which was a compromise to give the applicant a
bonus on the property without any further bonus of
affordable units. Chairman Person agreed with
Commissioner Kurlander.
Commissioner Turner stated that the proposed project is
specifically limited to a special group of individuals
in the community, and that the 10% allocation of
affordable housing is a reasonable trade -off.
Commissioner Winburn explained that she will support
the substitute motion because the proposed project is
not an affordable project and that there are many
senior citizens that cannot afford $170,000.00 to
$200,000.00 dwellings, and that there are many senior
-22-
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff
regarding her reasons for the change from 10% to 158,
Commissioner Koppelman stated that the proposed project
is a higher density project of 100 units than the
previously proposed Corona del Mar Cottage Homes of 80
units. She explained that the previously proposed
•
Brisa del Mar project in Corona del Mar proposed a 20%
affordable rate to be transfered into Baywood
Apartments, that the proposed project is a less intense
project than Brisa del Mar, but more intense than the
Corona del Mar Cottage Homes. Commissioner Koppelman
explained that the 158 affordable housing rate is
between 10% minimum rate of affordable housing and the
208 requested on Brisa del Mar.
Commissioner Kurlander opined that the applicant had
given some bonus on this property because the applicant
was relinquishing development rights on the Buck Gully
property, and that property went to recreational open
space which was a compromise to give the applicant a
bonus on the property without any further bonus of
affordable units. Chairman Person agreed with
Commissioner Kurlander.
Commissioner Turner stated that the proposed project is
specifically limited to a special group of individuals
in the community, and that the 10% allocation of
affordable housing is a reasonable trade -off.
Commissioner Winburn explained that she will support
the substitute motion because the proposed project is
not an affordable project and that there are many
senior citizens that cannot afford $170,000.00 to
$200,000.00 dwellings, and that there are many senior
-22-
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
Beach
INDEX
citizens that need housing. She emphasized that an
increase of 108 affordable housing to 15% affordable
housing is an increase of only 5 units.
Chairman Person advised that, he will not support the
substitute motion because of the density bonus of the
Buck Gully dedication in which the City took a
substantial portion of the open space. He commented
that the Planning Commission has the discretion to
require 10% to 30% of the units for affordable housing.
Ayes x x The substitute motion was voted on to amend Condition
Noes x x x x No. 1, amend Condition No. 17, amend Condition No. 50,
amend Condition No. 58, add Condition No. 61, add
Condition No. 62, add Condition No. 63, and add
Condition No. 64. Motion voted on, MOTION DENIED.
All Ayes
X X
Motion was voted on to approve Environmental Document,
n
Amendment No. 624, Traffic Study, and Tentative Map of
r v
m
Tract No. 11949, subject to.the findings and conditions
•
Z c
m
y m
Z
a s
°Z
x
y
Z r
°;
P
°
2
M
P
m s
r
m
°City
of
Z 9
Z
y Z
T
m
MINUTES
December 5, 1985
Beach
INDEX
citizens that need housing. She emphasized that an
increase of 108 affordable housing to 15% affordable
housing is an increase of only 5 units.
Chairman Person advised that, he will not support the
substitute motion because of the density bonus of the
Buck Gully dedication in which the City took a
substantial portion of the open space. He commented
that the Planning Commission has the discretion to
require 10% to 30% of the units for affordable housing.
Ayes x x The substitute motion was voted on to amend Condition
Noes x x x x No. 1, amend Condition No. 17, amend Condition No. 50,
amend Condition No. 58, add Condition No. 61, add
Condition No. 62, add Condition No. 63, and add
Condition No. 64. Motion voted on, MOTION DENIED.
All Ayes
Motion was voted on to approve Environmental Document,
Amendment No. 624, Traffic Study, and Tentative Map of
Tract No. 11949, subject to.the findings and conditions
•
of approval is Exhibit "A ", and to amend Condition No.
1 of the Traffic Study: "The circulation system
improvement shall be subject to the approval of the
City Traffic Engineer, and shall not cause any loss of
on- street parking on East Coast Highway "; Condition No.
17: "that lots C, D, E, and F be cared for and
maintained by the homeowners association so as to
protect the slopes from erosion and deterioration ";
Condition No. 50: "the development shall be in
substantial conformance with the approved plot plan,
floor plans, elevations and sections. The final
grading plan shall reflect the elevations shown on the
plot plan which will, in combination with the design
concept of the structures insure the view preservation
required by the General Plan "; Condition No. 61: "All
structures on the project site shall have
non - combustible roof coverings "; Condition No. 62:
"On -site lighting shall be designed so as to eliminate
light glare and spillage in adjacent residential areas.
