HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/1979COMMISSIONERS
poi `i
City of Newport Beach
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Place: City Council Chambers
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Date: January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Present
X
X
X
X
X
Absent
X
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS
R V. Hogan, Community Development Director
Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney
STAFF MEMBERS
James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Plannin
.Bill Dye, Assistant City Engineer
David Dmohowski, Advance Planning Administrator
Fled Talarico, Environmental Coordinator
i
ID
Minutes written by: Elisabeth McCoskey and James
Hewicker
Motion
X
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 4, 1916
Ayes
X
X
X
X
X
were approved as written.
Qhsent
4I
quest to permit the construction of a two -sto y
building that may include a mixture of retail,
office and light manufacturing uses on .a site i
the Recreation and Marine Commercial area of the
Mariners Mile Specific Plan Area, and the revie
of an Initial Study. Existing uses along the W s
Coast Highway frontage of the property are prop s
to remain in conjunction with the proposed deve c
Ont.
Location: A portion of Lot H, Tract No. 919, lac
ted at 2701 -2703 West Coast Highway,. ic
the southerly side of West Coast
Highway, between Riverside Avenue and
Tustin on Mariners Mile.
Zone: Specific Plan Area No. 5
Applicant: Edward B. Robinson, Newport Beach
0 ners: Elmer John Larson, Newport Beach; an
Gwendolyn I. Snyder, Balboa Island
I
-1- I
MINUTES
t
ed
p-
a-
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
&
'L
2
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
Motion
X
Motion was made to continue this item until the
Ayes
X
X
X
X
X
X
Planning Commission meeting of February 8, 1979
Absent
X
at the request of the Applicant.
Request to consider a Traffic Study for a two -sto
30,000 sq.ft. + office - retail building with relat
ed subterranean parking spaces in Corona del Mar.
Location: Lot 1, Block L, Tract No. 323, and Lo
16, 18, 20, and 22, Block 732, Corona
del Mar, located at 2600 East Coast
Highway, on the southeasterly corner
East Coast Highway and Dahlia Avenue
Corona del Mar.
Zone: C -1 -Z
Applicant: Ernest George, Corona del Mar
�—
Owner: Same as Applicant
Engineer: Osborn and Associates, Tustin
AND
Request to permit the construction of a two -story
office - retail building and related. subterranean
parking spaces in the Corona del Mar Specific Pla
Area where a specific plan has not been adopted,
and the acceptance of an Environmental Document
Location: Lot 1, Block 1, Tract No. 323, and Lo
16, 18, 20, and 22, Block 732, Corona
del Mar, located at 2600 East Coast
Highway, on the southeasterly corner
East Coast Highway and Dahlia Avenue
Corona del Mar.
Zone: C -1 -Z
Applicant: Ernest George, Corona del Mar
,.
Owner: Same as Applicant
-2-
MINUTES
•
INDEX
Item #2
ry TRAFFIC
- STUDY -
APPROyED
is
of
in
•
is
of
in
40
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
AND
I
Request to create one parcel of land for commerc;i<
development where five lots now exist.
Location: Lot 1, Block L, Tract No. 323, and Lbi
16, 18, 20, and 22, Block 732, Coron
del Mar, located at 2600 East Coast
j Highway, on the southeasterly corner <
East Coast Highway and Dahlia Avenue i
Corona del Mar.
Zone: C -1 -Z
Applicant: Ernest George, Corona del Mar
Winer: Same as Applicant
Enlgineer: Osborn and Associates, Tustin
hjairman indicated that because of the relations i
eltween Items Nos. 2, 3 and 4 they would be hearlH
together but voted upon separately.
Public hearing was opened in conjunction with the!
items. The applicant, Ernest George,.2600 East I
Colast Highway, Corona del Mar, stated he had real
the staff reports and felt they were- favorable tb
the project. He commented that the project had .
assed the Traffic Study criteria, complied with
zoning requirements, and he felt it would upgrad
the existing area and that the merchants he had
tanked to were favorable to the project.
i':scussion then followed between the Applicant anc
he Planning Commission regarding architectural
Lyle, increase in the intensity of land use and i
traffic that would be brought to this area. Some
f the concerns expressed by the Commissioners wer
that the building may not be in.keeping with it
urr,ent image of "Old Corona ", 2) increase in intE
ity up to 1.75 times the buildable area of the
iite, and 3) the general increase in traffic inchL
nlg the use of Fifth Avenue as a point of ingress
I I
-3-
MINUTES
INDEX
.Item #4
A RESl1B-
DIMON
N0. 584
:s
CONT'D
T
if FEB. 22,
n 11979
P
e
n
-e
ie
!n-
COMMISSIONERS
®m oo a
m vest °W amp � y`o
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
and egress and the traffic that might be circulat
through the adjoining residential area. It was
pointed out that this is one area where a Specifi
Plan has not yet been adopted with regard to inte
sity of land use. In other areas similar to this
one the maximum allowable is 1.0 times the build-
able area and in many cases less. As far as
traffic generation is concerned, it was noted tha
if the intensity is decreased traffic would possi
be reduced. Applicant stated he was amenable to
changing the style of the building and emphasized
that the size of the building was dictated by
existing parking criteria and suggested that cur-
rent parking requirements may not be applicable
to the Corona del Mar area.
Robert Donald, architect for the project, appeare
and indicated that the findings and conditions as
set forth in the Staff Report were acceptable to
the Applicant if the Planning Commission desired
to approve the project.
There being no others desiring to appear and be
heard the public hearing was closed.
Motion
X
Motion was made to accept the Traffic Report,
Ayes
X
X
X
K
X
X
subject to the following finding:
Absent
X
1. The proposed project will neither cause nor
make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic
service on any "major ", "primary- modified ",
or "primary street."
One of the Commissioners stated that he was havir
trouble accepting the report as it did not take
into consideration the residential streets. The
Staff stated that the Traffic Report had been pre
pared in compliance with requirements of the
Traffic Phasing Ordinance only and if the Commis-
sioners felt it advisable to make further findinc
and conditions related to the effects on other
streets it could be done when the Use Permit is
considered.
-4-
MINUTES
•
INDEX
;ed
C
�n-
t
bl_
0
l Y
COMMISSIONERS
vm0Oa 4 v�
• !S s 1p yCa �O
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Motion
X
Motion was made to deny Use Permit No. 1894 and
Ayes
X
X
X
X
X
X
make the following findings:
Absent
X
1. The proposed office - retail building is not'ir
keeping with the desired character of the
specific plan area as identified by the
General Plan.
2. The proposed building is not consistent wi h
j the General Plan Policies.
3. The proposed use will preclude the attainm ni
of the Specific Area Plan objectives state
in the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1894 will,
under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort and general welfare of per$ol
residing and working in the neighborhood on I
detrimental or injurious to property and im-
provements in the neighborhood or the generra
welfare of the City.
X
Motion was made to deny Resubdivision No. 584 so
as to be consistent with the denial of Use Permit
No. 1894.
