Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good stuff, man. How you been?

stupid. No, I'll make a motion.

Hey, it's good to see you. How are you? Oh, yeah. I know. Finally, right? It's been too long. I'm with the Pierc shopping center there for five years, but I was in going to ICS and doing all that with

uh we took last year was the first year we took off because now we're going Oh, I didn't know that. Good for you guys. Okay.

But I mean, I think I think I told I told you I've been trying to get this guy on. Yeah. Yeah. I know, right? I just want to say hi. I probably wouldn't catch you otherwise. That's right. Yeah. Well, thankfully it's the only agenda. Is it the only Yeah. still be here for sure.

No, I didn't even know that we had slips anymore. They just called for like public comment.

Yeah. I've talked to

What do you think? for way more.

They tied it up after after otherwise it wasn't for [ __ ] Well, who knows whether the owner knows

flag? [ __ ] Hey, what's your chair?

How come I don't get a cushion? Wow. Good thing everybody got one. Good thing I got here early. All ladies on the council. Good thing I'm not last. Yeah, this is great. Love that. No,

buddy. Okay, thanks for your patience everyone. We're a couple minutes tardy tonight. Um, but I will call the February 5th, 2026 planning commission meeting to order. Um, will everyone please stand for the pledge of allegiance? And will Commissioner Rosine please lead us in the flag salute?

Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Uh, staff, roll call, please. All commissioners are present with the exception of commissioners Gazano and Elmore who are excused this evening. Okay. Public comments. This is the time we take public comments on items that are not on the agenda tonight um but are generally within the purview of the planning commission. If you wish to speak, please keep your comments to three minutes or less. So there are there any public comments on non-aggenda items? Uh, Chair Harris and members of the planning commission, my name is Jim Moer. Uh, since since you last met, the uh, city council had a planning session which they held here. I don't know how many of you were able to attend or view that meeting, but one of the slides that was presented by the city staff gave us an update on our progress meeting our obligations under our housing element that we currently have. And I I found that interesting. As you may know, under our current reena cycle, we have an obligation to plan for the addition of about 3,000 affordable housing units in Newport Beach. And under our plan, we are promising that we can accomplish that by approving about 8,000 units under the assumption that those will redevelop at about 40% affordable. uh what the slide showed, we're currently ha halfway four years into the uh six rea cycle and the housing overlays that were counting on to develop to produce those have so far produced only about 200 out of the 3,000 that were supposed to produce. And the disturbing thing about it is that they're being produced at about a rate

of one affordable unit for 20 market rate units. And the math is not too complicated. At that rate of production, we would have to add to our city 60,000 market rate units to meet our reenim requirement. Uh it sounds to me like we do not have a realistic plan and the I I think you're from your tenative agenda I saw at your first meeting in March you're going to see a more definitive report from the city about this. Um, but I I think that the lack of affordable housing production is going to come back to haunt us and I think the caps that we have are currently not too realistic and we may be forced to raise those. We certainly will have to meet this in our next arena cycle. And adding to the complication, if you've not heard, there's a recent California Appeals Court opinion which the uh last week the Supreme Court of California decided to not review. So it is now the law and it makes overlays not in a an acceptable way of meeting the affordable housing requirements. and the city will face having to actually zone properties for those so that if they redevelop they won't have the option of an overlay but will actually have to redevelop in that way. And so I I think it should give us all pause when we are considering more housing with inadequate uh affordable units. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for non-aggenda items? Okay, moving on. The next item, uh, request for continuences. Staff, are there any requests for continuences? Uh, there are no requests.

Okay. Um, item number one, the minutes of the January 2022nd, 2020 or excuse me, January 22nd, 2026 uh, planning commission hearing. Would anyone like from the audience like to comment on the minutes from the January 22nd, 2026 meeting? See nobody call for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second. Call for a vote. The motion carries 4 Z with Commissioner Rosine abstaining. Okay, thank you. On to item number two, Dover Town Homes. It's PA 20225-0135. The site location is 601 Dover Drive. Staff Linda, please.

Good evening. Proceed with your presentation.

Good evening, chairman, commissioners. Melinda Wayland, Planning Division. This is the Dover Town Homes. The location is at the corner of Dover Drive and Cliff Drive. The existing site is developed with medical offices and it's downs slope from the Cliff Haven residential neighborhood across from Castaways Park and Newport Bay. The site was identified in the housing element as an opportunity site and has an housing overlay within the HO3 Dover Drive among nine other sites with the intent to provide a variety of additional units for the city. The project will demolish the existing medical offices and construct a 33 unit four cell town homes. Um they will be within seven detached three-story buildings approximately 38 ft tall and provide two three and four bedroomedroom units with twocar garages. Uh trash areas will be within the garages outside of the minimum uh garage dimensions. Here's the layout of the proposed project. It includes landscape buffers along the exterior uh property lines, a public plaza towards the rear of the lot. It includes uh two amenity areas for the residents and um it will utilize an existing uh driveway and it includes a hedge and landscape buffer adjacent to the existing residential. Required approvals are a major site development review, a variance requested to encroach into the street setbacks, a track map for condominiums,

and it qualifies under SQA under AB130 statutory exemption. The HO3 sub area has specific development standards. The project complies with all of these development standards except for requesting the variance to encroach into the street setbacks. The design of the site provides interior drive aisles, amenity areas that are screened from public view, the larger rear setback with the publicly accessible plaza. The existing medical office has about 231 greater trips. So, this is a significant lower trip generation. It's well below the height limit and it meets the minimum density. It's well below the maximum allowed density and provides greater setbacks and landscaping. A driveway analysis was provided by LSA Associates. Um it provided a queueing analysis for the uh proposed driveway operations and a sight distance analysis uh for the safety at the project driveway. A condition of approval is included um where if traffic issues do arise at the driveway that the developer will have to implement a right in right out only design. And the design was reviewed and approved and included in the LSA analysis. And this shows the design of the right turn right out. This is a view from the neighboring residential and it shows uh with the low

height limit and the large slope and the landscape area. It provides a lesser impact if than if it were to maximize the development standards. This provides a view from Dover sidewalk. It shows the landscape buffer, the entry courtyards and the um entries to the each unit which mimic typical residential throughout the city. This shows the public plaza which provides a seating and viewing area for residents and the public alike. It also shows the hedge adjacent to the residential neighborhood to the side of the property. The project complies with 47 of the 52 objective design standards. Minor deviations are requested, but the intent of all the standards are still met. Here's the project rendering for the six-unit building along do variance is requested due to the physical constraints of the property to the side property line down slope of the residential above. There's a required slope stability step back that cuts into the buildable area. And for a typical lot, this would be a zero setback. There's a sight distance safety corner on Dover and Cliff Drive. The rear yard exceeds the minimum

required setback and provides the required publicly accessible open space. Since the site is on the corner, it has two front setbacks that are 10 ft. Additionally, it has 20ft setbacks for the upper levels. A typical site would have one front setback. So, these constraints greatly cut into the buildable area of the site. Additionally, it was a priority for the design to provide the minimum 26 foot wide drive aisles for fire access, circulation, and safety. Alternative designs were explored to maximize the development standards up to the 65 ft height limit, but the goal was to be more compatible with the neighborhood and the encroachments were less impactful compared to a different design with a higher height limit. The vesting tenative track map is for condo purposes and um a park inl fee will be charged per unit. Project was found to be statutoily exempt from squa pursuant to AB130. It meets the requirement, the criteria for AB130, meets the zoning, land use, and no significant environmental resources on site. Tribal consultation concluded on December 22nd, 2025, and there are tribal monitoring conditions for two consulting tribes included in the resolution. There are some updated conditions, minor changes to conditions of approval that I