Light sources shall be concealed from adjacent
neighboring residential areas. Compliance with this
condition shall be verified by a licensed electrical
engineer "; Condition No. 63: "A provision to the
CC &R's that the homeowners association shall maintain
the landscaping to preserve a blue water view of the
Sandcastle Drive homeowners view plane "; Condition No.
•
64: "requiring all underground utilities ". MOTION
CARRIED.
-23-
MINUTES
INDEX
A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
Approve the draft Environmental Impact Report for the
Corona del Mar Seniors Project and supportive mate-
rials; recommend that the City Council certify the
Environmental Document is complete and make the Find-
ings listed below:
FINDINGS:
1. That the environmental document has been prepared
in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and
City Policy.
2. That the contents of this environmental document
have been considered in the various decisions on
the project.
3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the
proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures
0 11111111 discussed in the environmental document have been
incorporated into the proposed project.
B. AMENDMENT NO. 624
Approve Amendment No. 624 establishing Planned Communi-
ty District Regulations and adopting a Planned Communi-
ty Development Plan for the Corona del Mar Seniors
Project; also amending portions of Districting Maps.NO.
32 and 51 reclassifying said property from the R -1 -B
District to the P -C (Planned Community) District; and,
recommend to the City Council approval of said amend-
ment.
C. TRAFFIC STUDY
Approve the Traffic Study and make the following
Findings, based upon the facts and subject to the
Conditions listed below:
FINDINGS:
• 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which
analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the
circulation system in accordance with Chapter
15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City
Policy S -1.
-24-
X o
0I
December
5; 1985
f
s
m
y
9
9
z c
m
a m
z
`=
W a
W
z
°r
a=
°
T
°I
m
City
Y
of
Newport
P
Beach
INDEX
A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
Approve the draft Environmental Impact Report for the
Corona del Mar Seniors Project and supportive mate-
rials; recommend that the City Council certify the
Environmental Document is complete and make the Find-
ings listed below:
FINDINGS:
1. That the environmental document has been prepared
in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and
City Policy.
2. That the contents of this environmental document
have been considered in the various decisions on
the project.
3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the
proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures
0 11111111 discussed in the environmental document have been
incorporated into the proposed project.
B. AMENDMENT NO. 624
Approve Amendment No. 624 establishing Planned Communi-
ty District Regulations and adopting a Planned Communi-
ty Development Plan for the Corona del Mar Seniors
Project; also amending portions of Districting Maps.NO.
32 and 51 reclassifying said property from the R -1 -B
District to the P -C (Planned Community) District; and,
recommend to the City Council approval of said amend-
ment.
C. TRAFFIC STUDY
Approve the Traffic Study and make the following
Findings, based upon the facts and subject to the
Conditions listed below:
FINDINGS:
• 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which
analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the
circulation system in accordance with Chapter
15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City
Policy S -1.
-24-
COM
•
0
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the proj-
ect- generated traffic will be greater than one
percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5
hour peak period on any leg of two critical
intersections, and will add to an unsatisfactory
level of traffic service at the two critical
intersections, which will have an Intersection
Capacity Utilization of more than .9000.
3. That a circulation system improvement has been
suggested which will improve the level of traffic
service to an acceptable level at the critical
intersection.
CONDITION:
1. That prior to occupancy of any portion of the
project facilities, the circulation system im-
provement described in the staff report to the
intersection at East Coast Highway and Marguerite
Avenue and at MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin
Hills Road will be in place (unless subsequent
project approval requires modification thereto).
The circulation system improvement shall be
subject to the approval of the City Traffic
Engineer, and shall not cause any loss of
on- street parking on East Coast Highway.
D. TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 11949
Recommend that the City Council approve the Tentative
Map of Tract No. 11949 subject to the following Find-
ings and Conditions of Approval:
FINDINGS:
1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances
of the City, all applicable general or specific
plans.
2. That the Planning Commission is satisfied with the
plan of the subdivision as recommended.
3. That the subdivision, as recommended, presents no
problems from a planning standpoint.