Applicant stated he would withdraw this request.
Upon further consideration the Applicant indicat(
that he would probably want to join these parcel!
regardless of the design of the project. One of
the Commissioners asked if a 30 day continuancd
might not be in order for the Applicant to redes'
.the project. The Applicant agreed.
Motion
X
Motion was made to continue request for Resub-
Ayes
X
X
X
X
X
X
division No. 584 until February 22, 1979.
Absent
X
;Chairman stated that Items Nos. 5 and 6 would be
!heard following Items Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10 beca►►►IIIs
'traffic considerations relating to these 4 Itejns
,would also affect Items Nos. 5 and 6. The
!Applicant was agreeable.
_
i
-5-
!
MINUTES
S
e
V
gn
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
�Z
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Meeting was adjourned for a 10 minute recess.
Request to consider a Traffic Study for two ten -
story office structures and a free - standing res-
taurant. (Public Hearing)
Location: A portion of Block 55, Irvine's Sub-
division, located at 800 Newport Cent
Drive, on the westerly side of Newpor
Center Drive, northerly of Santa
Barbara Drive in Newport Center.
Zone: P -C
Applicant: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company
Newport Beach
Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
AND
Request to establish a Planned Community Develop-
ment Plan and Development Standards for Block 80C
in Newport Center, and the acceptance of an
Environmental Document.
Location: A portion of Block 55, Irvine's Sub-
division, located at 800 Newport Ceni
Drive, on the westerly side of Newpor
Center Drive, northerly of Santa
Barbara Drive in Newport Center.
Zone: P -C
Applicant: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company
Newport Beach
Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
AND
Request to subdivide 17.4 acres into 2 parcels f(
professional, office, restaurant, and residential
-6-
MINUTES
INDEX
Item #7
TRAFFIC
STUDY -
APPROVED
e r C NDI-
t TI WLY
,
:e r
.t
r
AMENDMENT
NO. 526-
R
W-1030)
I
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
• \ \ \ \ \\ <X January 18, 1979
MINUTES
ROIL CALL
condominium uses in accordance with proposed
Planned Community Development Standards for Blo�k
800 in Newport Center.
Location: A portion of Block 55, Irvine's Subs
division, located at 800 Newport
Center Drive, on the westerly side of
Newport Center Drive, northerly of
Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center.
Zone: P -C
Applicant: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company,
Newport Beach
Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
i
i
Engineer: Williamson and Schmid, Irvine
AND
Request of The Irvine Company to re- allocate
40,000 square feet of proposed office building
development from Block 500, 80;000 square feet
from Pacific Coast Highway east and west, and
40,000 square feet from Avocado /MacArthur to Block
800 in Newport Center making 350,000 square feelt
available for potential office building. Additlion-
ally, The Irvine Company requests that 5,667 sgjuare
feet from Pacific Coast Highway east and west iln
addition to the aforementioned 80,000 square felet
be re- allocated to Block 800 in Newport Center1to
allow for the construction of a 10,000 sq.ft.
restaurant. (Discussion)
Location: Block 800 Newport Center; Newport Beach
Applicant: The Irvine Company
The Chairman stated that Items Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10
would be heard together'because of their related-
ness.
-7-
i
INDEX
Item #10
APPROVED
COMMISSIONERS
9CM 7( B0
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Staff distributed to the Commission copies of a
letter received January 18, 1979 from The Irvine
Company, co- signed by The Irvine Company and
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company, indicatin
their agreement to and requesting the following
reallocations of space to provide the 350,000 s.
of office space required in Block 800 to develop
the proposed project: Block 800 - 88,015 s.f.,
Block 500 - 66,015 s.f., Pacific Coast Highway
east and west - 58,680 s.f., Avocado /MacArthur -
44,010 s.f., and at the option of The Irvine
Company and Pacific Mutual prior to recordation
of Parcel Map, transfer from either Block 500 or
Block 700 of 93,280 s.f. In addition a realloca
tion of 5667 s.f. - 4156 s.f. from Pacific Coast
Highway east and west and 15.11 s.f from either
Block 500 or 700, at their option, for 10,000 s.
of restaurant was requested.
It was also pointed out by the staff that the
Traffic Study in the Staff Report was prepared
�-
prior to the opening of the east -west couplet at
Bristol and therefore the traffic projections at
the intersection of Bristol North and Campus Dri
have changed. New tests taken on January 11 and
16, 1979 at the intersection of Bristol North an
Campus Drive were distributed to the Commission.
It was noted that these changes would affect bot
.the Pacific Mutual Project and the Back Bay Offi
development to be considered following these
items.
Public hearing was opened and Steven Gavin, Vice
President Corporate Relation Officer of Pacific
Mutual Life Insurance Company made some opening
remarks. He expressed publicly appreciation anc
gratitude for the Staff's cooperation during the
long period leading up to this point. He descri
the history and growth of Pacific Mutual prior t
the move of its home offices to Newport Beach,
stating it was a difficult decision and one that
required substantial investment on their part.
Since that time an attempt has been made by the
company and its personnel to be good corporate
citizens and active participants in the communit
It was pointed out that Pacific Mutual was not i
-8-
MINUTES
ti
f.
f.
ve
d
h
ce
be
0
y.
INDEX
r1
�J
0
COMMISSIONERS
F °
• njip4o9+ �,y :
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
;developer and had now outgrown its original spec
:and was in critical need of more. He stated the
;project is consistent with all City requiremenit<
iEstimated construction time is approximately.2b
;months to 2 years and initial occupancy will be
:approximately 70,000- 80,000 s.f. It was noted
!that the company is now growing at approximately
10,000- 15,000 s.f. per year. There are 1250
;employees at present and there will be approxi-
imately 2500 employees upon completion of occu-
ipancy. The project incorporates extensive land•
!scaping and is designed for efficiency from an
energy standpoint. Mr. Gavin noted that trafftii
:improvements are really traffic management mea-
sures designed to improve traffic flow throughi
;existing intersections. Mr. Gavin explained thi
:these will be paid for by Pacific Mutual and alri
;consistent with the City's General Plan Circula•
tion Element and will significantly improve ex;i!
ding and projected traffic congestion, and that i
;corporate commitment had been made to find other
;measures as well to deal with the traffic prob.li
:The company also recognizes the serious housing
.problem in the general area and has tried to
provide leadership to solve these problems.
Gin Wong, architect for the project, appeared
:before the Planning Commission and described th
design and orientation of the proposed develop -
ment. It was noted that the buildings would be
;set back approximately 130 feet from Newport
iCenter Drive and were orientated in such a way,
Ito take advantage of the northern exposure to c
serve energy and minimize obstruction to existi
buildings. Mr. Wong indicated that there would
be no parking along the Newport Center :Drive
frontage and that all vehicular access would be
from Santa Barbara Drive and the internal road
'system. It was further noted that the project
had been planned to minimize cut and fill andt
.building footprint. It was indicated that the!
buildings would occupy appoximately 10% of thel
isite, parking 62% and the remaining 28% would b
set aside for circulation and landscaping.
