Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 - Amendment to Front Yard Setbacks on Pacific Drive (Planning Commission Amendment No. 899)� J dEW°OAr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Hearing Date: 0 o COMMUNITY and ECONOMIC J DEVELOPMENT Agenda Item No.: G PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 Phone number: (714) 644 -3200; FAX (714) 644 -3250 AVIDeal Period: REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL June 13, 2000 27 Eugenia Garcia (714) 644 -3208 COE K QO OA �vOa so a" -6J SUBJECT: Amendment to front yard setbacks on Pacific Drive (Planning Commission Amendment No. 899) SUMMARY: Amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a lot -by -lot front yard setback for 13 properties located on the southerly side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the westerly side of Begonia Avenue due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way; amend Section 20.10.030 and Section 20.10.040 the Zoning Code to add clarifying language for determining the calculation of buildable area for the subject properties. SUGGESTED ACTION: Hold public hearing, introduce Ordinance No. 2000- approving Amendment No. 899, and pass to second reading on June 27, 2000. On April 20, 2000 the Planning Commission initiated Amendment No. 899. On May 18, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amendment and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council. An excerpt of the draft minutes of the Planning Commission, and a copy of the staff report prepared for their consideration is attached for the information of the City Council. Concurrent with Amendment No. 899 is a resolution declaring the City's intention to vacate unused portions of the southerly side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue. The amendment to the Districting Maps and Resolution to vacate are proposed simultaneously because the property owners have requested the vacation to allow them increased buildable area through use of the vacated area. The vacation will abandon approximately 12 to 19 feet of public right -of -way, reserving approximately 10 feet for a public utility easement. The abandonment will allow property owners for 13 lots between Avocado Avenue and the westerly side of Begonia Avenue to gain approximately 12 to 19 feet of lot depth, 'resulting in additional buildable area. At the May 18" Planting Commission meeting, the Commission recommended changes to the Proposed amendment in response to the neighbor's concerns over the location of future dwellings relative to the location of the new property line. Staff s original recommendation was to allow ' The 19 feet is reduced for some properties, due to the angle of the street relative to the subject properties. structures to be placed within the vacated area, while maintaining a 10 foot setback for a utility easement. The primary issues raised by the neighbors were the potential change to the current open streetscape on the southerly side of Pacific Drive if dwellings were allowed to be constructed within the area of abandonment, and the height of structures that could be placed closer to the street, resulting in a potential loss of view for some neighbors on the northerly side of the street. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended that, if the vacation is approved by the City Council, all new or remodeled dwellings on the southerly side of the street should maintain in the present setback location, which is 5 feet from the existing property line. Due to the change in the angle of the street, a lot by lot setback from the new front property line must be established. The building setback location relative to the new property line is as depicted on the Districting Map included in the attached Ordinance. The vacated area will be included in the area used for the purpose of determining the buildable area for the affected lots, although no actual construction will occur within this area. However, there are several properties with existing encroachments in both the existing 5 foot setback and the public right -of -way that include dwellings, minor fences and planters. These encroachments will be allowed to remain. There is also the potential for the construction of minor fences and walls within the area of abandonment, which will be subject to the Modification Permit process. The map below indicates the affected lots on Pacific Drive. z A899. Pacific Drive City Council June 13, 2000 i Submitted by: PATRICIA L. TEMPLE Planning Director % y Prepared by: EUGENIA GARCIA Ass .. 'ate Planner Attachments: Draft Ordinance Draft excerpt of revised Chapter 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 Amended Districting Map No. 16 Planning Commission staff reports of April 20, 2000 and May 18, 2000 and for Amendment No. 899 Minutes of Planning Commission meetings of April 20, 2000 and May 18, 2000. A899, Pacific Drive City Council June 13, 2000 ORDINANCE - 2000 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 899, WHICH AMENDS DISTRICTING MAP NO. 16, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A LOT - BY -LOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR DWELLINGS ON PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OF PACIFIC DRIVE BETWEEN AVOCADO AVENUE AND THE WESTERLY SIDE OF BEGONIA AVENUE, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 20.10.030 AND 20.10.040 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission initiated an amendment to the Districting Map to establish a lot -by -lot front yard setback for the location of dwellings from the newly established front property line on properties located on the southerly side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the southerly side of the prolongation of the line of the westerly side of Begonia .Avenue, due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way; and to amend Sections 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (hereinafter "Code ") to establish a 10 foot front yard setback for the purpose of determining the buildable area for each lot; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding this amendment and found that the proposed amehdments to the Zoning Districting Maps and Sections 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are consistent with the goals of the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the public was duly noticed of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has been determined that the proposed amendment is categorically exempt under Class 5, minor alterations in land use limitations; U I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment No. 899 is approved, as follows: A. Districting Map No. 16 is amended to establish lot -by -lot front yard setbacks for certain parcels on Pacific Drive, as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof. B. Section 20.10.030 of the Code is amended to add footnote "IC" to "Additional Regulations" for front setbacks. C. The following subsection is added to Section 20.10.040.A of the Code: 3. Pacific Drive - Buildable Area" For purposes of determining the buildable area for structures located on the bluff (southerly) side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the southerly side of the prolongation of the line of the westerly side of Begonia Avenue, a front yard setback of 10 feet shall be used (the setback for the location of all strictures as designated on the Districting Maps shall be used). D. The Following subsection is added to Section 20.10.040 of the Code: C. Pacific Drive — Front Yard Setback. Front - loaded garages and carports on the bluff southerly side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the southerly side of the prolongation of the line of the westerly side of Begonia Avenue shall maintain a minimum front yard setback of 19 feet from the front property line. Section 2. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. 