HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-03-2023 - Planning CommissionPage 1 of 7
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2023 REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER – 6:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Commissioner Barto III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Tristan Harris, Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, Commissioner Lee Lowrey, and Commissioner David Salene
ABSENT: None
Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Police Investigator Wendy Joe, Senior Planner David Lee, Planning Manager Jaime Murillo, Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, and Department Assistant Savannah Martinez IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS None V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JULY 6, 2023 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Secretary Harris to approve the minutes of the July 6, 2023 meeting with Mr. Mosher’s edits.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Langford, and Rosene NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Salene ABSENT: None
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 STAG BAR OCCUPANT LOAD INCREASE AND OPERATIONAL CHANGES (PA2022-0249) Site Location: 121 Mc Fadden Place Summary:
A conditional use permit and coastal development permit to increase the allowed occupant load of the existing Stag Bar from 260 persons to a maximum of 290 persons, which requires a waiver of 8 required
parking spaces as there is no on-site parking. Additionally, the applicant requests to allow live entertainment and dancing from 11 a.m. to 2 a.m., daily. The current hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 2 of 7
a.m., daily, are not proposed to be modified. The establishment currently operates with Conditional Use Permit No. UP2018-013, which would be superseded if this application is approved. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. If the Planning Commission wishes to approve the project, then first 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 adopt Resolution No. PC2023-028 approving a conditional use permit and coastal development permit; or
3. If the Planning Commission wishes to deny the project, then first find the denial of the project statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15270 and adopt Resolution No. PC2023-
028 disapproving a conditional use permit and coastal development permit. Senior Planner Lee used a presentation to review the Stag Bar operational changes, which included a
conditional use permit and coastal development permit. Senior Planner Lee discussed the project location, establishment background, project request, increased occupant load, floor plan options, parking requirements,
waiver of parking requirements, late hours, alcohol service, police department review, coastal development permit, and recommendation.
The Commissioners disclosed ex-parte communications with the applicant and/or his consultant by way of a
conversation.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Mario Marovic, Stag Bar and Kitchen owner, used a presentation to review the applicant’s background and track record, aerial view of McFadden Square, community outreach and involvement. Mr. Marovic showed before and
after photos of improvements to McFadden Square and 22nd Street, provided a project timeline and security plan, and discussed how the Stag Bar is the number one Uber “restaurant” drop off location rating in Orange
County with four- and one-half stars on Yelp. Mr. Marovic also discussed the merits of the parking study and agreed to the recommended conditions of approval. Jim Mosher thought that staff inadvertently left out the action that the Planning Commission is approving, which is typically located somewhere between action number one and two on page 28 in the decision portion of the resolution approval. Additionally, a mechanism to appeal the conditional use permit should be included, where the appeal language only pertains to the coastal development permit aspect on page 39. James Bozes expressed support for Stag Bar and Mr. Marovic.
Micah Schiesel, Director of Operations of the Lounge Group, expressed support for the changes. Nathan Holthouser, 7th Street homeowner on the Peninsula, asked the Planning Commission to support the changes and thought everything on the Peninsula should have no parking requirements. In response to Mr. Mosher’s comments, Senior Planner Lee stated that the resolution for the action and appeal period for Title 20 and 21 and correct language can be added into the final resolution for signatures. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing. Commissioner Langford thanked Mr. Mosher for his attention to detail.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 3 of 7
Secretary Harris noted that he frequents the area with his young children on his bike, would not have done so in the past, and thought it is a result of the applicant’s efforts, trusted the applicant’s track record, and expressed support.