Mr. Gavin concluded by stating that the project
•
had been designed to include all of the improve
;ments and measures recommended by the City staff
-9-
i
MINUTES
e
t
�t-
i
gym.
)s
)n
Ig
le
5
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
vc v FF O P y' o
} F
F 9C5� VF OF9 �<O
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
and that the project would be a positive benefit
to the Community. It was emphasized that Pacific
Mutual has a critical need for space for their er
ployees and they want to provide that space in
Newport Beach.
Olive Wiggenhorn, 1009 West Bay Avenue, appeared
and inquired about the condominium units which
have been mentioned in conjunction with the pro-
posed Planned Community Development Plan. She
indicated that she would be in favor of any dev.e'
opment that would improve the City and broaden ti
tax base.
Mr. Don Gralneck, representing Pacific Mutual,
explained that the entire property is zoned PC al
for that reason the Development Plan was prepares
to cover the entire PC area. Mr. Gralneck furth(
explained that the Planned Community would be di-
vided into two parcels one of which would be sol(
to and developed by Pacific Mutual. It was notes
that the Development Plan would permit a maximum
of 245 residential dwelling units to be developer
on the remaining site and that this proposal was
consistent with the City's General Plan. Mr.
Gralneck pointed out that the P.C. Text requires
any future developer of the residential site to
secure site plan approval from the Planning Comm
Sion.
There being no others desiring to appear and be
heard the public hearing was closed.
Fred Talarico, Environmental Co- ordinator, was asked to e)
plain the additional information which had been discussed
the Study Session regarding the intersection of Bristol
Street North and Campus Drive.
Mr. Talarico explained that the Traffic Analysis prepared
the City's consultant includes not only the existing trafi
but traffic which has been committed from undeveloped pro,
It was noted that the.committed traffic figures used in tl
report were approximately 26% higher than would be used tc
because of the reductions in intensity, which have occurr(
in the General Plan and zoning since the consultant start(
working on this project.
-10-
MINUTES
•
INDEX
r
ie
id
I
sr.
I
I
I
s-
at
by
'ic,
ect .
e
,day .
!d
!d
4
r1
LJ
COMMISSIONERS
e0,
• F 7�S'� 7� 0�9 Ti v4�
i
MINUTES
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
Mr. Talarico commented further on the system improvements.
w6ich.eould be used to reduce the I.C.U. at the intersectio
of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive from the higher .
figures calculated on January. 11 and 16, 1979, following th
restriping by Signal Development Corporation. Mr. Talarico
explained that the consultant had already suggested (EIR .0.p
pendix B, Page 24) that had a previous project been approle
by; the City Council, it would be necessary to add a third
southbound lane to Campus Drive. In addition, it was noted
that with a third southbound optional through right turn la
and the restriping of the Bristol Street westbound lanes wo
further reduce the I.C.U. measured on January 16 to .8864.
Richard Hogan, Community Development Director, summarized 1b
stating that with the addition of the project traffic plu
traffic system improvements, noted by Mr. Talarico, the ,
ject traffic plus the improvements would be less than these
ing traffic without the improvements - the level of service
would be improved and the I.C.U. would be reduced. Mr.. Hog
further noted that these improvements should be required if
the project is to be approved.
.
Commissioner McLaughlin asked if the system improvements wh
have been suggested are consistent with the adopted Circula
tion Element of the General Plan.
Mr. Hogan explained that the system's improvements which ha
been suggested are recommendations made by the City's Traff
Consultant to improve the traffic system as it is related 't
this project. Mr. Hogan further elaborated that the Circul
tion element as set forth in the General Plan is a major $y
tem for carrying traffic throughout the City and that the
street system calls for so many.through lanes without destr
irig the ultimate configuration of each intersection. In th
case, the proposals which have been suggested are not incon
si.stent with the General.Plan. However, Mr. Hogan emphasiz
that if the Commission, in considering these developments,
feels that the turning movements as proposed and the handli
of those turning movements is inconsistent with what they
would like to see as far as intersection design is concerne
they should say so and alternate designs can be considered
if they feel that the design is inadequate.
ommissioner Beek commented that the Circulation Element is
Bally silent on the point of intersection design so almost
tithing could be in conflict with it.
-11-
i
I
ie
A
Ki
in
ich
�e
is
i-
ib-
is
:d
Ig
i
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Commissioner McLaughlin asked if the proposed system improv,
ments set forth in Table 9, Pages 21 and 22 of Appendix A
of the Traffic Analysis Study just involved restriping. He
man Basmacujan, the City's Traffic Consultant, indicated th
the proposed system improvements involved a combination of
striping and new pavement.
Commissioner Beek asked for a clarification of the system i
provements which would have to be added to the Bristol Stre
North /Campus Dr. intersection. -Mr. Talarico explained that
there would be 1) a third southbound optional through right
turn lane from Campus Drive to Bristol Street North, and 2)
a second optional through left turn lane from westbound Bri
tol Street North onto Campus Drive.
Commissioner Frederickson commented on the traffic counts t
at Bristol Street North and Campus Drive on January 11th an
16th and indicated that they were probably abnormal, given
fact that the improvements on Bristol Street had only been
open for a few weeks. It was felt as this route becomes mo
congested, motorists will find alternate routes and the who
system will level off later on to some extent.
Motion
x
Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the fol-
Ayes,
x
x
x
x
lowing findings in reference to the Traffic Study:
Noes
x
x
Absent
x
1. That a `traffic -study has been prepared which analyzes
the impact of the proposed project on the peak hour
traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chap
ter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. That the traffic study indicates that the project -gene
ated traffic will be greater than one percent of exist
traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of
critical intersections, and will add to an unsatisfact
level of traffic service, prior to mitigation or circe
lation systems improvements, at three critical inter-
sections which will have an Intersection Capacity Util
zation of greater than .90.
3. That a traffic study prepared for the City at the .re-
quest of the applicant indicates that the project -gene
ted traffic will be greater than one percent of existi
traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of
intersection, and will add to an unsatisfactory level
traffic service, prior to mitigation or circulation
systems improvements at the Jamboree Road /Campus Drive
intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity
Utilization of greater than 0.90.
-12-
t
MINUTES
•
INDEX
it
°e
n-
et
L
ak n
d
th
re
le
ems]
r-
in
th
or
i-
ra-
ng
sai
of
•
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
City of Newport Beach
qy ti January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
4.; That the traffic study indicated that the project-
generated traffic plus "committed traffic" will be
greater than one percent of existing traffic during tl
2.5 hour peak period on any leg of the critical inter-
sections, and will add to an unsatisfactory level of:
traffic service, prior to mitigation or circulation
systems improvements, at ten critical intersections
which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization:
of greater than .90.
5i That a traffic study prepared at the applicant's re-
quest, for the Jamboree Road /Campus Drive intersectioi
not deemed critical by the City, indicates that the
project- generated traffic plus "committed traffic"
will be greater than one percent of existing traffic
during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of the
intersection and will add to an unsatisfactory level;
of traffic service, prior to mitigation or circulatib
systems improvements, at the intersection which will.
have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of greater
than .90.
