The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06 - SCAP III, LLC Propert Amendments, PA2011-196CITY OF Q SEW PORT @s NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report Agenda Item No. 6 February 28, 2012 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Department Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director 949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt @newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner APPROVED: TITLE: SCAP III, LLC Property Amendments (PA2011 -196) 514 E. Ocean Front (aka 101 -107 Palm Street) • Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 ABSTRACT: Amendment to the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation of the subject property from Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to Mixed - Vertical (MU -V). The code amendment will be consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan amendments that were unanimously approved at the February 14, 2012, City Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2012 -8 (Attachment No. CC1) approving Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012. NOTICING: The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Submitted by: t Kimberly Brandt, A Director Attachments: CC1 Ordinance No. 2012 -8 with Exhibit 1 2 City Council Attachment M City Council Ordinance with Exhibit 3 11 ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 514 E. OCEAN FRONT (PA2011 -196) WHEREAS, an application was filed Terry A. Jones, on behalf of the property owner SCAP III, LLC, with respect to the subject property located at 514 E. Ocean Front, requesting approval of amendments to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code to change the land use from Two -Unit Residential to Mixed -Use Vertical; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District, the General Plan Land Use Element category is Two -Unit Residential (RT); and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the coastal zone. The subject application considered by the City Council will simultaneously change the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan from Two -Unit Residential (RT and RT -E) to the Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) land use designations; and WHEREAS, the concurrent amendments of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan will provide consistency with the proposed code amendment to change the zoning of the subject property from Two -Unit Residential (R- 2) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); and WHEREAS, the existing building and use, and future development of the property affected by the proposed amendment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the MU -V Zoning district of the Newport Beach Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2012, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting; and WHEREAS, at the January 19, 2012, public hearing, the Planning Commission received public comments and on an affirmative motion (6 ayes, 0 noes), forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed Zoning Code Amendment; and 9 ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -8 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Therefore, to the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and property owner shall defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to the project, the project's approval based on the City's CEQA determination and /or the City's failure to comply with the requirements of any federal, state, or local laws, including, but not limited to, CEQA, General Plan and zoning requirements. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Zoning Map shall be amended as provided in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference to change the zoning district of the subject property from R -2 (Two -Unit Residential) to MU -V (Mixed -Use Vertical), with all other provisions of the existing Zoning Map remaining unchanged. SECTION 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 3: This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Section 15301 — Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. The proposed amendment is exempt since it does not entail any significant alteration to the subject property and will bring the zoning district and the existing use of the building and property into conformance with the General Plan land use designation and Coastal Land Use designation and Zoning District. NO ORDINANCE NO. Page 3 SECTION 4: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and it shall not become effective until Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005 is approved by the California Coastal Commission and in effect. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 14°i day of February, 2012, and adopted on the 28th day of February, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS NANCY GARDNER, MAYOR ATTEST: LEILANI BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: U z AARON HARP, CITY ArtTORNEY 7 ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -8 Page 4 Exhibit A 514 E. Ocean Front CA2011 -012 (PA2011 -196) 0 vu / 4 < �YgVF� 6q�BOq B��F �CFOQ 84��F t, CA2011 -012 (PA2011 -196) Zoning Code Amendment 514 E Ocean Front CA2011- 012.mxd December /2011 0 100 200 mmmmmmmnz== Feet e E .... T ...... ......... SEW PART CITY OF N C'4<I FORN�P City Council Staff Report Agenda Item No. 15 February 14, 2012 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Department Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director 949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt @newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner APPROVED: � v TITLE: SCAP III, LLC Property Amendments (PA2011 -196) 514 E. Ocean Front (aka 101 -107 Palm Street) • General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009 • Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005 • Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 ABSTRACT: Amendments to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and the Zoning Map to change the designations of the subject property from Two -Unit Residential (RT, RT -E and R -2) to Mixed - Vertical (MU -V) land use designations. The subject application does not include a specific project for development at this time. The proposed land use designation changes would allow for the retention of the existing development and allow for future development in accordance with the standards of the proposed MU -V zoning district. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Conduct a public hearing; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -17 (Attachment No. CC 1) approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009 and Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005; and 3. Introduce Ordinance No. 2012-8 (Attachment No. CC 2) approving Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012 and pass to second reading for adoption on February 28, 2011. FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. .9, Y 9 Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 2 . 4 J i +� ?� r a c � J �J og / 4 E .:/� � x� llq 'ilk � ` Subject Property as + ,Ji ' � If mod• �� dry a a a 7 � J A GENERAL PLAN ZONING is r '♦ 3 n x, Y,Y �Y Yu.r t f� ..,na , s B i r Yu f. it r y ' t � j'i2x• xJ i a filiesr ' ro a • l.W '�� I.l YY` Yp 1 r -r� 11Y ]]W y t 4'�.�• , �.r j Y. v "]' " ` Two -Unit Residential (RT) Two -Unit Residential (RT -E) Two -Unit Residential (R -2) (Exist ON SITE Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) SOUTH Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities PF EAST Multiple -Unit Residential Multiple Unit Residential !DkA% 10\J_c1 I Multi -Unit Residential (RM) 3 Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 3 INTRODUCTION Proiect Settin The subject property is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of East Ocean Front (boardwalk) and Palm Street on the Balboa Peninsula. The property is approximately 5,415 square feet in area and consists of two legal lots. It is designated by the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and the Zoning Code for Two -Unit Residential use. The property is currently developed with a mixed - use building with commercial use on the ground floor and five residential units on the second floor. The commercial uses are nonconforming with the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code. Background The existing two -story, mixed -use building was permitted in 1948 with four commercial tenant spaces on the ground floor and five residential apartments on the second floor. Throughout the years, the commercial suites have been occupied by a laundromat and various food service and retail uses. Current commercial uses include a bicycle rental and ice cream shop, a cigar shop, an office use, and a vacant suite. In 2003, Modification Permit No. MD2003 -017 was approved authorizing fagade improvements and the addition of a third floor deck. The fagade of the building was significantly enhanced with the addition of new roof elements, windows, window frames, pot shelves, and new exterior finish and paint. Photographs of the building are included as Attachment No. CC8. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -76 approving a comprehensive update to the Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan Update'). As a result, the land use designation of the property was changed from Retail and Service Commercial with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two - Unit Residential. On November 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007 -71, approving Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2007 -001, making the Coastal Land Use Plan consistent with the General Plan Update. The Coastal Land Use Plan designation for the property was changed from General Commercial (CG -C) with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two -Unit Residential. On January 28, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2008 -05, which in addition to other Zoning Code changes, established the maximum time period for the abatement and termination of nonconforming uses in residential districts. However, determinations of nonconformity could not be made until Coastal Commission approval of the City's Local 5 Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 4 Coastal Plan (LCP) amendments, which occurred on July 14, 2009, and the subsequent Zoning Code Update which was effective November 25, 2010. On October 25, 2010, the City Council adopted a Comprehensive Update to the Zoning Code (Newport Beach Municipal Code Title 20) bringing consistency between the Zoning Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The result of that action rendered several properties nonconforming, including existing commercial uses located within residential districts, which in accordance with Ordinance No. 2008 -05 became subject to abatement. Planning Commission Action On January 19, 2012, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments. After reviewing the proposed land use designations and their intensities, and hearing testimony from the applicant, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendments. A copy of the staff report (Attachment No. CC3), Planning Commission Resolution (Attachment No. CC4) and the draft minutes of the hearing are attached (Attachment No. CC5). A letter from a neighbor citing concerns with the operation of the cigar shop, a tenant within the subject building, was also submitted to Planning Commission (Attachment No. CC6- Correspondence). The City's Code Enforcement Division is investigating the concerns raised and will resolve as a separate Code Enforcement matter. DISCUSSION Analysis The subject application does not include a specific project for development at this time. The proposed land use changes, as shown below, would allow the retention of the existing mixed -use building and allow for future development in accordance with the standards of the proposed Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) zoning district and with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) designations. The proposed land use designations would allow for future development as follows: Mixed -Use Buildings: floor area to land ratio of 1.50; where a minimum floor area to land ratio of 0.35 and maximum of 0.5 shall be used for nonresidential purposes and maximum of 1.0 for residential. Nonresidential Buildings: floor area to land area ratio of 0.75 maximum. Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code are legislative acts. Neither City nor State Planning Law set forth required findings for approval or denial of such amendments. However, when making such decisions the City Council should consider applicable policies and development standards to ensure consistency and compatibility with surrounding uses. I Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 5 General Plan The applicant requests to amend the General Plan to- change the subject property from a RT to a MU -V land use designation. The MU -V designation is intended to provide for the development of properties for mixed -use structures that vertically integrate housing with retail uses including retail, office, restaurant, and similar nonresidential uses. MU -V designated sites also may be developed exclusively with commercial uses in accordance with the CN, CC, CG, or CO -G designations. Consistency with the applicable policies of the General Plan has been evaluated in conjunction with the proposed amendments and have been determined to be consistent with those policies. A detailed consistency analysis is included in the January 19, 2012, Planning Commission staff report (Attachment No. CC3). Coastal Land Use Plan The subject property is located in the coastal zone and therefore, is subject to the applicable goals, objective and policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. The subject property does not contain any sensitive coastal resources as it is presently improved with commercial buildings nor located where public access easements would be required. The Coastal Act prioritizes land uses, and visitor - serving uses are a higher priority land use than residential use. The continuation of commercial uses and future redevelopment on the subject property as permitted by the MU -V designation will not conflict with the policies of the Coastal Act. Zoning Code The stated purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to carry out the policies of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Consistency between the General Plan and zoning designation is critical to ensure orderly development and enforcement. Therefore, concurrent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan land use changes, the applicant is requesting to change the zoning designation from RT to MU -V. The MU -V zoning district is intended to provide for the development of mixed -use commercial and residential projects. The main purpose of the requested amendment is to allow the continued use of the existing mixed -use development as was originally approved in 1948. If the amendments are approved, the existing mixed -use building would be consistent with the allowed uses of the proposed MU -V district and the existing commercial uses would be allowed to remain without abatement. However, as explained in more detail in the January 19, 2012, Planning Commission staff report (Attachment No. CC3- Table 1) the existing building would remain nonconforming to the development standards of the proposed MU -V zoning district, . including standards related to density, floor area, Code Amendment No. CA2OO1 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 6 setbacks, and parking. Future new development would require conformance with applicable development and parking standards. Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Analysis Pursuant to Charter Section 423 and Council Policy A -18, an analysis must be prepared to establish whether a proposed general plan amendment (if approved) requires a vote by the electorate. The proposed amendment would be combined with 80- percent of the increases in traffic, dwelling units, and non - residential floor area created by previous general plan amendments (approved within the preceding 10 years) within the same statistical area. The following thresholds are applicable: 100 dwelling units, 100 a.m. peak hour trips, 100 p.m. peak hour trips, or 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area. If any of these thresholds are exceeded and the City Council approves the requested General Plan Amendment, the amendment would be classified as a "major amendment' and be subject to voter consideration. Approved amendments, other than those approved by the electorate, are tracked for 10 years and factored into the analysis of future amendments as indicated. Table 1 below summarizes the changes created by the proposed amendment. The table also shows threshold totals for the subject property. As indicated, none of the four thresholds would be exceeded, and therefore, a vote is not required. A more detailed analysis is included as Attachment No. CC7. Table 1: Charter Section 423 Analysis Summary Statistical Area D3 Increase in Increase in A.M. Increase in P.M. Increase in Allo Area Floor Peak Hour Trips Peak Hour Trips I Allow `dnDs Dwelling Prior Amendment 0(80%) 36.14(80%) 62.26(80%) -9(80%) GP2010 -007 Proposed 4 sq. ft. 10.42 14.09 1 G P2011 -009 1061 TOTAL 4,061 sq. ft. 46.56 76.35 -10 Section 423 40,000 sq. ft. 100 100 100 Threshold SB18 Tribal Consultation Guidelines Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. The appropriate tribe contacts supplied by the NAHC were provided notice on November 3, 2011, to allow tribe contacts an opportunity to request consultation. That 90 -day period ended on February 1, 2012. Although no formal responses were received, it should be noted that staff has consulted with one tribe contact on another ;al Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 7 project, during which various projects the City is processing were discussed, including this amendment. The tribe contact indicated he did not have any concerns with this amendment so long as future redevelopment of the site is subject to development review and complies with CEQA. Summary The applicant has requested the amendment to allow retention of the existing mixed - use building and uses. The building was constructed in 1948 and significantly renovated in 2003. The uses have been in existence for nearly sixty -three years and its abatement at this time seems contrary to the General Plan Policies that promote revitalization of the area. Continuation of these uses and future development consistent with the MU -V designation does not appear to conflict with the General Plan or Coastal Land Use Plan or Coastal Act. The Planning Commission and staff do not foresee any adverse environmental impacts with continued use or redevelopment. The approval of the General Plan Amendments to MU -V designation would not necessitate a vote of the electorate, as required by Section 423 of the City Charter. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. If denied, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") review, pursuant to Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines. NOTICING: The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Submitted by: Kimberly Brandt, Director Attachments Code Amendment No. CA2001 -012 February 14, 2012 Page 8 CC1 Draft City Council Resolution for Approval with Attachments CC2 Draft Ordinance with Attachments CC3 CC4 CC5 CC6 CC7 CC8 Planning Commission Staff Report, January 19, 2012 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1865 Draft Planning Commission Correspondence Section 423 Analysis Table Site Photographs Minutes, January 19, 2012 10 City Council Attachment CCI Draft City Council Resolution for Approval with Attachments RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND COASTAL LAND USE PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 514 E. OCEAN FRONT (PA2011- 196) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. An application was filed by Terry A. Jones, on behalf of the property owner SCAP III, LLC, with respect to the subject property located at 514 E. Ocean Front, legally described as Lots 15 and 16, Block 6, Balboa Tract, requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009 and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment LC2011- 005 changing the land use designation from Two -Unit Residential (RT and RT -E) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); and Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012 changing the zoning designation from Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V). In 1948, the City of Newport Beach permitted the construction of a mixed -use building located at 514 E. Ocean Front. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -76 approving a comprehensive update to the Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan Update "), resulting in the land use designation of the subject property to change from Retail and Service Commercial with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two -Unit Residential. 4. On November 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007 -71, approving Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2007 -001 making the Coastal Land Use Plan consistent with the General Plan Update. The Coastal Land Use Plan designation for the property was changed from General Commercial with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two -Unit Residential. 5. On January 28, 2008, the City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance No. 2008 -05) that established the maximum time period for the abatement and termination of nonconforming uses in residential districts. However, determinations of nonconformity could not be made until the finalization of the City's Local Coastal Plan (LCP), which occurred on July 14, 2009, and subsequent Zoning Code Update which became effective November 25, 2010. 6. On October 25, 2010, the City Council adopted a Comprehensive Update to the Zoning Code (Title 20) bringing consistency between the Zoning Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The zoning designation of the property was changed from Specific Plan No. 8 /Retail and Service Commercial (SP8 /RSC) to Two -Unit Residential (R -2). The result of that action rendered commercial uses located within residential )3 City Council Resolution No. Page 2 districts nonconforming. In accordance with Ordinance No. 2008 -05, mentioned above, those properties are subject to abatement. 7. Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the appropriate tribe contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were provided notice of the proposed General Plan Amendment on November 3, 2011. The California Government Code requires 90 days to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult unless the tribe contacts mutually agree to a shorter time period. The response period ended on February 1, 2012. No requests for consultation were received. 8. A public hearing was held on January 19, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (6 ayes, 0 noes) to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1865 recommending City Council adoption of the proposed General Plan Amendment, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, and Zoning Code Amendment. 9. A public hearing was held on February 14, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Section 15301 — Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. The proposed amendments are exempt since they do not entail alteration to the subject property and are establishing consistency between the General Plan Land Use designation and Coastal Land Use designation with the existing use of the buildings located on the subject property. 2. The City's action to amend the Coastal Land Use Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to California Code of Regulations §15265. 3. The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Therefore, to the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and property owner shall defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and i� City Council Resolution No. Page 3 commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to the project, the project's approval based on the City's CEQA determination and /or the City's failure to comply with the requirements of any federal, state, or local laws, including, but not limited to, CEQA, General Plan and zoning requirements. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. 1. The proposed amendments of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code are necessary to implement the property owner request. 2. Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10 -year span) exceeds any one of the following thresholds, a vote of the electorate would be required: if the project generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM); adds 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area; or, adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area. 3. This is the second General Plan Amendment that affects Statistical Area D3 since the General Plan update in 2006. Although there is no increase in the number of dwelling units, the amendment results in 4,061 additional square feet of non - residential floor area. The additional floor area results in an increase of 10 a.m. peak hour trips and an increase 14 p.m. peak hour trips based on the commercial and residential housing trip rates reflected in Council Policy A -18. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required. 4. The existing building and uses, and future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the MU -V zoning district of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. jS City Council Resolution No. SECTION 4. DECISION NOUN, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Page 4 1. Amendments to the General Plan and Local Coastal Land Use Plan are legislative acts. Neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. 2. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009 as shown in attached Exhibit A and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005 as shown in attached Exhibit B. 3. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby authorizes submittal of the Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to the California Coastal Commission for formal review and approval. 