3 This'Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall 1 become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on June 13, 2000, and adopted on the 27`h day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: CITY CLERK AYES, COUNCIL MEMEBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS 2 ` EXHIBIT' � (£ ), � ) ©i !� f � { ),y E 2° p, /}\\ eu 2- u w / ® R - _2/ \ u e ! ), � ) ©i !� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 INDEX SUBJECT: 13 Properties located on the bluff side of Pacific Drive, from Item No. 4 2205 Pacific Drive to the prolongation of the line west of A 899 Begonia Avenue at 2329 Pacific Drive • Amendment to front yard setbacks on Pacific Drive Amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a front yard setback of 10 feet for the dwellings and 19 feet for the garages from the newly established property lines of properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the west side of Begonia Avenue due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way; amend Section 20.10.030 (Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations) and Section 20.10.040 (Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula) of the Zoning Code. Associate Planner Genic Garcia noted that letters had been received late this afternoon and were distributed tonight. The letters note the primary concern of view obstruction and retaining the openness of the streetscape. Public comment was opened. Bill Edwards, architect of Planet Design, 503 Fernleof stated that he had been working with the City of Newport Beach facilitating the abandonment of the unused southerly portion of Pacific Drive right -of -way. He noted his support of this application stating the following: • This 80 -foot wide right -of -way was originally dedicated to the Pacific Electric railway line. • This use was never realized and by default remained with the excess width. • Parcels were subsequently created on the flat somewhat elevated north side of what became Pacific Drive. • After Bayside Drive was later dedicated, the remaining steeply sloped area in between was divided to create the residential lots on the southerly side of Pacific Drive. • Typical right -of -way in Corona del Mar is 50 feet. • Significant excess width has become a significant disadvantage to most of the subject property owners on the southerly side of Pacific Drive. • Pacific Drive is only two blocks long and is virtually one way for half of its length due to the one way Avocado Avenue outlet to the west. • Similar unused portions of excess rights of way in other areas of the City have been vacated over the years. • Many of the southerly Pacific Drive property owners were not aware that they did not own part of the front yards and driveway approaches. • Most of the front yard improvements done in this area are in violation of the encroachment regulations. • What is being proposed is a reduction of 20 feet, which will meet the new Code standard of 60 feet minimum overall. That would be 10 feet wider 19 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 INDEX than the typical Corona del Mar street. • The setback restriction is more than ample with front yards at 10 feet and garages at 19 feet for all on -site guests parking without blocking the sidewalks. • Additional building opportunities are well deserved in light of the challenges of the steeply sloped lots. • Precedence has been set with a partial vacation of residences that use a portion of southerly side of Pacific Drive at the east end at Begonia. • On the west end of Pacific this past year, the unused portion of a block of Avocado was also abandoned. Smith Baken, 2315 Pacific Drive stated that improvements should be the aim of any municipality. The question is, are you trying to improve lovely Pacific Drive, if not, what is going on? Are there taxes that can be made from the extra land available for building on the south side of Pacific Drive? When we remodeled our home, we stayed within our boundaries. We have'a front yard that compliments the rest of the street. If you want to improve Pacific Drive, remove the utility poles and put those services under ground. Jack Poucher, 2204 Waterfront Drive stated he owns a lot on the east end and that his lot is not impacted by the proposed vacation. He is in support of the vacation for similar reasons stated by Mr. Edwards. John Davidson, 2320 Pacific Drive stated that he enjoys the openness of the street especially as he has no view of the ocean, which has been lost due to construction. I do not want to see an encroachment into the street. One of the great things about Pacific Drive is the width of the street. The portion of the street to the west that is a one -way street is because it is more like a dead end with an alley like extension of Avocado. We get all the traffic up Acacia, and they horse shoe back around the park by Begonia and then find the beach. I have no complaints about not having an ocean view. But I do enjoy the openness of that street. If these proposed changes are approved, there will be an encroachment into the right -of -way. (he presented and explained a drawn plan depicting some of the potential hazards of ingress and egress). At Commission inquiry, he stated that he understands that the curb to curb width will not change. Kitty Westover, 2301 Pacific Drive noted the charm of Pacific Drive and that it will be lost if it is made possible to build closer to the street. The street will be impacted and will be the some as all other narrow streets of Corona del Mar. Don Corbett, 2316 Pacific Drive noted that there was a house built recently that does not impose on the neighborhood. It was constructed with all the amenities under the existing conditions. There is another home towards Bayside a home that is being constructed west of Carnation; the house is within 5 feet of the street. Those people will back out of their garage and run over people. I am afraid that will happen here on Pacific Drive. The last three homes built within the / last few years were able to build under the existing conditions. There are 60 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 probably another ten houses that will not change, so I don't know whom this will benefit. The change can only possible benefit one or two people. I ask you to deny this. Suzie Vaughn, 2200 Pacific Drive stated that there is a majority of Pacific Drive homeowners here tonight that are in opposition to this. We don't know if the piece of properly we are being offered, do we have to pay taxes? Is it free? Somebody needs to clarify what is to be achieved if this piece of property is granted. Most of the residents now there, have done their remodeling and are quite happy with what they have. Who is really benefiting from all of this? This could be a double whammy if these homes are put on the market and re -sold, and the new people coming in have the right to bring these houses closer to the sidewalk and encroach and go higher because they are on a bigger building pad. It will create a lot of havoc. Most of the garages are used for live -ins or maids or for storage, which leaves cars on the street because there is no place to park. Ken Jorski, 2228 Pacific Drive suggested that a possible solution would be that the land that is being given would not be buildable. Some type of restriction could be built into the gift of land saying that the addition space can not be calculated into the building allowance. I would be impacted by a couple of properties due to my house situation. Harry Jackwis, 419 Begonia stated he was alarmed by the setback change to 10 feet. One of the charms of Corona del Mar is the many gardens. I don't see how this reduction will lend it self to that. There is only so much buildable space, I built within the restrictions and I am satisfied with that. I did not come up here to try and get some extra square footage. I am concerned with -the ambience of Pacific Drive and Corona del Mar in general. Doug Lax, 2224 Pacific Drive read the following letter into the record. My property is located on the north side of the street within the some block as the Bettingens. I am here tonight to express my extreme opposition to any such