would like to go through. So this adds a time limit or a time frame for recording the trackmat for the condominiums. They are required to be recorded prior to the issuance of the building permit. And this adds some language uh if the right turn right out lane is required. And I would like to read that. It says if not installed prior to the developer transferring the project to the homeowner association, the developer shall preund the HOA reserves for this purpose. The fund shall be memorialized in the CCNRs. This condition shall expire 5 years from the date last unit sold and occupied. And there were some corrections to some fire conditions that were worked out post distribution of the staff report. Staff recommends conducting a public hearing and finding this project statutoily exempt from SQA pursuant to AB130 and adopt recommends the planning commission adopt the resolution number PC 2026003 approving the site development review variance and besting tenative track map. The applicant is here and has a presentation and I'm available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Will. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Mr. Rosie,

thank you for the presentation. Uh just quickly in regard to the traffic and especially this condition 71 uh if I understand correctly there the location of the curb cut is in the generally the same location as where the existing curb cut is. And if the traffic count is significantly less, why are we requiring this condition? Uh good evening, chair and members of the commission. My name is Kevin Riley. I'm the city traffic engineer. uh to answer your uh question. Uh Commissioner Rosine, uh this is uh this condition 71 is based on the the queuing at the eastbound approach. Um where the driveway is lo is proposed. It's actually it's going to be maybe 20 ft west of the existing driveway uh based on LA uh LSA report. And um what that does is it provides if if you have four vehicles queuing in the eastbound left turn lane, it blocks the ability of a driver exiting the private property to turn left. So they would have to turn right. Um this will likely happen during the morning peak hour because the morning peak hour aligns more with the hours of the the school u drop off at Inen. But in other cases, we we feel comfortable that the the the um left turn pocket will operate well with the with the proposed driveway curve cut, but we want to have the condition 71 just in case uh we see something different in the future.

Okay. And thank you for adding that portion about the language for the mechanism for how this is going to work. I still think that it's an unusual condition, but um the 20 ft could be 20 feet and that makes the difference. So, thank you commissioners Langford.

Thank you, Chair Harris. Um maybe I'll start with you. Um traffic engineer Riley, uh since we're on traffic, I had a question about the uh parallel parking on Dover Drive and Cliff Drive. Currently, neither of them have parking on them. Do you have plans to open them up for parking or keep them no parking zones? Uh there's no plans to install off-site parking in the public right away.

Okay, great. Thank you. Uh Miss Whan, a couple questions for you if you don't mind. Um is the publicly available I think you we call it a gazebo or or park area. Is that does that um fulfill a portion of the applicant's public parkland requirements? No, that is a develop or design standard that's found in the um multi-unit design standards. It requires amenities and it additionally requires a publicly accessible open space. Okay. But it's not part of the um public park fee if that answers your question.

That answers my question. Um, thank you. Um, another question I have is the there are often requirements for redevelopments to underground power if it happens to be in front of their property. Does this applicant have that requirement for this project? Yes, they will be undergrounding some utilities. Okay. Uh, that's good. And, uh, that is all I've got for now. Thank you commissioner. Okay, presentation. Thank you. Okay. Um, exparte communication.

I had a meeting with the applicant. I had a meeting with the applicant. None. I spoke on the phone with the representative of the applicant. I briefly communicated with the applicant. Okay, I'll open the public hearing. Um, proceed with your presentation.

Thank you. Good evening, Chair Harris, planning commissioners, staff. My name is Emily Samard, um, director of forward planning with Shea Holmes. It's great to be here with you tonight. I first want to thank staff for all the work that they've done to get us to this point of the process. Um, these housing element sites are still relatively new to all of us. They require um quite a bit of work on these infill sites and this one's no exception. So, I wanted to give special thanks to Melinda Whan who has been our quarterback um no pun intended for Super Bowl week, but um she's really done great in guiding this application and this project forward. So, thank you Melinda. I'm joined tonight by my team at Shay and our consultants. So, we'll be well represented for any questions that arise throughout the hearing tonight. Um Melinda did a great job covering the technical details. So my goal tonight is to give you some context on Shea Holmes and walk through the broader intent behind this community. I wanted to start off by giving a little history on Shea Holmes since we have such a unique legacy. It began in 1881 with a small plumbing company in Oregon. And over time, the family expanded their construction business and were able to contribute to some major public works projects, most notably the Golden Gate Bridge as well as Parker and Hoover Dams. In 1968, we entered the home building industry. And today, Shea Holmes is one of the largest private homebuilders in the country, operating across 11 states with our Southern California division based right here in Orange County. We're proud to be one of the nation's oldest and largest privately held builders with the Shea family now into its fourth generation of leadership. This slide is highlighting our most recent Newport Beach community, the K at Mariner Shores located off Irvine Avenue and Mariners Drive, which was built out

in early 2023. This is a 56-unit project that continues to be very wellreceived by the community and reflects the type of thoughtful developments that we strive for. Bringing focus back to our current application. And just to reorient everybody, the subject site is outlined here in red. We're at the intersection of Dover and Cliff Drive. It's currently developed with a singlestory medical office center and it's centrally positioned at the base of the cliff cliff haven neighborhood and directly across from Castaways Park offering walkable access to trails, Newport Bay, retail and restaurants. You're probably noticing our west property line. Um we have seven existing homes directly abuing the site. These homes sit on average about 35 ft higher than our pad elevation and are separated by a 2:1 slope. Here's a ground level view of that condition. It's showing the existing wall and slope separating our site from the neighboring homes. On infill sites like this, especially when we have residential direct neighbors like you just saw, um outreach is very important to us, we take it as our responsibility to balance interests, not just for ourselves, but for the local community and the city at large. We began engaging the Cliff Haven community about 2 months prior to our formal to our formal application into the city. And our intent of this was really just to open a line of communication early on in the process so that neighbors had my direct cell phone and email um throughout the entire entitlement process with the city. At our first meeting with neighbors, this was in May of 2025. There were six neighbors that attended and then from that point, our team has been consistent in

communication with four direct neighbors on St. James Place and handling correspondence individually with them just to better tailor to needs that come up or questions that arise. One of them even sent a letter of support this evening which we really appreciate and I think speaks to the level of intimate communication that we've had this past year when it came to site planning. Like Melinda touched on we are faced with several obstacles. It's an irregular triangular parcel with street frontage on two sides and a slope condition on the third. Along do cliff city code requires 10-ft setbacks at grade and 20 ft for any portion of the building over 20 ft in height. Along the west side, while zoning technically allows a zero setback, California building code requires 15 ft from the toe of the slope. Once you layer in sight distance requirements at the intersection, the setbacks and so slope safety buffers, the buildable area shrinks dramatically. We go from about 1.6 acres to just over 1.1 buildable acres, which you can see here in gray. When it came to selecting product, we really wanted to plan this site with the neighbors and greater community in mind. Instead of shrinking the footprint and building taller, we were determined to make a more traditional road town home product work here. While the overlay would allow up to 65 ft in height and up to 81 units, we designed this community at a minimum density of 20 units per acre and capped building heights below 38 ft with no rooftop decks here. specifically out of sensitivity to the adjacent homes and the greater community. I'll use this site plan to walk you through the layout of the site design. As you can see, although we have a tight footprint and minimum density

requirements to hit, the team did a really good job in laying out this community and utilizing space in a meaningful way. Uh I'll bring you in off Cliff Drive. We are essentially utilizing the existing access point into the property. Um, as I touched on, we're actually shifting it west, so that's away from the intersection about 12 ft. You'll see enhanced paving and landscaping to create a vibrant sense of place for this entrance. The 33 units are arranged across seven buildings, three of which front Dover Drive and one orienting out towards Cliff Drive. This will really activate the street edge and introduce residential character to the corner. Along the west boundary, we centrally located our outdoor lounge space with seating, a fire pit, and barbecue station. From here, there's a meandering landscaped walkway along the west project boundary leading to passive open space with seating, landscaping, and a turf zone with benches and a waste receptacle. So, for dog owners, um sometimes you just appreciate not having to go on a full walk to get the job done. So this space is really created for that convenience. And then at the northerly tip of the site, there's a public plaza which Melinda touched on. This is part of our 3% requirement of publicly accessible open space. So this is accessible directly off the rightway as well as from the interior of the site. Um this space will be nicely landscaped with circular seating around a focal tree to create a scenic and relaxing environment for homeowners and the greater Clif Haven community. I'll narrow focus a bit um on project specifics and development standards. We went over most of this, but I'll restate that this site falls under the HO3 section of the overlay zoning district in the certified housing element. We're providing three distinct floor plans and meeting the minimum required density of