4. This resolution shall not become effective until the effective date of the California Coastal Commission approval. Passed and adopted by the City Council of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on February 14, 2012, by the following vote to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS NANCY GARDNER, MAYOR ATTEST: LEILANI BROWN, CITY CLERK i� City Council Resolution No. Page 5 Exhibit A 514 E. Ocean Front GP- 2011 -009 (PA2011 -196) 1-7 �Eri'Oe o � F � U � Q GP2011- 009.mxd December12011 pp 6 -b� �1�. YN/ GP2011 -009 (PA2011 -196) General Plan Amendment 514 E Ocean Front F g g� i . 9� 5 0 125 250 Feet e City Council Resolution No. Page 7 514 E. Ocean Front GP- 2011 -009 (PA2011 -196) Uq l M ►II�j,,II �• I, at 1,o 04 NV,W4pQ, T a ^' n U yd 0 Cq GIPO &��P LC2011- 005.mxd December /2011 9 F� /\ l �a pp LC2011 -005 (PA2011 -196) ; Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment 514 E Ocean Front F 4A 9 aq v y�C B( b0 P n �BT 150 300 Wr-�— Feet N!.e.,. ....._... City Council Attachment C C2 Draft Ordinance with Attachments S- W" ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 514 E. OCEAN FRONT (PA2011 -196) WHEREAS, an application was filed Terry A. Jones, on behalf of the property owner SCAP III, LLC, with respect to the subject property located at 514 E. Ocean Front, requesting approval of amendments to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code to change the land use from Two -Unit Residential to Mixed -Use Vertical; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District, the General Plan Land Use Element category is Two -Unit Residential (RT); and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the coastal zone. The subject application considered by the City Council will simultaneously change the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan from Two -Unit Residential (RT and RT -E) to the Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) land use designations; and WHEREAS, the concurrent amendments of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan will provide consistency with the proposed code amendment to change the zoning of the subject property from Two -Unit Residential (R- 2) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); and WHEREAS, the existing building and use, and future development of the property affected by the proposed amendment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the MU -V Zoning district of the Newport Beach Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2012, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting; and WHEREAS, at the January 19, 2012, public hearing, the Planning Commission received public comments and on an affirmative motion (6 ayes, 0 noes), forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed Zoning Code Amendment; and 27 ORDINANCE NO. Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Therefore, to the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and property owner shall defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to the project, the project's approval based on the City's CEQA determination and /or the City's failure to comply with the requirements of any federal, state, or local laws, including, but not limited to, CEQA, General Plan and zoning requirements. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Zoning Map shall be amended as provided in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference to change the zoning district of the subject property from R -2 (Two -Unit Residential) to MU -V (Mixed -Use Vertical), with all other provisions of the existing Zoning Map remaining unchanged. SECTION 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 3: This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Section 15301 — Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. The proposed amendment is exempt since it does not entail any significant alteration to the subject property and will bring the zoning district and the existing use of the building and property into conformance with the General Plan land use designation and Coastal Land Use designation and Zoning District. as ORDINANCE NO. _ Page 3 SEC"T"ION 4: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance, The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in.the official newspaper of the City, and it shall not become effective until Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005 is approved by the California Coastal Commission and in effect. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 141h day of February, 2012, and adopted on the 28th day of February, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS NANCY GARDNER, MAYOR ATTEST: LEILANI BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: AARON HARP, CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO. Page 4 514 E. Ocean Front CA2011 -012 (PA2011 -196) 30 H O 6A �BgYgLE �L y �C W P fJF, ^ T F 1 CA2011 -012. mxd December /2011 �pp9gC� /T �F �E<LpE h a 0 3� e _ Ily �f CA2011 -012 (PA2011 -196) Zoning Code Amendment 514 E Ocean Front y �d 4" ` /, 0 100 200 MMMMmmmn=== Feet e 31 City Council Attachment CC3 Planning Commission Staff Report 1/19/12 33 sq CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT January 19, 2012 Hearing Agenda Item 2 SUBJECT: SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment - (PA2011 -196) 514 E. Ocean Front (aka 101 -107 Palm Street) General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009 Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012 Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005 APPLICANT: Terry A. Jones PLANNER: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3209, jmurillo @newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY The property owner is seeking to continue the existing nonconforming commercial uses of the subject property by requesting the following amendments: 1) General Plan Land Use designation from Two -Unit Residential (RT) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); 2) Coastal Land Use Plan designation from Two -Unit Residential (RT -E) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); and 3) Zoning designation from Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to the Mixed -Use Vertical (MU- V). No new land use or development is proposed at this time. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council: • Approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009; and • Approve Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005; and • Approve Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012. 2S_ SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 2 VICINITY MAP GENERAL PLAN 4t;t ^� Vv�.` `� ,•JJ,ja_� � 7a� � ��w�"7[' 4 �J �a. -'�� y�/i ^'�� - �/' v '/ O // ! EGYV v 1..i J� wY •Q 'TlflJjjlYYS�CS " BEY.. le - ,�.e Subject Property / �' � "ic Girl � r �� -� Q"'C9yi �`\•r� � V P S r..� J V � .� � 1. r Q .fYh?Y`•M' t' c -.vf 8 J Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) _ GENERAL PLAN ZONING E E - • � � � S M U -V WX'E 4w Y3 Si �.••• •'.•� t ry Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities (PF) A EAST 1 CY :I.•4 vil J LOCATION GENERAL PLAN COASTAL LAND USE PLAN ZONING ON -SITE Existing Two -Unit Residential (RT) Two -Unit Residential (RT -E) Two -Unit Residential (R -2) ON -SITE Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) (Proposed) NORTH M U -V MU -V M U -V SOUTH Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities PF EAST Multiple -Unit Residential Multiple Unit Residential Multi -Unit Residential (RM) RM RM -E WEST RT RT -E R -2 2b SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 3 INTRODUCTION Proiect Setting The subject property is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of East Ocean Front (boardwalk) and Palm Street on the Balboa Peninsula. The property is approximately 5,415 square feet in area and consists of two legal lots. It is designated by the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and the Zoning Code for Two -Unit Residential use. The property is currently developed with a mixed - use building with commercial use on the ground floor and five residential units on the second floor. The commercial uses are nonconforming with the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code. Surrounding land uses include a vacant restaurant building across the alley to the north, two -unit residential uses to the west, the Balboa Pier parking lot to the south, and a 24- unit condominium complex across Palm Street to the east. Background The existing two - story, mixed -use building was permitted in 1948 with four commercial tenant spaces on the ground floor and five residential apartments on the second floor. Throughout the years, the commercial suites have been occupied by a laundromat and various food service and retail uses. Current commercial uses include a bicycle rental and ice cream shop, a cigar shop, an office use, and a vacant suite. In 2003, Modification Permit No. MD2003 -017 was approved authorizing fagade improvements and the addition of a third floor deck. The fagade of the building was significantly enhanced with the addition of new roof elements, windows, window frames, pot shelves, 'and new exterior finish and paint. Photographs of the building are included as Attachment No. PC3. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -76 approving a comprehensive update to the Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan Update "). As a result, the land use designation of the property was changed from Retail and Service Commercial with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two - Unit Residential. On November 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007 -71, approving Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2007 -001, making the Coastal Land Use Plan consistent with the General Plan Update. The Coastal Land Use Plan designation for the property was changed from General Commercial (CG -C) with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two -Unit Residential. On January 28, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2008 -05, which in addition to other Zoning Code changes, established the maximum time period for the abatement and termination of nonconforming uses in residential districts. However, determinations of 27 SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 4 nonconformity could not be made until Coastal Commission approval of the City's Local Coastal Plan (LCP) amendments, which occurred on July 14, 2009, and the subsequent Zoning Code Update which was effective November 25, 2010. On October 25, 2010, the City Council adopted a Comprehensive Update to the Zoning Code (Newport Beach Municipal Code Title 20) bringing consistency between the Zoning Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The result of that action rendered several properties nonconforming, including existing commercial uses located within residential districts, which in accordance with Ordinance No. 2008 -05 became subject to abatement. The City sent letters to all known uses that are subject to abatement. Staff has met and continues to meet with many of the owners of property that are subject to abatement. Staff has explained to those owners the options available to them to remedy their individual situations. Those remedies may include conversion of use or development to a residential use; request for extension of the abatement period; and /or request to amend the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and Zoning Code to allow the continuation of the commercial use. In the case of the subject application, the owner chose to pursue amendments to change the land use designations of their property from residential to mixed -use. Proiect Description The subject application does not include a specific project for development at this time. The proposed land use changes, as shown below, would allow the retention of the existing land use and allow for future development in accordance with the standards of the proposed zoning district. DISCUSSION Analysis Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code are legislative acts. Neither City nor State Planning Law set forth required findings for approval or denial of such amendments. However, when making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission should consider applicable policies and development standards to ensure internal consistency. General Plan The applicant requests to amend the General Plan to change the subject property from a RT to a MU -V land use designation. The MU -V designation is intended to provide for 3� Existing Proposed General Plan Two -Unit Residential (RT) Mixed -Use Vertical MU -V Coastal Land Use Plan Two -Unit Residential RT-E) Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V Zoning District Two -Unit Residential R -2 Mixed -Use Vertical MU -V DISCUSSION Analysis Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code are legislative acts. Neither City nor State Planning Law set forth required findings for approval or denial of such amendments. However, when making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission should consider applicable policies and development standards to ensure internal consistency. General Plan The applicant requests to amend the General Plan to change the subject property from a RT to a MU -V land use designation. The MU -V designation is intended to provide for 3� SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 5 the development of properties for mixed -use structures that vertically integrate housing with retail uses including retail, office, restaurant, and similar nonresidential uses. MU -V designated sites also may be developed exclusively with commercial uses in accordance with the CN, CC, CG, or CO -G designations. The following floor area to land ratios are allowed under the MU -V designation: Mixed -Use Buildings: floor area to land ratio of 1.50; where a minimum floor area to land ratio of 0.35 and maximum of 0.5 shall be used for nonresidential purposes and maximum of 1.0 for residential. Nonresidential Buildings: floor area to land area ratio of 0.75 maximum. The property is located in the Balboa Village area of Newport Beach. In considering the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission should consider the following Land Use Element policies: Policy LU 3.3 - Opportunities for Change Provide opportunities for improved development and enhanced environments for residents in the following districts and corridors... G Balboa Peninsula: more efficient patterns of use that consolidate the Peninsula's visitor - serving and mixed uses within the core commercial districts; encourage marine - related uses especially along the bay front; integrate residential with retail and visitor - serving uses in Lido Village, McFadden Square, Balboa Village, and along portions of the Harbor frontage; re -use interior parcels in Cannery Village for residential and limited mixed -use and live /work buildings; and redevelop underperforming properties outside of the core commercial districts along the Balboa Boulevard corridor for residential. Infill development shall be designed and sited to preserve the historical and architectural fabric of these districts. Policy LU6.8,1— Urban Form Establish development patterns that promote the reinforcement of Balboa Peninsula's pedestrian scale and urban form as a series of distinct centers/nodes and connecting corridors. Policy LU6.8.6 — Historic Character Preserve the historic character of Balboa Peninsula's districts by offering incentives for the preservation of historic buildings and requiring new development to be compatible with scale, mass, and materials of existing structures, while allowing opportunities for architectural diversity. The subject property was re- designated with the adoption of the General Plan Update for residential use with the intent to strengthen the viability of other commercial uses around the existing commercial centers along Balboa Boulevard. However, the property is located on Palm Street, which has historically and is currently developed with S �l SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 6 commercial and mixed -use structures. Palm Street also serves as the primary entry into the Balboa Pier parking lot. Maintaining the property for mixed -use implements the City's goals and policies as follows: o Although the existing density and intensity of the building exceeds what is currently allowed under the MU -V designation, the design, scale, and massing of the building exhibits recommended design concepts of the Balboa Village Design Guidelines and is representative of the types of buildings that were historically constructed in the area. By allowing for the continued use of this traditional mixed -use structure, the historical and architectural fabric of the area is preserved and supports the architectural diversity of the area. The design and scale of the building implements the City's goal for pedestrian - oriented architecture and streetscapes in that the building fronts directly on Palm Street and the boardwalk, and includes articulation and modulation of the street - facing elevations to promote visual interest and character. o The residential uses have been seamlessly integrated into the architectural design of the building and include common open space for the residential tenants in the form of a courtyard and roof deck. o Maintaining the ground floor for commercial uses supports the preservation of important visitor - serving uses that benefit the area such as the bicycle rentals and food services. Given that Palm Street is the primary entrance and connecting corridor from Balboa Boulevard to the Balboa Pier parking lot, the existing mixed -use building helps to activate the streetscape of the corridor and also serves as a transition and buffer from the pedestrian and traffic activity to the neighboring residential dwelling units to the west. Coastal Land Use Plan The subject property is located in the coastal zone and therefore, is subject to the applicable goals, objective and policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. This