Vice Chair Rosene thought the operator does wonderful things for the community, acknowledged the operator for McFadden Square being well-maintained, thought the Planning Commission should give Mr. Marovic the opportunity for approval, and expressed support. Commissioner Lowrey noted the traffic engineer’s approval of the 2019 parking study, approval for safety items
by staff, the operator’s control of the areas regarding police department concern, and zero concern that Mr. Marovic, his team, and the police will be able to address and end potential problems relatively quickly. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Barto to approve the item with the
recommendations listed and from Mr. Mosher.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 THE HOUSE ANNUAL REVIEW (PA2011-005) Site Location: 2601 West Coast Highway Summary: The review of The House restaurant for compliance with Conditional Use Permit No. UP2011-001, originally approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2011. UP2011-001 authorized a restaurant with late hours, live entertainment, alcohol sales, outdoor dining, a parking management plan, and adjustment to off-street parking requirements. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this review exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15321 under Class 21 (Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; 3. Review the current operation, The House, for its compliance with UP2011-001; 4. Find the operator’s use of a floating outdoor dining vessel to be in violation of UP2011-001; 5. Direct the operator immediately cease and desist use of the floating outdoor patio vessel, and remove it within 30 days or file the necessary application to amend the use permit within 30 days requesting retention of the vessel; and 6. Direct staff to remove Condition No. 2 from Planning Commission Resolution No. 1844 related to annual reviews of the Use Permit No 2011-001 and perform reviews on an as-needed basis. Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill noted that additional comments were received from the applicant’s representative and suggested a modification from the recommended action to receive a brief presentation from staff, receive feedback from the Planning Commission, and ask for a continuance to bring back to the body for possible action.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 4 of 7
Senior Planner Lee used a presentation to present The House annual review, which included the project location, photos, background information, analysis of compliance with Use Permit (UP) 2011-001, the violation of a floating outdoor patio vessel, other violations, public comments from the applicant, and recommendation.
In response to Secretary Harris’ question, Senior Planner Lee noted that an additional coastal development permit and review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) would be required to pursue using the vessel as a patio to serve the restaurant. Additionally, he noted a conditional use permit amendment would be required to use the vessel for boat storage and guests and certain conditions of approval would need to be removed, especially Condition 65. For the boat storage, no coastal development permit would be required.
Ex parte communication was disclosed by Secretary Harris and Commissioners Rosene and Lowrey who spoke with the applicant and Commissioner Langford who spoke with the owner.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Jim Mosher noted the challenges with receiving CCC approval for a pier and docks, floats added to expand the pier/dock and uses that are not part of the original permit, and confusion if the area is a vessel or a patio, expressed doubt in the applicant’s credibility based on a violation after the owner promised to abide by the rules, and thought the vessel did not seem easy to take out.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing. At the direction of Assistant City Attorney Summerhill, Chair Ellmore
left the public hearing open.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s inquiry, Senior Planner Lee clarified that the Leilani Rose is the patio/float name, and the applicant has stated that it is officially registered as a vessel with the Coast Guard.
In response to Commissioner Salene’s question, Planning Manager Murillo clarified that the dock was
previously approved for boats or vessels so any boat or yacht can park there. He noted the concern among staff is that the vessel serves and functions like a floating patio as an extension to the restaurant which is
considered a different type of development that requires CCC approval. He indicated that a condition of approval for CCC permitting would be included in the City’s future approval if the Planning Commission decided
it is reasonable to use the vessel as a patio. Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Salene to continue the item to the September 7, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 4 HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION - NOISE-RELATED AMENDMENTS (PA2022-0201) Site Location: Various sites in the Newport Beach Airport Area Summary: Amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), the Newport Place Planned Community Development Standards (PC-11), and the Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) for the following:
• Adopting updated noise contours (Noise Element Figures N4 and N5) to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (EIR No. 617);
• Updating Land Use and Noise Element Policies, Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22, and LU23, Title 20, PC-11, and PC-60 to modify and incorporate the updated noise contours identified by EIR
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 5 of 7
No. 617 and to implement additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport; and
• Allowing residential units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element to be located within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as identified in the