6i That the traffic studies suggest several circulations
system improvements which, according to the calcula-
tions, will improve the level of traffic service to
an acceptable level at ten of the critical intersec i
and will improve the existing level of traffic servic
at the remaining impacted intersection.
7t That the traffic system improvements proposed for t e
intersection of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive
have been considered by the Planning Commission andli
has been determined that they will improve the level
of traffic service and reduce the I.C.U. to less thAn
.90.
8. That the proposed project, including circulation sy$t
improvements, will neither cause nor make worse an on
satisfactory level of traffic service on any "major'!,
"primary- modified" or "primary" street.
i
Commissioner Beek commented that he thought the staff wa§
being unusually forthright in suggesting the findings if,
the Commission desired to approve the project and anothe
olf findings if the Commission wanted to disapprove the p C
jiect.
i
-13-
e
I
>ns
t
em
set
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
tp y�ss, y� O��Q2p y�0
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
It was indicated that it should perhaps be the other way
around. First, you make the findings and having made the
findings, you decide whether or not you will approve or
disapprove the project. Mr. Beek went on to state that
he did not feel the Commission could find that given the
way the Traffic Phasing.Ordinance is written and with the
guidance and clarification being given by the City Counci
in preparing policy that the project could.be approved.
Beek concluded by saying that the proposal is dependent u
projects which have no corresponding description in the
Circulation Element of the General Plan and that these pr
jects may be unwelcome or unworkable when we get around t
considering a specific Circulation Element for the Genera
Plan.
Commissioner Cokas asked if there would be a time limit f
the completion of the proposed system. improvements. The
staff replied that they would be tied to the occupancy of
building.
Commissioner Agee indicated that he could not agree with
Commissioner Beek and that as far as he was concerned, tf
project met the intent of the current Traffic Phasing Orc
nance and the Commission should not speculate on what re-
vised version may ultimately be handed down by the City
Council.
Motion
x
Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the fol
Ayes
x
x
x
x
lowing findings in reference to the Draft Environmental
Noes
N
Impact Report:
Absent
x
1. That the Draft Environmental Impact Report is complf
and prepared in compliance with the California Envii
mental Quality Act, and that its contents have been
considered in the decisions on this project.
2. That based on the information contained in the Draf-
EIR, the project incorporates sufficient mitigation
measures to reduce potentially- significant environ-
mental effects, and that the project will not resul
in significant environmental impacts.
Commissioner Beek asked if it would be possible to find
that the Draft Environmental Impact Report is satisfacto
in all parts except the Traffic Phasing Analysis.
-14-
MINUTES
1
Nr.
D-
D
1
or
e
i-
!te
ry
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney, replied that the Com{
mission must either find that the Environmental Impact Repo
is'adequate and complete under the guidelines or if it isW
complete, why it isn't.
Motion
x
Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1030 approving Amel
Ayes
x
x
x
x
meet No. 526 and establishing a Planned Community Developmo
Noes
x
Plan and Development Standards for Block 800, Newport Centl
Absent
x
Motion
x
Motion was made that Planning Commission make the followinj
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
findings in reference to Resubdivision No. 612:
Noes
x
Absent
x
1.! That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of
the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of tl
City, all applicable general or specific plans, and tl
Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of sub
division.
2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems
from a planning standpoint.
and approve Resubdivision No. 612, subject to the following
•
conditions:
Li That a parcel map be filed.
2. That all public improvements be constructed as require
by. ordinance and the Public Works Department.
3.: That P.C.C. sidewalk be constructed along San Clemente
Drive.
4.1 That a hydrology and hydraulic study for the site be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department
prior to recordation of the parcel map. Any modifica
tions to the existing storm drain system or extensions
shown to be required by the study shall be the responl
bility of the developer.
5. That vehicular access to the site from the public
streets be subject to further review and approval by
the Public Works Department. In addition, the on -sit
vehicular circulation plan shall be reviewed and ap-
proved by the Public Works Department.
6. That a Water Capital Improvement Acreage Fee be paid.
i
i
i
-15-
MINUTES
INDEX
art
t
id—RESOLUTION
ar. 1030
a �
ie
ie
?d
s
si-
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
7. That storage capacity in San Joaquin Reservoir equal
to one maximum day's demand be dedicated to the City
of Newport Beach.
8. That the final design of on -site pedestrian circulatio
be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Departmen
and the Community Development Department.
9. That a standard subdivision agreement and surety be pr
vided to guarantee satisfactory completion of the publ
improvements if it is desired to obtain building permi
or record the parcel map before the public improvement
are completed.
0. That the developer be responsible for 50% of the cost
of a traffic signal at the intersection of Newport
Center Drive West with Santa Barbara Drive. A separat
agreement and surety should be provided.
1. That on -site fire hydrants be provided as required by
the Public Works Department and the Fire Department.
2. That Fire Department access shall be approved by the I
�—
Department.
3. That street trees be provided along the public street!
as required by the Public Works Department and the Pai
Beaches and Recreation Department.
4. That the developer reimburse the City, prior to recor(
tion of a final map, for 50% of the cost of the exist -
traffic signal at the intersection of Santa Barbara Di
with Jamboree Road in conformance with an a reement w,
The Irvine Company dated February 10, 1975 �Resolutioi
No. 8431).
5. That the developer construct a traffic signal at the
intersection of San Clemente Drive with Santa Barbara
Drive. The plans for the traffic signal shall be re-
viewed and approved by the Public Works Department.
6. That the project comply with the Uniform Building Cod,
1976 requirements.
7. Development of the site will be subject to a grading
permit to be approved by the Department of Community
Development. Surface and subsurface drainage shall
be provided to the satisfaction of the Community Deve
ment Department and the Public Works Department.
-16-
MINUTES
INDEX
I
t
D-
ic
is
s
.y
i
,ks
fa-
ng
-i Vf
th
i
0
•
1
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
'62 y
ROLL CALL
181. An erosion and dust control plan shall be submitted
with the grading permit application and be subject to
the approval of the Community Development Department.
19. The landscape plan be subject to the approval of the
Community Developemtn Department and the Parks, Beach
and Recreation Department, and shall include a maintei
ance program which controls the use of organo - phospha
and pesticides.
Oj. That the landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on
use of drought - resistant or ornamental vegetation.
T. That planting be done on any exposed slopes within 30
days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engi
eer.
2. That the applicant provide for daily vacuum sweepinj
all surface parking areas and the top levels of all p
ing structures.
3,. That the applicant provide on -site retention basins
j (i.e., grease traps) and for their. maintenance.
4,. That the applicant demonstrate to the approval of +
Community Development Department that the project's,
desiltation facilities have a capacity designed to ac
commodate runoff and silt from both the Pacific Mutwa
Plaza project and the area tributary to this existing
facility, and agrees to the maintenance and improveme
of off -site desilting basins.