Plan was created to govern the use of land and water in the coastal zone within the City of Newport Beach and is in accordance with the California Coastal Act of 1976. The subject property has a land use designation of Two -Unit Residential (RT -E). The applicant is requesting to change the current land use to a mixed -use designation. The subject property does not contain any sensitive coastal resources as it is presently improved with commercial buildings nor located where public access easements would be required. The Coastal Act prioritizes land uses, and visitor - serving uses are a higher priority land use than residential use. The continuation of commercial uses and future redevelopment on the subject property as permitted by the MU -V designation will not conflict with the policies of the Coastal Act. SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 7 Zoning Code The stated purpose and intent of the Zoning Code is to carry out the policies of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Consistency between the General Plan and zoning designation is critical to ensure orderly development and enforcement. Therefore, concurrent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan land use changes, the applicant is requesting to change the zoning designation from RT to MU -V. Under the existing RT designation, the subject property could be developed with a total of four residential dwelling units (two units per underlying legal lot). A total of eight parking spaces would be required. The requested MU -V zoning district is intended to provided for the development of mixed -use commercial and residential projects. The main purpose of the requested amendment is to allow the continued use of the existing mixed -use development as was originally approved in 1948. If the amendments are approved, the existing mixed -use building would be consistent with the allowed uses of the proposed MU -V district and the existing commercial uses would be allowed to remain without abatement. However, the existing building would remain nonconforming to the development standards of the proposed MU -V zoning district, including standards related to density, floor area, setbacks, and parking. Future new development would require conformance with applicable development and parking standards. For reference, the tables below provide a comparison between the existing mixed -use development and how the property could be developed under the proposed MU -V zoning designation. Table 1- Proposed MU -V Development Standards Existing Mixed -Use Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum 0 spaces Intensity/Den it Intensity/Density Intensity/Density Par ing Parkin Allowed Mixed -Use 0 spaces Non - Residential 1,895.25 sf 2,707.5 sf 8 (1,895.25 11 (1/250) 0.35 FAR 0.50 FAR sf @ 1/250 Residential No min. FAR 5,415 sf (1.0 FAR) 4 covered 6 covered 2 units (20du /ac) 3 units (26.7 du /ac) spaces and spaces and 1 guest 1 guest s ace space Total 7,310.25 sf (1.35 FAR) 8,122.5 sf (1.5 FAR) 13 spaces 18 spaces w/2 units w/3 units Allowed N/A 4,061 sf (0.75 FAR) N/A 16 spaces Commercial Only 11250 sf Table 2- Existing Mixed -Use Development Existing Mixed -Use Existing Intensity/Density Intensity/Density Provided Parkin Non - Residential Approx. 5,375 sf .99 FAR 0 spaces Residential Approx. 4,343 sf (.80 FAR) 5 units 0 spaces Total Approx. 9,718 sf 1.79 FAR) w/ 5 units 0 spaces q1 SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 8 Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Analysis Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area, or increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips, or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases resulting from prior amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years. The project site for which the General Plan amendment is proposed is located within Statistical Area D3 of the General Plan Land Use Element, and would result in an increase of 4,061 square feet of non- residential floor area. Based on the trip generation rates contained in the Council Policy A -18 (blended commercial rate), the proposed project is forecast to generate an additional 10 a.m. peak hour trips and 14 p.m. peak hour trips. There has been one prior amendment (GP2010 -007) approved within Statistical Area D3 since the adoption of the 2006 General Plan, which was adopted on September 14, 2010. This amendment involved land use changes for the Balboa Fun Zone /Newport Harbor Nautical Museum site from Private Institutions to Visitor- Serving Commercial, and also involved land use changes for the Balboa Inn site from Mixed -use Vertical to Visitor - Serving Commercial. This amendment did not involve any increases in density or intensity, but did result in an increase in peak hour trips. Table 3 below shows the floor area and peak hour trips analysis for the prior amendment and the proposed project: Table 3: Charter Section 423 Analysis Summary Statistical Area D3' Allowed Floor A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour _ Increase 11 I Area Trips Trips I Allowed Dwell Dwelling Units Prior Amendment 0(80%) 36.14(80%) 62.26(80%) -9(80%) GP2010 -007 Proposed 4,061 sq. ft. 10.42 14.09 -1 GP2011 -009 TOTAL 4,061 sq. ft. 46.56 76.35 -10 As indicated in the table above, the proposed GPA does not result in an increase in allowed dwelling units, does not exceed the non - residential floor area threshold, and does not exceed the a.m. or p.m. peak hour vehicle trips threshold. Therefore, none of the thresholds that require a vote pursuant to Charter Section 423 are exceeded. If the proposed General Plan amendment is approved by City Council, the amendment will tt k SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 9 become a prior amendment and 80 percent of the increases will be tracked for ten years for any proposed future amendments. A more detailed analysis is attached (Attachment No. PC 4). SB18 Tribal Consultation Guidelines Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. The appropriate tribe contacts supplied by the NAHC were provided notice on November 3, 2011, to allow tribe contacts an opportunity to request consultation. The City has mailed out invitations for consultation to each of the tribe contacts and had not yet received any responses although the review period remains open until February 1, 2012. It should be noted that staff has consulted with one tribe contact on another project, during which various projects the City is processing were discussed, including this amendment. The tribe contact indicated he did not have any concerns with this amendment so long as future redevelopment of the site is subject to development review and complies with CEQA. The Planning Commission may recommend the proposed project to City Council at this time. However, the City Council may not act on the proposed amendments until the tribe review period is concluded. Given that the sites are presently developed and that the no development is proposed at this time, staff does not anticipate any conflicts or need for monitoring by the tribes. If any comments are received from the tribes, they will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. Environmental Review The proposed amendments are exempt since they do not entail any significant alteration to the subject property and will bring the General Plan Land Use, Coastal Land Use, and Zoning District designations into consistency with the present use. The sites are presently developed and no new development is proposed at this time, which is categorically exempt under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines — Class 1 (Existing Facilities). Summary The applicant has requested the amendment to allow retention of the existing mixed - use building and uses. The building was constructed in 1948 and significantly renovated in 2003. The uses have been in existence for nearly sixty -three years and its abatement at this time seems contrary to the General Plan Policies that promote revitalization of the area. Continuation of these uses and future development consistent with the MU -V designation does not appear to conflict with the General Plan or Coastal Land Use Plan or Coastal Act. Staff does not foresee any adverse environmental impacts with continued use or redevelopment. The approval of the General Plan Amendments to y- 3 SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment January 19, 2012 Page 10 MU -V designation would not necessitate a vote of the electorate, as required by Section 423 of the City Charter. Alternatives Alternatives to the proposed amendments could inc retention of the existing General Plan, Coastal Land of Two -Unit Residential. If it is the desire of the Plan request in its entirety, the attached resolution rec o (Attachment No. PC2). Howe existing nonresidential use in Section 20.38.100. Public Notice lude disapproval of the request and Use Plan and Zoning designations ning Commission to disapprove this mmending disapproval is provided ver, such an action would require abatement of the accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Code, Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the properties, and was posted at the site a minimum of ten days in advance of this hearing, consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: ,8gbmitted by: aime Murillo r n Wisneski Associate Planner D ou Communi evelooment Director FAUsers\PLN\Shared \PA's \PAs - 2011\PA2011- 196\Planning Commission\PA2011 -196 - PC staff report 01-05 - 2012.docx �q City Council Attachment CC4 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1865 q5 RESOLUTION NO. 1865 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMENDMENT TOTHE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AND THE ZONING CODE TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM TWO -UNIT RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED -USE VERTICAL (MU -V) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 514 E. OCEAN FRONT (PA2011 -196) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOVdS: SECTION I. STATEMENT OF FACTS. In 1948, the City of Newport Beach permitted the construction of a mixed -use building located at 514 E. Ocean Front. 2. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -76 approving a comprehensive update to the Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan Update "), resulting in the land use designation of the subject property to change from Retail and Service Commercial with an allowance for residential above the first floor to Two -Unit Residential. Or November 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007 -71, approving Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2007 -001 making the Coastal Land Use Plan consistent with the General Plan Update. The Coastal Land Use Plan designation for the property was changed from mixed -use to Two -Unit Residential. 4. On January 28, 2008, the City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance No. 2008 -05) that established the maximum time period for the abatement and termination of nonconforming uses in residential districts. However, determinations of nonconformity could not be made until the finalization of the City's Local Coastal Plan (LCP), which occurred on July 14, 2009. 5. On October 25, 2010, the City Council adopted a Comprehensive Update to the Zoning Code (Title 20) bringing consistency between the Zoning Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The result of that action rendered commercial uses located within residential districts nonconforming. In accordance with Ordinance No. 2008 -05, mentioned above, those properties are subject to abatement. An application was tiled by Terry A Jones, on behalf of the property owner SCAP III, LLC, with respect to the subject property located at 514 E. Ocean Front, requesting approval of amendments to the General Plar, Coastal Land Use Plan and the Zoning Code to change the land use from Two -Unit Residential to Mixed -Use Vertical, Y-7 Planning Commission Resolution No, 1865 Page 2 of 4 7. The requested change of the General Plan designation is from Two -Unit Residential (RT) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V). 8. The requested change of the Zoning District designation is Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to ivlixed -Use Vertical (MU -V). 9. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The requested change of the Coastal Land Use designation is from Two -Unit Residential (RT -E) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V) and will not become effective until the amendment to the Coastal Land Use Plan is approved by the Coastal Commission. 10. Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10 -year span) exceeds any one of the following thresholds. a vote of the electorate would be required: if the project generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM); adds 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area; or, adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area. 11. This is the second General Plan Amendment that affects Statistical Area D3 since the General Plan update in 2006. Although there is no increase in the number of dwelling units, the amendment results in 4.061 additional square feet of non - residential floor area. The additional floor area results in an increase of 10 a.m. peak hour trips and an increase 14 p.m. peak hour trips based on the commercial and residential housing trip rates reflected in Council Policy A -18. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required. 12. A public hearing was held on January 19, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, Cafifornia. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 1 (Existing Facilities). 2. The proposed amendments are exempt since they do not entail any significant alteration. to the subject property and will bring the existing use of the building and proper; involved consistent with the General Plan land use designation, Coastal Land Use Plan designation and Zoning district. 3. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should 'bear the expense of defending against any such iudicial Tmplt: 04/14/10 149 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1865 Page 3 of 4 chailenoe, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. SECTION 3 FINDINGS. 1. Amendments to the General Flan and Coastal Land Use Plan are legislative acts. Neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. 2. Zoning Code amendments are legislative acts. Neither the City Municipal Code nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments, unless they are determined not to be required for the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 3. The amendments of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan will provide consistency with the proposed code amendment to change the zoning of the subject property from Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V). 4. The existing building and uses, and future development of the property affected by the proposed amendments will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Coastal Lard Use Plan; and will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the MU -V zoning district of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009, and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment LC2011 -005, changing the designation from Two -Unit Residential (RT and RT -E) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V); and recommends approval of the request for Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012 changing the zoning designation from Two -Unit Residential (R -2) to Mixed -Use Vertical (MU -V;, affecting 514 E. Ocean Front, Statistical Area 03, legally described as Lots 15 and 16 in Block 6 of Balboa Tract, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 4, Page 11 of miscellaneous maps, in the Office of the County Recorder in said county. 2. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and ail claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner related (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of the proposed SCAP III, LLC Property Tmp!t. 04114.110 q9 Planning Commission, Resolution No. 1865 Page 4 of 4 Amendments (PA2011 -196) including, but not limited to, General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -0..09, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment LC2011 -005, and Code Amendment No CA2011 -012. This indemnification shall include. but not be limited to damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19th DAY OF JANUARY, 2012. AYES: Ameri, Hillgren, Myers, Kramer, Toerge, and Tucker NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None, Mienae!^7oerge, Chairmap BY: `, C-4 web Amer, Secretary Tmp;t 0411 W 0 0 City Council Attachment CC5 Draft Planning Commission Minutes 1/19/12 sl NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers — 3300 Newport Boulevard Thursday, January 19, 2012 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER —The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Commissioner Kramer C. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Ameri, Hillgren. Kramer. Myers. Toerge, and Tucker Sta" ?resent: Kimberly Brandt. Coror iuniiy Development Director: Brenda Wisnesici. Deputy Community Development Director; Leonie Mulvihill, Assistant City Attorney; and Tone Brine, City Traffic Engineer D. WELCOME OF NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONER LARRY TUCKER Chair Toerge welcomed new Planning Commissioner Larry Tucker and briefly listed his background and qualifications. E. RECOGNITION OF FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER ROBERT C. HAWKINS' SERVICE Chair Toerge acknowledged former Planning Commissioner Robert Hawkins, expressed his appreciation of his service to the City, and Staff presented him with a plaque. F. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Toerge invited comments from those in the audience who wished to address the Commission on other than Agenda items. W.R. Dildine noted he resides within the Balboa Village Business Improvement District and referenced the General Plan opining that it is misleading. Specifically, he mentioned the Post Office is listed as a public facility which it is not. He addressed abatement extensions, noted the telephone company is shown as residential and listed other errors within the Plan. He opined the entire document needs to be reviewed and corrected. G. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES — None. H. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 Minutes of December 8, 2011 Motion made by Vice Chair Hillgren and seconded by Secretary Ameri. and carried (5 - 0), with Commissioner Tucker abstaining, to approve the minutes of December 8, 2011, as corrected. AYES: Amen, Hillgren, Kramer, Myers, and Toerge NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): None. ABSTENTION: Tucker I. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment (PA2011 -196) 514 E. Ocean Front (aka 101 -107 Palm Street) The Chair read title to the aforementioned item, opened the public hearing and called for a report from staff Page 1 of 3 ,9 ,1 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 01 /1 912 01 2 Associate Planner Jaime Murillo presented details of the report addressing location. surrounding land uses, existing conditions, non - conforming commercial uses due to General Plan update, and change in zoning. It was noted the property owner has no plans in redeveloping the property for residential use and wishes to maintain the existing mixed - use building. He presented recommendations and offered to respond to questions from the Commission. In! crested parties were invited to address the Commission or, `.his item. Chair Toerge opened the public hearing. Tent' Jones, Attorney for the property owner, emphasized that her client merely :;ants to maintain the same use that was approved when the building was permitted in 1948. He plans no changes and wants to continue business as usual and !1a<_ an interest in the residential portion of his property as he would not like his tenants disturbed by noise. `/+i.R. Dildine spoke in support of the item. No one else wished to address the Commission on this item and Chair Toerge closed the public hearing. Motion made by Vice Chair Hillgren and seconded by Secretary Ameri. and carried (6 - 0) to adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approves General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -009; approve Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -005, and approve Code Amendment No. CA2011 -012. AYES: Ameri, Hillgren, Kramer, Myers, Toerge, and Tucker NOES: None. ABSENT(EXCUSED): None. ABSTENTION: None. ITEM NO. 3 Flyn' Fish Oyster Bar & Grill (PA2011 -199) 2304 W. Ocean Front The Chair read title to the aforementioned item, opened the public hearing and called for a report from staff. Associate Planner Jaime Murillo presented details of the report noting it is a request for a conditional use permit to change the seating configuration of an existing eating and drinking establishment as well as expanding the hours of operation. He addressed location, existing conditions and parking. Mr. Murillo presented a brief background on the restaurant: floor plan, proposed construction of a new bar, and recommendations. Interested parties were invited to address the Commission on this item. Dennis Braeutigam, Architect, reported on the interior modifications. Stephen Loomis, Restaurant Partner, affirmed reading and accepting the conditions of approval. Joel Faucetta spoke in support of the project. Gordan Barienbrock commented in support of the project. No one else wished to address the Commission on this item and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Myers expressed concern over parking. Mr. Murillo addressed the number of parking spaces for the adjacent hotel and clarified the restaurant maintains three designated parking spaces. He also noted that the hotel allowed the use of additional parking spaces on their property as available for restaurant valet parking. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of obtaining additional parking and whether the City has ever received complaints regarding the restaurant parking. Mr. Murillo confirmed that there was no record of complaints. Page 2 of 3 sy F Council �t��•�CP1�11� ^l,t. �� Correspondence sS Correspondence Item No. 2a SCAP III, LLC Property Amendment n al".. ^T1' 1 PA2011 -196 n'Z ivir. Jaime Muri_lo, associate ?Lsmar t11jV `j ° f Dear Nlr. Murillo, / -his letter is jr. regard to the Notice of Pubic Flea: i -g scheduled -or Januard 19, 20:2, project CIe no. Pa2011 -156. FVe are very corn.ern ed orith the possibili::y of ma-e o- expanuer retail space being allowed a; the project address. We are ovdners of a concc directly across the street from this property and are negatively affected b, the operation of one of the businesses currently in operation. I assure you that we are pro cusiness, but when busir asses are allowed to operate urJl 2 or 3 0 ? ?-, in the morning, disruption to ;Fe residences adjacent :o the property is inevitable. LouC, drunk, boisterous, patrons c ten arrive and leave the business at all hours. Chairs and a table outside the front doer and cn the publ`: sidewalk encourage congrega' on. furthe - adding to the noise and disruption. Cigar smoke from the business is another huge concern. It is virtually impossible on many days and nights to sit outside have a wirdow open in our .nit without .he cigar smoke entering. We are asthmatic and have rurchaseJ a^ air purification system tc hoop with this issue. The possibility of th -- retail space or anot er like it to be allow'ec' to lease s :ace or operate without health concern for neighboring res:cen -s is werr, sorne. Pariing is anot�,er issue. Patrors of ti-e business have Jegally parked in spaces clean,, marked as pe-mit only for residents of cur condominium complex. When this has been brought to the attention of the business ovine ', alter- ations ha de arisen. 1%'e are therefore as "wing the p'a ^ning commissior to cons ider very carefully the ramifications of E poroving this application. Thank you for your censidera:ion. Gecrge and Cat "y Mi...`novich 600 -. Ocean `r z nt 113: -I Newport Bead °, Ca. 52661 559- 289 -0067 57 City Council Attachment CC7 Section 423 Analysis Table S9 �t )) as 61 /.: , ; • , . �■ /� \| . , § § < / [�) / °; � ; ; • i ! � \ - \ fill ` � ` |� ■ ! 61 City Council Site Photographs 63 `- - ' ��i. � �� O W wim DECEIVED PROOF OF PUBLICATION iu�Z FEB 24 API 9 36 C" ICE Of THE 071 Y CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA) CiTVC,l-, "%',IJRTBEACH ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF NEWPORT REACH I am a citizen of the United States and a PUBUC NOTICE resident of the County Los of L Angeles; I g ORDINANCE SUMMARY am over the age of eighteen years and NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Feb - not a party to or interested in the notice ruary 14, 2012, the city Ce of the City published. I am a principal clerk of the of Newpowpo rt Beach, California, introduced NEWPORT BEACH /COSTA MESA an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. DAILY PILOT, which was adjudged a 2012 -8 RYINANCEL newspaper of general circulation on THE OF THE CITY OF NEW- September 29 ' 1961 case A6214 and PORT BEACH AP- PROVING A ZONING June 11, 1963, case A24831, for the CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZON- City of Costa Mesa, Count of Orange, Y 9 ING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED , and the State of California. Attached to AT 514 E. OCEAN FRONT (PA2011, 196) this Affidavit is a true and complete co p copy The proposed Ordi- nance would change the as was printed and published on the zoning designation of the subject property following date(s): from Two -Unit Resi- dential (R -2) to Mixed - Vertical (MU -V). This Ordinance was in- Saturday, February 18, 2012 traduced by 'the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, Cali- fornia, at regular meeting thereof on the 14th day h February, 2012, by the following I certify (or declare) under penalty of AYES:Hill, Rosansky, perjury that the foregoing is true and Daigle, Ma Gardner, yorHenn °r`r' correct. NOES:None ABSENT:None Second reading of Or- dinance No. 2012 -8 will occur at the February 28, 2012 City Council meeting. If adopted on Executed on February 22, 2012 Ordinance8 at Los Angeles, California shall2 bee come final and effec- tive thirty (30) days after adoption. Dated this 15th day of February, 2012. /s/ Leilam I. Brown, City Clerk City Newport Beach �4M-- Published Newport Beach/Costa osta Mesa Dai- r- V'ffi%Y Signature ly February 18, 2012.