Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/1986COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES PLACE: City Council Chambers p n TIME: 7:30 p.m. M m DATE: February 6, 1986 2 C m s m = C 2 w o S o o n z = T m City of Newport Beach A R LL CALL INDEX Present x x x x x x Commissioner Koppelman was absent. Absent x * * x EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney x * re STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert T. Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator_ . W. William Ward, Senior Planner Chris Gusti.n, Senior Planner Donald Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary 01on Minutes of January 23, 1986: Minutes of x Motion was made for approval of the January 23, 1986, 1-23-66 Ayes x x x z x x Planning Commission Minutes. Motion was voted on, Absent MOTION CARRIED. Request for Continuances: Request for James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that Item Continuance No. 1, Use, Permit No. 3184, Tiffany's Astrological Club, be removed from calendar, and Item No. 5, Use Permit No. 3188, a nighttime restaurant in Central Balboa, be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 20, 1986. Motion x Motion was made to remove from calendar, Item No. 1, Ayes x x x 11 x x Use Permit No. 3184, and to continue Item No. 5, Use Absent x Permit No. 3188 to the Planning Commission meeting of February 20. 1986. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. � s � 0 COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 x x Request to permit the construction of an office buil- c o � y ding in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area which _ M ,a. m c z 0 o r 0 0 i= a z m z T m( City of Newport Beach Use Permit No. 3184 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a restaurant with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live entertainment in the former Tiffany's Private Club facility in the C -1 -H District. The proposal also includes a request to purchase in -lieu parking permits from the City on an annual basis, so as to allow a portion of the restau- rant parking to be provided in the City Hall Employee parking lot. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to use a valet parking service in conjunction with the parking proposal. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 60 -43 (Resubdivision No. 433), located at 3388 Via Lido, on the northeasterly side of Via Lido, between Via Oporto and Via Malaga, adjacent to Lido Marina Village. ZONE: C -1 -H • APPLICANT: Tiffany's Astrological Club, Newport Beach OWNER: Traweek Investment Fund #12, Ltd., Marina del Rey Motion x Motion was made to remove Use Permit No. 3184 from Ayes x x x I,xlxl calendar. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Absent Use Permit No. 3185 (Continued Public Hearing) -2- MINUTES INDEX TYAm Nn -I UP3184 Removed from Calendar Item No.2 UP3185 Continued to 2 -20 -86 Request to permit the construction of an office buil- ding in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area which exceeds the 26 foot basic height limit in the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District and contains a gross structural area in excess of .5 times the buildable area of the site. The proposal also includes a modifi- cation to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact and tandem parking spaces for a portion of the required off - street parking, and a request to use a substandard aisle width with wider than normal parking spaces for a portion of the required parking; and the acceptance of an environmental document. As an option to the tandem parking spaces, the applicant is willing • to purchase an equal amount of in -lieu parking spaces on an annual basis in the Mariner's Mile Municipal Parking Lot. -2- MINUTES INDEX TYAm Nn -I UP3184 Removed from Calendar Item No.2 UP3185 Continued to 2 -20 -86 COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 xx C o z C a >_v m z c m y m 2 i = a = . = T m ( City of Newport Beach C 2 N O C o o LOCATION: Lot 45, Tract No. 1133, located at 2620 Avon Street, on the northerly side of Avon Street, between Riverside Avenue and Tustin Avenue, in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: James Adams, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Jim Conrad appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant'. Mr. Conrad stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in the revised Exhibit "A ". Ms. Karen Harrington, 441 Santa Ana Avenue, representing the Newport Heights Community Association, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Harrington advised that one of the issues that the Newport Heights Community Association has concerning the subject use permit is the building height and the abrupt scale relationship that the proposed structure • has to the adjacent properties. Ms. Harrington commented that the proposed structure would also increase the traffic problems in the area. -3- MINUTES INDEX Mr. John Gates, property owner on the east side of the subject property, appeared before the Planning • Commission. Mr. Gates requested a condition be added stating that the applicant be required to approach the rear easement from Ocean view Avenue only so as not to create a parking hazard along his driveway. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Gates replied that he does not know the height of his building but that there is one story in the front of the building and two stories in the rear of the building. Discussion followed regarding the applicant's approach to the rear easement. Mr. Hewicker explained that the suggested condition could be added to the use permit but that the condition would be difficult to enforce; however, he commented that a sign could be posted on the front of the applicant's property to advise the public how to approach the rear of the property, and also that the adjacent driveways could have "no parking" signs posted. Ms. Karen Harrington, 441 Santa Ana Avenue, representing the Newport Heights Community Association, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Harrington advised that one of the issues that the Newport Heights Community Association has concerning the subject use permit is the building height and the abrupt scale relationship that the proposed structure • has to the adjacent properties. Ms. Harrington commented that the proposed structure would also increase the traffic problems in the area. -3- MINUTES INDEX February 6, 1986 Beach Ms. Marian Rayl, 426 San Bernadino Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Newport Heights Community Association. Ms. Rayl commented that the Newport Heights Community Association opposes the proposed application. She .cited that Commissioner Goff, City Engineer Donald Webb, business representatives from Mariner's Mile and over 100 citizens from the Newport Heights area had a meeting regarding the proposed widening of West Coast Highway and the proposed extension of Avon Street to Santa Ana Avenue. Ms. Rayl stated that the citizens recommended that the City Council and the Planning Commission consider denial of use permits requesting extensive building in the area, because of the increase in traffic and that there is presently no place to park. She stated that the citizens do not want West Coast Highway widened and Avon Street extended. xx Mr. Robert Clark, President of the Newport Heights a O n e a v Community Association appeared before the Planning = v , y m Commission. Mr. Clark confirmed previous remarks made by members of the Newport Heights Community Association z c m o m z m 9 M= A W Z r 0 O S O�City � r am o M > ma r r `Y Z a = y= m m VI February 6, 1986 Beach Ms. Marian Rayl, 426 San Bernadino Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Newport Heights Community Association. Ms. Rayl commented that the Newport Heights Community Association opposes the proposed application. She .cited that Commissioner Goff, City Engineer Donald Webb, business representatives from Mariner's Mile and over 100 citizens from the Newport Heights area had a meeting regarding the proposed widening of West Coast Highway and the proposed extension of Avon Street to Santa Ana Avenue. Ms. Rayl stated that the citizens recommended that the City Council and the Planning Commission consider denial of use permits requesting extensive building in the area, because of the increase in traffic and that there is presently no place to park. She stated that the citizens do not want West Coast Highway widened and Avon Street extended. Mr. Hewicker advised that a Resolution from the Newport • Heights Community Association dated September 20, 1985, states "that the Newport Heights Community Association is concerned with the density in the Mariner's Mile -4- MINUTES Mr. Robert Clark, President of the Newport Heights Community Association appeared before the Planning • Commission. Mr. Clark confirmed previous remarks made by members of the Newport Heights Community Association regarding building height and the widening of West Coast Highway. Mr. Clark advised that he concurs with Condition No. 3 recommending a covenant on the property binding the applicant to 1,380± square feet of floor area in the building solely to marine- oriented uses. Mr. Clark asked how the covenant can be enforced? He recommended an annual audit by the City of previously approved use permits requiring marine- oriented uses, and if there is a finding that the required marine - oriented uses are not executed, then a certain amount of square footage should not be allowed to be leased. Mr. Hewicker explained that the City can monitor the marine- oriented uses through the Business License Department on a consistent basis. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Turner, Mr. Clark replied that the Newport Heights Community Association is concerned with the bulk and height of proposed projects in the Mariner's Mile area, and that the Newport Heights Community Association is concerned that the subject proposal over - maximizes the use of the parcel. Mr. Hewicker advised that a Resolution from the Newport • Heights Community Association dated September 20, 1985, states "that the Newport Heights Community Association is concerned with the density in the Mariner's Mile -4- MINUTES MMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 x x C o s MM x _ C z C M m s m Z m C= Z Z W O S O z a a T O m 1 City of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX area, and that we approve of the existing precedent set by the City Council of approximately .8 times the buildable area...... ", signed by Mr. Clark. Mr. Hewicker referred to a letter dated December 19, 1985, signed by members of the Newport Heights Community Association, stating that "with appropriate limits maximum actual height of 35 feet, proposal for large lots south of the highway may be acceptable ". Mr. Clark confirmed with Mr. Hewicker that the referred to area is the inland area. In reference to the Resolution and letter signed by the Newport Heights Community Association, Mr. Clark stated that the Newport Heights Community Association was compromising with the business community to allow higher density in an attempt to hold the height and to preserve the views. j I I I I j Chairman Person asked if the proposed project is close I I to the Newport Heights Community Association requirements regarding density and height, and he • opined that the proposed project appeared to be within the guidelines of the aforementioned requirements. Discussion followed between Chairman Person and Mr. Clark regarding what the Newport Heights Community Association is requesting. Mr. Clark concluded the discussion by stating that the Newport Heights Community Association is attempting to set a general policy of a maximum 26 foot height limit. Ms. Dana Saljeu, 2953 Cliff Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission expressing her concern regarding the parking requirements of the proposed project, and, that each project should not be dependent upon the public streets. Mr. Don Williams, 2936 Cliff Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission stating that the 35 foot height limit could set a precedent in Mariner's Mile if the proposed project is approved. In response to a request by Commissioner Eichenhofer to describe the roof elevations of the proposed project, Mr. Jim Conrad reappeared before the Planning Commission explaining the height and setback of the proposed structure. . In response to questions posed by Commissioner Goff and Commissioner Turner, Mr. Conrad replied that the third floor of the proposed project contains 820 square feet of leasable space, and that the 820 square feet is above the basic height limit of 26 feet. -5- COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 A x c O n 2 v > y m z c m> m z 1= a z , _ , m I City of Newport Beach e z w v a 0 0 The public hearing was closed at this time. Mr. Hewicker advised that the 26 foot height limit refers to an absolute height if the structure has a flat roof, and to an average height if the structure has a pitched roof.. He explained that if there would be a pitched roof in the area, the roof could be 31 feet to the top of the ridge. In response to Commissioner Goff, Mr. Hewicker replied that the proposed structure is 2 feet higher than the structure could be without the approval of a use permit. The public hearing was reopened at this time, and Mr. Jim Conrad reappeared before the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Conrad advised that the second and third floors were affected by the revised net floor area. Commissioner Goff opined that if the applicant deleted the third floor, a use permit would not be required because the project would not need to exceed the height limit. He commented that the excess of .5 times the buildable area would still be permitted as long as the project is marine - useage. He further opined that tandem parking would not be needed to meet the parking requirement inasmuch as the removal of the third floor would reduce the floor area of the project by 8201 s stitute square feet. Commissioner Goff made a substitute Motion motion to deny Use Permit No. 3185 and he asked staff to develop findings for denial. R= MINUTES The public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Turner cited his concerns regarding the marine- oriented uses required, the concerns of the Sion residents in the area regarding the height limit, and that the .7 times the buildable area be revised to .5 times the buildable area. He made a motion to approve x Use Permit No. 3185, subject to the findings and conditions of approval in Revised Exhibit "A ", including the deletion of Condition No. 2 requesting that a minimum of 1,380± square feet of the proposed building shall be used exclusively for marine - oriented use, and the deletion of Condition No. 3 requesting a covenant. Discussion followed between Commissioner Turner and Mr. Hewicker regarding Condition No. 4 requesting 2 compact and 2 tandem parking spaces. Chairman Person asked to amend the motion to state that Condition No. 4 read that no more than 258 of the parking spaces shall be compact spaces, because he opined that he would like to avoid the use of tandem parking spaces whenever possible. Commissioner Turner accepted the amended condition. Commissioner Goff opined that if the applicant deleted the third floor, a use permit would not be required because the project would not need to exceed the height limit. He commented that the excess of .5 times the buildable area would still be permitted as long as the project is marine - useage. He further opined that tandem parking would not be needed to meet the parking requirement inasmuch as the removal of the third floor would reduce the floor area of the project by 8201 s stitute square feet. Commissioner Goff made a substitute Motion motion to deny Use Permit No. 3185 and he asked staff to develop findings for denial. R= MINUTES C0MMISS10NERS February 6, 1986 X C 0 C a v m Z c m a m Z Z z A a T m City of Newport Beach c z w o; 0 0 Mr. Hewicker advised that a use permit would still be required if the applicant exceeds .5 times the buildable area. Carol Korade, Assistant City .Attorney, advised not to pass a motion on denial in order to find a justification for denial later. She recommended a motion to continue the use permit in order for staff to provide the Planning Commission with an appropriate basis for denial. Substitute Commissioner Goff corrected his substitute motion to Motion x state that Use Permit No. 3185 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 20, 1986, to enable staff to develop findings for denial. Commissioner Turner stated that he agreed with Commissioner Goff's statements regarding the deletion of the third floor; and therefore, withdrew his motion. H„�cnt �xlxl February2 voted on to continue Use Permit No. 3185 to February 20, 1986. MOTION CARRIED. mot Use Permit No. 3012 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the establishment of a take -out restaurant, specializing in the sale of shaved ice products, in the C -1 District and waived all of the required off - street parking spaces. In accordance with Condition No. 7 of the existing use permit, the applicant is requesting the subject amendment so as to change the shaved ice facility to a muffin shop which includes the installa- tion of a small oven and the sale of frozen yogurt. The proposal also includes a request to amend Condition No. 8 so as to change the hours of operation from 10:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. LOCATION: Lot 12, Block 14, Balboa Island Tract, located at 322 Marine Avenue, on the easterly side of Marine Avenue, between Balboa Avenue and the Balboa Island Channel, on Balboa Island. 