updated noise contour maps identified by EIR No. 617. Parcels bisected by the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support future housing; whereas parcels located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support housing, if deemed necessary to satisfy the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) mandate. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find the proposed amendments are exempt and not subject to further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183 because the amendments would not allow development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan, including the Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. The updated contours, and impacts associated therewith, were also fully analyzed in the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617); and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-015 recommending approval of the Housing Element Implementation, Noise-Related Amendments to the City Council (PA2022-0201). Assistant City Attorney Summerhill noted a lack of quorum due to the number of recused Commissioners and announced the process of drawing cards to identify Commissioner participation. Chair Ellmore, Vice Chair Rosene, Secretary Harris and Commissioners Langford and Lowrey stated the conflict associated with their recusal and cards were drawn. Vice Chair Rosene and Chair Ellmore received the top two high cards and remained at the dais to participate in the matter. Planning Manager Murillo used a presentation to review the background, airport area map, context, purpose of the amendments, affected plans and codes, updated noise contour exhibits, existing and proposed John Wayne Airport’s (JWA’s) noise contours with housing sites, proposed compatibility standards, proposed 65 dBA CNEL allowance, recommended actions, modification to Exhibit C, definition of “site,” and next steps. In response to Vice Chair Rosene’s question, Project Manager Murillo indicated that within the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan, standards are in place requiring notification and a noise study to ensure that the interior noise environment of new structures is at 45 dBA. Except for Secretary Harris, ex parte communication was disclosed by the Commissioners for speaking with area parcel representatives. Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing. Jim Mosher expressed displeasure that the Noise Element Subcommittee of the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) has not met yet to discuss the proposed amendments and had been bypassed, thought the amendments are not ready yet, questioned why the City is not using the best modern predictions, disagreed with using a “bisected” approach, and expressed concern for noise provisions throughout the City. Community Development Director Jurjis relayed staff’s shared frustration about the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) units and thought staff has taken the best approach to implement State law and used the best available noise contours that are legally defensible. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 6 of 7
Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve the item as recommended.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None RECUSED: Langford, Lowrey, and Harris ABSENT: None VIII. DISCUSSION ITEMS ITEM NO. 5 MUNICIPAL CODE REVIEW TO REDUCE OR SUNSET PROVISIONS (PA2022-0219) Site Location: Not Applicable Summary: A review of potential planning-related Municipal Code and City Council Policy amendments for inclusion in a recommendation to the City Council. Recommended Actions: 1. Find the recommended action not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; and 2. Recommend the City Council review the potential amendments to the Municipal Code identified in Attachment PC-1 to the staff report. Planning Manager Murillo used a presentation to review the support of City Council efforts and five recommended areas. Jim Mosher supported policy review, noted recommended area numbers three and five seem to eliminate redundancy while the others seem to be policy changes, thought including areas that are policy change would be deceptive if they are included in a City-wide package of recommendations from all boards, commissions, and City Council under the title “obsolete code,” and suggested the Planning Commission defer the final decision until closer to the deadline of next June 2024 in order to review other potential obsolete code for removal. Community Development Director Jurjis noted that a subcommittee worked on this matter, State law changes are rapid and everchanging, and staff has completed the task and looks forward to the Planning Commission’s approval to bring back to the City Council. Motion made by Commissioner Barto and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve the item as recommended.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 6 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023
Page 7 of 7
ITEM NO. 7 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA Community Development Director Jurjis noted that the soil vapor extraction (SVE) remediation project appeal at the Ford Aeronutronic Facility was denied by the City Council and the project should move forward. He announced a public hearing by the CCC next Thursday to review the Local Coastal Program amendment that clarifies fractional ownership as a time share use and announced a Planning Commission meeting on August 17 to discuss the increased enrollment at Pacifica Christian High School.
Jim Mosher relayed that the City Council directed staff to refund the SVE project appeal fees to the appellant. ITEM NO. 8 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Barto requested an excused absence from the August 17 Planning Commission meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT – With no further business, Chair Ellmore adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. The agenda for the August 3, 2023, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, July 27, 2023, at 5:15 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 Thursday, July 27, 2023, at 4:50 p.m. _______________________________ Curtis Ellmore, Chair _______________________________ Tristan Harris, Secretary
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D06064D-1281-44F1-AD78-1CFCF4730305