-25-
MINUTES
x x
C
F
a v
=
z c
M m
a m
z
W a
a
,
X
2
A m
0
m a
r
Z a
Z
a Z
T m
•
0
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the proj-
ect- generated traffic will be greater than one
percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5
hour peak period on any leg of two critical
intersections, and will add to an unsatisfactory
level of traffic service at the two critical
intersections, which will have an Intersection
Capacity Utilization of more than .9000.
3. That a circulation system improvement has been
suggested which will improve the level of traffic
service to an acceptable level at the critical
intersection.
CONDITION:
1. That prior to occupancy of any portion of the
project facilities, the circulation system im-
provement described in the staff report to the
intersection at East Coast Highway and Marguerite
Avenue and at MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin
Hills Road will be in place (unless subsequent
project approval requires modification thereto).
The circulation system improvement shall be
subject to the approval of the City Traffic
Engineer, and shall not cause any loss of
on- street parking on East Coast Highway.
D. TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 11949
Recommend that the City Council approve the Tentative
Map of Tract No. 11949 subject to the following Find-
ings and Conditions of Approval:
FINDINGS:
1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances
of the City, all applicable general or specific
plans.
2. That the Planning Commission is satisfied with the
plan of the subdivision as recommended.
3. That the subdivision, as recommended, presents no
problems from a planning standpoint.
-25-
MINUTES
MINUTES
I J I I I( I
COMMISSIONERS
X z
C
O n
x
a m
z c m s m z
ff m a a z r m x
A m O m D r OT I limit
z a z a z r m
4. That the site is physically suitable for the
recommended density of development.
5. That the design of the recommended subdivision or
the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
6. That the design of the recommended 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
subdivision.
7. That the discharge of waste from the recommended
subdivision into an ,existing community sewer
system will not result in violation of existing
requirements prescribed by the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7
of the Water Code.
S. That the recommended subdivision is consistent,
with the Newport Beach General Plan, and the
policies contained therein.
CONDITIONS:
1. That a final map be recorded.
2. That all improvements be constructed as required
by ordinance and the Public Works Department.
3. That each dwelling unit be served with an indi-
vidual water service and sewer lateral connection
to the public water and sewer systems unless
otherwise approved by the Public Works Department.
4. That the intersection of the streets and drives be
designed to provide sight distance for a speed of
25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscaping, walls and
other obstructions shall be considered in the
sight distance requirements. Landscaping within
the sight distance line shall not exceed twen-
ty -four inches in height. The sight distance
requirement may be approximately modified at
non - critical locations, subject to approval of the
City Traffic Engineer.
-26-
5; 1985
December 5
City o
of N
Newport B
Beach
O n
x
a m
z c m s m z
ff m a a z r m x
A m O m D r OT I limit
z a z a z r m
4. That the site is physically suitable for the
recommended density of development.
5. That the design of the recommended subdivision or
the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
6. That the design of the recommended 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
subdivision.
7. That the discharge of waste from the recommended
subdivision into an ,existing community sewer
system will not result in violation of existing
requirements prescribed by the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7
of the Water Code.
S. That the recommended subdivision is consistent,
with the Newport Beach General Plan, and the
policies contained therein.
CONDITIONS:
1. That a final map be recorded.
2. That all improvements be constructed as required
by ordinance and the Public Works Department.
3. That each dwelling unit be served with an indi-
vidual water service and sewer lateral connection
to the public water and sewer systems unless
otherwise approved by the Public Works Department.
4. That the intersection of the streets and drives be
designed to provide sight distance for a speed of
25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscaping, walls and
other obstructions shall be considered in the
sight distance requirements. Landscaping within
the sight distance line shall not exceed twen-
ty -four inches in height. The sight distance
requirement may be approximately modified at
non - critical locations, subject to approval of the
City Traffic Engineer.
-26-
COMMISSIONERS
x x
n
A 9
=
y y r v
2 C T D T
z
=
C A A= r
O 2
C z V' O S
O O
i n o m D
z A z
r m
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX
•
5. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompa-
nying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory
completion of the public improvements, if it is
desired to obtain a building permit or record the
tract map prior to completion of the public
improvements.
6. That the water capital improvement fees be paid.
7. That street, drainage and utility improvement be
shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a
licensed civil engineer.
8. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation
and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to
further review by the Traffic Engineer and that
these plans be approved prior to the issuance of
the final site grading plan.
9. That the design of the private streets and drives
conform with the City's Private Street Policy
(L -4), except as otherwise approved by the Public
Works Department. The basic roadway width shall
be a minimum of 32 feet. The location, width,
configuration, and concept of the private street
and drive system shall be subject to further
review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer.