0 11111111 ZONE: C-1 -7- MINUTES Item No.3 UP3012A Continued to 2 -20 -RA MMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 F a O O f ti a v = o z 2 M s m z c z w o t 0 0 M z T I City of Newport Beach APPLICANT: Lloyd Flodin, Newport Beach OWNERS: Paula Benabou and Howard Tucker, Laguna Hills The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Lloyd Flodin, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Flodin stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit A ^. Ms. Betty Felling, 309 Grand Canal, an adjacent resident, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Felling stated her opposition to the proposed take -out restaurant as inadequate delivery access between the alley and the proposed business; the proposed business would open at 7:00 a.m., creating an intensification of use that would result in an increased parking demand for the area; and she opined that the applicant does not have adequate exhaust fans and grease traps. In response to Commissioner Goff, Mr. Hewicker advised that staff could respond to Ms. Felling's aforementioned concerns if the Planning Commission continued the use permit for two weeks. Mr. Hewicker commented that the Planning Commission and the Modifications Committee had approved the shaved ice business previously located at the subject address, and that the difference between the businesses is that the proposed business is to permit the sale of muffins and to change the hours of operation to 7:00 a.m. Ms. Felling reappeared before the Planning Commission and stated that the setback in the alley is inadequate for trash containers. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Commssioner Goff made a motion to continue Use Permit Ayes x x x No. 3012 to the Planning Commission meeting of February Noes x 20, 1986. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Absent x i • MINUTES INDEX • Motion Ayes Absent • COMMISSIONERS ©F� February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach Use Permit No. 3187 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a take -out restaurant with incidental seating and on -sale beer and wine on property located in -the C -O -H District. The proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the required off - street parking. LOCATION: Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map No. 35 -1 (Resubdivision No. 284), located at 1616 San Miguel Drive, on the northeasterly corner of San Miguel Drive and San Joaquin Hills Road, in the Harbor View Commercial Center. ZONE: C -O -H - APPLICANT: Joe Rubino Enterprises, Inc., Irvine OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Renaldo Haug, 4220 Long Beach Boulevard, Long Beach, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Haug stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Haug advised Chairman Person that the applicant operates a take -out restaurant in Lido Village. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3187 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surround- ing land uses. 2. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 3. That the waiver of development standards for the proposed take -out restaurant facility will not be detrimental to adjoining properties. MINUTES tem No.4 l x x C o � x _ v y m 2 C III D m = m p A Z r 0 x a Z 0 o r o o o III D M 2 L Z 2 T m ©F� February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach Use Permit No. 3187 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a take -out restaurant with incidental seating and on -sale beer and wine on property located in -the C -O -H District. The proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the required off - street parking. LOCATION: Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map No. 35 -1 (Resubdivision No. 284), located at 1616 San Miguel Drive, on the northeasterly corner of San Miguel Drive and San Joaquin Hills Road, in the Harbor View Commercial Center. ZONE: C -O -H - APPLICANT: Joe Rubino Enterprises, Inc., Irvine OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Renaldo Haug, 4220 Long Beach Boulevard, Long Beach, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Haug stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Haug advised Chairman Person that the applicant operates a take -out restaurant in Lido Village. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3187 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surround- ing land uses. 2. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 3. That the waiver of development standards for the proposed take -out restaurant facility will not be detrimental to adjoining properties. MINUTES tem No.4 l MMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 X C o x y a v m 2 G m y m = 9 z m z T m I City of Newport Beach c 2 W O r 0 0 4. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3187 will not, under the circumstances- of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 4. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapters 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 5. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Depart- ment. 6. That all trash area shall be screened from view. 7. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be provided in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 8. That a trash compactor shall be installed in the restaurant facility. 9. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform • Plumbing Code, unless otherwise. approved by the Building Department. -10- MINUTES INDEX 2. That the development standards for the subject take -out restaurant facility, including twen- ty -four (24) additional parking spaces, are waived. • 3. That the restaurant shall be open only between the hours of 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. daily. 4. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapters 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 5. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Depart- ment. 6. That all trash area shall be screened from view. 7. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be provided in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 8. That a trash compactor shall be installed in the restaurant facility. 9. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform • Plumbing Code, unless otherwise. approved by the Building Department. -10- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 X C o n D 9 - a M y m z c m y m z I= 9 z m z m m City of Newport Beach c z w o; o o 10. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor. 11. That no off -sale beer and wine shall be permitted in conjunction with the subject restaurant. 12. That the on -sale service of beer and wine shall be incidental to the primary food service operation of the restaurant. 13. That no live entertainment or dancing shall be permitted in the restaurant unless the Planning Commission approves an amendment to this Use Permit. The Planning Commission recessed at 8 :45 pm. and reconvened at 8:52 p.m. x t x Use Permit No. 3188 (Public Hearin Request to establish a nighttime restaurant with on -sale beer and wine and a daytime take -out restaurant establishment on property located in the C -1 District, where a take -out restaurant (Papagayo's) previously existed. The proposal also includes a request to approve an informal off -site parking agreement for the additional parking required for the nighttime dinner . operation, and a request to waive all of the required off - street parking spaces in conjunction with the daytime use on the property. -11- MINUTES INDEX Item No.5 Aicil Continued to 2 -20 -86 14. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit, • cause injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 15. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The Planning Commission recessed at 8 :45 pm. and reconvened at 8:52 p.m. x t x Use Permit No. 3188 (Public Hearin Request to establish a nighttime restaurant with on -sale beer and wine and a daytime take -out restaurant establishment on property located in the C -1 District, where a take -out restaurant (Papagayo's) previously existed. The proposal also includes a request to approve an informal off -site parking agreement for the additional parking required for the nighttime dinner . operation, and a request to waive all of the required off - street parking spaces in conjunction with the daytime use on the property. -11- MINUTES INDEX Item No.5 Aicil Continued to 2 -20 -86 COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 �x c o � x C C v y m 2 m n m Z i z. z m z T m 1 City of Newport Beach c= H o S O O LOCATION: Lots No. 5, 6, and 7, Block 5, Balboa Tract, located at 209' i Palm Street, on the southwesterly corner of Palm Street and East Bay Avenue, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Opaso Vachirachatchot, Balboa OWNER: Estate of Albert Gilbert, Security Pacific Bank, Administrator, Newport Beach Motion Ix Motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 3188 to the Ayes x x x x x Planning Commission meeting of February 20, 1986. Absent Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. rM1 B. Initiation of Amendment No. 8 (A) to the City of Newnnrt Beach Certified Local Coastal Program. Land Use Plan Request to amend the Local Coastal Program, Land Use • Plan, changing the designation of the non - bayfront sites from "Recreational and Marine Commercial" to "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. It is further proposed to change the designation for the McFadden -12- MINUTES INDEX Item No.6 GPA 86 -1(A) I Approved Amend. No. 8 I Approved Amend. No. 629 Continued to 2 -20 -86 A. Initiation of General Plan Amendment 86- 1(A)(Discussion) Request to amend the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan, changing the designation for the Cannery Village area from a mixture of "Recreational and Marine Commercial" and "General Industry" uses to "Recreational and Marine Commercial" uses on the bayfront sites, "Retail and Service Commercial" uses in the area northerly of 29th Street between Newport Boulevard and Villa Way, and a mixture of "Retail and Service Commercial" and "General Industry" uses for the remainder of the area. It is further proposed to change the designation for the McFadden Square area from "Recreational and Marine Commercial" to "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. Those existing areas designated for "Two - family Residential" and "Multi - Family Residential" uses are to remain unchanged. rM1 B. Initiation of Amendment No. 8 (A) to the City of Newnnrt Beach Certified Local Coastal Program. Land Use Plan Request to amend the Local Coastal Program, Land Use • Plan, changing the designation of the non - bayfront sites from "Recreational and Marine Commercial" to "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. It is further proposed to change the designation for the McFadden -12- MINUTES INDEX Item No.6 GPA 86 -1(A) I Approved Amend. No. 8 I Approved Amend. No. 629 Continued to 2 -20 -86 1AMISSI0NERS February 6, 1986 X C o 0 M a y _ ti L m Z C M y m Z c Z w o T. o 0 z 9 m z a= m j City of Newport Beach Square area from "Recreational and Marine Commercial" to "Retail and Service Commercial" uses. Those existing areas designated for "Two- family Residential" and "Multi - Family Residential" uses are to remain un- changed. Amendments will also be required to Land Use Plan Maps No. 3, 8, and 9. ! C. Amendment No. 629 (Public Hearing) Request to consider amending Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, adding Chapter 20.63, the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan, and amend- ing Districting Maps, Nos., 3, 8, and 9, deleting the existing zoning districts and adding the S -P desig- nation; and the acceptance of an environmental docu- ment. LOCATION: Area generally bounded by 32nd Street on the north; the Rhine Channel on the east; 19th Street on the south; and West Ocean Front, 24th Street and west Balboa Boulevard on the west. ZONE: From C -1, C -1 -H, C -O -Z, M -1, U, R -2, R -3, and R -4 to SP -6. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator, presented background information regarding the City's original General Plan designations, the development of the Land Use Plan and the Local Coastal Program, the existing zoning designations, and the preparation of the Specific Area Plan for Cannery Village /McFadden Square. Pat Mann, Planning Consultant, and retained by the City to work with the Ad Hoc Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Area Plan Committee and staff in preparation of the Specific Area Plan, presented the basic concept of the Land Use Plan to the Planning Commission. He advised that the focus of activity in Cannery Village is a specialty retail core bounded by Newport • Boulevard, Villa Way, 32nd Street and 29th Street. He said that the purpose of this specialty retail area would be to provide a pedestrian oriented retail core -13- MINUTES INDEX WWSSIONERS February 6, 1986 A x C o f a v = _ r v v z C= V' o r 0 0 Z M Z'D z T m I City of Newport Beach served by new parking structures within the area. Mr. Mann pointed out that pedestrian and landscape improvements would be provided. He cited that adjacent to the specialty retail area there would be a mix of retail, service, and industrial uses that would provide the transition between the specialty retail core and the marine and visitor - serving commercial uses along the bayfront in Cannery Village. Mr. Mann.cited that the McFadden Square proposal is to continue retail uses oriented toward beach use, to provide public improvements, and maintenance that would upgrade the quality of the area, and additional parking. Mr. Mann recommended the 'development of design standards and to develop guidelines which would enhance the character and interest of the area, such as special architectural features. In reference to the circulation and parking changes, Mr. Mann recommended two parking structures to provide additional parking for the retail service core in Cannery Village and an additional parking structure to support the McFadden Square area; to widen Newport Boulevard, to widen Villa Way in order to provide two -way traffic, and the realignment of the Newport Boulevard - Balboa Boulevard intersection. Mr. Mann stated that the Specific Area Plan for Cannery Village/McFadden Square includes pedestrian pathways and plazas, public improvements throughout the area, and additional landscaping. He commented that entry signs will be provided in order to designate the area from other others. Mr. Mann cited that the recommended public improvements would include underground utilities, relocation of restrooms at the Newport Pier, and pedestrian improvements to be provided for the proposed McFadden Square promenade. He advised that the public improvements would be implemented through a variety of techniques: through the City's General Fund; through gas funds; development fees; through a local District that would implement some of the improvements; and through dedications as development takes place. Chris Gustin, Senior Planner, described the Development Standards that have been suggested by staff. Mr. Gustin -14- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS I February 6, 1986 MINUTES Beach INDEX explained that staff is recommending that residential areas within Cannery Village/McFadden Square be standardized to 5 foot front yard setbacks. Mr. Gustin stated that the current parking standards require hotels, motels,, and bed and breakfast require one parking space for each two rooms, and staff is proposing one parking space for each room in hotels, motels, and bed and breakfasts. He further stated that staff will require adequate on -site parking for any new uses, proposed. Mr. Gustin cited that currently the parking requirements for the hotel public assembly area is one parking space for each five occupants, and that, staff is recommending one parking space for each three occupants. He said that requested in -lieu fees will require that a use permit be approved by the Planning Commission in order to control the number of parking spaces utilized. Mr. Gustin explained the draft plan provides that the • proposed total gross floor area permitted in commercial districts is 1.0 times the site area with two exceptions: the mixed commercial /residential concept would be 1.5 times the site area, with .75 times the site area permitted for the commercial use and .75 times the site area permitted for the residential use; and the Transferrable Development Rights whereby all or a portion of the required off - street parking would be on a separate lot, the maximum floor area ratio would be 2.0 times the site area. Mr. Gustin stated that the height limit in the commercial district will remain at 26 feet with a maximum height of 35 feet permitted upon securing a use permit. Mr. Gustin explained that a five foot front yard setback will be required for all commercial development from 20th Street through 32nd Street, Lafayette Avenue, and Newport Boulevard, with the exception of the lots on the "islands "; that 50% of the five foot front yard setback be landscaped; that the Newport Boulevard "islands" shall maintain a front setback of 2.5 feet; side yard setback areas are not required in commercial districts; a minimum setback area of ten feet shall be • maintained from any bulkhead for bayfront developments. -15- x x c o � f a v m y v r v z c m y m z m o z z r o x v m 0 M a MO's City of Z a z a z r m Beach INDEX explained that staff is recommending that residential areas within Cannery Village/McFadden Square be standardized to 5 foot front yard setbacks. Mr. Gustin stated that the current parking standards require hotels, motels,, and bed and breakfast require one parking space