33 units. Despite the tight site constraints, we exceed open space and parking requirements, providing an intentional and refined environment for our future homeowners. It's also worth noting that the land use change from commercial medical to residential generates much fewer daily trips. During peak hours, it will generate 13 a.m. and 17 p.m. peak trips. This overlay district allows for a 65 ft maximum height and a maximum density of 50 units per acre. As you now know, we're building to the minimum allowed density of 20 units per acre and are keeping building heights at an average of 35 ft with no rooftop decks. When we are deciding on architectural direction here, we drew inspiration from the surrounding context. The project was was inspired by mid-century modern design principles, drawing direct inspiration from both the existing on-site commercial buildings and the nearby environmental nature center, which features that distinct butterfly roof form. We liked the idea of continuing that roof design and elongating the visual interest as you pass the ENC and continue south down dober. These mid-century influences are also expressed through clean horizontal and vertical massing, deep overhangs, large window groupings, and a soft material palette that reflects the simplicity and refinement of mid-century architecture while complenting the coastal luxury atmosphere of Newport Beach. I'll go through some site renderings. Um, so here are a couple examples. These are these buildings are fronting Door Drive. So you can see the layered landscaping, focal street trees, the gates coming to the private courtyards.

And then here are some vignettes of the site details. So going from left to right, you'll see the community gathering space. So this is our outdoor lounge area in the center of the community for residents. Has a fire pit, seating, and a barbecue. And then in the middle you'll see the open space that we're calling the dog relief area, but it's really just a passive open space with seating and landscaping. And then you'll see the public courtyard that's accessible off the public right away. And that's really for the greater community and our residents to enjoy. Here are some comparison street seammen images. So this is at the intersection of Cliff and Dover and you can see here um just for a point of reference of height the street light on the corner of Cliff and Dover it's um 35 ft tall. So you can see um that building has a um peak height of 34t 11 in coming in you know pretty much right where that light is. And a lot of the street trees along do actually exceed the height of the buildings right now. So just to give a little bit scale of massing here. Here's a closer image of that intersection photo rendered. Here is a comparison image coming southbound down Do. So you'll see on the right hand side of the rendered image, that's our public plaza or portion of it. Um you'll notice the street trees going down Dover Drive. Um just going in and out of the buildings, which really makes this a softened residential feel as you come down the corridor. Um

another height reference here, we are removing um that power pole as Commissioner Langford highlighted. Um there are four crossarms on that pole. The bottom crossarm is at 38 feet. And again, the buildings along Drive are 34 feet 11 in. So hard to assess scale there, but I just wanted to point that out as as you're looking at the street scene here. And then here's a um focused image of that rendering as you're coming down Do. And that wraps up my presentation tonight. So on behalf of Shea Holmes, thank you for your time and your engagement this evening. We hope that you agree that this project delivers housing in exactly the manner envisioned by the city's housing element while remaining sensitive to its residential surroundings. We're excited to bring another great community to Newport Beach. And I'll open it up for any questions now. Thank you.

Uh do you agree with the conditions as changed and as presented? Yes. Thank you, Chair Harris. Um, we have worked on the conditions with staff and agree to the resolution and conditions as modified. Thank you. Uh, commissioners, questions for the applicant. Commissioner Reed, I'll take the first few if you don't mind. Thank you, Emily. Uh, a couple questions for you. Number one, what was the thought process in pushing the project towards Dover and, you know, encroaching on the setbacks to request the variance? I think three variances.

Yes, thank you for bringing that up. So, a a couple things and it wasn't necessarily a decision of moving it forward. It was um kind of the opportunity cost that we landed on in picking product. So with the 15t setback that we needed off the toe of the slope and then the unique situation that the site lent itself since we have the major street frontage on two sides, we had that 20ft setback requirement for anything over 20 ft and then had the unique condition to have the 15t setback. Whereas I'll use Ford Road as an example just because it had just come before you over the summer. They had two zero setbacks, Ford Road being one of them. So they had a six-foot setback off of what would their frontage would be. Um but since it wasn't technically on an arterial street, they weren't they didn't have the same requirement. So our footprint shrunk right away. Um and instead of building higher, we decided to work with the city on encroaching on the setback to keep the product as less dense as we can. Um, so it really was a a matter of constraint because of topography. Um, and then we just worked with staff on what would make the most sense for the site and product. So it was really product driven.

Got it. And the second question, was there ever a discussion to add a secondary exit onto Dover or to make that the primary versus exiting onto Cliff? cuz as the city highlighted, it's a little unique in that if you're trying to go left, you can only get three or four cars backed up before you can't go left. So it it gets this particular intersection can get really crowded at certain times and backed up.

We did um so when again when we were planning the site, our preference was to utilize the existing access as Commissioner Rosine pointed out. If you have a less impact with residential use and lesser daily trips and it's a full access drive right now, why not preserve that? But in looking at the site with fresh eyes, I mean, we really did a litany of traffic studies to make sure that that access point was the safest condition for the community um our our community that we're building and then the community at large. So, we did assess going in off Dover, which would have been a ride in ride out access, not a full access. Um, and ultimately it came down to safety with the traffic speed going southbound down. Since we're downgrade, um, it did not pass as an primary access point. We would have to have a right lane um, to deescalate traffic to turn into the site to make that feasible. Um, and so our primary access is actually most safe where it currently is. And then we've shifted it as stated 12 feet west, which creates a little bit looser of a condition since we're moving further from the intersection. And it just didn't um lend itself space or requirement to have two points for a 33 unit project.

Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it,

Commissioner Langford. Thank you, Chair Harris. Uh, Miss Samard, uh, appreciate all your outreach to the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven communities. I'm curious in those communications and open houses and whatnot. Um, what they believed their preference was for the architectural inspiration, if they pointed you towards the mid-century modern as something to replicate from ENC, whether they like the idea, if there was consensus there. I'm just curious. Sure. Um the architecture elevation style was not a main point of conversation with the neighbors. Um it was mainly height and really just direct impact to them individually and that's really why a lot of our conversation with the neighbors ended up more indiv individual approach um because they all had individual concerns with their property. Um, and it it wasn't surrounding architectural style. Um, more so height um, and and impact in that way.

Okay. Yeah. My my personal read on it and I'd be curious eventually um, with all of us and maybe from the audience what they thought about it. To me, it seemed like it was kind of lending itself. This style made it seem more like part of the commercial corridor instead of part of the, you know, coastal Cape Cod, Cliff Haven feel. So, I was just curious if that was intentional, unintentional. You thought you were trying to match the ENC look, which is its own kind of like goofy use case. Um,

yeah. Um, no, good, good question. Um, we thought the corner is a pretty transitional part of the town. um kind of marrying both commercial and residential which is upgrade from us. Um so when we were playing with elevation styles and the density um of the buildings to see really what would lend itself best um to a row town home style here and fitting coastal um kind of contemporary Newport Beach. We met with staff and went over um multiple iterations of this project and this is what we felt would um resonate best for this corner. Okay. Thanks, Miss Manard. I really liked uh Mariner Shores by the way. I think it looks great.