10. That asphalt or concrete access roads shall be
provided to all public utilities, vaults, man-
holes, and junction structure locations, with
width to be approved by the Public Works Depart-
ment.
11. That a hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared
and approved by the Public Works Department, along
with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain
facilities for the on -site improvements prior to
recording of the final map. Any modifications or
extensions to the existing storm drain, water and
sewer systems shown to be required by the study
shall be the responsibility of the developer. A
storm drain shall be extended on site to pick up
drainage from the proposed tract.
12. That prior to issuance of any grading or building
permits for the site, the applicant shall demon-
strate to the satisfaction of the Public Works
-27-
ROLL
MINUTES
Department and the Planning Department that
adequate sewer facilities will be available for
the project. Such demonstration shall include
verification from the City's Utilities Department
and the County Sanitation District.
13. That County Sanitation District fees be paid.prior
to issuance of any building permits.
14. That a paved access road be constructed by the
project proponent to Buck Gully from the corner of
Fifth Avenue and Poppy Avenue for access to City
utilities, with the design to be approved by the
Public Works Department.
15. That easements for public emergency and security
ingress, egress, and public utilities purposes on
all private streets be dedicated to the City and
that all easements be shown on the tract map.
• 16. That storm drain easements be a minimum of 15 feet,
wide and that storm drain and utility easements
not be split by fences. That all uses of the
surface within the easement shall be subject to an
encroachment permit approved by the Public Works
Department.
17. That lots C, D, E, and F be cared for and
maintained by the homeowners association so as to
protect the slopes from erosion and deterioration.
18. That full improvements on both sides of Narcissus
Avenue be constructed.
19. That the Fifth Avenue frontage be .improved to a 40
foot width curb -to -curb, with curbs, gutter,
sidewalk, pavement, street lights, and storm
drain, and that existing power lines be un-
der- grounded.
20. That the California Vehicle Code be enforced on
the private streets and drives, and that the
delineation acceptable to the Police Department
and Public Works Department be provided along the
sidelines of the private streets and drives.
21. That if it is desired to have a. control gate at
the entrances, 80 feet of vehicle storage and a 50
OEM
c o
�)
December
5, 1985
f
z v
=
v
y
m
z c
m
y m
>
z
C=
D
N
z
osoo�
9 =
�
m
City
Y
f
Newport
p
Beach
Department and the Planning Department that
adequate sewer facilities will be available for
the project. Such demonstration shall include
verification from the City's Utilities Department
and the County Sanitation District.
13. That County Sanitation District fees be paid.prior
to issuance of any building permits.
14. That a paved access road be constructed by the
project proponent to Buck Gully from the corner of
Fifth Avenue and Poppy Avenue for access to City
utilities, with the design to be approved by the
Public Works Department.
15. That easements for public emergency and security
ingress, egress, and public utilities purposes on
all private streets be dedicated to the City and
that all easements be shown on the tract map.
• 16. That storm drain easements be a minimum of 15 feet,
wide and that storm drain and utility easements
not be split by fences. That all uses of the
surface within the easement shall be subject to an
encroachment permit approved by the Public Works
Department.
17. That lots C, D, E, and F be cared for and
maintained by the homeowners association so as to
protect the slopes from erosion and deterioration.
18. That full improvements on both sides of Narcissus
Avenue be constructed.
19. That the Fifth Avenue frontage be .improved to a 40
foot width curb -to -curb, with curbs, gutter,
sidewalk, pavement, street lights, and storm
drain, and that existing power lines be un-
der- grounded.
20. That the California Vehicle Code be enforced on
the private streets and drives, and that the
delineation acceptable to the Police Department
and Public Works Department be provided along the
sidelines of the private streets and drives.
21. That if it is desired to have a. control gate at
the entrances, 80 feet of vehicle storage and a 50
OEM
MINUTES
INDEX
foot wide turn- around shall be provided prior to
the gate. The design of the controlled entrance
shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
Department and Fire Department.
22. Development of the site shall be subject to a
grading permit to be approved by the Building and
reviewed by the Planning Department and Public
Works Department.
23. That the grading plan shall include a complete
plan for temporary and permanent. drainage facil-
ities, to minimize any potential impacts from
silt, debris, and other water pollutants.
24. The grading permit shall include a description of
haul routes, access points to the site, watering,
and sweeping program designed to minimize impact
of haul operations.