for each two rooms, and staff is proposing one parking space for each room in hotels, motels, and bed and breakfasts. He further stated that staff will require adequate on -site parking for any new uses, proposed. Mr. Gustin cited that currently the parking requirements for the hotel public assembly area is one parking space for each five occupants, and that, staff is recommending one parking space for each three occupants. He said that requested in -lieu fees will require that a use permit be approved by the Planning Commission in order to control the number of parking spaces utilized. Mr. Gustin explained the draft plan provides that the • proposed total gross floor area permitted in commercial districts is 1.0 times the site area with two exceptions: the mixed commercial /residential concept would be 1.5 times the site area, with .75 times the site area permitted for the commercial use and .75 times the site area permitted for the residential use; and the Transferrable Development Rights whereby all or a portion of the required off - street parking would be on a separate lot, the maximum floor area ratio would be 2.0 times the site area. Mr. Gustin stated that the height limit in the commercial district will remain at 26 feet with a maximum height of 35 feet permitted upon securing a use permit. Mr. Gustin explained that a five foot front yard setback will be required for all commercial development from 20th Street through 32nd Street, Lafayette Avenue, and Newport Boulevard, with the exception of the lots on the "islands "; that 50% of the five foot front yard setback be landscaped; that the Newport Boulevard "islands" shall maintain a front setback of 2.5 feet; side yard setback areas are not required in commercial districts; a minimum setback area of ten feet shall be • maintained from any bulkhead for bayfront developments. -15- COMMISSIONERS xx C February 6, 1986 t Beach Mr. Gustin cited that the sign standards will require a prohibition against roof signs; pole signs require a frontage of 100 feet per site; and monument signs are limited to a maximum of 3 feet in height. Mr. Gustin stated that the Draft Specific Area Plan includes a requirement for a pump out facility for boat holding tanks on all waterfront properties that have any public water oriented use facilities such as marinas and service stations. He stated that staff is recommending vertical and lateral public access requirements to the bayfront. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding off -site parking, Mr. Gustin replied that the off -site parking should be within 300 feet or a reasonable distance from the building or structure. Chairman Person stated his concern regarding the flow is of traffic on the ingress /egress from the Newport Boulevard "islands ". Mr. Joe Foust, Traffic Consultant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Foust explained the impact of traffic capacity from the driveways, parking, and intersections. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person regarding the restriping of Newport Boulevard, Mr. Foust described the proposed plan to provide a third outbound lane at peak periods, and the permanent and temporary curbside parking. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Mann reappeared before the Planning Commission, stating that the proposed plan includes one parking structure each in Cannery Village and McFadden Square, and that the proposed 6 lot site on 30th Street in Cannery Village would be a suitable area for the parking structure. He suggested a parking structure to accommodate 200 to 250 parking spaces. Mr. Hewicker commented that based on 16,740 square feet of parking area, one parking space for each 300 square feet, a surface parking area would accommodate 55 automobiles or a three level parking facility would accommodate 165 automobiles. Commissioner Goff asked how the Specific Area Plan proposes the funding of public improvements, specifically the parking structures. Mr. Hewicker replied that staff is not making recommendations as to -16- MINUTES INDEX O 2 C m y m Z [C 9 Z S W Z K 0 0 2 o�City MM I M3 m ) '" r of Z S 2 Z M", February 6, 1986 t Beach Mr. Gustin cited that the sign standards will require a prohibition against roof signs; pole signs require a frontage of 100 feet per site; and monument signs are limited to a maximum of 3 feet in height. Mr. Gustin stated that the Draft Specific Area Plan includes a requirement for a pump out facility for boat holding tanks on all waterfront properties that have any public water oriented use facilities such as marinas and service stations. He stated that staff is recommending vertical and lateral public access requirements to the bayfront. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding off -site parking, Mr. Gustin replied that the off -site parking should be within 300 feet or a reasonable distance from the building or structure. Chairman Person stated his concern regarding the flow is of traffic on the ingress /egress from the Newport Boulevard "islands ". Mr. Joe Foust, Traffic Consultant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Foust explained the impact of traffic capacity from the driveways, parking, and intersections. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person regarding the restriping of Newport Boulevard, Mr. Foust described the proposed plan to provide a third outbound lane at peak periods, and the permanent and temporary curbside parking. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Mann reappeared before the Planning Commission, stating that the proposed plan includes one parking structure each in Cannery Village and McFadden Square, and that the proposed 6 lot site on 30th Street in Cannery Village would be a suitable area for the parking structure. He suggested a parking structure to accommodate 200 to 250 parking spaces. Mr. Hewicker commented that based on 16,740 square feet of parking area, one parking space for each 300 square feet, a surface parking area would accommodate 55 automobiles or a three level parking facility would accommodate 165 automobiles. Commissioner Goff asked how the Specific Area Plan proposes the funding of public improvements, specifically the parking structures. Mr. Hewicker replied that staff is not making recommendations as to -16- MINUTES INDEX how the public improvements will be funded, that the funding will be left to the discretion of the City Council and the Planning Commission. Mr. Hewicker suggested that a portion of the proposed parking area be available at the time of development. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney, confirmed that Cannery Village parking structure in -lieu parking fees could be segregated from other areas of Newport Beach. Commissioner Goff stated his concern for a time - table, and he asked if such a time -table would be possible. Mr. Hewicker replied that a time -table is possible in order to establish priorities, and in order to attempt to meet realistic time frames. February 6, 1986 COMMISSIONERS In response to questions posed by Commissioner F 0 c o � Eichenhofer, Mr. Gustin summarized the three scenarios f s v = 2 c m D m z in the traffic analyses land area of the existing c z W o r 0 0 9== T i City of Newport Beach zoning district in the Cannery Village/McFadden Square how the public improvements will be funded, that the funding will be left to the discretion of the City Council and the Planning Commission. Mr. Hewicker suggested that a portion of the proposed parking area be available at the time of development. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney, confirmed that Cannery Village parking structure in -lieu parking fees could be segregated from other areas of Newport Beach. Commissioner Goff stated his concern for a time - table, and he asked if such a time -table would be possible. Mr. Hewicker replied that a time -table is possible in order to establish priorities, and in order to attempt to meet realistic time frames. -17- MINUTES INDEX In response to questions posed by Commissioner Eichenhofer, Mr. Gustin summarized the three scenarios in the traffic analyses land area of the existing zoning district in the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area: that currently there is a total of 682,189 • square feet of commercial development within the Cannery Village and McFadden Square area, the existing zoning would permit a total of 2,909,976 square feet of commercial development resulting in an increase of 58,772 vehicle trips per day, that 313 dwelling units are permitted of which there are currently 202 dwelling units, resulting in an additional 111 dwelling units. Under the "Maximum Development" scenario, a total of 1,089,758 square feet of commercial uses would be permitted but this is considered unattainable due to a variety of physical constraints, such as on -site parking standards, the height