Thank you. Yeah, commissioners. Um, do you mind walking through a little bit more of uh some of the feedback and how it's implemented in the site plan and the uh position of you know buildings or or based off communication with neighbors? Can you walk us through some of that or a little more of the back and forth or some compromises potentially that?

Yeah, absolutely. Um, so just giving an example and if you don't mind, I'll pull up a site plan just so it might be easier to follow the context of the neighbors or I'll pull up an aerial. So, some of the neighbors have been utilizing the property because it has been partially vacant for some time. Um, they've been utilizing that to access the back of their slopes and some have had gates put in and things for maintenance. Um, so we've been working individually with homeowners to have um something embedded in our CCNRs that would allow them access um via pathway to the back of their slopes um to facilitate landscaping. Um, we have a neighbor who didn't necessarily have a suggestion for site planning for us, but since, you know, we've been collaborating and we're, you know, a direct conduit to city staff at this point, they have voiced um, certain concerns which I can share with you. Um, we mentioned the power poles. So, we're conditioned underground the pole that's directly in front of our property. We're not conditioned to underground poles that are north on do. Um, and so that's something that was asked by a neighbor if there's anything we can do to remove the pole in front of their property. So, we're in design right now with SoCal Edison and it's something that we asked Edison as if they can evaluate that as part of the design. What does that do if we're removing that pole? Um, what does it do to remove the second one? Is it going to cause us to have to dig up do because there's a switch in a transformer on that pole? Um, so it it might be more cumbersome than we would think. Um, it's not just

removing a second pole, but the question was asked, so I should know that information soon. And um, we're in direct conversation with the neighbors, keeping them in the loop on that. Um, another thing that they brought up is the sycamore trees in the center median. Um, the city re recently redid that center median on Dover. Um, those sycamore trees get pretty tall and when they have all their leaves, um, it does impede views of the neighbors um, that are up on St. James Place. So, that was another request if we could talk to the city about maybe selecting a more thoughtful type of tree in the median. Um, so that those are the kind of personal things that come up. There is a home that you see at 702 St. James Place. It's new construction. They're building down the slopes. So, that's a unique situation because all the other homes, um, a lot of them are original. They have very mature vegetation on the slopes. That one in particular, um, they're building down the slope. And so we've been working closely with them as they work with buyers on really just messaging and um giving them, you know, what we have as we work through the entitlement process.

Thank you. Um can you compare the heights on this project to Mariner Shores?

Uh yes, Mariner Shores I believe hit a peak at about 33 feet. Is that correct? Um 33 feet. it had a wider footprint. We actually initially tried to plot that product here. We did not come close to the yield that we needed to hit the minimum density required for this overlay district. Um but we're at about 33 ft at Mariners and then five of our buildings hit a max height of 34t 11 in. We have two buildings at the interior of the site where the butterfly roof form hits a peak of 37 feet one inch.

Thank you. Any other questions, commissioners? Okay. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. So, it sounds like one of the letters that was sent from the neighbors, they had the two comments, one on the electrical and the poles. It sounds like you're undergrounding that. The other was to the sycamore trees. Um, were you able to work with the city to do something there or not?

We had risen the question and the feedback that we got was that it was newly landscaped and planted um, you know, pretty intentionally as part of the city beautifification project. Um, and so that's where it uh, rested. And you know, we'll keep raising the question and and see, but um we did remove the sycamore trees from our project cuz we initially had um plotted a couple just for um consistency, bringing in the Newport city selected trees into our site to have kind of that mirrored effect as you drive down Dober. Um but because it's a hot button for the neighbors, we elected to remove those from our site and pick a different species.

Got it. Thanks, Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Um does anyone from the audience wish to speak on this item? Um please come forward if you like to give your name. It's just a reminder you have three minutes typically and uh um it's not a time for question Q&A. Just a reminder that's all. Got it. Thanks. Uh, thanks uh uh chair and commissioners. My name is Tom Dapy. Oh, you get more time. Just give us a second.

Perfect. I don't need much. So, uh I just I live at 2532 Vista Drive, which is just south of this project. I've been driving and walking by this site when I'm heading up to walk my dogs uh at the park uh for the last 20 plus years. It's always looked to me like an obsolete medical office building, a little out of place with where it's at. And I think that this project is a great reuse for it. I think, you know, adding new housing stock to the city is really important and the ripple effect for the city with with people being able to buy more affordable homes. Maybe the folks that buy homes here are leaving, you know, houses somewhere else and more residents can come into the city and, you know, someday while I could probably never afford to buy my house again, maybe I could at least uh, you know, hope that my kids could someday find a buy the house of someone that moved into this house. So, I think that's real important. A lot of great amenities in the area for it. I I I really like how the front doors face uh Dover. Uh so, it doesn't have just kind of like the walled look like you see in a lot of new projects or existing projects throughout Orange County. It's it's really kind of open and and I think friendly. So, I'm a big fan of it. I think it's a great reuse. I'd love to see more stuff like this happening in the city. Thanks.

Thank you, speaker. Uh, my name is Morgan Craig. I live at 624. Uh, it's my grandparents old house they built in 1973. And my the first point I didn't want to say anything to Emily that she couldn't rebuttal, but I was going to bring up I was going to ask which neighbor wrote a letter of support because I wouldn't expect anybody to support this really in the neighborhood. I'm apparently wrong because the gentleman before me uh just made a a statement in support of it which I um I don't really understand. I've grown up in this neighborhood. I grew up in this neighborhood. Uh lived here almost my whole life and um you know first of all the the traffic that it it'll produce the traffic numbers that Emily presented to me don't seem correct. uh the amount of cars that are going in and out of it now are it's the volume is very low and I think with that many residences there it'll go up quite a bit uh and with Enen and Newport Harbor right there and the amount of kids and uh riding bikes the amount of people running the amount of people walking the amount of cars every morning going up and down that hill um I think it'll create quite quite a problem um they talk about you know Sha Holmes talks about wanting to work with the community um the third level at 35 ft or whatever it's at to me um sit luckily I get to sit on a a beautiful deck and look over the bluffs but that level is pretty much right at eye level for for all of us there and it's going to block a lot and she compared uh she was pointed out the trees being at pretty much that height and you can't really compare uh something in nature to uh a constructed building a condo in a an area that is just surrounded by beautiful homes. So, to me, it's it's uh

that's pretty disappointing. Um and uh like I said, uh and it's unfortunate for uh the gentleman who built the house, that beautiful home right next to us, who Doug Quesan spent a lot of money uh securing that hill to build a pool at a level that is now basically going to be staring at the back of these of these homes. And I understand that there's a mandate by the state and all that sort of thing. Um but in this situation, people that have been there for 40 years, 30 years, all my neighbors, um it's it it it breaks my heart and it's it's really hard to see happen and uh in such a beautiful area. Um it's just it doesn't to me it doesn't make a lot of sense. a compromise which would be I would understand is is two levels and not three of these of these these homes that don't don't look like they belong there and completely stand out and uh we'll just create more traffic and with more traffic more accidents and more kids in danger with Newport Harbor High School and uh and Enson right there. Um and that's all I have to say. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Nick. I'm here to speak in support of building these homes. I moved to Newport Beach from Manhattan Beach a few years ago with my family, partly for work. The uh the jobs are down here, but honestly, it was more than that. I heard Newport Beach was where all the young families were. that if I wanted to raise a family that was similar to the place that I grew up, um, good schools, safe streets, real communities, that Newport Beach was the place to go. So, I started house hunting, being a renter now down here, and uh, quickly dawned upon me that that was not going to be an option. It was not an option for me to put down roots, buy a home, move here with my family, unless I was from here and inherited or lived in my parents' home. So, I started getting creative, then desperate, started scrolling through listings that I just didn't think fit for me and my family. I even started getting on planning department websites and looking at development pipelines. That's how desperate I was getting to find something. Then, I come across this project and it's perfect. It's not a mega mansion. It's not tiny condos there. It's just exactly what I was looking for. Good, honest, fair priced housing. Um, it's looks like it actually belongs in the community. It fits in terms of size. It fits in terms of parking. It fits in terms of open space that you can actually use. Uh, it feels like somebody actually thought about what it would be like to live in these homes and wasn't just trying to maximize what the law legally allows them to build. Candidly,

I'm confused how anybody can in good faith oppose this project. The developer could have gone taller. They didn't. They could have gone denser. They didn't. They could have put roof decks on here. They didn't. At every turn where they had the right to take more, they took less. So, I'm asking the commission to support this project. This is exactly what a family like mine needs to put roots down here. Not just my family, but any family that wants to move to Newport Beach and be a part of this community. Otherwise, it's basically closed off to people like us. Thank you. Thank you.