5. That construction activities on site be limited to th
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and that all reasonab
steps be taken to avoid generation of loud, excessive
repetitive noise.
8. That the project be designed to conform to Title 24,
graph 6, Division T -20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4.
7., The final design of the project provide for the sorti
of recyclable material from other solid waste.
8. That final design of the project provide for the in�c
poration of a private security system.
i
9. That final design of the project provide for the in.tc
poration of water- saving devices for project lavatohi
and other water -using facilities.
I
-17-
as
1-.
:es
i-
)f
1
nt
e
le
an
Par -
ng
r-
r-
es
INDEX
of P00�O,y.�P�. 9�
F v��'F � pPO2l
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
0. That should any resources be uncovered during constru-
ction, that a qualified archaeologist or paleontologis
evaluate the site prior to completion of construction
activities.
1. That the applicant consider the inclusion of an obser-
vation area open to the public on one of.the upper flo
of one tower.
2. That operation noise characteristics of the project be
considered in the final design phase of each structure
3. That the applicant investigate the potential reduction
of wastes as provided for by the Quiet Communities Act
of 1978.
4. The following disclosure statement of the City of New-
port Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airpor
shall be included in all leases or subleases for space
in the project and shall be included in any Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions which may be recorded agai
the property.
Disclosure Statement
The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknow
ledge that:
a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide ad
quate air service for business establishments which rel
on such service;
b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete
phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County
Airport;
c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose addi-
tional commercial air service expansions at the Orange
County Airport;
d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not acti
ly oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach
to phase out or limit jet air service at the Orange CoL
Airport.
5. That prior to the occupancy of the project, the applic
shall install all the circulation systems improvements
identified in Table 9, pages 21, 22, 23 and 24, for e)
-
isting plus committed, plus total Block 800 in the Dra
-18-
MINUTES
e-
ft
•
INDEX
L
COMMISSIONERS
• CiA m �p
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL cnu
EIR, with the exception of the Upper Newport Bay Bridg
and the redesign of the intersection of MacArthur Bouil
vard /ford Road. The Bay Bridge project and the redesi
of the MacArthur Boulevard /Ford Road intersection shal
be under construction prior to occupancy.
6. That prior to the occupancy of the project, that appll
cant shall install the circulation systems improvemenit
designated as Improvement A and B in the "Supplemental
Traffic Study for Block 800 at Newport Center."
37.1 That an erosion and siltation control plan be approvek
by the California Regional Water Quality Control Boa
Santa Ana Region, and that the plan be submitted to se
Board ten days prior to any construction activities.
8. That prior to the occupancy of the buildings, the Trai
System Improvements proposed for the Bristol Street Nc
Campus Drive intersection, being a third southbound dT
tional through right turn lane from Campus Drive to ;
Bristol Street North and a Second optional through 101
turn lane from west bound Bristol Street North onto
.
I Campus Drive, shall be completed.
Motion
x
Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the fol�
Ayes
x
x
x
x
lowing findings with regard to the reallocation of develo r
Noes'
x
x
Newport Center:
Absent
x
1.. That the proposed project does not exceed the total pi
jected intensity for Newport Center as established by
General Plan Amendment 78 -2, subject to Condition No.
below.
2.; That the traffic analysis of both location and inters
i of the proposed uses demonstrates that the traffic s
tem is not adversely affected and that traffic genera.
tion as it affects the major intersections during cr .
tical peak periods does not exceed the capacities in
the approved street development plan.
3.i That the necessary improvements to the traffic system
are coordinated with increases in traffic generation. .
4.1 That the project is consistent with other relevant alb
ed policies of the City.
ar�d approve the reallocation of development /Newport Centeq
subject to the following Condition:
I
-19-
MINUTES
e'
e-
gn
1
M
id
C
02
1
ty
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS=
®0 0
qy
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
1. That the reallocation shall be consistent with letter
from The Irvine Company, co- signed by The Irvine Compai
and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company, dated Jan-
uary 18, 1979, which is incorporated as part of the
record.
The Planning Commission recessed for a period of ten minute
Request to consider a Traffic Study for a 69,720 sq. ft.
office building complex. (Public Hearing)
Location: Parcel 2, Parcel Map 3 -35 (Resubdivision No.
211), located at 2222 University Drive on
the northerly side of University Drive, east
erly of Irvine Avenue, adjacent to the Orang
Coast Y.M.C.A.
Zone: R -3 -B -2
Applicant: James F. Deane, Newport Beach
Owner: Same as Applicant
AND
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 30 from 1
R -3 -8-2 District to the A -P District, and the acceptance of
Environmental Document.
Location: Parcel 2, Parcel Map 3 -35 (Resubdivision No.
211), located at 2222 University Drive on
the northerly side of University Drive, ease
erly of Irvine Avenue, adjacent to the Orani
Coast Y.M.C.A.
Zone: R -3 -B -2
Applicant: James F. Deane, Newport Beach
Owner: Same as Applicant
These items were heard together because of their relatednei
-20-
MINUTES
INDEX
V
s.
Item #5
e
•
:he Item #6
le (APPROVED
ss.
0
COMMISSIONERS
7p � ptp p0 Y q
R v��? 7S p�pOypC O
• ��P l2
RO
0
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ll CALL
Rilchard Hogan, Director of Community Development, indicate(
that the only information to be added at this point is that
this same traffic problem exists with this project, the in'
section of Bristol Street North /Campus Drive, as existed w.
the Pacific Mutual project. Mr. Hogan explained further ti
with the conditions as recommended by the Commission in thr
proval of the Pacific Mutual project the traffic added by
this proposal would be insignificant and would be absorbed
in the Pacific Mutual development. Mr. Hogan concluded by
indicating that the Commission would want to make sure tha'
the improvements required of the Pacific Mutual project ar
completed before the development and occupancy of the buih
iogs proposed by this project.
Commissioner Beek commented on the practice of tying occub
to the completion of traffic system improvements and the (ff(((
consensus that seemed to have been reached by the Commissf
that this was a very difficult problem to deal with.
Mt. Hogan indicated that the easiest way to control the s'
ation would be that not to issue building permits until t
system improvements were completed. However; it was note
this procedure would not allow the development of the pro'
and the installation of the system improvements to be car-
ried on at the same time. It was explained that the intern
s�aff, if building occupancy is the controlling factorytoj
rpuire the developer to acknowledge prior to the issuance
of the building permit, that he will not be given occupargc
or utility releases until the system improvements are co -.
ppeted. Mr. Hogan concluded by indicating that in the fin
analysis the risk is the responsibility of the developer.
Commissioner Beek asked the Assistant City Attorney if h
felt the Commission could be absolutely secure that the i
w4s entirely that of the developer.
I
Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney, replied that with a siigned acknowledgement, it may be presumed to be valid tho
arguments could be raised regarding its validity and perha
through litigation it could be overturned. Mr. Coffin con
ciluded by indicating that it would be a difficult conditic
to enforce.