limit, and existing patterns of development. Under the "Trend Growth" scenario which is the more realistic level of development and is achievable, a total of 670,610 square feet of commercial development is anticipated. This is less than the existing square footage of 682,189 square feet. He explained that there will be a reduction of trips generated in the area if all of the lots are developed as anticipated, the reason being that second floor residential units generate substantially less traffic than the commercial uses. Mr. Gustin also cited that existing buildings do not provide any on -site, parking; however, as the area is converted to new uses all of the parking will be on -site parking which will reduce the total development in the area. -17- MINUTES INDEX • February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach In response to Chairman Person's question regarding why second floor dwelling units are prohibited on bayfront property but allowed on inside property, Mr. Lenard replied that to keep the Specific Area Plan in accordance with the Local Coastal Program, and the Coastal Commission's resistence of any residential building on the bayfront, staff did not propose any residential on the bayfront. Discussion followed regarding the dominent use of upper floor residential units compared to lower floor commercial use, public access, and public walkway on bayfront property. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Henry K. Swenerton, 1106 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Swenerton advised that he was active as a private citizen during the draft of the proposed Specific Area Plan. He listed specific concerns to be addressed by the City for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area: the subject area is in the older part of Newport Beach; the subject area is not a Planned Community and was not designed for underground utilities; flooding in the streets of Cannery Village; improper land use; substandard construction and poorly designed streets; tourist traffic with related police and nuisance problems; Balboa Peninsula never enjoyed the benefits of renewal; sewers and water lines through Balboa Peninsula are inadequate. Mr. Swenerton stated his objections to Councilman Strauss' newspaper interview regarding the Specific Area Plan. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Swenerton opined that flooding problems in the area will have to be satisifed before underground utilities can be implemented. Mr. Joe Rosener, 125 Via Venezia, appeared before the Planning Commission stating his opposition to the Specific Area Plan. He said that he opposes the proposed funding that will be required in order to support the Specific Area Plan, and that the monies could be used in a totally different fashion within the City. He further stated his concern regarding the impact of the intensification in the area. Mr. Rosener commented that he has a concern regarding how specific funds will be obtained. -18- MINUTES INDEX xx �e r n Z C m > m Z m A Z x O Z C 2 Z p; 0 0 Z x O m a 0 2 y Z m m • February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach In response to Chairman Person's question regarding why second floor dwelling units are prohibited on bayfront property but allowed on inside property, Mr. Lenard replied that to keep the Specific Area Plan in accordance with the Local Coastal Program, and the Coastal Commission's resistence of any residential building on the bayfront, staff did not propose any residential on the bayfront. Discussion followed regarding the dominent use of upper floor residential units compared to lower floor commercial use, public access, and public walkway on bayfront property. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Henry K. Swenerton, 1106 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Swenerton advised that he was active as a private citizen during the draft of the proposed Specific Area Plan. He listed specific concerns to be addressed by the City for the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area: the subject area is in the older part of Newport Beach; the subject area is not a Planned Community and was not designed for underground utilities; flooding in the streets of Cannery Village; improper land use; substandard construction and poorly designed streets; tourist traffic with related police and nuisance problems; Balboa Peninsula never enjoyed the benefits of renewal; sewers and water lines through Balboa Peninsula are inadequate. Mr. Swenerton stated his objections to Councilman Strauss' newspaper interview regarding the Specific Area Plan. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Swenerton opined that flooding problems in the area will have to be satisifed before underground utilities can be implemented. Mr. Joe Rosener, 125 Via Venezia, appeared before the Planning Commission stating his opposition to the Specific Area Plan. He said that he opposes the proposed funding that will be required in order to support the Specific Area Plan, and that the monies could be used in a totally different fashion within the City. He further stated his concern regarding the impact of the intensification in the area. Mr. Rosener commented that he has a concern regarding how specific funds will be obtained. -18- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 T_;o z z n Z Z a m I City of Newport Beach C z N O r O O In response to a question posed by Chairman Person regarding phasing of the Specific Area Plan, Mr. Gustin replied that curbs, gutters and sidewalks in Cannery Village are a top priority and should be considered immediately, and the parking structure should be looked at within one or two years, and that the long term development will be from ten years to fifteen years. Mr. Don Regan, 924 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission, stating his support of the Specific Area Plan and he cited the flooding in the area after a rain. He opined that the opposition to the Specific Area Plan is only parochial to the residents of Lido Isle. Mr. Chris Kuhta, 120 - 27th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in favor of the Specific Area Plan with the exception of the Newport Boulevard "islands ". Mr. Kuhta opined that there may not be an increase of intensification in the area, and that Cannery Village/MCFadden Square are the "roots" of Newport Beach. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander, Mr. KuMa stated that his opposition to the removal of the "islands" is because the private property owners have the right to remain on the "islands ", and what is the purpose of the traffic flow if the traffic is bottle- necked at the Arches? Mr. Gustin responded that the purpose of removing the "islands" is to allow three lanes of travel in each direction side by side. Chairman Person commented that the removal of the "islands" does not increase the flow of traffic or assist the flow of traffic. Mr. Willis Longyear, 3355 Via Lido, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Longyear stated that Lido Isle residents are not against the Specific Area Plan. He opined that the funds should be spent where improvements are needed for sidewalks and streets, specifically to control flooding on Balboa Peninsula. He opposes the possibility of a hotel in the area and the amount of traffic that could be generated from hotel traffic. Mr. Longyear questioned the need for added retail space, the possibility of an increase in rent, and that local residents will be moving out of the area. • I ( I I I I Ms. Marie France Lefebvre, 2112 East Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Lefebvre opined that creating businesses will create traffic. -19- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 T x C o � F a v = 2 C m a m Z z�= T 1 Z 9 I City of Newport Beach C Z H o r 0 0 MINUTES Ms. Lefebvre opined that the proposed parking structure would provide 160 parking spaces, 30 parking spaces will belong to the Assistance League, a balance of 130 parking spaces for the proposed development. She asked about the previously proposed structure on City land that would have provided for 300 automobiles? Mr. Hewicker and Ms. Lefebvre discussed the possibility of a parking structure built on City owned property or a combination of City owned property and private property. Mr. Hewicker advised Ms. Lefebvre that there is currently a discussion between the City Council Ad Hoc Parking Committee and the Assistance League regarding an agreement for a proposed parking structure, and depending upon the outcome of the current discussion, there could be the need to explore a parking structure closer to City Hall. I ( I I I I Mr. Tom Orlando, Balboa Coves, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the West Newport Beach Association. Mr. Orlando opined that the McFadden Square area needs improving and that the Specific Area Plan is