• 11111111 25. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall
be submitted and be subject to the approval of the
Building Department.
26. The velocity of concentrated run -off from the
project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities
controlled as part of the project design:
27. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with
plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on
recommendations of a soil engineer and an engi-
neering geologist subsequent to the completion of
a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of
the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the
"Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size
sheets shall be furnished to the Building Depart-
ment.
28. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the
design engineer shall review and state that the
discharge of surface runoff from the project will
be performed in a manner to assure that increased
peak flows from the project will not increase
erosion immediately downstream of the system. This
report shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning, Public Works, and Building Department.
29. That erosion control measures shall be done on any
exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or
as approved by the Grading Engineer.
-29-
c o
nl
December
5, 1985
f
m
y
o
y
2 c
m
a m
=
C Z
9=
N
O S
O
T
O
A=
j City
of
Newport
Beach
INDEX
foot wide turn- around shall be provided prior to
the gate. The design of the controlled entrance
shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works
Department and Fire Department.
22. Development of the site shall be subject to a
grading permit to be approved by the Building and
reviewed by the Planning Department and Public
Works Department.
23. That the grading plan shall include a complete
plan for temporary and permanent. drainage facil-
ities, to minimize any potential impacts from
silt, debris, and other water pollutants.
24. The grading permit shall include a description of
haul routes, access points to the site, watering,
and sweeping program designed to minimize impact
of haul operations.
• 11111111 25. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall
be submitted and be subject to the approval of the
Building Department.
26. The velocity of concentrated run -off from the
project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities
controlled as part of the project design:
27. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with
plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on
recommendations of a soil engineer and an engi-
neering geologist subsequent to the completion of
a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of
the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the
"Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size
sheets shall be furnished to the Building Depart-
ment.
28. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the
design engineer shall review and state that the
discharge of surface runoff from the project will
be performed in a manner to assure that increased
peak flows from the project will not increase
erosion immediately downstream of the system. This
report shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning, Public Works, and Building Department.
29. That erosion control measures shall be done on any
exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or
as approved by the Grading Engineer.
-29-
COMMISSIONERS
0
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
30. The recommendations by the soils engineer and
engineering geologist relative to surface and
subsurface drainage will be incorporated into
project development to ensure proper groundwater
drainage.
31. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
project proponent shall submit to the City a
Master Plan of Drainage. Said plan shall detail
all drainage improvements and evaluate local
drainage capacity. Said plan shall be received
and approved by the City engineer prior to the
issuance of any grading permit.
32. During grading the site will be watered to control
dust.
33. Prior to grading, a plan will be developed to
restrict construction truck traffic along
residential streets and to confine the limits of
grading to the project site.
34. The recommendations of the soils and engineering
geologists will be incorporated into the project
design.
35. Grading plans shall include methods for minimizing
intrusion of off -site activities into the riparian
habitat within Buck Gully.
36. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project
shall be prepared by a licensed landscape archi-
tect.
37. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review
of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department
and approval of the Planning Department and Public
Works Department.
38. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance
program which controls the use of fertilizers and
pesticides.
39. Street trees shall be provided along the public
streets as required by the Public Works Department
and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department.
-30-
MINUTES
INDEX
x x
a o
x
m
Z C
y m
2
M a
x
z
a x
C Z
N
O i
o o
a
i
m D
Z
M z
o m
0
December 5, 1985
of Newport Beach
30. The recommendations by the soils engineer and
engineering geologist relative to surface and
subsurface drainage will be incorporated into
project development to ensure proper groundwater
drainage.
31. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
project proponent shall submit to the City a
Master Plan of Drainage. Said plan shall detail
all drainage improvements and evaluate local
drainage capacity. Said plan shall be received
and approved by the City engineer prior to the
issuance of any grading permit.
32. During grading the site will be watered to control
dust.
33. Prior to grading, a plan will be developed to
restrict construction truck traffic along
residential streets and to confine the limits of
grading to the project site.
34. The recommendations of the soils and engineering
geologists will be incorporated into the project
design.
35. Grading plans shall include methods for minimizing
intrusion of off -site activities into the riparian
habitat within Buck Gully.
36. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project
shall be prepared by a licensed landscape archi-
tect.
37. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review
of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department
and approval of the Planning Department and Public
Works Department.
38. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance
program which controls the use of fertilizers and
pesticides.
39. Street trees shall be provided along the public
streets as required by the Public Works Department
and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department.