How much was paying you for that? Hey, excuse me. Hey. Hey. Excuse me. Notrop not appropriate, guys. Uh, good evening. I My name is Cynthia and I live at 500 Kings Place. Can you speak in the microphone? I should talk here more.

Um, oh yeah. My name is Cynthia. Good evening. And I live at 500 King's Place, um, which is just up the street and around the corner from this development. My primary concern is the traffic problem. Um, I understand that there's statistics on uh traffic that and trips, but I also know that there's two entries. I walk my dog in that area. Um, I'm in Castaways Park regularly. Um, and there's two entries into that medical office building, one off of Dover and one off of Cliff Drive. I also walk up and down um, Cliff Drive. And I know how busy it is during um the morning when school comes out the elementary school or the high school at lunchtime for both the elementary and high school and at 3:00. I also know that people use um Cliff Drive for parking. Um not regularly residential parking, but they do come and park along Cliff Drive. And when you park there, if it's a no parking zone, um it it's not clear to many people. And so my concern really is that the traffic on on a singular entry exit off of Cliff Drive is going to severely impact the traffic for anybody that lives in the immediate area, those first few blocks. If you miss that entry off of Cliff Drive, you're going to come up and you're going to try to make a Uturn exactly on the corner of King's Place

and Cliff Drive. When you make that Uturn, it's very blind. It's very difficult for anybody to see. when people are crossing the street at that corner, they're already risking um a certain amount of, you know, danger because the traffic is very fast on that corner. That corner could really use a four-way stop in order to get people across it. And once you start to add the idea that people may be coming up there and doing a U-turn or coming into the neighborhood because they missed the drive to come back down and get into the housing development. You see that there might be a significant problem. There also might be a lot of people with 10 visitor parking spaces and everything else all the other site parking in garages that the 10 visitor parking spots may not be enough. Is my time is up? But

please finish your thought. Um my thought really is that it needs to be clearer that you can't park along um Cliff Drive up and down uh so that people don't start parking there and then start parking into the neighborhood. Um in terms of the um I'm sorry. Okay, that's good. Thank you so much. Thank you.

Next speaker, please. Uh, Chair Harris, members of the commission, my name is Jim Moer. Uh, to to follow up on my earlier comment about the housing element, I think we're all grateful that the developer is not proposing to put 81 units and 65 ft tall structures at this site. It would be very inharmonious with that neighborhood. However, there does seem to be a state requirement that your resolution because we're not producing the 81 units that we promised is good should explain how that impacts our housing element because they have to go somewhere else. So, I did not see that in the resolution any analysis of how we make up for the shortfall at this location and how it impacts our ability to complete our housing element. Uh I I agree with Cynthia that intuitively this seems to be creating a parking problem. Uh if there is many guests here, I don't know where they're going to park even though it meets our technical requirement. Uh there maybe is a condition in here of if the homeowners are not using their garage, we have something to keep them from parking in the drive aisles and creating uh hazardous situations. And I personally do not live in the area, so I do not understand the parking situation. On my bicycle, I noticed near the ENC. There is a sign saying on Dover that there is no parking along that whole block, but Cliff Drive seems to have some red zones which imply that the non- red zones you can park. And also if you continue down Dover overdrive there's no

sign and there are some red zones implies you can't park there which I think would be a dangerous thing to do as to the finding that this is harmonious with with the area. It was good to see some renderings of what it looks like from some locations. I did not see anything from what it looks like from Castways Park to the public. And the rendering I saw looking southbound on Dover, it is very imposing and very close to the street. And that is what they're asking for a variance for. And in your resolution, there are claims that other sites with the same zoning are much bigger and nonconstrained. But there's actually only two other sites, one at 15016th Street and the other at 747 Dover. And they're both smaller and they're probably both more constrained. So I'm not sure how you can grant the variance for that. So I would just ask they seem to have three floor plans which are mislabeled incidentally on handwritten page 110 and 111. Uh, but to avoid the encroachment, can't they have another plan that just makes those units a little bit smaller so that they're not right up against overdrive? I agree with Commissioner Lanford. The style does not really fit in. And finally, I don't understand at all the trash plan that is on handwritten page 130. It it it has no explanation of how the trash is going to be handled. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Measure. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Jod Young and I was born in Newport Beach. I grew up on Dover Drive at my parents' home and I live at 604 St. James Place directly above this project and we've lived there 40 years. I have seen the traffic on do the start where there wasn't castaways or any place and now they there's just so many more people that use that thorough affair to get to coast highway. They cut up uh glyph drive often times just to avoid PCH. So, it's not just students at a certain time, but it's people all the time in that traffic area, and it's going to be dangerous. There are people with their strollers. They're walking their dogs. Newport Harbor has their cross country team going up and down the hills. It just And it the project itself seems so out of character for single homes, family homes, and it's just it's makes me really sad. I feel like it's ruining where I live in my community and and that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Tom. I live on 418 Snug Harbor Road. I've been a resident here for 40 years. Um, we didn't get any notification on Snug Harbor, but I will say that I did use the buildings when they were the professional buildings when the professionals were in those medical spaces and it is practically impossible to exit and turn left. Number one, the cars coming down do are very fast and they make a very quick right turn on the cliff. Just very fast. If you can get out and make a left turn on the cliff, trust me, it just doesn't happen. I have waited there 10 minutes when it's just the simple medical building. You have to turn right, go up the hill, and you would have to make a turn, like Cynthia said, on that blind corner. And it is a blind corner. It's where everybody crosses with their dogs, the kids, Newport Harbor, and u the high school. Enson, the kids are just impacting like crazy all the time. It's not just after school, it's during school hours, lunch hours. Uh, Cliff Drive is now just impacted very, very heavy with traffic and it's backed up all the way to the top of the hill when the school lets out and it goes very, very slow. So the egress from this project is completely insufficient for this plan. And additionally, the people in this this new development, they're going to have housekeepers. They're going to have construction trucks. There's going to be people that are working on their homes. And there's just no space for these contractors and housekeepers to park their cars. And it really is busy on my street alone on Snug Harbor. The

whole street is full with just contractors working on homes, uh, housekeepers all during the day. There's just almost no parking. And this is a residential neighborhood with large homes. So, I cannot imagine how this project is going to work packed in so tight with such limited parking. It's going to be a nightmare. and you can just ride off this left exit onto uh Cliff Drive. It just doesn't happen. So, thank you for your time. Thank you, speaker.

