Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0_Draft Minutes_03-22-2018IV V VI. VII. NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2018 REGULAR MEETING — 6:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER — The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Dunlap ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Peter Koetting, Vice Chair Peter Zak (arrived at 6:33 p.m.), Secretary Erik Weigand, Commissioner Bill Dunlap, Commissioner Lauren Kleiman, Commissioner Kory Kramer, Commissioner Lee Lowrey /_1:i.1A01R.7S Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine, Civilian Police Investigator Wendy Joe, Principal Planner Gregg Ramirez, Assistant Planner Chelsea Crager, Systems and Administrative Manager Dan Campagnolo, Administrative Support Specialist Brittany Ramirez PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Mosher remarked that the Brown Act provides the public with an opportunity to speak to each item on the agenda. He requested the status of the video recording of the March 8, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Chair Koetting agreed that the public can speak to each item on the agenda. Director Jurjis advised that the video recording would be available the following day. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES Deputy Director Campbell requested a continuance of Item 3, Agape Art Collective, to the April 5, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2018 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Kleiman to approve the draft minutes of the March 8, 2018 meeting with the inclusion of Jim Mosher's edits. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Kleiman NOES: None ABSTAIN: Dunlap, Kramer ABSENT: None STUDY SESSION ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 STAFF PRESENTATION: WEBSITE RESOURCES AND STAYING INFORMED Summary: A brief staff presentation on using the City's News Alerts and other online features to keep informed on current planning applications. 1 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a study session. Systems and Administrative Manager Dan Campagnolo presented online features that allow the public to stay informed about planning applications. From the City's homepage, interested parties should select "Planning Case Log" and "Project Map Viewer' under the "Trending" tab. The "Stay Informed" button leads to registration for email notification of City news and events. The current planning case log pulls data from the permitting system and lists all active planning cases. Data can be filtered by address, contact, Council district, permit type, and project title. Clicking on a case name reveals a brief description of the application, the case number, discretionary approvals, Council district, the planner, and a chronology of the project. Clicking on the address opens a neighborhood viewer that shows all development activity in the neighborhood of the project. In the viewer, orange boxes are building permits, blue boxes are discretionary permits, and purple boxes are high-profile projects. Clicking on a box will provide additional information about a project. The viewer also lists police and fire calls, short-term lodging, and tree maintenance. The "Building Activity Reports' tab provides data about building activity. The Planning Commission's homepage leads to agendas, minutes, and audio and video recordings. Cora Newman, 881 Dover, complimented staff on the City's website. It's both user-friendly and data -rich. Jim Mosher remarked that Mr. Campagnolo is one of the nicest and most customer -oriented employees of the City. He inquired about the meaning of "PA" in the title of each planning case; whether hearing dates are loaded into the system ten days prior to the hearing or as soon as the date is known; whether data can be filtered by hearing date; and about a means to access planning cases that are no longer active. Systems and Administrative Manager Campagnolo reported "PA" stands for planning activity VIII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 3 AGAPE ART COLLECTIVE (PA2017-232) Site Location: 365 Old Newport Boulevard Summary: A request for a minor use permit to operate a tattoo studio (Personal Services, Restricted land use) and artist's studio within an existing commercial tenant space. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-011 approving Minor Use Permit No. UP2017-031. Deputy Director Campbell requested this item be continued to April 5, 2018, due to a typographical error in the notice. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Kramer to continue PA2017-232, Agape Art Collective, to the April 5, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kleiman, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 2 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS: ITEM NO. 4 TACO BELL CANTINA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA2017-198) Site Location: 2121 West Balboa Boulevard Summary: A conditional use permit (CUP) to allow a food service, eating and drinking establishment, Taco Bell Cantina, with late hours (6 a.m to 2 a.m.), and a Type 41 (On -Sale Beer and Wine) Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license in a tenant space historically occupied by Original Pizza. Currently a legal nonconforming restaurant use with a Type 40 (On -Sale Beer Only) is allowed to operate with no limitation of business hours. Taco Bell Cantina opened in mid-December and is currently open Sunday - Thursday 7 a.m. to 2 a.m and Friday -Saturday 7 a.m. to 3 a.m. The floor plan includes a dining room with 32 seats. If approved, the restaurant as proposed requires the owner/operator to obtain an Operator License through the City because of the issuance of a new conditional use permit for a restaurant with alcohol sales operating after 11 p.m., pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) 5.25. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-012 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2017-028 (Attachment No. PC 1). All Commissioners reported they had spoken to the applicant, the applicant's representative, or the applicant's consultant. Commissioner Dunlap recused himself from the item as he is conducting business with the landlord. Principal Planner Gregg Ramirez reported the application is a request for approval of a conditional use permit to upgrade a Type 40 license for beer only to a Type 41 license for beer and wine at an existing, legal nonconforming restaurant. If the application is approved, the legal nonconforming status will be eliminated, and the project will have to abide by all conditions of the use permit. Original Pizza occupied the site prior to Taco Bell Cantina and held a Type 40 license. Taco Bell remodeled the facility and reduced the size of the dining room and the number of seats such that it is consistent with the nonconforming restaurant previously occupying the location and able to continue without the benefit of a conditional use permit. A Type 40 license does not require a full menu. A Type 41 license is an on -sale beer and wine license and requires a full menu. The existing restaurant is not required to have an operator license. If the project is approved, an operator license will be required because the applicant is requesting business hours after 11 p.m. The current allowed hours of operation are 24 hours daily since it is a nonconforming restaurant. The proposed hours and staffs recommended hours are 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. daily. The facility has a takeout window located at the front of the building adjacent to the parking lot. Given the location of the window and the potential amount of foot and vehicular traffic, Planning and Public Works staff are concerned about patrons loitering and vehicles parking near the window. Therefore, staff included Conditions Number 13 and 14, which obligate the applicant to work with the City to correct any issues that may arise. No onsite parking is provided, and no additional parking is required. Staff requests the addition of a condition of approval to require the submittal and approval of a security plan by the Police Department prior to implementation of the permit. In response to Chair Koetting's question, Principal Planner Ramirez advised that if the application is approved, he will calendar a review by the Commission for one year from implementation of the permit. In reply to Commissioner Weigand's queries, Principal Planner Ramirez indicated other modifications noted in Condition of Approval 13 could be delineating a queuing area with paint or installing signage directing patrons to a queuing area. He had not seen another application with the language of Condition 13. Other uses in the area have patrons queue on the boardwalk or sidewalk, but he did not believe that is required by a use permit. 