amendment. Although I have not had amply notice to investigate the full implications of said amendment, I am sure of one thing; It will not be beneficial to my and may be grossly unfair and injurious to the other homeowners on the inland side of Pacific Drive. When I purchased my property five years ago I had every reason to expect the City would uphold my rights as a property owner. Thus far the City has sorely disappointed me and I am not experiencing financial harm due the city's preferential treatment of the Bettingens and other abusers of the system. I do not expect the City to impose any harsh new restrictions on the bluffside residents, but I do expect and hereby request that you maintain the setbacks and easements, which were clearly in place at the time we all purchased our properties. Since my home is currently listed for sale, I am keenly aware of the value of a view and the buyers' perception of the degree of obstruction. The Bettingens' proposed remodel and the variances the city has granted them have already cost me dearly in the marketability of my home. This 21 INDEX iT i City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 INDEX proposal is injuring me further by its very existence. Should the Commission rule to approve this amendment we can all be assured of a protracted legal battle due to the resolve of the inland residents. I urge you all to take a stand against the type of pandering and preferential treatment, which infects so many levels of our government today. The privileges of a few should never interfere with the rights of others. It is my perception that the Bettingens and their architect Mr. Edwards have asked for far too many favors of the City and the other fine residents of Pacific Drive. I have a letter dated May 20, 1999 from Mr. Edwards where he initiated this entire transaction. This had nothing to do with Mr. Edwards helping the City; this is a selfish act. It has everything to do with the fact that he has a client who has requested that this be done. It is dishonest and deceitful of them to propose it in this manner. Michael Mann, 2304 Pacific Drive agreed with the previous comments about who is being represented here. I would like to know how many people on the ocean side of Pacific Drive have actually contacted Mr. Edwards and give him permission to represent them in this endeavor. I do not understand the initiative of this. Chairperson Selich stated that Mr. Edwards represents the Bettingens as far as he knows. The Planning Commission decided that because we do this in other areas of the city where there are street vacations. that we would initiate the zoning changes. We have done this in other areas of the City where there have been excess right -of -way. Ms. Wood noted that the abandonment of the right -of way is an action that will be considered by the City Council on June 13th. The Planning Commission action is with respect to the zoning amendment, which would change the front setback. Jerry Vaughn, 2200 Pacific Drive noted that the change of the setbacks would have varying affects on the homes. Some of the homes can be brought out to 10 feet from the street and some of the homes will be set back. We will end up with a zig zag of homes instead of just a straight open area that we have now. The original letter sent by Mr. Edwards to Don Webb stated that Mr. Edwards represented several homeowners who were in favor of this. This is the deceit that is going on, as I don't believe that Mr. Edwards ever represented multiple property owners on that street. Nancy Neen, 2220 Pacific Drive stated that she is opposed to these changes. Christy Bettingen, 2215 Pacific Drive noted that Pacific Drive is unique. Referencing an exhibit on the wall, explained the right -of -way to be abandoned and the homes that currently encroach into that right -of -way now. This abandonment would essentially put all of these homes in conformity. She then noted the height standards that could be built to and what the current heights J are. The abandonment has no bearing on height. At Commission inquiry, she 22 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 INDEX noted that Mr. Edwards represents Jack Pouch, Bettingens, Al Ross, Chris Street and several others. There have been no letters of support from these people, but she will obtain them. Steven McNash, 2319 Pacific Drive stated his approval of this abandonment as he intends to remove his garage and enlarge his home. Barbara Feinberg, 2316 Pacific Drive stated that she has a small view of the bay and stated that she does not support any changes to the street, as it is a charming area. If Mr. McNash builds sideways into his lot, he will completely eliminate my ocean view, so I am completely opposed to this plan. Open space is one of the most important things we have. Having more rooms and things is not as wonderful as having open space. Public comment was closed. Chairperson Selich asked about: • Consideration of price for the relinquishment of right -of -way and whether taxes would need to be paid. - Ms. Clauson answered that the abandonment procedures the City has done in the past. I don't recall that we have ever charged a fee for an abandonment of a right -of -way. Once it is abandoned, the City no longer has an ownership interest, which in this case is an easement in the property, so it would revert to the underlying property owner. That would be an adjustment of the lot line and would pay property taxes on it. • What is the necessity for the Planning Commission to move on the zoning adjustment in advance of the City Council considering the abandonment? - Staff answered that the change to the setback can not take place unless the abandonment takes place. The setback needs to be amended and is currently five feet from the existing property line. If the abandonment is approved, the setback would be changed to 10 feet from the existing property line. Staff added that the abandonment could go forward without the zoning amendment. Traditionally, this is the way it has been handled in the past. If there is an adjustment to the zoning boundaries, they may be done concurrently with the abandonment. Broad Street actually abandoned first. An abandonment without action would mean that the underlying property owner would own to the abandonment. However, there would not be any type of property line in the zoning regulations. The setback would still be from the property line as designed in the City's Districting Maps. Chairperson Selich asked staff it the reason that the setbacks are being adjusted is because it affects the calculation of buildable area. I tend to agree with a lot of the comments made about the setbacks, I think the street is nice the way it is. I would hate to see the setbacks be adjusted. I don't have a problem with the property going back to the adjacent property owners who would be able to 23 1� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 INDEX continue to maintain and use the properly as they have in the past. I would be in favor of maintaining the setbacks where they are. My understanding is that the reason for it is where the setback line affects the calculation of the buildable area. Is there a way to set the zoning on these properties that the building setbacks would remain where they are now. For example, it they are ten feet from the existing right -of -way and we change the right -of -way and now it becomes twenty feet away, that the existing setback line stays where it is. It would just be a different number that still provides a mechanism that the normal setback would be used for calculation of buildable area. Is there a way that could be done? Staff answered yes. Commissioner Kranzley noted that this solution would satisfy everyone. I would love to maintain the look of that street as much as possible. If we increase the bulk of that buildable area it would be down the slopes and would not be intrusive into the view planes of the residences, especially on the other side of the street. The Bettingens could build higher on the froht of the house. I wonder if