Good evening, Commissioner Harris, members of the commission. Uh my name is Mark Shenuda. For the record, uh I live on 712 St. James Place in Newport Beach right above the project or just two houses to the north of of the project. Um, in light of the uh housing element, I will say I am not opposed to this project. Make no mistake, I am opposed that it's uh part of the housing element, but I realize that ship is sailed. Um, and I understand that the commissioners your hands are tied somewhat. Uh, one of the things that I would have liked to uh um see as a community benefit is undergrounding the power lines that are right on Dover. Do is a beautiful street. Now, they're undergrounding the power line that's right in front of their the proposed development. Uh, where there's another power line that is just right in front of ours. I'd like to see that and I'd like to see that as a community benefit. We're not opposed to this project again as in light of in light of what's going on. Uh we like the Shayes. We like Emily. She's done a great job uh in reaching out to the neighbors, but I would like to see that and more particularly I'd like to see that as a condition of approval. I know she's doing the best she can and to underground talking with Edison, but we sure get a lot more comfort if it's a condition of approval to do that. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Uh, good evening. My name is Kathy. I live in Newport Heights. I did not receive any notification of this project and only found out about it a couple of weeks ago. And I know my neighbors did not either because I was telling them we're coming tonight and they didn't know anything about it. That's irrelevant. What I would say is that um I would be very concerned about the traffic impacts. As many people have said, uh Cliff Drive is a thoroughfare to avoid PCH. People drive at great rates of speed up and down that hill all the time. I walk over to Castaways Park on a regular basis almost at probably three or four times a week. Um, there are electric bikes and pe people speeding down Cliff Drive. There are cars speeding up Cliff Drive. There do of course is a nightmare uh at any time of the day just about anymore. It's so busy. So if if this is going to happen and if the ship has sailed and this is unavoidable, there really does need to be some consideration of a stoplight at the top of Cliff Drive where King's Place hits Cliff Drive because it's a completely blind corner as cars come from the opposite direction on Cliff Drive going down toward Dover. And anybody who's trying to cross that intersection, you you take your life in your hands. you have to run because you can't see and cars are coming so fast that you know it's dangerous. So, I would really recommend that there be some consideration for a stoplight there or a crosswalk. Uh if not a stoplight, at least a crosswalk because with the increase in traffic that will come with this development, I can guarantee you there's going to be some kind of accident. Somebody's going to get killed or hurt. Um I I would hope that uh this project gets done and that our worst fears don't come to fruition, but um I fear that this is a done deal. So at least take into consideration the impacts to neighbors with the parking. And one other thing, uh, I don't know

how all these big construction vehicles are where they're going to be parking or be situated while all of this is going on, but someone should have a good plan for that because, uh, my home is under construction right now. And I know all of the the crafts people and all the vehicles that they drive and the size of these vehicles and cement trucks and grade alls and all of that. So, someone needs to be thinking about how that's going to impact Cliff Drive as well while it's under construction. So that's my two cents. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please.

Good evening. Uh I'm at 1101 Kings Road and I think my neighbors are going to be pissed at me. Uh but life comes full circle. I took my kids to that pediatric center when they were babies. So that means that that building is 25 years old. Medical used to be medical. As far as I can tell, I drive by there every day. It has not changed one bit. They've not paved the parking lot. It is a dying bill building that is at least 25 years old. And it medical office has moved to the hospital. That is never going to be a medical office building. And the truth is my son lives in Houston. And it was really interesting that the young man came up and he was right. He would be if I lived on St. James Place, I would be uh not happy that this was happening. I'd be happy that it wasn't 65 ft. But and his idea of a second story is actually a great idea. The problem is the state mandates 20 20 density units, 20 houses per acre. There is no way you're getting twotory. There's just not it's just not physically possible. The just not possible. So there's just kind of ying. You have to meet the state and you have to do this. I actually like the elevations. It's interesting that someone was you were saying that uh you're right. Castaways is here which is very Cape Cod but if you look just to the left the actual houses that are are all modern houses and on King's Road and there's actually a new kind of duplex on on cliff that's almost identical like type of architecture. So it's definitely drifting toward modern architecture but it was interesting. Uh there was a lot of conversation about the front setback. The best thing about the front se the

closer the houses the units are to the streets the farther they are away from the house and in the site plan wasn't pointed out but it was the best thing about the site plan was the narrower side of the buildings are facing the existing residents and so they're actually the it's about as amicical as you're going to get as opposed to putting the long buildings along the slope. Um, so I I actually really want my son to move back here. And that is just not possible unless this type of product is built, a starter housing, starter town home. It's just not possible unless this we build it in Newport. And I've lived in Newport Heights for I don't know 30 years or something. So, but and if you remember, there isn't any of these. none except uh the Mariner Square that they built. So we have to do it. We just have to thank you. Any other speakers? Good evening. My name is Georgia Fox. I live on the boundary of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach, but I'm on Dover and Cliff all the time. And I'm attending this meeting basically to express my concern to the approval of this construction project and all these units. Um, I think it's just too much. It's going to add to all the traffic on Dover and Cliff. And uh I think what people are not really talking about is in advent of a fire, how long would it take people to get out of this area? I mean, it was, you know, it would be d in a danger to the residents in the event of a fire. How would the residents be able to evacuate in time? Uh which way would

they go? They would have limited ways in and out of that area. So really, did we not learn anything from the fires in Pacific Palisades in Los Angeles about a year ago? I'm hoping we did. Uh, I guess people have forgotten too soon about those about those fires, especially in Pacific Palisades. And there was multi there was 12 to 13 people that died in Pacific Palisades simply because there was only one way in and one way out of the Palisades. And I'm afraid this is going to happen in this area. That's why I'm speaking out. So, I don't think we want this to happen in Newport. I think we want a safe area. And the problem with with Dover is, especially on the weekends, especially on Friday nights and Saturdays, the traffic there is really congested. It's not gotten any better, if you put 33 units more in that area, it's just going to add to the traffic. And as somebody said, especially with construction people and trucks and things like that, it's going to make it worse. So, that's basically my opinion. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers? Uh the applicant, would you like to respond to anything or make any other comments? Okay. Okay. Staff, any comments for the record?

Yes, Chair. Uh Hi, Memorial Community Development Director. So, um just want to touch upon a couple points uh regarding notification. uh the project was notified in accordance with our municipal code. Uh so we have a minimum distance that we send out uh mail notices but we also have other means of providing a notice. Um with regards to potential construction impacts, we do have a condition of approval that does require the preparation and approval of a construction management plan uh prior to the issuance of building permits. Uh with regards to parking concerns, um the city's municipal code does prohibit the storage of you know materials or anything in a garage that's not a vehicle. To reinforce that, we do have conditions of approval that requires as part of the CCNRs that prohibition be included in the CCNRs. And with regards to traffic, um I know it's hard to compare under today's conditions given that the medical office complex is kind of underutilized and a lot of the existing tenants have vacated, but uh based on what's allowed and peak usage of medical office. That complex uh is estimated to generate 453 trips per day. The residential project is projected to generate 222 trips. So, it's actually 231 trips less than the allowed medical office complex today. Um, so with regards to that, we believe there'll actually be a reduction in traffic.

Uh, unless there are any specific questions with regards to legality, I'm happy to answer those. Have a question. Um, one of the, um, speakers asked about undergrounding and potentially a condition. Um would we be able to is that a possibility? Um you know assuming that's approved by SC if they've applied for it or whatnot. I think it would be beneficial to hear from the applicant and see if they're amendable to that condition.