the first step in that direction. Ms. Dorothy Doan, 633 Lido Park Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission as a property owner in Newport Beach and a developer/builder. Ms. Doan strongly supported the Specific Area Plan, specifically she pointed out the deferred maintenance and deterioration in the Cannery Village/McFadden Square area, and she opined that the City has the opportunity to reverse the situation. -20- Mr. William Blurock, 2300 Newport Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission as an architect and a landowner in the McFadden Square area. He stated his support of the Specific Area Plan, and he commented that the improvements would be for the citizens of Newport Beach. He cited that the Arches Bridge should be a separate project; that there is a need to improve traffic patterns; and that aesthetics and landscaping are necessary. Mr. Blurock suggested how individuals can support the funding: Parking District or by payment of in -lieu fees at a proper price based upon the value of the land and rented on that basis; or Assessment District. Relating to zoning, Mr. Blucrock pointed out that 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 density can be established piecemeal, but not throughout the area. He • further stated that the draft plan reduces intensity to a floor area ratio of 1.0 and the City should provide public improvements as compensation for this reduction in permitted intensity of use. -20- COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 Beach Ms. Nancy Kriz, 128 Via Ithaca, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Kriz recommended that McFadden Square be considered as a historical restored area, and she further commented upon the charm and ambiance of McFadden Square. . In response to questions posed by Ms. Kriz regarding the proposed zoning, Mr. Gustin described the proposed zoning of the Specific Area Plan, and in summary, he stated that one of the attempts of the Specific Area Plan is that there will be a consistency between the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan and zoning. The Planning Commission recessed at 10:20 p.m. and reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Mr. Paul Michalzcyk, 2414 Newport Boulevard, owner of Balboa Boat Yard, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Michalzcyk stated his concerns regarding the marine industry in Newport Beach: boat yards are going out of business; service organizations supporting the marine industry are going out of business; the City is not doing much to support the marine industry; is the McFadden Square property going to escalate in value, and thus making the property completely out of reach for the small business person? In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Michalzcyk opined that the City has a responsibility to support the marine business, that in other communities the public sector has set aside certain areas for shipyards for shipbuilding activities for the marine industry, and will support the industry with public lands that are leased back to owner- operators. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Michalzcyk replied that the main cause that the marine industry cannot survive in the area is because the property values have escalated and that the rent has increased. Commissioner Goff referred to the proposed recreational and marine - commercial zoning in the bayfront area, and he opined that to some extent the aforementioned concerns would establish permitted uses which would relate to the rent and sales price of the property. Mr. Lenard replied that the incentive use program provides a program whereby some of the more • profitable uses are allowed in conjunction with incentive uses in order to provide a mechanism to encourage those types of activities along the bayfront. -21- MINUTES xx c o � z � v � v m 2 c m y m 2 a s a z r c 0 IAm o mZoM City of 2 D z y z T m February 6, 1986 Beach Ms. Nancy Kriz, 128 Via Ithaca, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Kriz recommended that McFadden Square be considered as a historical restored area, and she further commented upon the charm and ambiance of McFadden Square. . In response to questions posed by Ms. Kriz regarding the proposed zoning, Mr. Gustin described the proposed zoning of the Specific Area Plan, and in summary, he stated that one of the attempts of the Specific Area Plan is that there will be a consistency between the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan and zoning. The Planning Commission recessed at 10:20 p.m. and reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Mr. Paul Michalzcyk, 2414 Newport Boulevard, owner of Balboa Boat Yard, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Michalzcyk stated his concerns regarding the marine industry in Newport Beach: boat yards are going out of business; service organizations supporting the marine industry are going out of business; the City is not doing much to support the marine industry; is the McFadden Square property going to escalate in value, and thus making the property completely out of reach for the small business person? In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Michalzcyk opined that the City has a responsibility to support the marine business, that in other communities the public sector has set aside certain areas for shipyards for shipbuilding activities for the marine industry, and will support the industry with public lands that are leased back to owner- operators. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Michalzcyk replied that the main cause that the marine industry cannot survive in the area is because the property values have escalated and that the rent has increased. Commissioner Goff referred to the proposed recreational and marine - commercial zoning in the bayfront area, and he opined that to some extent the aforementioned concerns would establish permitted uses which would relate to the rent and sales price of the property. Mr. Lenard replied that the incentive use program provides a program whereby some of the more • profitable uses are allowed in conjunction with incentive uses in order to provide a mechanism to encourage those types of activities along the bayfront. -21- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach He cited that the incentive uses do not determine how much rent is actually to be charged a tenant but they do create a mixed use concept along the bayfront which essentially forces the property owner to keep his non - incentive use in operation to provide an incentive use on =site. Commissioner Goff suggested that the Specific Area Plan look at the previously stated issue very carefully. Mr. Paul Michalzcyk reappeared before the Planning Commission and described how the shipyard business cannot mix with office buildings on adjoining property. Chairman Person agreed that the boat yard business should be encouraged to remain in the area. Mr. Hewicker asked Mr. Michalzcyk, who operates a boat yard and leases the property, if he was suggesting establishment of zoned private property where the boat yard can operate in a protected environment where the boat yard would not be encroached upon by other uses • competing for waterfront sites such as restaurants, or marine related offices. Mr. Michalzcyk replied that the City could utilize existing property, on public land, to create a marine center that would have a shipyard or marine support facilities. Mr. William Blurock reappeared before the Planning Commission by opposing the previous recommendation stated by Mr. Michalzcyk and suggested that the City not subsidize boat yards to compete with private boat yards, that the boat maintenance has changed in the past few years, that the economics of the industry will balance out, and that the incentive use program is a good one. MINUTES 7 X E o 0 F y 9> v m Z C m D m Z C 2 to p; 0 0 0 M m o m D m 2 9 2 A Z M m m February 6, 1986 of Newport Beach He cited that the incentive uses do not determine how much rent is actually to be charged a tenant but they do create a mixed use concept along the bayfront which essentially forces the property owner to keep his non - incentive use in operation to provide an incentive use on =site. Commissioner Goff suggested that the Specific Area Plan look at the previously stated issue very carefully. Mr. Paul Michalzcyk reappeared before the Planning Commission and described how the shipyard business cannot mix with office buildings on adjoining property. Chairman Person agreed that the boat yard business should be encouraged to remain in the area. Mr. Hewicker asked Mr. Michalzcyk, who operates a boat yard and leases the property, if he was suggesting establishment of zoned private property where the boat yard can operate in a protected environment where the boat yard would not be encroached upon by other uses • competing for waterfront