Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/05/2015 - Planning Commission CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers—100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, March 5, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER-The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Chair Tucker I11. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker Staff Present: Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director; Michael Torres, Assistant City Attorney; Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer; Makana Nova, Assistant Planner; Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner; Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner; Jason Van Patten; Planning Technician; Jennifer Biddle, Administrative Support Specialist IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Tucker invited those interested in addressing the Planning Commission on items not on the agenda, to do so at this time. Seeing no one wishing to address the Planning Commission, Chair Tucker closed Public Comments. V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19,2015 Chair Tucker noted that written corrections to the minutes of February 19, 2015, were submitted by Mr. Jim Mosher and that other suggested changes were submitted by Commissioner Hillgren and him. Chair Tucker opened public comments. Seeing no one wishing to comment, Chair Tucker closed public comments. Motion made by Chair Tucker and seconded by Commissioner Koetting to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes of February 19, 2015, as corrected. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 SESSIONS SANDWICHES ABC LICENSE (PA2014-153) 2823 Newport Boulevard Chair Tucker reported that the Planning Commission had extensive discussion when it considered this matter at the last meeting and that staff was given direction to return with changes to a resolution. Chair Tucker opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chair Tucker closed the Public Hearing. Motion made by Commissioner Lawler and seconded by Chair Tucker to adopt Resolution No. 1971 approving Minor Use Permit No. UP2014-050. Page 1 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 315(15 Commissioner Koetting referenced findings regarding alcohol sales and noted that the approval is for beer and wine. Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres reported that the actual authorization for this matter is beer and wine and that the Code is not specific as to the type of alcohol. The applicant indicated acceptance of all Conditions of Approval. AYES: Brown, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: Hillgren ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 PETERSON SETBACK DETERMINATION (PA2014-195) 706 Park Avenue Chair Tucker introduced the item and reported receiving a memo from the Community Development Director concerning setbacks on the subject alley. Planning Technician Jason Van Patten provided details of the staff report addressing the request, location, existing conditions, original orientation of the lot, application of standard setbacks, adjustment of setbacks, development limits for the subject and neighboring properties, maintaining access through the alley, and recommendations. He additionally specified that allowed encroachments within the alley side setback would need to maintain two-feet to the property line in order to provide adequate clearance through the alley due to the location of an existing power pole. In response to Commissioner Hillgren's question, Planning Technician Van Patten reported that the focus was on providing clearance through the alley. He indicated that shifting the property back would not address access through the alley given the allowed encroachments in the alley setback. He identified the existing setbacks and property line. In reply to Commissioner Koetting's inquiry, Planning Technician Van Patten reported there is no proposed project at this time but when a project comes forward, any above-ground encroachments would need to be returned to the existing grade, consistent with the alley;the curb would need to be leveled. Vice Chair Kramer commented on other setback alternatives and Deputy Community Development Director Brenda Wisneski reported that staff looked at a variety of options and focused primarily on the alley. She noted that Vice Chair Kramer's suggestion of a five-foot alley setback and three-foot side setback would be a good one as it would maintain the floor area being proposed and would maintain alley access area. Planning Technician Van Patten clarified that the four-foot side setback is the standard setback based on the width of the lot. Secretary Myers commented on allowable encroachments and Planning Technician Van Patten clarified the intent. Chair Tucker opened the Public Hearing. Sally Peterson, property owner, agreed with the ideas proposed by the Planning Commission. She agreed with having a three-foot setback on one side and a five-foot setback on the alley side. Chair Tucker closed the Public Hearing. Motion made by Commissioner Hillgren and seconded by Vice Chair Kramer to adopt Resolution No. 1972 approving Staff Approval No. SA2014-028 modifying the buildable area so that it results in three-foot setback to the left of the property along Park Avenue and a five-foot setback on the alley side. Page 2 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3/5/15 AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 4 HONOR COFFEE CUP(PA2015-002) 3400 Via Lido, Suite B Associate Planner Makana Nova provided details of the staff report including a description of the proposed project, location, surrounding uses, existing conditions, parking, background, and reported there is no alcohol service, live entertainment, or dancing proposed. Additionally, she presented the proposed 627-square-foot net public area, hours of operation between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., daily, and