we could maintain the nature and ambience of the street by allowing building down the slope so that it would not be impactful. Maybe we could limit the height at street level. Chairperson Selich noted he was not in favor of that, this is only the abandonment of the street and if we keen the setbacks as exactly the way we are, we are not changing the status quo on the upper end of the lots. I would not be in favor of putting increased restrictions there. Commissioner Ashley asked staff: • The current pavement width on Pacific Drive - it is currently thirty feet. • Curb side parking width on each side - seven to eight feet. _ • Two lanes are seven feet wide each -yes Commissioner Ashley noted that this is the problem in Corona del Mar. Here, the City has the opportunity to increase the width of the street so that you wouldn't have the hazards of two -way traffic having to stop to let cars pass. Instead of making an opportunity to widen the street by eight feet, you are willing to vacate some forty feet of the street. I wouldn't go along with this at all. Why did the City want to abandon this? Mr. Edmonston answered that other than trying to work with the property owners, there is no other pro- active effort on the City's part that he is aware of. The one thing that makes this street a little different is at the westerly end of the street is Avocado Avenue, which is one -way away from Pacific Drive. The only two -way traffic on the street would be residents leaving their property and heading east towards Begonia. Commissioner Ashley noted his agreement with the comments made by the i Chairperson regarding the houses on the south side extending towards to the 1 street into the area being vacated by the City. I don't know why the City is 24 r� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 vacating it, nor the people on the south side be willing to accept responsible of ownership of property that they could not build into. All they can do is pay additional taxes for it. Commissioner Gifford noted that she is not clear on the proposal to adjust setbacks, which is not possible if the City has all the interest in the land. We would be moving the setback into what the City owns now. The abandonment would have to come first. If the abandonment does not take place, instead of a five - foot setback people, most people will have a ten -foot setback from their same existing property line they have now. Ms. Wood noted that the Commission's action is a recommendation, not the adoption of the amendment. The two would be current with the City Council. Continuing, Commissioner Gifford stated that we have now from the curb on the south side, ten -feet of what would be maintained as public right -of -way. Additionally there is another ten feet that would have to be maintained for utilities. The lot line may be adjusted to within ten feet of the curb, but it would be subject to an easement for utilities. What is being proposed is the building setback would coincide with the width of that easement. Chairperson Selich stated the decision is to abandon the street or not. Mr. Edmonston is correct, that the City Council has traditionally been in favor of these kinds of abandonment if there is strong support for it. Quite frankly, I have not seen it here tonight. I think it is possible for us to make a recommendation because it is a recommendation on the zoning if the City Council does decide to go ahead with the abandonment, then the recommendation would be for their consideration. Even though the issue before the Council may be the abandonment, the setbacks are going to enter the issue as well. Since the abandonment is scheduled for the City Council, it would be in the City's best interest to make a recommendation on what we think the proper setback should be. Motion was made by Chairperson Selich that we recommend to City Council that if they go ahead and abandon the right -of -way then the zoning setbacks should be adjusted as follows: • The setbacks shall remain in place, as they are with the exception that there shall be ten -foot setback solely for the purpose of calculation of buildable area. Is there anything wrong with this? Ms. Wood answered that it appears that the setback varies from lot to lot. We might have to set each one individually on the Districting Map. Chairperson Selich stated that the idea is to maintain the status quo. If that is what is needed, then so be it. He clarified that the Commission has no recommending authority on the abandonment that is solely a Council decision. 25 INDEX ..r J City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes May 18, 2000 This way, the City Council will have something to consider in the way of setbacks on this issue. Commissioner Tucker clarified the motion. What the consequence would be is where the setbacks would fall today without the abandonment is where they would you could start to build with the abandonment. For purposes of floor area ratio it would be a ten -foot setback from the new property line. The consequences would be that the profile of the house for those who live across Pacific Drive would be the some because the height limitation would stay the same because where the building could start would be the same. They could be bigger as they go down the hill; you might end up with more square footage on the downside. Ayes: Kiser, Ashley, Selich, Gifford, KranzJey and Tucker Noes: None Absent: None " SUBJECT: Conexant Project 4311 Jamboree Road • General Plan Amendment No. 96 -3F • Amendment No. 898 • Environmental Impact Report No. 159 • Traffic Study No. 110 • Development Agreement General Plan Amendment No. 96 -3F, Amendment No. 898, Environmental Impact Report No. 159, Traffic Study No. 110 and a Development Agreement to allow a long range development plan for the construction of up to 566,000 square feet of additional light industrial and supporting office /lab space in four new, multi -story buildings, two new parking structures and the balance of the site landscaped open space. The project site is approximately 25 acres and is located on the northwest side of Jamboree Road between MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street within the Koll Center Newport Planned Community Commissioner Kiser recused himself from deliberation on this matter as one of his business associates recently purchased a home on this street. Motion was made by Commissioner Ashley to adopt a resolution of intent to initiate Amendment No. 899. Ayes: Kiser, Ashley, Selich, Gifford, Kranzley and Tucker Noes: None Absent: None 26 INDEX Item No. 5 1C� FILE COPY RESOLUTION NO. -1516 A RESOLUTION OI' THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO AMEND DISTRICTING MAP NO. 16, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED FRONT PROPERTY LINE ON PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PACIFIC DRIVE BETWEEN AVOCADO AVENUE AND BEGONIA AVENUE DUE TO THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- WAY WHEREAS, Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code authorizes the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution initiating amendments to the Zoning Code or Districting Maps of the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires to initiate an amendment to Districting Map No. 16 to establish a 10 foot front yard setback from the newly established property line due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach to initiate an amendment to Districting Map No. 16. to establish a 10 foot front yard setback on properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue. BY `l �• EDWARD SELICH CHAIRMAN BY LARRY TUCKER SECRETARY AYES Kiser. Ashlev. Selich, Gifford. Kranzlev. and Tucker NOES None ABSENT None CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Hearing Date: May 18, 2000 a' a COMMUNITY and ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Agenda Item No.: 4 g n 33o NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: Eugenia Garcia NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 Phone number: (714) 644 -3208 (714) 644.3200; FAX (714) 644.3250 Appeal Period' REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: Amendment to front yard setbacks on Pacific Drive SUMMARY: Amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a front yard setback of 10 feet for the dwellings and 19 feet for the garages from the newly established property lines of properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the west side of Begonia Avenue due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way; amend Section 20.10.030 (Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations) and Section 20.10.040 (Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Perainsula) of the Zoning Code. LOCATION: 13 Properties located on the bluff side of Pacific Drive, from 2205 Pacific Drive to the prolongation of the line west of Begonia Avenue at 2329 Pacific Drive. SUGGESTED ACTION: Hold hearing; adopt Resolution No. recommending to the City Council approval or modification of Amendment No. 899; or deny the Amendment. Points and Authoritv • Environmental Compliance (California Environmental Quality Act) It has been determined that this project is categorically exempt under Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). • Conformance with the General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan designate the properties for "Single Family" residential use. The existing residential development is consistent with this designation. • Amendment procedures are set forth in Chapter Section 20.94.020 (B) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Background The City is proposing to abandon approximately 19 feet of public right -of -way for properties located on the southerly side of Pacific Drive and reserve approximately 10 feet for a public utility easement. The abandonment will allow property owners for 13 lots between Avocado Avenue and ,n the west side of Begonia Avenue to gain approximately 20 feet of lot depth.[ The proposed amendments, if approved, will be contingent on the approval of the vacation by the City Council, f scheduled for public hearing on June 13, 2000. ,r r b + +♦ �� +Y �T Y $- a n +•� f� C .,b. Y ' P < ". r a i. 6 -• 4Y.� Y P s W �d J a '� f r•'`� y - a• 4 Sublecl Properties � � ' Y i Analvsis Pacific Drive has a public right -of -way width of approximately 80 feet, of which only the northerly side of the street is fully improved with 20 feet of curbs, sidewalk and street improvements. The right -of -way on the southerly side of Pacific Drive includes a 5 foot parkway and a 4 foot sidewalk with the remainder of the right -of -way comprised of a combination of level areas and steep slopes. The City is proposing to abandon right -of -way in excess of 60 feet. The new right -of -way on the south side will maintain the existing 5 foot parkway (from face of curb), a 4 foot wide sidewalk, and include an additional 1 foot behind the sidewalk. The abandoned right -of -way area will range from 17 to 24 feet. As most of the properties on this side of Pacific Drive are made up of sloping lots (down to Bayside Drive), the vacation will allow for additional flat buildable area at the front of the lots. Additionally, several of the dwellings on this side of Pacific Drive currently encroach into the public right -of -way, as well as the existing 5 foot front yard setback. The vacation and reestablishment of the front setback from the new property line will eliminate these encroachments. The 20 feet is reduced for some properties and increased for others, due to the angle of the street relative to the subject properties. 3 A899. Pacific Drive May 18. 2000 . rI The Public Works Department is requesting a minimum 10 foot front yard setback in order to be able to provide for the required 10 foot public utility easement behind the existing sidewalk. The 10 foot setback will result in an additional 12 to 19 feet of buildable lot depth for the subject properties, which includes the existing 5 foot front setback from the existing property line. This will increase the buildable area of each lot, thereby increasing the permitted floor area for each lot. All other development standards for the R -1 Zone remain unchanged. Similar Vacations of Public Right- of -Way In 1998, the City vacated portions of Broad Street for properties between Santa Ana Avenue and Redlands Avenue and established a new setback of 20 feet, resulting in additional buildable area for each lot. In this case, the right -of -way width was 80 feet with a street width of 36 feet with 22 foot parkways on both sides of the street. Ten feet of parkway was abandoned on both sides of the street resulting in a right -of -way width of 60 feet. Although the abandonment of a portion of the right -of -way of Pacific Drive is similar, it differs from the Broad Street vacation because the street developed within the Pacific Drive right -of -way is not on the centerline. Additionally, the site characteristics of the lots are different. The Pacific Drive properties have street access for parking while the Broad Street properties are designed with rear alley access. This creates potential problems when establishing a 10 foot front yard setback because, if the garages were built up to the setback line, only ten feet would be available for parking in front of the garage, resulting in vehicles that extend into the public right -of -way when parked on the driveway. In order to avoid parking in the right -of -way, staff has proposed a setback different from the dwelling for front facing garages. The City Traffic Engineer is of the opinion that a 19 foot setback area in front of the garage will provide adequate space for parking. Buildable Area The proposed dwelling setback is 10 feet and the garage setback is proposed at 19 feet. For purposes of calculating the buildable area for each lot, the 10 foot dwelling setback, as depicted on the Districting Maps, will be used. Because the lots are sloping on the south side of the street, the additional area from the abandonment will increase the amount of flat buildable area for the lots. In order to establish the setback to be used in determining the buildable area for the affected lots, amendments to Sections 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 are needed. Section 20.10.030 will add Additional Regulation 'K" to the minimum front yard requirement as shown shaded on the Property Development Regulations chart. Section 20.10.040 will add `B -3" with language to clarify which setback is to be used for the calculation of the buildable area; and additional Special Development Regulation "D" will be added with specific language estalishing the two front yard setback requirements. If adopted, Sections 20.10.030 and Section 20.10.040 would be revised as follows: 20.10.030 Residential Districts. Property Development Regulations The following schedule prescribes development regulations for residential districts. The columns prescribe basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the 4 A899, Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 f4 "Additional Regulations" column reference regulations following the schedule or located elsewhere in this code. Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations R -A R -1 R -1.5 R -2 MFR Additional Regulations _ Minimum Site Area per — — 1,000 1,000 1,200 (A), (B) Unit (sq.ft.) Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) - Corner Lots (sq. ft.) Minimum Lot Width (ft.) - Corner Lots (ft.) Minimum Yards: Front (ft.) Side (ft.) Corner Side (ft.) Rear (ft.) - Abuttine an alley (ft.) Distance Between Detached Buildings Maximum Height (ft.) Maximum Floor Area Limit Maximum Coverage Required Open Space Off - Street Parking and Loading 87,120 5,000 5,000 5,000 87,120 6,000 5,000 6,000 125 50 -- 50 125 60 - -- 60 20 20 20 20 5 3;4 +'3;4 3;4 5 3 ;4 3;4 3:4 5;25 10 10 l0 - -- 2.00 1.50 40% 2.00 5,000 (A) 6,000 (A) 50 (A) 60 (A) 20 (C), (D), (E), (F), (H) _(K) 3;4 (C), (D), (E), (G), (H) I A (C), (D), (E), (G), (H) 10 (C), (D), (E), (H), (Q) (1) (J) (K), (L) r: 1.75 (K), (NI) (N) (K),(0) (P) Residential Districts-Additional Property Development Regulations (K) R -1 R -2, and MFR Districts in Corona del Mar and R -1 District in West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula. See Section 20.10.040: Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula. 20.10.040 Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula 3. 