sites such as restaurants, or marine related offices. Mr. Michalzcyk replied that the City could utilize existing property, on public land, to create a marine center that would have a shipyard or marine support facilities. Mr. William Blurock reappeared before the Planning Commission by opposing the previous recommendation stated by Mr. Michalzcyk and suggested that the City not subsidize boat yards to compete with private boat yards, that the boat maintenance has changed in the past few years, that the economics of the industry will balance out, and that the incentive use program is a good one. MINUTES -22- The Planning Commission complimented staff, Mr. Mann and the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Ad Hoc Committee for a thorough report. Commissioner Winburn cited that the public hearing has pointed out the concerns that the citizens have regarding infra structure. Commissioner Winburn asked staff to provide a specific funding program, a time -table for the proposed projects, and funding for the parking structure prior to the next public hearing. Chairman Person commented that he would like to eliminate tandem parking spaces, and one way to rid of the tandem parking would be to utilize the parking spaces within a • parking structure, and he further opined that financing of the parking structure could be determined as the parking structure is being developed. -22- February 6, 1986 MINUTES x Item No.7 Proposed General (GPA 86- 1)(Discussion) IGPA 86 -1 Consideration of initiation of Amendments to the Land Approved Use and Housing Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan. a. Cannery Village/McFadden Square (City of Newport a F f x v = + v c m Z c m y m z CZ V. 0 ;0o M a z _ m City f Newport Beach Y p ROLL CALL b. 4881 Birch Street (Plaza de Cafes) INDEX Motion (Von der Ahe) • x Motion was made to recommend to the City Council the Ayes x x x x x x initiation of General Plan Amendment 86 -1(A), recommend d. 1177 Camelback Street (AT &T Storage Yard) Absent x to the City Council the initiation of Amendment No. e. SE corner, Ford Rd./MacArthur Blvd.(Freeway 8(A) to the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and Reservation East) (The Irvine Company) to continue the public hearing to the Planning f. 4656 -4678 Campus Drive (Birtcher Building) Commission meeting of February 20, 1986. Motion voted (Sirtcher) on, MOTION CARRIED. x Item No.7 Proposed General (GPA 86- 1)(Discussion) IGPA 86 -1 Consideration of initiation of Amendments to the Land Approved Use and Housing Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan. a. Cannery Village/McFadden Square (City of Newport An amendment to the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, is also required for the Cannery village /McFadden Square and the Santa Ana Heights proposals. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that in addition to the proposed General Plan Amendments requested for initiation, staff anticipates an Amendment to the Koll Center Planned Community District which does not require an Amendment to the City's General Plan. The Planned Community Amendments, when • combined with the General Plan Initiation requests, would add approximately 2.1 million square feet of development to the area north of Bristol Street, and as a result of the magnitude being requested, Mr. Hewicker -23- Beach) b. 4881 Birch Street (Plaza de Cafes) (Von der Ahe) • c. 3601 Jamboree Road (sporting House) (Gordon Hall Corporation) d. 1177 Camelback Street (AT &T Storage Yard) (The Irvine Company) e. SE corner, Ford Rd./MacArthur Blvd.(Freeway Reservation East) (The Irvine Company) f. 4656 -4678 Campus Drive (Birtcher Building) (Sirtcher) g. Santa Ana Heights (City of Newport Beach) (Pre- Annexation) h. Housing Element (City of Newport Beach) An amendment to the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, is also required for the Cannery village /McFadden Square and the Santa Ana Heights proposals. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that in addition to the proposed General Plan Amendments requested for initiation, staff anticipates an Amendment to the Koll Center Planned Community District which does not require an Amendment to the City's General Plan. The Planned Community Amendments, when • combined with the General Plan Initiation requests, would add approximately 2.1 million square feet of development to the area north of Bristol Street, and as a result of the magnitude being requested, Mr. Hewicker -23- COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 7c z Mr. Hewicker added that the aforementioned c O O x recommendation be done in conjunction with the I C c m y m z c z 0 O r o o 9 z x= m m 1 City of Newport Beach suggested that the City consider the area by the Airport north of Bristol as a whole. The result anticipated would be overall intensity limitations with a program for allocation of additional square footage among property owners. He said that in order to accomplish this, staff has suggested that there be some kind of comprehensive study undertaken by the City, similar in scope to the study that has been undertaken with respect to the expansion of Newport Center, utilizing much of the same traffic information which has been generated this past year as a result of the Newport Center General Plan Amendment, to undertake a study which would take approximately one year to complete and cost in the neighborhood of $150,000.00 to $200,000.00. Mr. Hewicker explained that the City is processing an Amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan and an Environmental Document for the project; and that because time is running on the Environmental Document, one of the possible courses of action while the study is underway, would be to certify the EIR as being adequate and complete but not take final action as far as the Amendment to the Planned Community. • I I I Ij{ I I I I In response to questions posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding mitigation measures, Mr. Hewicker replied that the project proponet is asking for -24- MINUTES INDEX Mr. Hewicker added that the aforementioned recommendation be done in conjunction with the initiation of the subject General Plan Amendments, and he suggested not to act upon any of the requests north of Bristol Street until the City has some of the answers. Mr. Hewicker stated that one application currently underway is for the Bank of America site on MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Place, where the staff is preparing an Environmental Document. He cited that the law requires an environmental document to be acted upon within one year from the time that the application is initiated, and that there is a possibility that between now and the time of the completed study of the area north of Bristol, that the Planning Commission may have to take some type of action at least on the Environmental portion of the project. He suggested that there is a possibility that the City could certify the EIR but not necessarily act upon the Proposal. Mr. Hewicker explained that the City is processing an Amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan and an Environmental Document for the project; and that because time is running on the Environmental Document, one of the possible courses of action while the study is underway, would be to certify the EIR as being adequate and complete but not take final action as far as the Amendment to the Planned Community. • I I I Ij{ I I I I In response to questions posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding mitigation measures, Mr. Hewicker replied that the project proponet is asking for -24- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS February 6, 1986 MINUTES C x o z c m s m z D z r m City of Newport Beach C z N p; 0 0 A R LL CALL INDEX additional development rights on the project, and the City has to evaluate in terms of that proposal. He said that the City has not only to determine what is asked for but what could happen in terms of growth inducing impacts as far as other property owners. He added that the City has to take into consideration the knowledge the City has regarding other projects that are being requested or coming up. Discussion followed regarding the implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendments, and that 4881 Birch Street (Plaza de Cafes) , 3601 Jamboree Road (Sporting House), and 4656 -4678 Campus Drive (Birtcher Building). Motion x Motion was made to initiate.General Plan 'Amendment (GPA Ayes x x x x x x 86 -1) (a. through h.) to recommend to City Council that Absent x all of the requests for general plan amendments be initiated including a program approach to the airport area projects. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. • a * x A D J O U R N M E N T: 11:08 P.M. Adjournment PAT EICHENHOFER, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -25-