3 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 Christian Fanticola, applicant, shared his personal and business history and the circumstances under which he opened the restaurant. He read property owner Mario Marovic's statement in support of the application. He shared photos of the site before and after improvements and pictures of interior and exterior improvements. T.J. Fuentes, applicant representative, commented that the restaurant has had a positive impact on the community by eliminating a dilapidated property and improving the existing building. The applicant is requesting a Type 41 license, which requires a bona fide food service. The applicant is willing to restrict operating hours and provide a security plan. Commissioner Kleiman asked how sales were and the current hours of operation, Mr. Fanticola stated that current operating hours are Sunday through Thursday 7 a.m. to midnight, Friday and Saturday 7 a.m. to 3 a.m. Food and alcohol sales have been strong. Chair Koetting asked about the location of trash facilities. Mr. Fanticola indicated that they share a dumpster with Stag Bar, located at the rear of the building adjacent to the alley. Chair Koetting asked if Condition 13 should include a queuing plan. Principal Planner Ramirez stated the City did not have anything like that for the public right-of-way, and indicated that Planning and Public Works would have to determine type of materials and permanency but said they would wait to determine whether it is needed before anything was planned. Motion made by Vice Chair Zak and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 of the CEQA guidelines; and to adopt Resolution No. PC2018-012 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2017-028 with an additional condition of approval as stated by staff. Principal Planner Ramirez reported the additional condition of approval is "the permittee shall implement an operational security plan designed to ensure that alcoholic beverage control regulations and building occupancy limits are being followed. The content and adequacy of the plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. The Police Department shall be notified of any changes to the approved plan. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Kleiman, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: None RECUSED: Dunlap ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 5 CRAFT BREWERY ORDINANCE (PA2017-181) Site Location: Citywide Summary: An amendment to the Zoning Code revising the City's regulations related to alcoholic beverage manufacturing. Specifically, the amendment would establish regulations permitting alcoholic beverage manufacturing with tasting rooms in the Industrial Zoning District. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-010 recommending the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment CA2017-004. Associate Planner Chelsea Crager reported the ordinance will apply to breweries, wineries, and distilleries. Alcoholic beverage manufacturing is defined as a food processing land use, which is permitted within the industrial zoning district. There is no process in place that allows onsite consumption or tasting rooms in conjunction with food processing in the City of Newport Beach. On October 5, 2018, the Planning Commission initiated a code amendment to consider a process to allow alcoholic beverage manufacturing uses with accessory tasting rooms 4 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 in the industrial zoning district. The industrial zoning district applies to 39 properties. The draft ordinance will require each prospective tasting room business to apply for a minor use permit subject to review by the Zoning Administrator. This will allow each location to be reviewed individually and, if approved, to have appropriate conditions of approval. The draft ordinance creates a new land use definition, which is separate from food processing, and classifies all alcoholic beverage manufacturing. Standards include a maximum tasting room size of 750 square feet interior and a maximum outdoor patio size of 1,000 square feet. The draft ordinance limits hours of operation to 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. for the tasting room. The ordinance will place no size requirements or limitation on hours for the manufacturing aspect of the business. Live entertainment and food service may be permitted on a case-by-case basis. These standards are regulatory limits; therefore, each operational standard may be further limited through conditions of approval for each individual business. Parking is required at a rate of 1 space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, which includes manufacturing and public area. Two property owners on Production Place provided written comments regarding concerns about traffic, parking, noise, street cleaning, and pollution from a manufacturing use. All new businesses will be subject to a discretionary review process and will be required to comply with the California Building Code. The discretionary review process will allow specific conditions to be placed on each business. Chair Koetting asked why there was a limit of 750 square feet of interior space and why there were limitations on the outdoor patio. Associate Planner Crager stated that staff wanted to have limits in place because the tasting room is intended to be accessory to the manufacturing use. Commissioner Dunlap asked staff to explain how Orange Coast Winery came to be. Deputy Director Campbell stated that the establishment opened at a unique time, between adoption of the General Plan and adoption of the current Zoning Ordinance. There was an interim study overlay process that allowed the owner to rezone the property to establish and regulate land uses that were thought to be consistent with the future Zoning Code. Orange Coast Winery was established through that process with the findings that it would be consistent with the industrial zone. The Zoning Code Update adopted in 2010 did not provide for retail sales and/or consumption of alcohol at an establishment such as this. Orange Coast Winery is a grandfathered use. Commissioner Dunlap asked if a wine tasting operation came in today, could the Commission approve it or would we have to deny it because it is not a proper use for the area. Deputy Director Campbell stated that that use would be consistent with the ordinance. Wine tasting could be allowed if it met all the regulatory requirements in the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Dunlap mentioned that some properties back up to residences, specifically the strip on the south side of Production Way backs up to a mobile home park. Deputy Director Campbell responded that the south side is Seaside mobile home park and apartment complex. Commissioner Dunlap asked about the property south of Carden Hall. Deputy Director Campbell responded that the property backs up to a residential zone, but is developed with Coastline College. Coastline Community College District constructed an educational facility in a residential zone. Commissioner Dunlap, asked for the other Commissioners' thoughts on removing the properties along the southern side of Production Way from consideration due to the proximity to residential properties. Commissioner Weigand asked for clarification regarding Commissioner Dunlap's concerns with the use. Commissioner Dunlap responded that he is not concerned with the manufacturing aspect because it does not produce fumes and is not noisy. His concerns were primarily with the outdoor tasting and dining that would take place until 11 p.m. next to residential neighborhood. Commissioner Kramer noted that the Commission cannot selectively pick and choose areas within a certain zoning area to apply the ordinance to. Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that this is correct, that could be considered spot zoning. He stated that the action must be applicable to entire zone and cannot exclude specific properties. Vice Chair Zak asked about the process to approve a use with an outdoortasting area and whether it would include an acoustic analysis in relation to residents immediately adjacent. Associate Planner Crager responded that as the draft ordinance is currently written, a minor use permit would be required, which is reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. A minor use permit requires all the same findings as a conditional use permit and compatibility with surrounding uses, including nearby residential, would be addressed. As an example, it is possible that an applicant proposes an outdoor patio at the rear of the property near a residential use, and the review process may require the patio be relocated or closed at an earlier hour. These types of issues would be worked out on a property -by - property basis during use permit process. 5 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 Commissioner Lowrey stated that if it was a conditional use permit it would come to Planning Commission. He stated that the use should require a conditional use permit rather than minor use permit. Commissioner Dunlap asked for confirmation that live entertainment is a privilege, and not permitted by right. Associate Planner Crager confirmed. Commissioner Dunlap asked that the Planning Commission hear proposals for live entertainment rather than the Zoning Administrator. Associate Planner Crager responded that, as written, the Zoning Administrator would handle all aspects of review under a minor use permit. If the Planning Commission changed the ordinance to require a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission would review. Chair Koetting stated that these types of places are typically located in commercial zones and asked why they were being restricted to the industrial zone. Associate Planner Crager stated that this specific use is not intended to be a restaurant. If food service is included it would be accessory to the manufacturing aspect. These types of businesses are primarily manufacturing and typically located in industrial zones. Commissioner Dunlap stated that many breweries are using vendor trucks to provide food or have container kitchens. Chair Koetting proposed an example of a national chain coming into Newport Beach and wanting to open a restaurant with a brewery inside and asked if that would be permitted in a commercial retail zone. Deputy Director Campbell stated that that use would be called a brew pub, and that they would be brewing for onsite consumption. It would be a restaurant with brewing as an accessory activity. It would be allowed in a commercial district subject to a conditional use permit if they have late hours. He also stated that nobody has asked for that recently. He stated that breweries are typically limited to the industrial zone because of the cost and compatibility with other uses. He stated that if the use works in industrial zone, the City may consider other areas in the future. Chair Koetting opened the public hearing. Gordon Wanlass, the owner of a building in south section of industrial zone, spoke and questioned why the City is proposing the Ordinance. He expressed concern that the area was being used as guinea pigs for uses that may be allowed elsewhere. He also stated that there are three schools in the area and a parking problem on Production Place. He would like the Commission to put this amendment aside, as they do not know of the effect on property values or how alcohol sales will affect the area. He mentioned that a number of buildings on Production Place are family businesses and that he would like to work with the Planning Commission to see what is right for the very unique area. Jim Mosher stated he believed there was a Brown Act issue about this item. He stated that the description of this item on the agenda called the Ordinance a Craft Brewery Ordinance, and nothing would lead someone to believe the Ordinance would apply to any use other than breweries. He believes the item must be considered at a later date after proper notice. He stated that there is a discrepancy regarding products for sale being limited to alcohol produced or manufactured on the manufacturer's licensed premises and alcoholic beverages produced and bottled by or produced and packaged for the business. He expressed that a tasting room is not really a tasting room as there is no limit on how much you can taste. He asked about consistency with General Plan. Becca Mantee, a business within industrial zone, spoke and stated that she has hundreds of customers talk about having a place to hang out in the neighborhood. She stated that her customers have no problem with parking, and that they have a parking lot. She stated that the Ordinance would be a great addition to neighborhood. Ian Elliott, owner of a business at 870 Production Place, spoke and stated that parking is a big issue and he would like to work with the City. He stated that a piecemeal approach is part of the problem. Kyle Connelly, a business owner and operator, spoke and stated that the Ordinance provided a great opportunity, as there are no notable craft breweries in the area. He stated that it could create a place for employees in the area to meet and share ideas. Richard Allred, of Toes on the Nose off of Monrovia, spoke and stated that parking is not an issue. He stated that many people walk and ride bikes, that the area was live/work, and that the Ordinance could provide a great 6 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 opportunity to socialize after work. He stated that residential uses were coming into this part of town and that the Ordinance provides a viable opportunity for the area to grow and mature. Chair Koetting closed the public hearing. Deputy Director Campbell responded to the concerns regarding the Brown Act. The title "Craft Brewery Ordinance" is just a name, and the public notice refers to alcoholic beverage manufacturing which includes distilleries and wine making operations. The item was properly noticed. The language of the notice addresses the entire scope of the amendment. Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that the item was properly noticed. He stated that staff routinely incorporates a title for ease of reference. Commissioner Dunlap addressed the discrepancy regarding sales. He stated that breweries typically bring in people to bottle and can the brewery's product. Associate Planner Crager stated that staff intended to allow for some amount of tap takeovers where beverages from one brewery are served in another brewery to promote the industry. Commissioner Weigand asked about the parking situation and adding flexibility in the requirement to increase protections for existing businesses in the area. Associate Planner Crager responded that the draft ordinance requires one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, which includes all manufacturing area and net public area. Staff believes that this is sufficient to address parking requirements for this type of business, considering there are limitations on size of tasting room and outdoor patio and that these areas could be further limited during the discretionary process. If the Commission wishes to require different amounts of parking, restaurant parking is based on net public area. Because this use is primarily manufacturing, staff did not consider this approach. Other types of uses in the Zoning Code may state a parking requirement with an addition of "or as required by use permit" That provides some flexibility for the review authority to implement parking requirements. This is not typical. Vice Chair Zak asked if parking spaces are required to be onsite. Associate Planner Crager confirmed that they are. Commissioner Kleiman asked about the parking requirement for restaurant or bar. Associate Planner Crager responded that restaurant parking requirements are based on net public area, with a range of 1 parking space per 30 square feet to 1 parking space per 50 square feet, and are typically parked at 1 parking space per 40 square feet of net public area. Commissioner Kleiman asked the parking requirement for 1,750 square feet public area plus requirement for employees and manufacturing portion. Associate Planner Crager responded that a restaurant with 1,750 square feet of net public area would typically require 44 parking spaces. Commissioner Lowrey stated that a conditional use permit provides more transparency and opportunity for public comment than a minor use permit. Commissioner Weigand confirmed that City Council makes final decision to adopt an ordinance. Vice Chair Zak asked if staff received any comments or questions from Carden Hall or other schools in the area. Associate Planner Crager responded that none were received. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Dunlap to amend the proposed ordinance to require a conditional use permit ratherthan a minor use permit and a revision to add "or as required by the reviewing authority" to the parking requirement. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: Kleiman ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 7 of 9 Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305; and to adopt Resolution No. PC2018-010 recommending the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment CA2017-004 as amended. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: Kleiman ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 6 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None ITEM NO. 7 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT Update on City Council Items Director Jurjis reported staff will present the annual status reportfor the General Plan and Housing Element during the next City Council meeting. He requested Commissioners' preference for holding or cancelling the July 5, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioners generally agreed to cancel the July 5, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. Vice Chair Zak recused himself from discussion of the Koll Residences project due to a business interest in the area. Commissioner Kleiman recused herself due to a business conflict. As Commissioner Lowrey had already left the meeting, Assistant City Attorney Torres advised that Commissioner Lowrey was recused due to membership in the Pacific Club. Director Jurjis advised that staff is considering May 29, May 30, and May 31, 2018, for a study session on the Koll Residences project. In response to Chair Koetting's questions, Director Jurjis indicated the applicant is not available on May 24, a date originally considered. Staff would prefer to hold the regular meeting on May 17 and schedule a separate date for the Koll project. Coralee Newman advised that the applicant's planning team would prefer May 31. She could not be present on May 24. Commissioners discussed their availability for dates in April, May, and June and determined a special meeting could be scheduled for May 31, 2018, at 4 p.m. to discuss the Koll Residences project. In answer to Chair Koetting's query, Director Jurjis reported staff expects the Lido House to hold a soft opening in the next few weeks. He was not aware of a date for a ribbon -cutting ceremony. Commissioner Kramer added that the opening will likely be in late April. ITEM NO. 8 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT None ITEM NO. 9 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Absences were requested for Commissioner Kramer on April 19'n, Commissioner Weigand on May 31d, and Commissioner Dunlap on May 171n Newport Beach Planning Commission March 22, 2018 XI. ADJOURNMENT — 8:08 p.m. The agenda for the March 22, 2018, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, March 16, 2018, at 2:45 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on Friday, March 16, 2018, at 2:36 p.m. Peter Koetting, Chairman Erik Weigand, Secretary 9of9 IV V VI. VII. Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2018 REGULAR MEETING — 6:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER — The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Dunlap ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Peter Koetting, Vice Chair Peter Zak (arrived at 6:33 p.m.), Secretary Erik Weigand, Commissioner Bill Dunlap, Commissioner Lauren Kleiman, Commissioner Kory Kramer, Commissioner Lee Lowrey /_1:i.1A01R.7S Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine, Civilian Police Investigator Wendy Joe, Principal Planner Gregg Ramirez, Assistant Planner Chelsea Crager, Systems and Administrative Manager Dan Campagnolo, Administrative Support Specialist Brittany Ramirez PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Mosher remarked that the Brown Act provides the public with an opportunity to speak to each item on the agenda. He requested the status of the video recording of the March 8, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Chair Koetting agreed that the public can speak to each item on the agenda. Director Jurjis advised that the video recording would be available the following day. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES Deputy Director Campbell requested a continuance of Item 3, Agape Art Collective, to the April 5, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2018 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Kleiman to approve the draft minutes of the March 8, 2018 meeting with the inclusion of Jim Mosher's edits. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Kleiman, Lowrey NOES: None ABSTAIN: Dunlap, Kramer ABSENT: None STUDY SESSION ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 STAFF PRESENTATION: WEBSITE RESOURCES AND STAYING INFORMED Summary: A brief staff presentation on using the City's News Alerts and other online features to keep informed on current planning applications. 1 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a study session. Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Systems and Administrative Manager Dan Campagnolo presented online features that allow the public to stay informed about planning applications. From the Citys homepage, interested parties should select "Planning Case Log" and "Project Map Viewer' under the "Trending" tab. The "Stay Informed" button leads to registration for email notification of City news and events. The current planning case log pulls data from the permitting system and lists all active planning cases. Data can be filtered by address, contact, Council district, permit type, and project title. Clicking on a case name reveals a brief description of the application, the case number, discretionary approvals, Council district, the planner, and a chronology of the project. Clicking on the address opens a neighborhood viewer that shows all development activity in the neighborhood of the project. In the viewer, orange boxes are building permits, blue boxes are discretionary permits, and purple boxes are high-profile projects. Clicking on a box will provide additional information about a project. The viewer also lists police and fire calls, short-term lodging, and tree maintenance. The "Building Activity Reports" tab provides data about building activity. The Planning Commission's homepage leads to agendas, minutes, and audio and video recordings. Cora Newman, 881 Dover, complimented staff on the City's website. It's both user-friendly and data -rich. Jim Mosher remarked that Mr. Campagnolo is one of the nicest and most customer -oriented employees of the City. He inquired about the meaning of "PA" in the title of each planning case; whether hearing dates are loaded into the system ten days prior to the hearing or as soon as the date is known; whether data can be filtered by hearing date; and about a means to access planning cases that are no longer active. Systems and Administrative Manager Campagnolo reported "PA" stands for planning activity. VIII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 3 AGAPE ART COLLECTIVE (PA2017-232) Site Location: 365 Old Newport Boulevard Summary: A request for a minor use permit to operate a tattoo studio (Personal Services, Restricted land use) and artist's studio within an existing commercial tenant space. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-011 approving Minor Use Permit No. UP2017-031. Deputy Director Campbell requested this item be continued to April 5, 2018, due to a typographical error in the notice. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Kramer to continue PA2017-232, Agape Art Collective, to the April 5, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kleiman, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 2 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS: Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 ITEM NO. 4 TACO BELL CANTINA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA2017-198) Site Location: 2121 West Balboa Boulevard Summary: A conditional use permit (CUP) to allow a food service, eating and drinking establishment, Taco Bell Cantina, with late hours (6 a.m to 2 a.m.), and a Type 41 (On -Sale Beer and Wine) Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license in a tenant space historically occupied by Original Pizza. Currently a legal nonconforming restaurant use with a Type 40 (On -Sale Beer Only) is allowed to operate with no limitation of business hours. Taco Bell Cantina opened in mid-December and is currently open Sunday - Thursday 7 a.m. to 2 a.m and Friday -Saturday 7 a.m. to 3 a.m. The floor plan includes a dining room with 32 seats. If approved, the restaurant as proposed requires the owner/operator to obtain an Operator License through the City because of the issuance of a new conditional use permit for a restaurant with alcohol sales operating after 11 p.m., pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) 5.25. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-012 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2017-028 (Attachment No. PC 1). All Commissioners reported they had spoken to the applicant, the applicant's representative, or the applicant's consultant. Commissioner Dunlap recused himself from the item as he is conducting business with the landlord. Principal Planner Gregg Ramirez reported the application is a request for approval of a conditional use permit to upgrade a Type 40 license for beer only to a Type 41 license for beer and wine at an existing, legal nonconforming restaurant. If the application is approved, the legal nonconforming status will be eliminated, and the project will have to abide by all conditions of the use permit. Original Pizza occupied the site prior to Taco Bell Cantina and held a Type 40 license. Taco Bell remodeled the facility and reduced the size of the dining room and the number of seats such that it is consistent with the nonconforming restaurant previously occupying the location and able to continue without the benefit of a conditional use permit. A Type 40 license does not require a full menu. A Type 41 license is an on -sale beer and wine license and requires a full menu. The existing restaurant is not required to have an operator license. If the project is approved, an operator license will be required because the applicant is requesting business hours after 11 p.m. The current allowed hours of operation are 24 hours daily since it is a nonconforming restaurant. The proposed hours and staffs recommended hours are 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. daily. The facility has a takeout window located at the front of the building adjacent to the parking lot. Given the location of the window and the potential amount of foot and vehicular traffic, Planning and Public Works staff are concerned about patrons loitering and vehicles parking near the window. Therefore, staff included Conditions Number 13 and 14, which obligate the applicant to work with the City to correct any issues that may arise. No onsite parking is provided, and no additional parking is required. Staff requests the addition of a condition of approval to require the submittal and approval of a security plan by the Police Department prior to implementation of the permit. In response to Chair Koetting's question, Principal Planner Ramirez advised that if the application is approved, he will calendar a review by the Commission for one year from implementation of the permit. In reply to Commissioner Weigand's queries, Principal Planner Ramirez indicated other modifications noted in Condition of Approval 13 could be delineating a queuing area with paint or installing signage directing patrons to a queuing area. He had not seen another application with the language of Condition 13. Other uses in the area have patrons queue on the boardwalk or sidewalk, but he did not believe that is required by a use permit. 3 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Christian Fanticola, applicant, shared his personal and business history and the circumstances under which he opened the restaurant. He read property owner Mario Marovic's statement in support of the application. He shared photos of the site before and after improvements and pictures of interior and exterior improvements. T.J. Fuentes, applicant representative, commented that the restaurant has had a positive impact on the community by eliminating a dilapidated property and improving the existing building. The applicant is requesting a Type 41 license, which requires a bona fide food service. The applicant is willing to restrict operating hours and provide a security plan. Commissioner Kleiman asked how sales were and the current hours of operation, Mr. Fanticola stated that current operating hours are Sunday through Thursday 7 a.m. to midnight, Friday and Saturday 7 a.m. to 3 a.m. Food and alcohol sales have been strong. Chair Koetting asked about the location of trash facilities. Mr. Fanticola indicated that they share a dumpster with Stag Bar, located at the rear of the building adjacent to the alley. Chair Koetting asked if Condition 13 should include a queuing plan. Principal Planner Ramirez stated the City did not have anything like that for the public right-of-way, and indicated that Planning and Public Works would have to determine type of materials and permanency but said they would wait to determine whether it is needed before anything was planned. Motion made by Vice Chair Zak and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 of the CEQA guidelines; and to adopt Resolution No. PC2018-012 approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2017-028 with an additional condition of approval as stated by staff. Principal Planner Ramirez reported the additional condition of approval is "the permittee shall implement an operational security plan designed to ensure that alcoholic beverage control regulations and building occupancy limits are being followed. The content and adequacy of the plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. The Police Department shall be notified of any changes to the approved plan. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Kleiman, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: None RECUSED: Dunlap ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 5 CRAFT BREWERY ORDINANCE (PA2017-181) Site Location: Citywide Summary: An amendment to the Zoning Code revising the City's regulations related to alcoholic beverage manufacturing. Specifically, the amendment would establish regulations permitting alcoholic beverage manufacturing with tasting rooms in the Industrial Zoning District. Recommended Action: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2018-010 recommending the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment CA2017-004. Associate Planner Chelsea Crager reported the ordinance will apply to breweries, wineries, and distilleries. Alcoholic beverage manufacturing is defined as a food processing land use, which is permitted within the industrial zoning district. There is no process in place that allows onsite consumption or tasting rooms in conjunction with food processing in the City of Newport Beach. On October 5, 2018, the Planning Commission initiated a code amendment to consider a process to allow alcoholic beverage manufacturing uses with accessory tasting rooms in the industrial zoning district. The industrial zoning district applies to 39 properties. The draft ordinance will require each prospective tasting room business to apply for a minor use permit subject to review by the Zoning 4 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Administrator. This will allow each location to be reviewed individually and, if approved, to have appropriate conditions of approval. The draft ordinance creates a new land use definition, which is separate from food processing, and classifies all alcoholic beverage manufacturing. Standards include a maximum tasting room size of 750 square feet interior and a maximum outdoor patio size of 1,000 square feet. The draft ordinance limits hours of operation to 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. for the tasting room. The ordinance will place no size requirements or limitation on hours for the manufacturing aspect of the business. Live entertainment and food service may be permitted on a case-by-case basis. These standards are regulatory limits; therefore, each operational standard may be further limited through conditions of approval for each individual business. Parking is required at a rate of 1 space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, which includes manufacturing and public area. Two property owners on Production Place provided written comments regarding concerns about traffic, parking, noise, street cleaning, and pollution from a manufacturing use. All new businesses will be subject to a discretionary review process and will be required to comply with the California Building Code. The discretionary review process will allow specific conditions to be placed on each business. Chair Koetting asked why there was a limit of 750 square feet of interior space and why there were limitations on the outdoor patio. Associate Planner Crager stated that staff wanted to have limits in place because the tasting room is intended to be accessory to the manufacturing use. Commissioner Dunlap asked staff to explain how Orange Coast Winery came to be. Deputy Director Campbell stated that the establishment opened at a unique time, between adoption of the General Plan and adoption of the current Zoning Ordinance. There was an interim study overlay process that allowed the owner to rezone the property to establish and regulate land uses that were thought to be consistent with the future Zoning Code. Orange Coast Winery was established through that process with the findings that it would be consistent with the industrial zone. The Zoning Code Update adopted in 2010 did not provide for retail sales and/or consumption of alcohol at an establishment such as this. Orange Coast Winery is a grandfathered use. Commissioner Dunlap asked if a wine tasting operation came in today, could the Commission approve it or would we have to deny it because it is not a proper use for the area. Deputy Director Campbell stated that that use would be consistent with the ordinance. Wine tasting could be allowed if it met all the regulatory requirements in the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Dunlap mentioned that some properties back up to residences, specifically the strip on the south side of Production Way backs up to a mobile home park. Deputy Director Campbell responded that the south side is Seaside mobile home park and apartment complex. Commissioner Dunlap asked about the property south of Carden Hall. Deputy Director Campbell responded that the property backs up to a residential zone, but is developed with Coastline College. Coastline Community College District constructed an educational facility in a residential zone. Commissioner Dunlap, asked for the other Commissioners' thoughts on removing the properties along the southern side of Production Way from consideration due to the proximity to residential properties. Commissioner Weigand asked for clarification regarding Commissioner Dunlap's concerns with the use. Commissioner Dunlap responded that he is not concerned with the manufacturing aspect because it does not produce fumes and is not noisy. His concerns were primarily with the outdoor tasting and dining that would take place until 11 p.m. next to residential neighborhood. Commissioner Kramer noted that the Commission cannot selectively pick and choose areas within a certain zoning area to apply the ordinance to. Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that this is correct, that could be considered spot zoning. He stated that the action must be applicable to entire zone and cannot exclude specific properties. Vice Chair Zak asked about the process to approve a use with an outdoor tasting area and whether it would include an acoustic analysis in relation to residents immediately adjacent. Associate Planner Crager responded that as the draft ordinance is currently written, a minor use permit would be required, which is reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. A minor use permit requires all the same findings as a conditional use permit and compatibility with surrounding uses, including nearby residential, would be addressed. As an example, it is possible that an applicant proposes an outdoor patio at the rear of the property near a residential use, and the review process may require the patio be relocated or closed at an earlier hour. These types of issues would be worked out on a property -by - property basis during use permit process. Commissioner Lowrey stated that if it was a conditional use permit it would come to Planning Commission. He stated that the use should require a conditional use permit rather than minor use permit. 