Commissioner McLaughlin asked if the Traffic System Imprqv
ments proposed by Mr. Dean were a part of the Circulation)
Element of the General Plan as adopted.
I
-21-
MINUTES
:er
th
rat
!a
i-
)n
to -I
athot
pct
to
Y
al
sk
ps
n
e-
INDEX
MINUTES
:er
th
rat
!a
i-
)n
to -I
athot
pct
to
Y
al
sk
ps
n
e-
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
F vas} vU, 0�9 yc yGo
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
tO►► cAU
Mr. Hogan explained that the arterial highways are a part
the Circulation Element but the General Plan does not disc
the specifics of the design of each intersection.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Dean, the applicant, appeared and indicated that he co
curred with the staff report, but requested that the fol-
lowing items be clarified:
1. Does Condition No. 11 require that Anniversary
Lane be terminated in a cul -de -sac; and,
2. Is Condition No. 2, occupancy of the buildings,
dependent on the State in light of Findings No.
and 5, which indicate that the impact of this
project at the intersection of MacArthur Blvd./
Campus Dr. is very small and the system improve-
ments planned by the State are anticipated to
commence within a year.
The staff indicated that Condition No. 11 would not requir
a cul -de -sac at the end of Anniversary Lane. With respect
Condition No. 2, it was indicated that if the Commission f
-
the effect of this project on the intersection was inconse
quential, the occupancy requirement could be deleted. How
ever, if the Commission feels that the impact is of some c
sequence, it should be left in.
Commissioner Balalis asked about the costs which would be
lated to the improvement of the MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Dr.
intersection.
Bill Dye, Assistant City Engineer, indicated that the cost
would be approximately $30,000 and could be as high as
$65,000 with the modification to the traffic signal.
Commissioner Balalis asked Mr. Dean if he would be willing
post a bond for these improvements. Mr. Dean replied that
he would.
The staff distributed a letter, received late in the after
noon, from the Miller's, 2231 Golden Circle, protesting th
office park proposal.
Dick Hunsaker, engineer for the applicant, appeared and as
for verification that Condition No. 12 on the Environmenta
Impact Report would supercede a former condition of Re-
subdivision No. 215, dealing with the extension of Univers
-
Drive.
-22-
MINUTES
•
INDEX
of
us
n-
4
e
el
on
s
h
0
ked
1
ity
•
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Bill Dye indicated that the developer would be obligated tc
bond for that portion of the alignment adjacent to the pro -
ject.
Mr. Dean responded that it would be very difficult to bond
for the extension of University Drive particularly because
one knows what the alignment will be if it is extended at
all.
i
Commissioner Beek indicated that the developer's share of t
extension of University Drive, if it is extended to Jam re
Blvd., would be very small in terms of the total cost ofl th
project and therefore suggested that the bonding requirener
should be waived altogether.
i
John Chiu, 2128 Mesa Dr., appeared and expressed his oppbsi
tion to the increase in traffic that this project wouldlbri
to the area and the incompatibility between the proposed) of
fice use and the existing residential use.
Tim Shepard, 2215 Anniversary Lane and President of the ad-
joining Newport Upper Bay Estates Homeowners Associations,
appeared and spoke in opposition to the intensity of thel pr
posed use, the increase in traffic and noise that this pro-
ject would bring to the area and inadequacies in the design
of the site plan, particularly if University Drive is rep
Aligned.
Keith Goodell, 2107 Anniversary Lane, appeared and expreisse
his concern regarding proposed sewer connections and on -Isit
drainage.
Mr. Hunsaker, replied that it would be their intent to use
the facilities of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District and that
drainage would be handled through on -site catch basins.
Jean McClatchey, 2201 Anniversary Lane, spoke in oppositIion
to the project and the fact that it would infringe on the
Back Bay Preserve and the beauty of the Back Bay area.
Sill Pannell, 2245 Golden Circle, spoke in opposition to,th
site plan and explained that he would like to see Buildipg,
located in such a manner that it would be more compatible t
the entire area.
Ar. Dean explained that the main reason for the placement o
the buildings was to allow the greatest flexibility in the
Alignment of University Drive, provide greater setbacks IFro
the residential area and reduce the impairment of views.;
� I
-23-
MINUTES
he
e
e
t
ng
o-
e
A
0
f
M
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
�L0
F
a
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard with
respect to this project, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
x
Motion was made to approve the Traffic Study, Amendment No
520 and the Environmental Impact Report incorporating the
findings and conditions as set forth in the staff report w
the suggestion that the applicant consider the relocation
Building B.
A discussion followed among the Planning Commission regard
the location of the buildings on site and the possibility
continuing the public hearing for a revised site plan, pro
traffic system improvements and their relationship to the
adopted Circulation Element of the General Plan, and a nee
for the applicant to bond for the proposed system improve-
ments at the intersections of MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Dr. a
Bristol Street North /Campus Dr. Following the discussion,
Commission determined that they would vote on the Traffic
Study, and Amendment No. 520 and the Environmental Impact
Report separately and the original motion was withdrawn.
Motion
x
Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the foll
AyPC
x
x
x
x
ing findings regarding the Traffic Analysis:
NL,,,,,
x
x
Absent
x
1. That a traffic study has been prepared which analyzes
the impact of the proposed project on peak hour traff
and the circulation system in accordance with Chapter
15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. That the traffic study indicates that the project -gen
ated traffic will be greater than one per cent of exi
ing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any le
the critical intersections, and will add to an unsati
ctory level of traffic service, prior to circulation
tems improvements, at two critical intersections whic
will have an ICU of greater than .90.
3. That the traffic study suggests two circulation syste
improvements which, according to calculations, will i
prove the level of traffic service to an acceptable 1
at both critical intersections.
4. That the traffic study indicates that at the intersec
of MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Dr. the existing ICU is 0.9
the existing plus project ICU is 0.9340, and that bot
values round to 0.93. Further, that this equals roug
six - tenths of one percent of the total volume of thos
movements.
5. That circulation system improvements are scheduled by
the State of California that would effectively reduce
-24-
MINUTES
of
nd
is
er-
st-
ms
m-
tioi
259
h
hly
e
INDEX
L
•
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
City of Newport Beach
• \ \ \\\ `,A Pc\ January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
\
ICU at the intersection of MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Dr.
below 0.90 and that these improvements are anticipated
to commence within a one year period.
6. That the proposed project, including the circulation
system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an
unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major ",
"primary- major" or "primary" street.
and approve the Traffic Report subject to the conditions
that:
1. That prior to the issuance of building permits, theiap-
plicant shall enter into an agreement and post a bond in
the amount of $45,000 to guarantee satisfactory completii
of the proposed Traffic System Improvements at the inter•
section of Bristol Street North /Campus Dr. Said improve.
ments shall be completed prior to occupancy or within 3
years from the date on the agreement, whichever occurs
first.
ti. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the appl•
in
cant shall enter into an agreement and post a bond thi
amount of $60,000 to satisfactory completion o
.guarantee
the proposed Traffic System Improvements at the intersec•
tion of MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Drive. Said improvements
shall be completed prior to occupancy or within 3 years,
from the date on the agreement, whichever occurs fi st.