5 A899, Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 n t\ Avocado Avenue and the south side of the prolongation of the hne of :of the wes[ stde. Begonia Avenue, the front,yard,setbacK designated on the_Distnctuig Maps shall be, C. Open Space Option. In the R -1 and R -2 Districts as designated in this section, open space shall be provided in addition to the required front yard setback. This additional open space shall be a volume of space equal to the buildable width of the lot, times the basic height limit, times 6 feet and may be provided anywhere on the lot behind the required yard setback lines. This open space shall be open on at least 2 sides and shall have a minimum dimension in any direction of at least 6 feet, except as indicated in this section, and may be used for outdoor living area. Open space with a dimension of less than 6 feet in any direction may be included in the required volume of open space, provided that said space is contiguous to required open space that provides a minimum 6 foot dimension in any direction. Roofs, balconies, decks, patios, cornices, exterior stairways with open risers and open railings, and architectural features may project into this area. This additional open space may be provided on any level or combination of levels and may extend across the entire structure or any portion thereof. D. Pacific Drive — Front Yard Setback. Front - loaded garages and carports on the bluff (south) side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the south side of the prolongation of the line of the west side of Begonia Avenue, shall maintain a minimum front yard setback of 19 feet. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION It is the opinion of staff that the proposed ordinance represents a reasonable and appropriate change to the front yard setbacks on the bluff side of Pacific Drive, in association with the abandonment of right -of -way. It will also allow for an increase in the amount of buildable area for each lot that is appropriate for this neighborhood due to the sloping characteristics of the lots that occurs only on the south side of the street. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of Amendment No. 899 to the City Council with the findings contained in the draft resolution. Submitted by: PATRICIA L. TEMPLE Planning Director Prepared by: EUGENIA GARCIA Associate Planner J ✓ I Attachments: Draft Resolution Draft revised Chapter 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 1 Districting Map No. 16 Pacific Drive street section A899. Pacific Drive May 18. 2000 ni RESOLUTION NO. - 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND DISTRICTING MAP NO. 16, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE DWELLINGS AND 19 FEET FOR THE GARAGES FROM THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED FRONT PROPERTY LINE ON PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PACIFIC DRIVE BETWEEN AVOCADO AVENUE AND THE WEST SIDE OF BEGONIA AVENUE DUE TO THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT - OF -WAY; AND AMEND SECTIONS 20.10.030 (RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS: PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) AND SECTION 20.10.040 (SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR CORONA DEL MAR, WEST NEWPORT, AND THE BALBOA PENINSULA). AMENDMENT NO. 899 WHEREAS, as part of the development and implementation of the Newport Beach General Plan the Land Use Element has been prepared; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has been determined that the proposed amendment is categorically exempt under Class 5, minor alterations in land use limitations; and WHEREAS, Section 20.94.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to the Zoning Districting Maps and an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to revise Section 20.10.030 (Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations) and Section 20.10.040 (Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula) must be approved by a Resolution of the Planning Commission setting forth full particulars of the amendment; and 7 A899, Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 01 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires to initiate an amendment to Districting Map No. 16 to establish a 10 foot front yard setback for the dwellings and a 19 foot front yard setback for the garages from the newly established property lines due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and the south side of the prolongation of the line of the west side of Begonia Avenue; and WHEREAS, in order to establish a setback for front facing garages on Pacific Drive, in addition to the ten foot front setback for the dwelling, Sections 20.10.030 (Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations) and 20.10.040 (Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula) require additional language; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding this amendment and is of the opinion that the proposed amendment to the Zoning Districting Maps and Sections 20.10.030 and 20.10.040 are consistent with the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the public was duly noticed of the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach approve Amendment No. 899 to amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a 10 foot front yard setback from the newly established property lines; amend Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to add letter "K" to "Additional Regulations" for front setbacks in Section 20.10.030; add language to Section 20.10.040 `B -3" entitled "Buildable Area," and letter "D" entitled "Front Setbacks," to establish criteria for the calculation of the buildable area and establish a 19 foot front yard setback for front facing garages on properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive 8 A899. Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 43 between Avocado Avenue and south side of the prolongation of the line of the west side of Begonia Avenue; m Em1 ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: EDWARD SELICH CHAIRMAN LARRY TUCKER SECRETARY AYES NOES ABSENT 9 A899, Pacific Drive May 18. 2000 A y 't EXHIBIT "A" 20.10.030 Residential Districts. Property Development Regulations The following schedule prescribes development regulations for residential districts. The columns prescribe basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column reference regulations following the schedule or located elsewhere in this code. Residential Districts: Property Development Regulations R -A R -1 R -1.5 R -2 MFR Additional Regulations Minimum Site Area per - -- - -- 1,000 1,000 1,200 (A), (B) Unit (sq.ft.) Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 87,120 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 (A) - Corner Lots (sq. ft.) 87,120 6,000 5,000 6,000 6,000 (A) Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 125 50 - -- 50 50 (A) - Corner Lots (ft.) 125 60 - -- 60 60 (A) Minimum Yards: Front (ft.) 20 20 20 20 20 (C), (D), (E), (F), (H), (K) Side (ft.) 5 3;4 3;4 3;4 3;4 (C), (D), (E), (G), (H) Corner Side (ft.) 5 3;4 3;4 3;4 3;4 (C), (D), (E), (G), (H) Rear (ft.) 5;25 10 10 10 10 (C), (D), (E), (H), (Q) - Abutting an alley (ft.) (1) Distance Between Detached Buildings (J) Maximum Height (ft.) (K), (L) Maximum Floor Area Limit Maximum Coverage Required Open Space Off - Street Parking and Loading 40% 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.75 (K), (M) (N) (K),(0) (P) Residential Districts; Additional Property Development Regulations (A) See Section 20.60.040: Development on Substandard Lots and Across Property Lines. (B) See Section 20.60.045: Slopes and Submerged Lands. 