one parking space per 50-square- foot parking rate based on the net public area, which results in a request to waive seven parking spaces. Ms. Nova reported that a parking demand analysis was conducted as part of a Conditional Use Permit for the greater Lido Marina Village area which demonstrated a parking shortfall. However, the Use Permit was approved with an occupancy scenario that requires another parking study to be conducted in the future based on real-time data. She added that staff is supportive of the use and provided the rationale for the waiver including shared trips throughout Lido Marina Village, off-peak demand hours, and the addition of pedestrian and bicycle amenities to accommodate visitors. She addressed CEQA exemptions and presented recommendations. In response to Secretary Myers's question, Associate Planner Nova explained parking credits and the basis for this credit in the Nonconforming Chapter of the Zoning Code. Secretary Myers pointed out the need to correct the numbering in the facts supporting the findings within the staff report. In reply to Commissioner Hillgren's question, Associate Planner Nova reported there has been no communication received from DJM Capital, majority property owner of Lido Marina Village, regarding this project. Commissioners Hillgren and Brown commented on the parking, hoping that the area will be successful and emphasizing the possibility that this may be the first of several uses that need a parking waiver in Lido Marina Village. Chair Tucker referenced a non-conforming parking situation when the project was originally built. Commissioner Koetting inquired about Condition No. 14 relative to the location of trash dumpsters. Associate Planner Nova reported she has been working with the applicant regarding this matter and that the applicant has stated they have an agreement with DJM to share some of the trash enclosures along the private alley. Staff will request a copy of that agreement prior to the issuance of a building permit. In reply to Commissioner Koetting's question, Associate Planner Nova reported that outdoor dining would be in the right-of-way and that Public Works would need to amend the agreement in place for the right-of-way improvements in order to authorize outdoor dining, which would require City Council approval. In response to Chair Tucker's questions, Associate Planner Nova reported that the improvement plan for Lido Marina Village includes additional bicycle racks and explained the process for rescinding the prior CUP in the draft resolution. Chair Tucker opened the Public Hearing. John Birer, owner of Charlie's Locker, spoke in support of the proposed project but expressed concerns with permit parking along Via Lido. He asked regarding the possibility of eliminating the Master Permit Parking so that people can park on Lido with a limitation of two hours. He opined that would ease the congestion in the area, substantially. Ken Schultz, applicant, introduced himself and offered to respond to questions from the Planning Commission. Chair Tucker closed the Public Hearing. Page 3 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3/5/15 Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski confirmed that the matter of on-street parking would be under the purview of the City Council. Motion made by Secretary Myers and seconded by Commissioner Koetting to adopt Resolution No. 1973 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2015-001, AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 5 APPEAL AND CALL FOR REVIEW PROCEDURES CODE AMENDMENT(PA2015-029) Citywide Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski presented details of the staff report addressing a recent court decision regarding the matter, clarification of procedures and consistency with City Council policy. In reply to Vice Chair Kramer's inquiry, Assistant City Attorney Torres reported that the amendment submitted addresses the bias issue by limiting the reason of the call for review by Commissioners or City Council Members to an item so that the entire body has an opportunity to review it. In response to Commissioner Koetting's inquiry, Assistant City Attorney Torres reported that a Commissioner or Council Member could call for a review. He added there is not a filing fee related to calls for review but if a Commissioner or Council Member, acting as interested parties, appeal a project, they would pay the fee out of their own pocket. Responding to Commissioner Hillgren's question, Assistant City Attorney Torres confirmed that a call for review would be a de novo hearing. Additionally, he explained the difference between a Zoning Administrator and a Hearing Officer. He reported that the subject code amendment is specific to the Planning Commission but staff is in the process of amending other sections of the code so that other commissions could call for review or appeal cases. Chair Tucker opened the Public Hearing. Jim Mosher spoke regarding the City's intent to have a mechanism for avoiding appeal fees. He stated that the Planning Commission and City Council exist as bodies, in the aggregate, and they act in the aggregate. He opined that it is improper to empower any individual member to do something, entirely on their own. Additionally, he stated that it is a fundamental principle of law that one cannot sit as a judge in their own cause. He added that anyone calling an item up for review, would not be doing so if they did not believe there was something wrong with the original outcome. He believed this matter is setting the City up for potential litigation. He suggested that it be part of the mechanism that the person calling up the item, recuse themselves from hearing it. He suggested that staff think of another mechanism for avoiding appeals fees. Chair Tucker closed the Public Hearing. Chair Tucker commented on the current appeals process and stated that the concept of having the fee