The occupancy of the buildings will not occur untillthe
traffic system improvement at the intersection of I vine
Avenue /University Drive has been completed.
4;. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall indicate to the Director of Community Development
in writing that he understands and agrees to conditions
numbered 1, 2 and 3 above.
Motion
Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the follow -
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
x
iing findings with regard to the Environmental Impact Report:
Absent
x
li. That the Draft.Environmental Impact Report is complete
and was prepared in accordance with the California n-
vironmental Quality Act, and that its contents havei
been considered in the decisions on this project.
i
i
-25-
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
2cry
ROLL CA
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
LL
0
mi
n
2. That, based on the information contained in
Draft EIR, the project incorporates sufficie
mitigation measures and will not result in
significant environmental impacts, providing
the following conditions are met:
and that the Planning Commission recommend appro
of the Draft EIR and of Amendment No. 520, subject to 1
following conditions:
1. That a landscape plan shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect. Said plan sha
include a maintenance program which controls
the use of organo - phosphates and pesticide a
shall place a heavy emphasis on the use of
native vegetation and planting materials of
drought - resistant nature. Prior to the occu
pancy of the buildings a licensed landscape
architect shall certify that the landscaping
has been installed in accordance with the pr
pared plan.
2. That prior to the commencement of grading
activities the applicant shall contract with
an approved paleontologist to be on site to
oversee the collection and storage of signif
cant fossils if uncovered.
3. That prior to the issuance of a building per
the applicant demonstrate to the satisfactio
of the Community Development Department and
Public Works Department that sewer facilties
will be available for the project at the tim
of occupancy.
4. That the project be designed to meet the Sta
Standards for interior noise level.
5. That the proposed structures be designed in
such a manner that they do not reflect glare
emit electronic interference or produce smok
so as to endanger aircraft operations at
Orange County Airport.
6. That prior to the issuance of a building per
the applicant demonstrate to the satisfactio
-26-
MINUTES
I INDEX
th
nt
va
:he
11
nd
a
I-
nn
n
th
e
to
r�
LJ
0
mi
n
r�
LJ
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
v
• � v S� v�` Fp }'}y�C 9p
R
4
F_
L
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
OLL CALL
of the Community Development Department that
the guidelines of the Airport Land. Use Commi
sion have been followed in the design of the
project.
7.. That building access shall be approved by th
Fire Department prior to the issuance of
building permits.
8i. That development of the site will be subjec
to a grading permit to be approved by the
Department of Community Development. Surfa
and subsurface drainage shall be provided t
the satisfaction of the Community Developmeh
Department and the Public Works Department.
91 . That the grading plan shall be developed in
accordance with Mitigation Measures 1 throug
7, 9, 10, and 11 as set forth on pages 11 an
12 of the Draft EIR.
10. An erosion and dust control plan shall be sip
mitted with the grading permit application p
be subject to the approval of the Community'
Development Department.
11�. That prior to the issuance of building perm'
all remaining applicable conditions of Resu
division No. 215 shall be met.
121. That all necessary improvements be made in
extension of Univeristy Drive (to the parki
area) which will insure that no erosion is
caused by runoff from the paved surface into
the Santa Ana -Delhi channel.
13. That the project incorporate a pollution sep
ration device (grease trap) on the proposed
drain from the parking lot to the Santa Ana -
Delhi channel.
14. That the applicant provide for the weekly
cleaning of the parking lot by vacuum sweepi
15. That the applicant provide for a regular
maintenance program for the pollution separy
tion device(s).
I
j I
-27-
INDEX
s-
e
e
t
h
d
b-
nd
is
he
9
a-
n
F
n} P Cy
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
L6. That the vegetative buffer between the Santa Ana - Dehli
Channel and the project be retained so as to stabilize
the channel and prevent erosion.
7. That the applicant investigate the potential reductior
of wastes as provided for by the Quiet Communities Aci
of 1978.
8. The following disclosure statement of the City of New{
Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport shi
be included in all leases or subleases for space in ti
project and shall be included in any Covenants, Condi•
tions and Restrictions which may be recorded against
property.
Disclosure Statement
The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns
acknowledge that:
1. The Orange County Airport may not be able to pro
vide adequate air service for business establish
ments which rely on such service;
v
2. When an alternate air facility is available, a c,
plete phase out of jet service may occur at the
Orange County Airport;
3. The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose
additional commercial air service expansion at t
Orange County Airport.
4. Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will n
actively oppose any action taken by the City of
Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air sery
at the Orange County Airport.
19. That the applicant consult with the Orange County En-
vironmental Management Agency as to the need for stab
zation of the Santa Ana -Delhi flood control channel p
to the issuance of grading permit.
20. That the site plan as contained in the EIR is approve
in concept with the exception that Building B shall b
relocated to a position parallel to Building A and ae
jacent to the Santa Ana -Delhi Channel.
-28-
MINUTES
•
INDEX
11
e
:he
>m -I •
ie
)t
ice
ili
rio
d
e
•
I
I
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROIL CALL
Request to amend a previously approved Use Permlii
which.allowed a remodel and second floor expansnc
of the Red.Onion Restaurant so as.to permit exits
iing guest dock spaces or in -lieu parking permits
to be used as an alternative to providing requilri
narking spaces off -site.
Location: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 57 -25 (resub-
division No. 375) located at 2406
Newport Boulevard, on the easterly
side of Newport Boulevard, souther,
of 26th Street on the Balboa Peninslu
Zones: C -1 and C -2
Applicant: Mrs. Jean R. Belden, Newport Beach:
Owner: Same as Applicant
l
public hearing was opened and the applicant, Mis
.Dean Belden, Newport Beach, appeared and stated
he concurred with the staff report.
Sohn Butler, representing the Central Newport
Beach Community. Association, stated it was the
feeling of the Association that to allow docki g
Or in -lieu parking permits as an alternative t
providing off -site parking spaces as pre -
'v iously required. would only increase the Already. conges e
raffic situation that now exists for drivers in the area
and should be prohibited for this or any other operation,.
Mr. Frederickson stated that in light of the
tommission's,desire to encourage the use of the bay for
marine purposes, he felt the practice of having
people come by boat was a healthy one and should
be encouraged for this and other restaurants hav
!the capacity.
;Commissioner McLaughlin asked why in ConditionlN
4 of the Staff Report that 7 docking spaces we e
being given for the proposed dock facilities ii
ilieu of 4 parking spaces previously allowed.
Staff explained that present dock area if proper
jmanaged would handle a maximum of eleven boats, a0c
1 -29-
MINUTES
In
ad
Ia.
M
ins
o.
ly
INDEX
tem #11
SE
'ERMIT
10. 1581
MA ENTE
iPPROVED
:ONDI-
'I LLY
COMMISSIONERS
ROLL CALL
Motion
MINUTES
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979 •
that seven dock spaces would be a reasonable use.of the dock'
space.