5 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Commissioner Dunlap asked for confirmation that live entertainment is a privilege, and not permitted by right. Associate Planner Crager confirmed. Commissioner Dunlap asked that the Planning Commission hear proposals for live entertainment rather than the Zoning Administrator. Associate Planner Crager responded that, as written, the Zoning Administrator would handle all aspects of review under a minor use permit. If the Planning Commission changed the ordinance to require a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission would review. Chair Koetting stated that these types of places are typically located in commercial zones and asked why they were being restricted to the industrial zone. Associate Planner Crager stated that this specific use is not intended to be a restaurant. If food service is included it would be accessory to the manufacturing aspect. These types of businesses are primarily manufacturing and typically located in industrial zones. Commissioner Dunlap stated that many breweries are using vendor trucks to provide food or have container kitchens. Chair Koetting proposed an example of a national chain coming into Newport Beach and wanting to open a restaurant with a brewery inside and asked if that would be permitted in a commercial retail zone. Deputy Director Campbell stated that that use would be called a brew pub, and that they would be brewing for onsite consumption. It would be a restaurant with brewing as an accessory activity. It would be allowed in a commercial district subject to a conditional use permit if they have late hours. He also stated that nobody has asked for that recently. He stated that breweries are typically limited to the industrial zone because of the cost and compatibility with other uses. He stated that if the use works in industrial zone, the City may consider other areas in the future. Chair Koetting opened the public hearing. Gordon Wanlass, the owner of a building in south section of industrial zone, spoke and questioned why the City is proposing the Ordinance. He expressed concern that the area was being used as guinea pigs for uses that may be allowed elsewhere. He also stated that there are three schools in the area and a parking problem on Production Place. He would like the Commission to put this amendment aside, as they do not know of the effect on property values or how alcohol sales will affect the area. He mentioned that a number of buildings on Production Place are family businesses and that he would like to work with the Planning Commission to see what is right for the very unique area. Jim Mosher stated he believed there was a Brown Act issue about this item. He stated that the description of this item on the agenda called the Ordinance a Craft Brewery Ordinance, and nothing would lead someone to believe the Ordinance would apply to any use other than breweries. He believes the item must be considered at a later date after proper notice. He stated that there is a discrepancy regarding products for sale being limited to alcohol produced or manufactured on the manufacturer's licensed premises and alcoholic beverages produced and bottled by or produced and packaged for the business. He expressed that a tasting room is not really a tasting room as there is no limit on how much you can taste. He asked about consistency with General Plan. Becca Mantee, a business within industrial zone, spoke and stated that she has hundreds of customers talk about having a place to hang out in the neighborhood. She stated that her customers have no problem with parking, and that they have a parking lot. She stated that the Ordinance would be a great addition to neighborhood. Ian Elliott, owner of a business at 870 Production Place, spoke and stated that parking is a big issue and he would like to work with the City. He stated that a piecemeal approach is part of the problem. Kyle Connelly, a business owner and operator, spoke and stated that the Ordinance provided a great opportunity, as there are no notable craft breweries in the area. He stated that it could create a place for employees in the area to meet and share ideas. Richard Allred, of Toes on the Nose off of Monrovia, spoke and stated that parking is not an issue. He stated that many people walk and ride bikes, that the area was live/work, and that the Ordinance could provide a great opportunity to socialize after work. He stated that residential uses were coming into this part of town and that the Ordinance provides a viable opportunity for the area to grow and mature. Chair Koetting closed the public hearing. 6 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Deputy Director Campbell responded to the concerns regarding the Brown Act. The title "Craft Brewery Ordinance" is just a name, and the public notice refers to alcoholic beverage manufacturing which includes distilleries and wine making operations. The item was properly noticed. The language of the notice addresses the entire scope of the amendment. Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that the item was properly noticed. He stated that staff routinely incorporates a title for ease of reference. Commissioner Dunlap addressed the discrepancy regarding sales. He stated that breweries typically bring in people to bottle and can the brewerys product. Associate Planner Crager stated that staff intended to allow for some amount of tap takeovers where beverages from one brewery are served in another brewery to promote the industry. Commissioner Weigand asked about the parking situation and adding flexibility in the requirement to increase protections for existing businesses in the area. Associate Planner Crager responded that the draft ordinance requires one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, which includes all manufacturing area and net public area. Staff believes that this is sufficient to address parking requirements for this type of business, considering there are limitations on size of tasting room and outdoor patio and that these areas could be further limited during the discretionary process. If the Commission wishes to require different amounts of parking, restaurant parking is based on net public area. Because this use is primarily manufacturing, staff did not consider this approach. Other types of uses in the Zoning Code may state a parking requirement with an addition of "or as required by use permit." That provides some flexibility for the review authority to implement parking requirements. This is not typical. Vice Chair Zak asked if parking spaces are required to be onsite. Associate Planner Crager confirmed that they are. Commissioner Kleiman asked about the parking requirement for restaurant or bar. Associate Planner Crager responded that restaurant parking requirements are based on net public area, with a range of 1 parking space per 30 square feet to 1 parking space per 50 square feet, and are typically parked at 1 parking space per 40 square feet of net public area. Commissioner Kleiman asked the parking requirement for 1,750 square feet public area plus requirement for employees and manufacturing portion. Associate Planner Crager responded that a restaurant with 1,750 square feet of net public area would typically require 44 parking spaces. Commissioner Lowrey stated that a conditional use permit provides more transparency and opportunity for public comment than a minor use permit. Commissioner Weigand confirmed that City Council makes final decision to adopt an ordinance. Vice Chair Zak asked if staff received any comments or questions from Carden Hall or other schools in the area. Associate Planner Crager responded that none were received. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Dunlap to amend the proposed ordinance to require a conditional use permit ratherthan a minor use permit and a revision to add "or as required by the reviewing authority" to the parking requirement. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: Kleiman ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305; and to adopt Resolution No. PC2018-010 recommending the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment CA2017-004 as amended. AYES: Koetting, Zak, Weigand, Dunlap, Kramer, Lowrey NOES: Kleiman ABSTAIN: None 7 of 9 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENT: None X. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 6 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None ITEM NO. 7 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT Update on City Council Items Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Director Jurjis reported staff will present the annual status report for the General Plan and Housing Element during the next City Council meeting. He requested Commissioners' preference for holding or cancelling the July 5, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioners generally agreed to cancel the July 5, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. Vice Chair Zak recused himself from discussion of the Koll Residences project due to a business interest in the area. Commissioner Kleiman recused herself due to a business conflict. As Commissioner Lowrey had already left the meeting, Assistant City Attorney Torres advised that Commissioner Lowrey was recused due to membership in the Pacific Club. Director Jurjis advised that staff is considering May 29, May 30, and May 31, 2018, for a study session on the Koll Residences project. In response to Chair Koetting's questions, Director Jurjis indicated the applicant is not available on May 24, a date originally considered. Staff would prefer to hold the regular meeting on May 17 and schedule a separate date for the Koll project. Coralee Newman advised that the applicant's planning team would prefer May 31. She could not be present on May 24. Commissioners discussed their availability for dates in April, May, and June and determined a special meeting could be scheduled for May 31, 2018, at 4 p.m. to discuss the Koll Residences project. In answer to Chair Koetting's query, Director Jurjis reported staff expects the Lido House to hold a soft opening in the next few weeks. He was not aware of a date for a ribbon -cutting ceremony. Commissioner Kramer added that the opening will likely be in late April. ITEM NO. 8 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT None ITEM NO. 9 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Absences were requested for Commissioner Kramer on April 19th, Commissioner Weigand on May 31d, and Commissioner Dunlap on May 171h XI. ADJOURNMENT — 8:08 p.m. The agenda for the March 22, 2018, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, March 16, 2018, at 2:45 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on Friday, March 16, 2018, at 2:36 p.m. NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Peter Koetting, Chairman Erik Weigand, Secretary 9 of 9 Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1a Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 3/22/2018 Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1b Additional Materials Received Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 April 5, 2018, Planning Commission Item 1 Comments These comments on a Newport Beach Planning Commission agenda item are submitted by: Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(o)yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229). Item No. 1. MINUTES OF MARCH 22, 2018 Suggested changes to draft minutes passages are shown in stFikesut underline format. Page 1: Item 1: "Motion made by mer Secretary Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Kleiman to approve the draft minutes of the March 8, 2018 meeting with the inclusion of Jim Mosher's edits." Page 2: paragraph 1, sentence 2: "From the City's homepage, interested parties should select " " "Planning Case Log and Project Map Viewer" under the "Trending" tab." [one phrase, not two separate items] Page 3: last paragraph: "In reply to GemmissieneSecretary Weigand's queries, Principal Planner Ramirez indicated other modifications noted in Condition of Approval 13 could be delineating a queuing area with paint or installing signage directing patrons to a queuing area." Page 4: paragraph 5: "Motion made by Vice Chair Zak and seconded by Secretary Weigand to find this project exempt from..." Page 4: paragraph 6: The paragraph stating an added condition is missing an end of quote (belonging, most likely, at the end) Page 5: paragraph 3 from end: "Ge ,,,, i�ssinne- Secretary Weigand asked for clarification regarding Commissioner Dunlap's concerns with the use." Page 5: last sentence: "These types of issues would be worked out on a property -by -property basis during the use permit process." Page 6: paragraph 5, last sentence: "He stated that if the use works in the industrial zone, the City may consider other areas in the future." Page 6: paragraph 7: "Gordon Wanlass, the owner of a building in the south section of the industrial zone, spoke and questioned why the City is proposing the Ordinance." Page 6: paragraph 8, last sentence: "He asked about consistency with the General Plan." Page 6: paragraph 9: "Becca Mantee, a business owner [?] within industrial the zone, spoke and stated that she has hundreds of customers talk about having a place to hang out in the neighborhood.... She stated that the Ordinance would be a great addition to the neighborhood." Planning Commission - April 5, 2018 Item No. 1b Additional Materials Received April 5, 2018, PC agenda item 1 comments - Jim Mosher Draft Minutes of March 22, 2018 Page 2 of 2 Page 7: paragraphs 2-3: "Deputy Director Campbell responded to the concerns regarding the Brown Act. The title "Craft Brewery Ordinance" isjust a name, and the public notice refers to alcoholic beverage manufacturing which includes distilleries and wine making operations. The item was properly noticed. The language of the notice addresses the entire scope of the amendment. Assistant City Attorney Torres stated that the item was properly noticed. He stated that staff routinely incorporates a title for ease of reference." Comment: The state -mandated Brown Act noticing rules (Gov. Code 54954.2) require clarity in the meeting agenda. That requirement is unrelated to, and cannot be saved by, the separately published hearing notices required by our Municipal Code (e.g, Sec. 20.62.020). An open meeting agenda must provide adequate description of the topics to be discussed for the public to judge, from the agenda alone, if it is a meeting they want to attend, or not. In making that decision, it should not be necessary, at least initially, to search for staff reports or separately posted hearing notices. An agenda that announces the Planning Commission will be discussing a "Craft Brewery Ordinance" when the actual discussion is known and intended to be about an ordinance of wider scope is clearly misleading the public. No one concerned about the City creating new rules for, say, wine or whiskey tasting rooms would have any idea, from the posted agenda, that they had any need to show up to this meeting, or comment. Such an agenda is, to put it charitably, in questionable compliance with the Brown Act. Page 7: paragraph 5: "GammissieaeSecretary Weigand asked about the parking situation and adding flexibility in the requirement to increase protections for existing businesses in the area.... Staff believes that this is sufficient to address parking requirements for this type of business, considering there are limitations on the size of tasting r-eeHa rooms and outdoor patioap tios and that these areas could be further limited during the discretionary process." Page 7: paragraph 7: "Commissioner Kleiman asked about the parking requirement for a restaurant or bar.... Commissioner Kleiman asked about the parking requirement for 1,750 square feet public area plus the requirement for employees and the manufacturing portion." Page 7: paragraph 9: "Commissioner Secretary Weigand confirmed that the City Council makes the final decision to adopt an ordinance." Page 8: last sentence: "Absences were requested for Commissioner Kramer on April 19th, r^^nn•'��'^n^Secretary Weigand on May 3rd, and Commissioner Dunlap on May 17th."