Thank you. Um so we do have a condition of approval that requires us to underground the power pole along the project frontage. So, that has been submitted and it's it's similar um conversations that we've had with the neighbors. So, I hope I'm not um beating a horse here, but when we submitted into Edison for the evaluation of the removal of the pole in front of the project, they have to assess the the circuit. So, we would essentially rise on the most northerly pole um which is a subject pole in um front of 612 St. James Place that pole has a transformer and a circuit on it. Um so while the request was made to Edison what it would take to underground that pole um I still have not gotten that design back of what that would take. Um we're anticipated to get it mid to end of next month um which will be shared with the neighbors and you know further the conversation on what the undergrounding is. It's hard to commit to a condition when we don't know how far we would need to chase it. Um the undergrounding of that pole, if it's something that we can, you know, realistically rope in with the removal of the one fronting our site, we'll do it. Um if we're having to chase a circuit, you know, really far up do to West 16th Street, um I just don't know what scope I'd be committing to at this time. So, for that reason, it it's hard to openly commit to broadening the condition, but I will commit that we will be in transparent communication with Edison, the neighbor, and the overall design um as we look at removing that pole.

Miss Zimmer, that that's very helpful. Would you be amendable to a a condition that's um contingent upon getting the information and if it is viable to uh underground that as uh the applicant would be willing to approve that? I think it's something that we can work on with planning on just keeping it very open-ended and um up to the discretion of the applicant. Well, up to the discretion of the applicant subject toce's um determination as to whether it can be underground reasonably.

Correct. But I I guess reasonable is a kind of an open-ended term. So I just um I just want to make that clear. Yeah. I just don't want to um extend expectations. It's something that we'll be assessing transparently with the neighbors in the city as we get more information from Edison. Um so, however we can word that as a condition, we're open to putting that as a condition as long as we um are in control of that language. And would if it were, let's say we're talking about reasonleness. So if it were up to a certain amount of money, if we could kind of come to an agreement on a reasonable amount that it would cost for the undergrounding, is that something the applicant would be amenable to?

It's something we can speak further on. It's it's cost and scope. So it's it's hard to I don't know if any of you have worked with Southern California Edison, but um it's very hard to predict what that's going to look like. So um committing to something is is difficult because the poll can move so so quickly with them. Um so it's difficult to to commit to language or a condition here. Um anything that we commit to would be fairly open-ended. Okay. Thank you.

Um are there any other plans for traffic mitigation in Cliff Drive area? kick sit down. Thank you.

Um there there are no other plans at this moment. Um that's on our our CIP schedule, but um I did hear uh several little comments about parking on Cliff Drive. We can evaluate it um to see if we can um add more signs or or to see what the actual impacts are initially maybe because you can't park in a a bike lane. So the um there's no parking um east of uh Kings. So uh between Kings and Dover. So we can we can look at that. Um we can evaluate the intersection at Kings to see if we can add an always stop. Um so there there's a clear uh warrant requirements for that. So, that's something that we can I could take back to my office and we can um take a look at that

or even consider um you know uh methods to slow people down a little bit or something to that effect. Yeah, that's correct. Yes. Thank you. Um any other questions for staff at this time? Is that okay? Keep the public comment open for a minute.

Yeah, I had two two questions for staff. I think one's a little bit redundant on what you were saying, but just so we're clear, the visitor right now, um, the site has, I think, 66 parking spots, 10 visitor spots. I think we all know with a project of this scale, you tend to go out of the 10 guest spots rather quickly, and you tend to have sprawl of cars on both sides. In this case, it would be uh Dover and it would be Cliff. But if I understand today, there is no parking on Dover. There is no parking on Cliff. Correct. All the way up to the hill there. There there is existing parking west of uh King's Place. West of So if you go Oh, so so you have to get to the top of the hill into the residential neighborhood before you can have parking.

Got it. So down below though, there's no once those 10 spots are full, there's no parking all the way up to the top and there's no parking up and down do. Correct. That's correct. Okay. Got it. Uh that was my first question. The second question is the the I think you hit on it, but one of the um speakers mentioned the stops. I think she said stop light but I think she meant stop sign at King's Place and Cliff. What is the process to evaluate that with the city time duration?

So we um so we we follow um the state guidelines uh to evaluate um intersection for always stop. So we the process would be um so it see we we already received the request here and um so I can work with the the constituent or resident on that request. We need to uh obtain traffic counts at the intersection. Um uh stop signs are based on um uh meeting a certain amount of u like volume through the intersection. the idea the um the always stop the the idea is that um you have an equal amount of traffic in uh both directions. So if that's the case then um always stop would help um with uh facilitating the rightway at the intersection um with with the equal amount of traffic and um both directions and or it's a it could be warranted based off of uh collision experiences. So we can look at the uh recorded uh collisions at the intersection. Uh um type of collisions that are correctable by always stop is like a broadside collision. So that that would be a type of collision that's uh correctable by a always stop and and generally it require about five collisions within a a 12-month period to to warrant the the always stop. So those are two ways you could warrant based on traffic volumes and and based on collision experience.

Okay. Got it. And just one final question. So I'm clear as it stands today, if this is approved and the 10 visitor spots are full and you want to park, you're parking up in the residential community walking down cliff into the project because there's no other parking area. That that's correct. Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions, commissioners? Okay, close the public hearing. Thank Thank you for all the speakers. Um bring it back to the commission for discussion action. Uh any general comments or responses? Commissioners Leford, please. Uh thank you, Chair Harris. Um yeah, I would I would have concerns, same concerns as everyone in the room, I think. Um, for parking, I know one of our conditions of approval is including in the CCNRs a requirement that the garages are used for vehicles and that's hard to police, you know, us policing it. So that ends up being on the HOA to enforce. But there's now I understand new HOA, you know, caps that the state has set. And maybe that's something that we should put on a future agenda is to understand how those HOA caps will influence our decisions on how we condition projects for future approval. Um, but it didn't it it said the CCNRs would be in there. It didn't necessarily say the HOA would require it or enforce it or something. Um, which would give me a little bit more comfort. I forget how we ended up writing it into the Ford Road project, but we had the same concerns there. Um, that being my neighborhood in the port streets, so I had special attention on that one also, but it the same uh philosophy would apply here. Um, and then as far as architectural style, I alluded to it earlier. If it was my neighborhood, and I used to drive to Newport Harbor every day from the port streets, so this would be my entrance into Cliff Haven and Newport Heights. And I find it strange, and maybe it's

okay cuz no one brought it up, maybe it's just me, that it wasn't really an entryway into the neighborhood to reflect the style of the neighborhood. And I know with the uh Ford Road project that we approved, that applicant specifically included a design element as like port street style because he wanted it to uh reflect that neighborhood and be kind of an to immediately be part of the neighborhood instead of like this is the commercial corridor like multif family housing project that's outside of the neighborhood and then you get into the neighborhood. So to me it doesn't seem completely congruous. It kind of reminds me of some of these Westside Costa Mesa multif family projects. Nothing not that there's anything wrong with that. It just doesn't seem to reflect the the like Newport aesthetic that this site being so high-profile and you know Dover and Cliff Drive is like such you know everyone's going to drive by all the time. It's an entryway into the neighborhood. So um but if no one else feels that way then that's fine. Um, but that's that would be my note to the applicants. And and perhaps part of it is you can't design that same, you know, coastal Cape Cod style and get the same amount of square footage. I think that that's what I heard you saying, trying to match the Mariner Shore look onto this site didn't quite pencil. Um, but those would be my thoughts.

Thank you. Oh, you're okay. Thanks.