Motion was made that Planning Commission make the following
findings in conjunction with Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended):
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use
Element of the General Plan and is compatible with
surrounding land uses.
2. The project is categorically exempt from the require-
ments of the California Environmental Quality Act.
3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not
contemplate any problems.
4. Adequate "guest dock spaces" are being provided in con-
junction with the proposed remodeling and expansion of
the Red Onion Restaurant facility.
5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended) will not,
under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to
the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general
welfare of persons residing and working in the neigh-
borhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare
of the City.
and approve Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended) subject to the fol-
lowing conditions:
1. That development shall be in substantial conformance wit
the approved plot plan.
2. That a maximum credit of 7 parking spaces be given for
the proposed guest dock facilities.
3. That the entire dock facility bayward of the restaurant
shall be maintained only for patrons of the Red Onion
Restaurant and shall be so posted. No overnite mooring
shall be permitted.
4. That should the guest docks be sued for any use other
than guest docks for the restaurant, the owner shall be
required to provide 4 parking spaces in a location meet-
ing the approval of the Planning Commission, or reduce
the net public area of the restaurant accordingly.
-30-
INDEX
E
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
���9�p�a�a ;� City of Newport Beach
• \ \\\\ \\\ January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Motion
Ayes x x xi
Noes x
Absent
Motion
Ayes x x x
Noes x
Absent
W
•
x
x
x
x
5: All other applicable conditions of Use Permit No. 1581
shall remain in effect.
6. Any violation of this use permit will be cause for re-
vocation proceedings by the Planning Commission.
Motion was made to amend the original motion and change Con -
d'p'tion No. 2 to read as follows:
Z. That a maximum credit of 5 parking spaces be given for
the proposed guest dock facilities.
The original motion was then voted on and carried.
Commissioner Beek indicated that he felt the City's formula
for parking is inadequate'in the case of a restaurant as
well populated as this one and that they should be provid-
ing more parking or have less public area. He concluded by
staying that this type of use does nothing to enhance the'Cit3
draws people from outside the City and should be discouraged.
-31-
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
p �1
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Motion
x
Request to construct a restaurant with on -sale
Ayes
x
x
x
Y
alcoholic beverages within Office Site "G" of the
Noes
x
Koll Center Newport Planned Community. A modifi•
Absent
x
cation is also requested to extend an unenclosed
roofed entry 10 feet into the required 30 foot
landscaped setback on Jamboree Road.
Location: Parcel No. 3, Parcel Map 108 -27
(Resubdivision No. 557) located at
5180 Birch Street, on the South-
westerly corner of Birch Street and
Jamboree Road.
Zone: P -C
Applicant: Far West Services, Inc., Irvine
Owner: Koll Center Newport, Newport Beach.
Motion
x
Request to permit the construction of a two -stor;
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
single family dwelling (and related third floor
Noes
x
open deck) in the C -1 District. Said dwelling
Absent
x
unit will be located on the same lot as an exist
muffler shop. A Modification to the Zoning Code
also requested, since the proposed development
encroaches to the rear property line and to the
side property line along Orange Avenue (where:th
Ordinance requires 5 foot yard setbacks).
Location: Lot 8, Block 6, Tract No. 27, locate
at 496 North Newport Boulevard, on t
southeasterly corner of North Newpor
Boulevard and Orange Avenue, adjacen
to Newport Heights.
Zone: C -1
Applicant: Morris Desatoff, Newport Beach
Owner: James L. Crockett, Newport Beach.
-32-
MINUTES
10
INDEX
USE
PERMIT
x$96
CONTINUED
TO FEB. 8
1979
•
Item #13
i USE
PERMIT
NO. 1895
in
is CONTINUED
TO FEB. 8
I
ie
t
t
n
A
COMMISSIONERS
9PA 9f B0
• � v��4 Y� �p� pbt� of
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
Motion
x
i
R I equest to permit the construction of a commerci
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
residential complex in the C -1 District, and the
Noes
x
ajcceptance of an Environmental Document. A modi
Absent
x
flication to the Zoning Code is also requested,
since a portion of the second floor of the strut
tlure encroaches to within 7 feet of the rear
property line (where the Ordinance requires a 1
foot rear yard). A portion of the required par
ing spaces are also tandem spaces (where the
Ordinance provides that all required parking.
slpaces shall be accessible and usable. Further
more, the proposal also includes the paying of
annual fee to the City for a portion of the re -I
gluired parking spaces in a nearby Municipal par
iing lot in lieu of providing said parking space$
op -site.
Location: Lot 13, Block 21, Newport Beach,
located at 114 22nd Street, on the
southeasterly side of 22nd Street,
between West Balboa Boulevard and
West Ocean Front in McFadden Square:.
i
Zone: C -1
Applicant: Vic Sherreitt, Balboa Island .
Owner: John W. Klug, Newport Beach.
Motion
x
Request to consider an amendment to the Civic
Ayes
x
x
x
x
K
Pjlaza Planned Community Development Plan to re -1
Noes
x
gjuire the preparation of a traffic phasing plan!
Absent
X
aInd possible reduction in allowable intensity of
dlevelopment and the acceptance of an Environment
Document.
Location: Property bounded by San Joaquin Hill
Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente
Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in
Newport Center.
l
1
I
-33-
MINUTES
INDEX
Item #14
al USE
PERMIT
NO. 1897
CONTINUED
TO FEB. 8
1979
n
al
3
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
January 18, 1979
ROLL CALL
PLAN
NWPRT
PLACE
PTANNED
h
MPRUNTITY
CONTINUED
TO FEB. 8
1979
•
i
Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach
t.
a-
al
Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
* * *
Motion
x
Request for the approval of a Phasing Plan for
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
remaining development in the Newport Place Plann
Noes
Community. (Discussion)
Absent
Location: Property bounded by MacArthur Boule-
vard, Bristol Street North, and Birc
Street,.in Newport Place.
Applicant: Emkay Development and Realty Company
Newport Beach.
* **
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Motion
x
1. Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1031 setting i
All Ayes
public hearing for February 22, 1979, to consider re-
Absent
x
classification of the Caltrans parcels in West Newpor
Motion
2. Motion was made to adjourn to a special study session
All Ayes
at 7:30.p.m. on January 25, 1979, to discuss the Circ
Absent
x
lation Element of the General Plan.
Motion
x
3. Commissioner Cokas asked to be excused from the Speci
Ayes
x
x
x
x
x
Study Session of January 25, 1979.
Noes
x
Absent
x
There being no further business, the Planning Commiddion a
journed at 11:40 p.m.
GEORG COKAS, Secretary
City o Newport Beach
Planning Commission
GC /gg
-34-
..r.
MINUTES
i
INDEX
e d
PLAN
NWPRT
PLACE
PTANNED
h
MPRUNTITY
CONTINUED
TO FEB. 8
1979
•
i
RESOLUTION
t.
a-
al
d-
•