-30-
MINUTES
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
X
n
v % _
o
C
z
O 9
M C) C) 2
Z
N O C o o
.A m
IC
o m s M +�
Z a
z z z a m
MINUTES
December 5, 1965
of Newbort Beach
40. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of
weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regu-
larly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition.
41. Landscape plans for the slope adjacent to the
Harbor View Hills South homes will be subject to
review by the City of Newport Beach prior to
implementation to determine what, if any, pene-
tration of view planes will result. The purpose
of this review will be to derive input concerning
species and location of trees to be utilized, so
that landscaping will not interfere with views
currently enjoyed.
42. All manufactured slopes will be no steeper than 2
to 1 horizontal to vertical for maximum stability.
Further, all recontoured slopes will be reland-
scaped.
43. Manufactured slopes in Buck Gully will be undulat-
ed and rounded at the toe of the slope to produce
a natural appearance, positive drainage, and
blending with undisturbed areas.
44. The recontoured slope adjacent to Buck Gully will
be reviewed during the landscape plan for
potential as a repository for rare or endangered
plant species from the surrounding area.
45. Landscape plans for all manufactured slopes will
be developed utilizing a plant palette consisting
of drought - tolerant native and naturalized species
similar to those found in the area. This en-
hanced, natural vegetative cover will be imple-
mented upon completion of grading so as to ensure
establishment of the vegetation as quickly as
possible to control erosion. The revegetation
program could include relocation of rare and
endangered species to be removed by development to
suitable habitat in the project's portion of Buck
Gully. Further, topsoil used for the slope into
Buck Gully should be of the type suitable for
introduction of the native species.
46. A temporary irrigation system will be installed to
. assist in the establishment of the vegetation and
will be removed once accomplished,
-31-
MINUTES
INDEX
47. That any cul -de -sac, building address, and street
name shall comply with City Standards and shall be
approved by the Fire Department.
48. That all on -site fire protection (hydrants and
Fire Department connections) shall be approved by
the Fire and Public Works Departments.
49. Fire department access and fire vehicle access
shall be approved by the Fire Department.
50. The development shall be in substantial confor-
mance with the approved plot plan, floor plans,
elevations, and sections. The final grading plan
shall reflect the elevations shown on the plot
plan which will, in combination with the design
concept of the structures insure the view
preservation required by the General Plan.
51. The project should investigate the use of alterna-
tive energy sources (i.e. solar) and to the
0 11111111 maximum extent economically feasible incorporate
the use of said in project designs.
52. All buildings shall conform to the Uniform Build-
ing Code and the City's seismic design standards.
53. All work shall be done in accordance with the
Standard City Policies and Requirements regarding
paleontological and archaeological procedures,
respectively.
54. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during
pregrade meetings to inform the developer and
grading contractor of the results of the APC
study. In addition, an archaeologist shall be
present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If
significant cultural resources are uncovered, the
archaeologist shall have the authority to stop to
temporarily divert construction activities for a
period of 48 hours to assess the significance of
the finds.
55. in the event that significant archaeological
remains are uncovered during excavation and /or
grading, all work shall stop in that area of the
subject property until an appropriate data recov-
-32-
C o o
of D
December 5, 1985
f y
m
y v
v m
z c m
m
z
z
M m
z =
=
T m
m z
City o
of N
Newport B
Beach
INDEX
47. That any cul -de -sac, building address, and street
name shall comply with City Standards and shall be
approved by the Fire Department.
48. That all on -site fire protection (hydrants and
Fire Department connections) shall be approved by
the Fire and Public Works Departments.
49. Fire department access and fire vehicle access
shall be approved by the Fire Department.
50. The development shall be in substantial confor-
mance with the approved plot plan, floor plans,
elevations, and sections. The final grading plan
shall reflect the elevations shown on the plot
plan which will, in combination with the design
concept of the structures insure the view
preservation required by the General Plan.
51. The project should investigate the use of alterna-
tive energy sources (i.e. solar) and to the
0 11111111 maximum extent economically feasible incorporate
the use of said in project designs.
52. All buildings shall conform to the Uniform Build-
ing Code and the City's seismic design standards.
53. All work shall be done in accordance with the
Standard City Policies and Requirements regarding
paleontological and archaeological procedures,
respectively.
54. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during
pregrade meetings to inform the developer and
grading contractor of the results of the APC
study. In addition, an archaeologist shall be
present during grading activities to inspect the
underlying soil for cultural resources. If
significant cultural resources are uncovered, the
archaeologist shall have the authority to stop to
temporarily divert construction activities for a
period of 48 hours to assess the significance of
the finds.
55. in the event that significant archaeological
remains are uncovered during excavation and /or
grading, all work shall stop in that area of the
subject property until an appropriate data recov-
-32-
MINUTES
ery program can be developed and implemented. The
cost of such a program shall be the responsibility
of the landowner and /or developer.
56. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the
landowner and /or developer to attend pregrade
meetings and perform inspections during develop-
ment. The paleontologist shall be allowed to
divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area
to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
57. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition
permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions
of AB 952, related to City of Newport Beach
responsibilities for mitigation of archaeological
impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City
Attorney.
58. Prior to issuance of any grading or building
permits for development on this site, an agreement
• shall be entered into by developer, landowner and
City providing for a number of units equal to at
least 108 of the total units be provided on -site
or off -site on the Baywood Expansion with 758 of
the units affordable to County median - income
families and 25% of the units affordable to County
low - income families.
59. That Lot A shown on TTN 11949 be dedicated to the.
City to satisfy the requirements of the Park
Dedication Ordinance. The applicant shall be
required to grade this lot plus approximately 0.40
acre of the OASIS park site in such a manner as to
provide a continuous, flat area on the entire park
area. The balance of park dedication requirements
shall be met through the payment of in -lieu fees.
60. Roof -top television antennas are prohibited.
61. All structures on the project site shall have
non - combustible roof coverings.
62. On -site lighting shall be designed so as to
eliminate light glare and spillage in adjacent
residential areas. Light sources shall be
concealed from adjacent neighboring residential
areas. Compliance with this condition shall be
verified by a licensed electrical engineer.
-33-
C o
cI
5, 1985
December
a
m
y
9
9
z c
m
y m
z
_=
C n=
N
OX00�
a=
T
m
City
Y
f
Newport
Beach
1-
ery program can be developed and implemented. The
cost of such a program shall be the responsibility
of the landowner and /or developer.
56. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the
landowner and /or developer to attend pregrade
meetings and perform inspections during develop-
ment. The paleontologist shall be allowed to
divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area
to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
57. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition
permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions
of AB 952, related to City of Newport Beach
responsibilities for mitigation of archaeological
impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City
Attorney.
58. Prior to issuance of any grading or building
permits for development on this site, an agreement
• shall be entered into by developer, landowner and
City providing for a number of units equal to at
least 108 of the total units be provided on -site
or off -site on the Baywood Expansion with 758 of
the units affordable to County median - income
families and 25% of the units affordable to County
low - income families.
59. That Lot A shown on TTN 11949 be dedicated to the.
City to satisfy the requirements of the Park
Dedication Ordinance. The applicant shall be
required to grade this lot plus approximately 0.40
acre of the OASIS park site in such a manner as to
provide a continuous, flat area on the entire park
area. The balance of park dedication requirements
shall be met through the payment of in -lieu fees.
60. Roof -top television antennas are prohibited.
61. All structures on the project site shall have
non - combustible roof coverings.
62. On -site lighting shall be designed so as to
eliminate light glare and spillage in adjacent
residential areas. Light sources shall be
concealed from adjacent neighboring residential
areas. Compliance with this condition shall be
verified by a licensed electrical engineer.
-33-
•
63. A provision shall be included in the CC &R's that
the homeowners association shall maintain the
landscaping to preserve a blue water view of the
Sandcastle Drive homeowners view plane.
64. On -site utilities and the utilities on Fifth
Avenue between Poppy Avenue and Marguerite Avenue
shall be undergrounded.
The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:28 ( Adjourn -
p.m. ment
PAT EICHENHOFER, SECRETARY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
-34-
COAA/V\ISSIONERSI
MINUTES
a A -
o
c �
December 5, 1985
x
m
z c m s m z
c 2 N a i o o
z z m a T m
City of
Newport Beach
p
9
ROLL CALL
INDEX
•
63. A provision shall be included in the CC &R's that
the homeowners association shall maintain the
landscaping to preserve a blue water view of the
Sandcastle Drive homeowners view plane.
64. On -site utilities and the utilities on Fifth
Avenue between Poppy Avenue and Marguerite Avenue
shall be undergrounded.
The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:28 ( Adjourn -
p.m. ment
PAT EICHENHOFER, SECRETARY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
-34-