waived is a political matter and that it is at the prerogative of City Council. He added that the biggest problem was that the City did not follow its own rules. He did not agree with Mr. Mosher's suggestion that the person bringing the matter up for review needs to recuse themselves and stated that the way that it is written, fits within the City's political system. Vice Chair Kramer agreed with Chair Tucker's comments and addressed prior appeals considered by the Planning Commission. He requested a review of the Commission's authority to appeal. Assistant City Attorney Torres referenced Section 20.64.020 within the Municipal Code, adding that It gives the authority for what items may be called up for review by the Planning Commission. He provided an example of a Page 4 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 315/15 Zoning Director interpretation that could be called up for review. He reiterated that the item being considered addresses the bias issue, head on. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski added that the Hearing Officer referenced in the code, is used very sparingly and she provided examples of proceedings where one would be necessary. Vice Chair Kramer stated that if a matter is a planning issue, the body that reviews it should be the Planning Commission, Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that the Commission may make that part of the motion at this time. Commissioner Koetting stated that other cities call such matters "reconsideration", rather than a call for review. Assistant City Attorney Torres noted that a motion to reconsider would be different than a call for review. He added that the idea of the call for review is not that the person making the call does not like the project. Chair Tucker noted that once a call for review is concluded at the Council level; that would be the final determination. Motion made by Vice Chair Kramer and seconded by Chair Tucker to adopt Resolution No. 1974 recommending City Council adoption of Code Amendment No. CA2015-001 amending the appeal and call for review procedures in Title 20, changing Section 20.64.020 (C) stating, "The decision of the Hearing Officer shall be appealed or called for review to the Planning Commission"and as amended by Chair Tucker. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None VIII. CURRENT BUSINESS ITEM NO. 6 GENERAL PLAN AND HOUSING ELEMENT ANNUAL REPORT(PA2007-195) Citywide Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan provided a staff report explaining the annual report on the General Plan including a Housing Element report which is required by the state. The format provided meets requirements by the state to provide a status on the implementation of the general plan programs including a more detailed report on the housing element and implementation of its programs. She addressed Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), other state requirements, and implementation of programs and offered to respond to questions from the Planning Commission. In response to Chair Tucker's inquiry, Assistant Planner Whelan explained that the annual General Plan status report including the Housing Element report provides a status for the Calendar Year 2014, Assistant Planner Whelan provided a summary of the City's status in implementing the Housing Element programs as well as an update on affordable housing, She added that the City is currently working on an Request For Proposals(RFP)to spend the in-lieu housing fund. Commissioner Hillgren commented positively on the report and asked regarding General Plan Implementation programs in terms of updating the General Plan to reflect the Citys vision. Assistant Planner Whelan stated that the report would include General Plan amendments that impacted the entire City's vision overall and not individual General Plan amendments. Vice Chair Kramer commented on efforts and money spent on improving the General Plan and stated that at some point, he would like the Planning Commission to recommend to Council, that the majority of updates to the General Plan be approved. Page 5of8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 315(15 Chair Tucker opened public comments. Jim Mosher clarified that relative to Measure Y, the item before the public was proposed changes to the allocation in the anomaly tables of the General Plan and that the electorate was not asked to vote on other proposed changes. He noted the loss of four housing units in 2014 and opined there is a requirement to add nine, not five. In terms of the status of the overall General Plan, he addressed Section 10.2 regarding a tracking and monitoring program and expressed disappointment that the City has not provided something where the public could clearly see the status of development in the City. Chair Tucker closed public comments. In reply to Vice Chair Kramer's question, Assistant Planner Whelan reported that staff is currently working on a tracking and monitoring program. She added that the project is ongoing and that staff tracks development in its GIS system. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski added that staff monitors development and General Plan amendments, closely. Assistant Planner Whelan added that the goal is to compile all of the information into one database. Vice Chair Kramer stated this is something that should be transparent to everyone in the City. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski stated that staff is trying to make it into an accessible, public database. It is currently not available on the City's website but the goal is to include it in same. Vice Chair Kramer requested a timetableldeadline as to when the project can be completed. Commissioner Brown referenced Mr. Mosher's comments regarding the net loss in units and Assistant Planner Whelan clarified that those do not refer to affordable housing but rather total housing units constructed and is not related to RHNA. Motion made by Chair Tucker and seconded by Commissioner Lawler to forward to City Council for review and authorize submittal to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the State Department of Housing and Community Development(MCD). AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None IX. NEW BUSINESS ITEM NO. 7 MARINERS'MILE PLANNING CHARRETTE REPORT Citywide Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski referenced distribution of the memo and provided a PowerPoint presentation with a report on the recent Mariner's Mile Planning Charrette. She reported that a detailed report is available on the City's website as well as a copy of a presentation provided during the event. She introduced Matt Shannon who acted as facilitator of the charrette. She addressed community feedback and interests, opportunities to create a village core, widening the existing highway, opportunities for improvements, creating a centralized parking area, examples of design concepts, challenges in the area and potential development. City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine reported on traffic studies currently underway. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski referenced a memo that was distributed electronically and stated that a hard copy was not provided to the Commission. She noted that it was mentioned earlier that the Page 6 of 8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3/5/15 Land Use Element amendment included policy amendments specifically in relation to Mariners' Mile and stated that this is an opportunity for the Planning Commission to forward a memo to City Council reminding them of the work that is going on. She added that it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to look at the area in more depth and present a recommendation to Council. Chair Tucker commented on reviewing policies in terms of potential things that could be done to foster revitalization of Mariner's Mile. Vice Chair Kramer noted that in reviewing the General Plan/Land Use Element,the main area that was identified that rose to the level of additional study, was Mariner's Mile. He referenced the memo and hoped that it can be adopted tonight and that Council will agree and allocate the appropriate resources. Chair Tucker opened public comments. Jim Mosher asked regarding the company doing the traffic studies. Chair Tucker closed public comments. City Traffic Engineer Brine reported that HDR is the firm conducting the traffic studies. Motion made by Commissioner Hillgren and seconded by Commissioner Brown to direct staff to forward memo to the City Council for their consideration. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler, Myers and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None X. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 8 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION-None ITEM NO. 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1. Update on the General Plan/Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reported that the Committee met last week and that consideration was given to an overall schedule and low-cost visitor-serving uses. She added that as a result of the City receiving grants from the Coastal Commission, the City has agreed to slow down the approval process to work closely with them. It should be presented to the Planning Commission in the fall. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski provided an update on public meetings that have been held to date regarding this matter. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of cancelling the study session that had been previously planned. Vice Chair Kramer indicated he would prefer keeping the study session as scheduled so that staff can provide a general update on the issue. In response to his question, Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski addressed the role of the committee going forward. Chair Tucker requested additional time for the Planning Commission to review the information. The study session is tentatively scheduled for March 19th. Chair Tucker stated he would prefer scheduling the study session for April 9th. Members of the Commission concurred. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski referenced the tentative agenda provided to the Commission. Page 7of8 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 315115 Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski referenced the Planning Division Action report and noted that hard copies were distributed to the Commission and will be provided in the future. 2. Update on City Council Items - None ITEM NO. 10 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT Vice Chair Kramer reiterated his request for a status update and deadline for the Master Development Tracking System and added that he would like to have a study session of an annual review of the City's Capital Improvement Projects. Assistant City Attorney Torres reported that was eliminated from the list of Planning Commission duties per Charter Amendment EE. Vice Chair Kramer stated that the Planning Commission is allowed to review matters related to planning. Chair Tucker noted the Planning Commission has no authority in terms of money being spent for public improvements. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski agreed to have staff bring back a CIP overview for the April Planning Commission meeting. ITEM NO. 11 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Brown requested an excused absence for the Planning Commissioner meeting of March 19, 2015. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:31 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of March 19, 2015. The agenda for the Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, February 27, 2015, at 2:50 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on Friday, February 27, 2015, at 3:00 p.m. Larry T cker, Chair Tp— �ayV'Yers,P4c,retary Page 8of8