10 A899, Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 h C_, (C) See Section 20.60.030: Extensions Into Yards. (D) See Section 20.60.020: Accessory Structures and Mechanical Equipment... ' (E) See Section 20.60.035: Changes in Yard Requirements. (F) R -1. R -1.5. R -2. and MFR Districts. The minimum depth required for front yards shall be 20 feet, except as may be otherwise indicated on the Districting Maps. Distances shown on the Districting Maps are to be measured from the front property line, unless a different line is shown on the Districting Map. (G) R -1. R -1.5. and R -2. Districts. Each side yard shall be not less than 3 feet wide on development sites 40 feet wide or less, or 4 feet on lots wider than 40 feet; provided, that the side yard on the rear 20 feet of the street side of a comer lot, where there is reversed frontage, shall not be less than the front yard required or existing on the adjacent reversed frontage. MFR District. Each side yard shall not bg less than 3 feet wide on sites 40 feet wide or less; 4 feet wide on lots wider than 40 feet and narrower than 50 feet; and shall be equal in width to 3 percent of the average lot width for lots 50 feet or greater in width; provided that in no event shall a side yard wider than 25 feet be required; and provided further that the side yard on the rear 20 feet of the street side of a corner lot, where there is reversed frontage, shall not be less than the front yard required or existing on the adjacent reversed '10maee. Sire-et �N Corner S"w'e Yartl $et Franr Ycro SeiboCk Un Cr: - — -- Reversed Corner Lotl I I _ I Cn r I I s I �. I Interior Lot I o I o I �I — — — — — ._ I 0 I I � Diagram 20.10.030 (G): Setbacks on Reversed Frontages (H) R -A District. All structures housing animals (i.e., corrals, stalls, pens, cages, doghouses) shall maintain the following setbacks: From Another From Properties in From Public R•A District Other Zoning Rights -of -Way Property Districts Front 50 - -- ___ 1 l A899, Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 r, l Side 20 5 25 1 Rear 20 5 25 In addition to the setbacks established above, all structures housing animals shall be located a minimum of 35 feet from any building used as a dwelling on adjacent properties. All animal exercise areas and pasturing areas (i.e., paddocks, runs, racecourses, show grounds) may be located at the property line, however, shall maintain a 25 foot setback from the front property line abutting a public right -of -way and a 10 foot setback from any side property line abutting a public right -of -way. (1) In residential districts having alleys to the rear of lots or development sites shall maintain the following setbacks from rear property line, clear of all obstructions, except as provid- ed in Section 20.60.030 (A -6) and Section 20.60.030 (I): Alley Width Setback 15' or less 5' 15' -1" to 19' -11" T -9" 20' or more 0' Roll -up garage doors shall be required when garage door openings are located closer than 22 feet to alleys with widths of 20 feet or more. (I) R -1.5. R -2. and MFR Districts. 10 feet shall be maintained between buildings. This requirement shall not apply to buildings attached by a solid roof structure, a minimum of 4 feet wide. (K) R -1. R -2. and MFR Districts in Corona del Mar and R -1 District in West Newport and the Balboa Peninsula. See Section 20.10.040: Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula. 20.10.040 Special Development Regulations for Corona del Mar, West Newport, and the Balboa Peninsula A. Applicability. The residential development standards contained in this section shall apply to all dwellings located in the R -1 and R -2 Districts in Corona del Mar, and in the R -1 District in West Newport and the Balboa Peninsula as those areas are more particularly described below. Dwellings in those areas shall also be subject to all other provisions of this code. Where there is a conflict between this chapter and another provision of this code, the provisions of this chapter shall be controlling. 1. The areas of Corona del Mar in which the provisions of this chapter shall be controlling are more particularly described as follows: 12 A899. Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 '11 That area commonly referred to as old Corona del Mar generally bounded by Avocado Avenue, Pacific Coast Highway, Fifth Avenue, the easterly boundary of the Corona del Mar tract, the Pacific Ocean and the Harbor entrance; and f more specifically described as that area included in Annexation #3 as described in Ordinance No. 252 of the City of Newport Beach, approved on February 27, 1924. 2. The areas of West Newport and the Balboa Peninsula in which the provisions of this chapter shall be controlling are more particularly described as follows: That area commonly referred to as West Newport and the Balboa Peninsula generally bounded by the Semeniuk Slough. Pacific Coast Highway, the West Lido Channel, the Newport Channel, the Main Channel, the Harbor Entrance, the Pacific Ocean and the Santa Ana River. and more specifically described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the westerly boundary of the City of Newport Beach and the Mean High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean; thence proceeding northerly along said City Boundary to the intersection of said Boundary with the northerly right -of -way line of Pacific Coast Highway: thence due East a distance of 1" foot to an intersection with the City Boundary on the easterly side of that certain 1 foot strip shown on Annex No. 21. Ordinance No. 630. 10/31/1950: thence proceeding easterly. northerly, easterly and southerly along said City Boundary to an intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of Pacific Coast Highway: thence proceeding southerly along a perpendicular to said right -of -way line to the cuter -line of Pacific Coast Highwav: thence easterly along said centerline to an intersection with the centerime of Newport Boulevard: thence southerly along said centerline of Newport Boulevard to an intersection with the southerly Bulkhead of the Newport Island Channel, said point being westerly of U.S. Bulkhead Station #126 on the U.S. Bulkhead Line: thence easterly to said U.S. Bulkhead Station #126: thence continuing along the U.S. Bulkhead Line to U.S. Bulkhead Station #114; thence, northeasterly in a straight line to U.S. Bulkhead Station #162: thence southerly in a straight line to U.S. Bulkhead Station #113. and thence proceeding along the U.S. Bulkhead to U.S. Bulkhead Station #107; thence continuing southerly along the prolongation of the U.S. Bulkhead Line to an intersection with the Mean High Tide Line: thence westerly and northwesterly along said Mean High Tide Line to the point of Beginning. B. Floor Area Limit 1. In the R -1, R -2, and MFR Districts in the area designated as Old Corona del Mar, the total gross floor area (excluding those structures excepted under Section 20.10.030) shall not exceed 1.5 times the buildable area of the site. 2. Calculation. The gross floor area shall consist of the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, and including halls, stairways, service and mechanical equipment rooms, and basement or attic areas having a height of more than 7 feet. Internal shafts, such as elevator shafts, dumbwaiter shafts, ventilation shafts, and similar vertical shafts shall be counted as floor area on one floor level only. Non - habitable rooms and spaces of a building, with the exception of bath or toilet rooms, connecting corridors, 13 A899. Pacific Drive May 18. 2000 ^ l foyers, and stairwells, that measure more than 14 feet 6 inches from finished floor to the ceiling above finished floor shall be considered to occupy two floor levels and the floor -area of each level shall therefore be calculated towards the maximum floor area limit. 