Um, where would I start? Um, first of all, I think the I think the uh applicants done a really nice job on the design of it. It's a very constrained site. So, I think from an access point, it's really tough to do anything other than what's proposed. You know, coming down do I don't think would be realistic to put a entrance onto Dover. From a parking perspective, we're offering I think it's 10 more spaces than are required per the code. Um, you know, certainly based on the underlying zoning, this could be much more aggressively planned. Um, so I appreciate the restraint that the applicant has um used in in designing this. Um, you know, from a design perspective, you know, I like the diversity of doing different things, not just having, you know, this is an Irvine. Um, so I mean I think this is a a well thoughtout, well-designed project and you know I think it's going to be you know while I respect the concerns of the people right above it certainly understand that um you know this this is allowed here um it's been proposed it's been known and you know I I think it's a well-designed project and I'm in support of it. So, first of all, I heard a couple things tonight that I think we should really consider. Uh, number one, there there is no nexus for asking the applicant to underground the line further up the hill. Uh, if you've dealt with Edison, I think that this is unreasonable. It's easily a million dollars that you're asking them to absorb. And so, I think it's dangerous to have that as a potential condition of approval and would not support that. Additionally, they're meeting our parking requirements. So, those are our parking requirements and we need to be

comfortable with that, that they've been they've met those guidelines. And so, I think we need to be aware that we're not talking about anything other than the code here. Additionally, I'd like to commend the applicant because I think that this is a good-looking project. I think that this architectural style is achievable in construction. I also think that this architectural style protects the height limitation with the butterfly roofs that otherwise you're going to end up with a taller building. Uh I think it's appropriate and it will be a good-looking project. uh you know the the applicant could have gone to a higher density, they could gone to a higher height limitation. They had a lot of leeway and they showed what was appropriate for the neighborhood. Uh that's that's our code. Remember, so they're meeting our code and then I do think that this will fit into the context of the neighborhood and will be a good-looking project. On top of that, we're bringing forale housing into our city that is a much more achievable price point. So I think that's a fantastic thing and I think this is going to be a great project and I will be supporting it.

Mr. Reed,

sure I'll go. Um let's see. I'll start off with I've been a resident of the Heights community for 18 years. So, I very much um know and appreciate the community's concerns. I appreciate everyone here tonight to speak for and against the project. Um at the expense of being redundant um with my other commissioners um to the applicant, I appreciate everything you did with the community outreach. Uh how organized, how thoughtful you were, how at every turn you you could have taken more, you took less. But on the other side of it, I also understand um the traffic complexities and I I think there's no there's no easy answer with uh our housing needs and our housing goal and our housing plan. Um it's it's really tough because you get stuck with these unique parcels where there just isn't the right answer for public parking. There isn't the right um a a a forced right and a right, for example, is is is not great cuz then they're going to go up the hill and make a U-turn. um having them go out at uh Dover is tough. So, it it it's it's really tricky when we get into these types of uh lots and we're putting an overlay. So, it's uh it's a challenge and I understand and um that being said, I do think the applicant meets the conditions and I will be supporting this project.

Thank you. Um um I think the site plan design was thoughtful um considering what they could do. We're kind of in a rock and a hard place here with our zoning and this overlay. Um where it could have, you know, been they can go vertical and get their density. You know, they need they have a minimum of 20 acre, so that's 33 units. Um, I think they they were thoughtful in trying to push it out, get away from the housing behind them. Um, and worked with the neighbors well. Um, so I can appreciate that. Um, traffic. Um, I do I've taken my kids here uh, Harvard Pediatrics for years. Um, when it was buzzing, it was buzzing a little bit. It was pretty full. Um, I I don't think traffic's as big of an issue. I do see parking potentially as an issue. Um, I like we have a condition that people, you know, have to have their their garages clean or or empty and have to park inside. I hope that's enforced. I could foresee there just aren't many there isn't a lot of overflow. So, if you have roommates or some uh other considerations or kids and, you know, four cars in two spots, you know, I don't know if they're parking in cliff walking down the hill. I don't know where they go. So, you know, they comply, but that's a problem and I don't know how we solve it. So, because I I don't foresee parking on cliff. Um, when I look at what alternatives could be built here, um, the community could really be jammed with a really big project that was really tight and tall and be a lot worse. And I think this is actually a nice project. Um, it offers a different income level to uh, potentially purchase here and be in the community. I along with Commissioner Langford don't love the the design, just to be honest. Um I would rather have seen and would rather see something similar to um the Mariner Shores project. I think that would fit in blend

better with a the traditional kind of Cape Cod even, you know, a little bit of farmhouse uh uh community and blend more as you come up the hill. I think it's more um an out parcel for the Heights in Cliff Haven versus you know blending as this this to me fits in more of an industrial area or more of a commercial area where we've done some in in um I want to say spot zoning but some some overlays where um housing is has been introduced in commercial areas. Um this is surrounded by residential. So, I um I would be open to trying to think of and I've I've kind of talked to Steph about um you know, you could condition, you know, some sort of condition to soften up some lines, some colors, um uh potentially um or they could come up with a different idea. I don't know if that's I've got, you know, the support for that. Um but I would be in favor of something to that effect, another look at the design. Um uh also the undergrounding we talked about I understand what you guys are saying the argument we cannot you know mandate that they uh underground beyond their property. Uh I would like to if the applicant is open to it and if I could add the support that they would still we could put that they would continue working with city as they've said and if you know if it's feasible you know at their discretion clearly we have to leave it then I would like to add that as condition if everyone's in favor um so if anyone has any thoughts on the design or ways we could you know kind of soften that up or or change something I'd be open to it um or else if if Um, somebody else wants to make a motion as is or with the condition that I'm proposing. Um, we can go from there. I'd like to make a motion to approve based on the existing conditions of

approval the existing architecture and not add any additional conditions of approval that are outside the nexus for this project. I'll second that. The motion carries 41 with Chair Harris voting no.

Congratulations. Thank you.

Okay, moving on. The next item, item number three, motions for reconsideration. Are there any motions, staff? Okay. Item number four, report by the community development director or request for matters which a planning commission member would like placed on a future agenda. Well, going to give a sec for everyone to cycle. Thanks. Yeah,

director Maria, you ready?

I just wanted to note for the commission that the February 19th planning commission hearing it will be cancelled. So, uh, no meeting for the second one in February and then our next meeting will be scheduled for March 5th. and uh it'll be a slightly heavier agenda. On that agenda, we do uh have scheduled the 300 Newport Center Drive condominiums. Uh so that's another housing project for your consideration. We'll also be sharing the annual general plan housing report for your consideration and recommendation to the city council. Uh we have an ordinance related to streamlining and incentivizing telecom facilities. Uh so it's an update to our municipal code. And then lastly, we have a conditional use permit for a restaurant called uh The Nice Guy over at 2607 uh West Coast Highway. So, uh those will be the four items for your consideration. That's it.

Thank you. It's a long one. Does anyone from the audience want to comment on these items, Mr. Motion?

Uh thank you again, Chair Harris. Uh uh one one item pending before you will be the general plan update. And I I notice if I look on this in the gray areas of it, I see a number of the other boards and commissions reviewing the general plan. And then I see an April 28th study session before the city council. I don't see on the schedule when you will be reviewing the general plan. And to the best of my memory, you've seen two of the eight elements so far. You've seen the land use element and the safety element. There's eight other elements. So there's a lot of stuff. And uh the last time the general plan was updated, the planning commission spent many, many hours reviewing it before presenting it to the city council. So I'm not totally sure when that will happen. One one element that is not being reviewed though is the housing element. And I made a non-aggenda comment about our progress on that. But another aspect of that is part of our housing element has not been implemented yet because it's in the coastal zone and we've been waiting and been hearing for a couple of years that we're waiting for the coastal commission to certify our plan for the housing and the overlays and so forth in the coastal zone. And that was actually on the plan the coastal commission agenda today. But before the hearing happened, it was marked as being postponed. And on this schedule is just on the very last page is now pending before the coast commission. And so that part of our housing element we can't even act on. And so I'm just maybe you would be wondering did the

the Coastal Commission had finally offered to hear it? Did we the city tell them we didn't want them to or why why has it gone off their agenda? And when are you going to hear the other elements of the general plan? Those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you, Maser. Speakers. Nope. Okay. Item number five, request for excused absences. Anyone? March 5th. I'll be out March 5th. All right. Ajourn.