3. Pacific Dr ve Buildable Area Forpuiposes.of determining the buildat area for structures` located on the bluff, (south) side of Pacific Dri between Avocado Avenue and the south side of the prolongation;of a line of the`west side of Begonia Avenue, the front yard, setback designat on the Distnctin -Maps shall be used _ C. Oven Space Option. In the R -1 and R -2 Districts as designated in this section, open space shall be provided in addition to the required front yard setback. This additional open space shall be a volume of space equal to the buildable width of the lot, times the basic height limit, times 6 feet and may be provided anywhere on the lot behind the required yard setback lines. This open space shall be open on at least 2 sides and shall have a minimum dimension in any direction of at least 6 feet, except as indicated in this section, and may be used for outdoor living area. Open space with a dimension of less than 6 feet in any direction may be included in the required volume of open space, provided that said space is contiguous to required open space that provides a minimum 6 foot dimension in any direction. Roofs, balconies, decks, patios, cornices, exterior stairways with open risers and open railings, and architectural features may project into this area. This additional open space may be provided on any level or combination of levers and may extend .cross the entire structure or any portion thereof. D. Pacific Drive — Front Yard Setback... Front- loaded garages and carports 6n the bluff (south) side of Pacific Drive between Avocado,Avenue and the south side of the prolongation of the line of the west side of Begonia Avenue, shall maintain a minimum, front yard setback of 19 feet. 14 A899. Pacific Drive May 18, 2000 r, </w e~» r/ d •may �,�•.s,. u _ , Q' P J''r ?�P a• ti �� a Pti e y p .(t. 1`i ? 0.51 iEr�tt) itSC I a u'ra P� f. �� [o/•S'r 5G f Pry �'r,. °°: y5L •n, O P P P •r. P � Oo P O P ^ Pry _•.0 1Q'S. ry ~ ^rL 4 / jv s ' P 4� p0i,i 5t C P s r Q! 4 •`P P tp� P / Q Y e+: 7 is il�'•;e u / � � °•i4� °.: •::�Y $e `ems e pJ'�� Q � s`P t s ley r � r YC MCI Nf. SI � / � � / � 5�,:• <r /Y ip 1 a F ° n V N s° 0 Q ILit 1 =: E n J � J � =tea V r Fr.— ' V W W i e L � a V/ Q n R 2= W r 0� '• i � o ° u a � 6 �Y w° e� a. o `7 nF i �l �. .R now �.. (E.) PL.. r �N, „1 F; PACIFIC DRIVE C; o ^Y � F 1 a Q } m `Q .. YAR wAY rARKw V . �- _(N.) PL . .rR 01 05 PA UF. T 1 LINE �.��Gg ` ' •� it µEY r- (E.) PL' +— --� oI 1 i RCSIDGNCE City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes April 20, 2000 INDEX SUBJEC Amendment to front yard setbacks on Pacific Drive Item No. 3 2205 to 2333 Pacific Drive Intent to Amend Districting Map No. 16 A resolution of intent to amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a front yard setback of 10 feet from the newly established property lines of properties Initiated located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way. Ms. Temple noted that this is an act of initiation and does not constitute a final decision on this issue. The Planning Commission will make its final recommendation to the City Council when this item is brought back for a public hearing. Commissioner Kiser asked if this was adopted, would it change the buildable area of the homes at those addresses come closer to the existing Pacific Drive? He was answered yes. Commissioner Ashley stated his concern of reducing the size of Pacific Drive, as it is one of the few streets in this area where two -way travel is not impeded by cars parked at the curb. I would like to ask Mr. Edmonston to investigate the possibility of looking at a one way street system in Corona del Mar as it is difficult to negotiate those streets in a two -way configuration. A one way street system would be a lot more fluid and probably reduce a lot of accidents. I would like to see what this study would show. Motion was made by Commissioner Ashley to adopt a resolution of intent to initiate Amendment No. 899. Ayes: Kiser, Ashley, Selich, Gifford, Kranzley and Tucker Noes: None Absent: None SUBJECT: Lido Diner Item No.4 3461 Via Lido Use Permit No. 3671 Use Permit No. 3671 A request to establish a change in an existing retail space to a full- service, high Approved turnover eating and drinking establishment. The request includes an Alcoholic Beverage Outlet approval for the sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption (Type 41 License). Senior Planner Campbell passed out copies of revised findings and conditions of approval. As a follow up to the previous discussion on the Alcoholic Beverage Ordinance, this operation is a diner and will take the place of a vacant retail space in the Griffith Building in the Via Lido Plaza Shopping Center. This operation is a restaurant with no bar and they are seeking an ffj .�a �E,w,Q4r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH fAera g Date: April 20, 2000 O� B COMMUNITY and ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Agenda m No.: 3 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ss� NEWPORT BOULEVARD Person; Eugenia Garcia NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 number: (714) 644 -3208 (r4) 644-32 % FAX (74) 644-VSO Period: REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: Amendment to front yard setbacks on Broad Street SUMMARY: A resolution of intent to amend Districting Map No. 16 to establish a front yard setback of 10 feet from the newly established property lines of properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way. LOCATION: 14 properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive, 2205 through 2333 Pacific Drive. SUGGESTED ACTION: Adopt resolution of intent to amend Districting Map No. 899. The City is proposing to abandon approximateiy 20 feet of public right -of -way for properties located on the southerly side of Pacific Drive and reserve approximately 10 feet for a public utility easement. The abandonment will allow property owners for 14 lots between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue to gain approximately 20 feet for the purpose of increasing the buildable area of the lots. The amendment may involve changes to the Municipal Code. The resolution of intent to amend the Districting Map is predicated on the approval of the vacation. Section 20.94.020 (B) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that an amendment to a Districting Map may be initiated by resolution of the Planning Commission or the City Council. Submitted by: PATRICIA L. TEMPLE Planning Director Prepared by: EUGENIA GARCIA Associate Planner Attachments: Plot Maps Showing Pacific Drive Properties Districting Map No. 16 h�R N RESOLUTION NO. - 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO AMEND DISTRICTING MAP NO. 16, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED FRONT PROPERTY LINE ON PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PACIFIC DRIVE BETWEEN AVOCADO AVENUE AND BEGONIA AVENUE DUE TO THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- WAY WHEREAS, Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code authorizes the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution initiating amendments to the Zoning Code or Districting Maps of the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires to initiate an amendment to Districting Map No. 16 to establish a 10 foot front yard setback from the newly established property line due to the vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach to initiate an amendment to Districting Map No. 16. to establish a 10 foot front yard setback on properties located on the south side of Pacific Drive between Avocado Avenue and Begonia Avenue. M WA EDWARD SELICH CHAELMAN LARRY TUCKER SECRETARY AYES NOES 01-161 00 � '-1�'� i'�•� -u�T� is "v � �r• r r �:: ��srr,�•t x r 4��' Y - �' /� �/ .. i e � $ C C$a / �i 9 � d ONO ki a` 'td a`� °° o �N/� ys °s a� �7 . '�`•°��d� 6� 9 �`�,d° a`�d� ` P�' S a �5 h (�• JJ / A x bi v t e ( Y11 w 4 g r 4 4 z a a S Y NN� V °5,• i Aid ^t(. a e u. O C f' r,e ,'j ��d�oroa ii 4: +01 ^ g z o a 3 co R > c a OD g > 4 Z -u � n D 4 ... a %s• a �4 ti 7d tia i �'o. rya � ao a a + ti 5a 5 • b C`l • 2 ti 's. ...y + p'j+•f, + qt J 'S� ob IS N y a + � tia b ' -c� i - / `a° +�•� 4ati vy�y 14,! F.. Jf! MAP 'VO. /> h (�• ! V, ^`- -ell .- � a 'KIM '00' 91 h lot, c MR. n. lot, c MR. n. P, 4w a r✓ Y. �d a mon r "717m.. .l 1� e. m -akk