Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/22/1990COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: February 22, 1990 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX All Present All Commissioners were present. s s s EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney s : : William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of February 8. 1990: Minutes of 2 -8 -90 Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve the February 8, 1990, Ayes Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Abstain s s s Public Comments: Public No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on Comments non - agenda items. Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Agenda Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, February 16, 1990, in front of City Hall. COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES o `S i 'p��. d�� °' �� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Request for Continuances: Request for James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that Item No. 3, Continuance General Plan Amendment No. 89 -2 (D), Amendment No. 688, and Tentative Map of Tract No. 14120, Todd Schooler and Steve McCluer, applicants, property located at 1900 West Balboa Boulevard, be continued to the March 8, 1990, Planning Commission meeting to allow staff additional time to review the application. Motion Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3 to the All Ayes March 8, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3374 (Public Hearine) Item No.I Request to permit the establishment of a facility that specializes UP3374 in the sales, service and installation of automobile cellular phones on property located in the M -1 -A District. Approved LOCATION: Lot 46, Tract No. 3201, located at 4023 Birch Street, on .the northwesterly side of Birch Street, between Dove Street and Quail Street, across Birch Street from the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: M -1 -A APPLICANT: Pack -Cell, Newport Beach OWNER: George Souleles, Irvine The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Shiram Vosough, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards with regard to letters from the Code Enforcement Division notifying i -2- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the applicant to apply for a use permit at the subject location, Mr. Vosough explained that he did not understand that the use permit was not transferable from his previous location at 4001 Birch Street to the subject location. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3374 subject to the - All Ayes findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Edwards supported the motion; however, he . explained that Condition No. 9 permits the Planning Commission to add or modify conditions of approval to the use permit if it is determined that the operation is detrimental to the community. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposed application is support service in nature and not an intensification of use of the existing structure, and as such, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate parking exists on -site for the proposed development. 3. That the establishment of the subject business will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3374 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 neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -3 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES & \\I\� \ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plans, except as noted below. 2. That should the parking lot require restriping, the parking lot layout shall be prepared and the striping shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to the continuation of the subject business. 3. That all installation, testing and demonstration automotive sound, communications and alarm systems shall be conducted within the building and no outdoor display shall be permitted. 4. That the existing as -built identification sign belonging to the subject facility shall obtain a building permit issued by • the Building and Planning Departments in conformance with the Sign Ordinance of the Municipal Code. 5. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from Birch Street and adjoining properties. 6. That no outdoor sound system shall be utilized on -site. 7. That all employees shall park on -site at all times. 8. That a minimum of 12 parking spaces shall be provided in the parking lot for the subject facility. 9. That the Planning Commission may add 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 causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. S -4 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990 MI N UT ES O CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 10. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Use Permit No. 3376 (Public Hearine) Item No.2 Request to establish a church facility including a 100± seat UP3376 sanctuary, a reception room and kitchen, administrative offices, bathrooms, and miscellaneous storage and service preparation Approved areas within an existing commercial building located in the C -N- H District. LOCATION: Lots 5 and 6 and a portion of Lot 7, Tract . No. 4225, located at 1723 Westcliff Drive, on the southwesterly side of Westcliff Drive, between Irvine Avenue and Dover Drive, in the Westcliff area. ZONE: C -N -H APPLICANT: St. Matthew's Traditional Episcopal Church, Corona del Mar OWNER: Westcliff Center Associates, Newport Beach Commissioner Pers6n and James Hewicker, Planting Director, discussed the provision that allows a church in a commercial district as long as adequate parking is provided. Commissioner Glover and Commissioner Edwards discussed their concerns with Don Webb, City Engineer, regarding the traffic congestion that could be created by the subject church and St. Andrew's Church on Sunday mornings. Don Webb, City Engineer, explained that based on the size of the church's congregation there would not be an impact of traffic on Westcliff Drive and 17th Street. • -5- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES O � d O A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. Commissioner Merrill stated that based on previous use permit applications that were not executed for the subject location, the site may not be a viable commercial area. Commissioner Debay expressed her support of the church based on the letter from St. Matthews Church to staff indicating that the congregation consists of an average of SO to 70 people per service, and the front of the church and parking access are on Sherington Place. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Steve Scarlett appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit Mr. Scarlett and Commissioner Merrill discussed the feasibility of limiting the size of wedding receptions for the purpose of providing adequate parking. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards regarding the location of the church. entrance and daytime parking spaces, Mr. Scarlett explained that the majority of the congregation will enter from Sherington Place on the basis that it is most convenient to egress /ingress from Irvine Avenue. Mr. Scarlett further explained that there is available parking for the small Bible Study class that meets weekdays during the lunch hour. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover regarding the Westcliff Drive address, Mr. Hewicker explained that all of the properties located on Sherington Place have Westcliff Drive addresses. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. * Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3376 subject to the Motion findings and conditions in Exhibit W. Commissioner Edwards requested a clarification of Condition No. 3 which states that no private school program shall be permitted 6 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES 1\' • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX without an amendment to this use permit. Mr. Hewicker replied that a day care facility would be included as a school program. All ayes Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate off- street parking and related vehicular circulation are provided in conjunction with the existing shopping center and proposed church facilities. 3. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3376 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 neighborhood, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from adjoining properties. 3. That no private school program shall be permitted on -site without approval of an amendment to this use permit application. 4. That any increase in the size of the sanctuary shall require an amendment to this use permit. 5. That all employees and parishioners shall park on -site. -7 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 6. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 7. That 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. A. General Plan Amendment No 89- 2(D)(Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan GPA 89 -21) and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan so as to change the land use designation of the subject property from "Retail and A688 Service Commercial" to "Multi - Family Residential ". TTM14120 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Continued AND to 3 -8 -90 B. Amendment No. 688 (Public Hearing) Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 9 so as to reclassify the subject property from SP -6 to SP -6 (MFR) and to establish on the Districting Map, 5 foot front yard setbacks on both the 19th Street and West Balboa Boulevard frontages of the subject property. AND C Tentative MaRof Tract No 14120 (Public Hearing) Request to subdivide two existing lots into a single lot for a five unit residential condominium development and related garages, located on property to he rezoned to SP -6 (MFR). COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 219, Section A, Newport Beach, located at 1900 West Balboa Boulevard, on the northeasterly comer of 19th Street and West Balboa Boulevard, in the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan. ZONE: SP -6 APPLICANTS: Todd Schooler and Steve McCluer, Newport Beach OWNER: William Tepper, Newport Beach ENGINEER: Alpine Consultants, Laguna Hills James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be . continued to the March 8, 1990, Planning Commission meeting to allow staff additional time to review the application. Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3 to the es March 8, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Amendment No. 698 (Public Hearing) Item No.4 Request to consider amending portions of Districting Maps No. A698 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, (81214) 32, 37, 46, 50, and 52. Specific properties on these Districting Maps are proposed for rezoning from their current zones of C- Approved O -H, C -1 -H, C -2, U, R -3, and R-4 to Multi- Family Residential (MFR). As part of this amendment, the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan will be amended to reflect the proposed zone changes. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager, explained that revised charts and maps were attached to the Supplemental Staff Report and distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES � �d O f0 A N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX public hearing. Mr. Lenard explained that the reductions in density and intensity of development adopted as part of the General Plan Amendment in October, 1988, are being implemented through this zone change. He explained that commercial density reductions and the R -2 and R -1 zone changes have already occurred, and the remaining multi- family residential parcels in the City are now being considered for zone changes to the Multi- Family Residential District. Mr. Lenard indicated that public notices concerning the proposed zone change were mailed to affected property owners, and that 150 telephone calls were received from property owners as a result of the public notice. Mr. Lenard explained the colored exhibit identifies the location of the zone changes, and the charts and maps attached to the staff report describe the affected blocks and individual lots. Mr. Lenard stated that an amendment to the MFR District will. be heard by the Planning Commission on March 8, 1990, to address the minimum lot size to construct a duplex. The proposed amendment to the MFR zone will allow for the construction of two units on lots of at least 2400 square feet in size. For development of more than two units, the density standards are established on the Districting Maps. Mr. Lenard explained that the reason for this change is because several subdivided lots currently developed with multi- family structures are not large enough to develop more than a single family dwelling. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Lenard replied that the Carnation Avenue and Seaview Avenue area in Corona del Mar would primarily be affected by said change. Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and Mr. Lenard regarding proposed amendments that will be coming to the Planning Commission concerning duplex and multi- family development. Commissioner Pers6n addressed the MFR Zone Change Chart that is attached to the Supplemental Staff Report, and he discussed with Mr. Lenard what is proposed for the 400 block of East Bay Avenue, the area is currently zoned R -3, lot sizes vary from 2,000 to 8,550, and the proposed density is 1,200 square feet for each lot. The future dwelling units allowed for this block would vary from 1.67 to 7.13. Mr. Lenard explained that there will be no change in the number of allowable dwelling units in • -1a COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES A \\ \' \ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the block. He further explained that blocks that were substantially committed to multi - family residential have remained multi - family in the General Plan even though there are lots that are too small to construct more than a single family dwelling. Mr. Hewicker stated that a property owner may be able to develop one large dwelling unit on the property in accordance with the MFR Standard. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, discussion ensued concerning State Laws that require consistency of the Circulation and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Robert Sprague, 101 Bayside Place, property owner with his brother of Carnation Cove Apartments located at 205 Carnation Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated . that his brother owns the property located at 207 Carnation Avenue. Mr. Sprague opposed the proposed amendment on the basis that the buildable area of the subject property would be considerably reduced because the slope of the property is greater than 2 to 1, and a portion of the property is submerged land. Commissioner Pers6n pointed out that 12 dwelling units exist at 205 Carnation Avenue and the staff report chart shows 25.08 units as the number of future dwelling units. Mr. Lenard indicated the adopted General Plan established a density of 2,178 square feet of land area per dwelling unit excluding slope areas greater than 2 to 1 and submerged land; however, a future revision to the MFR District would implement the provision of the General Plan concerning slope and submerged areas. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Lenard replied that the proposed revision to the MFR District would not permit 25 dwelling units at 205 Carnation Avenue assuming Mr. Sprague's comments regarding slope area were accurate. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy regarding the number of properties that would be affected by the foregoing revision concerning slope and submerged areas, Mr. Lenard replied there are several properties located in Corona del Mar that would be affected by the amendment to the MFR District. -11- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES db \\I\' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Sprague and Commissioner Pers6n discussed what portion of the 54,617 square foot lot could be considered buildable, and the size of the existing 12 units. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Sprague replied that he contemplated 30 to 40 units could be developed on the property. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay regarding unique lots, Mr. Lenard explained that the General Plan requires 2,178 square feet of land area per dwelling unit less any submerged lands or slopes greater than 2 to 1. Thd zoning regulations, when adopted, would require the same density standard as the General Plan without the ability to increase the number of units by discretionary action. Mr. Lenard further replied that a slope analysis is the only way to determine which portion of the Carnation Cove property contains slopes of 2 to 1, and submerged land area. To determine the permitted number of dwelling units, subtract the area of land or a slope of greater than 2 to 1 and the area of submerged lands from the total lot size. Then divide that number by 2178 to obtain the number of dwelling units. Mr. Lenard stated that subsequent to when the . General Plan was adopted, all of the projects have been required to conform with the density standard of the General Plan; however, property owners have been allowed to use the development standards of the existing zoning district. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Sprague replied that 40 to 50 percent of his property could be considered flat and not submerged. He explained that a gentle slope existing on a side of his property is buildable. Mr. Sprague objected to restricting the lot to only 12 allowable units because of the unusual characteristics of the property. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the MFR Zone Change Chart indicates that Mr. Sprague would be allowed up to 25 units inasmuch as there is no information pertaining to the slope and the submerged land. Mr. Lenard explained that 25 units would be the maximum number of units allowed assuming that the land is flat. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Lenard confirmed that Mr. Sprague's property is probably a . -12- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES � o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX coastal bluff with limits on excavation and development. Mr. Hewicker advised that many restrictions have been made by the Coastal Commission and the City subsequent to when 205 Carnation Avenue was originally developed. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover regarding the 'Future DU Allowed' category as indicated on the MFR Zone Change Chart, Mr. Lenard confirmed that the number of dwelling units as stated would not be adopted. The 'Future DU Allowed' column is only a guide to the possible number of units. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Hewicker explained that the City determines the number of dwelling units to be developed in an area based on the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Commissioner Pers6n addressed concerns that were expressed regarding density standards when the Planning Commission adopted the General Plan. Mr. John Sipple, 452 Seaward Road, Vice President of the Corolido Community Association, representing 24 property owners, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Sipple referred to the map designating the change from R -3 -B to MFR- B. He explained that the property owners dedicated 10 feet to construct Shorecrest Lane and an additional 5 feet to enable the residents to receive public services. Mr. Sipple indicated that the supplemental staff report revised the proposed density of the area to 1,770 square feet compared with 1,900 square feet as stated in the original staff report. Mr. Sipple suggested that a revision be made to consider zero setbacks for the Shorecrest Lane area. Mr. Sipple objected to the designated density of 1,770 square feet based on the average lot size of each property owner which is 5,386 square feet. He explained that the .33 additional guest parking space per unit in addition to the required 2 parking spaces per unit would increase the required parking spaces 37 percent. Mr. Sipple commented that 2 required parking spaces would be consistent with the Coastal Commission's requirements; however, .33 is not needed for guest parking and the property owners do not have that space available for additional parking. Mr..Sipple supported the .33 parking space requirement if a unit is reconstructed; however, he opposed • -13- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the requirement if a homeowner was sunply remodeling the unit. Mr. Sipple and Commissioner Pers6n discussed the notification to the property owners regarding the zoning reclassification. Mr. Sipple indicated that the majority of the homeowners in the Corolido Community Association are opposed to the MFR -B District until all of their concerns have been addressed, i.e.: setback requirements, the property owner's average lot size, and the .33 guest parking space. Commissioner Pers6n and Mr. Lenard discussed the feasibility of continuing the subject amendment until the property owners' concerns have been addressed. The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Commissioner Debay stated that the MFR Zone Change Chart in the Supplemental Staff Report was not corrected to show that • the proposed density on Seaward Road and Shorecrest Lane was changed from 1,900 square feet to 1,770 square feet, and the allowable future dwelling unit would change from 2.91 units to 3 units. Mr. Donald Bendetti, 188 Emerald Bay, Laguna Beach, appeared before the Planning Commission representing property located at 824 West 15th Street, Newport Terrace Mobile Home Park. Mr. Bendetti requested a clarification of the proposed change from the U -2178 MHP District to the MFR District. Mr. Lenard stated that there will be no change in the status of the Mobile Home Park, and the only future change would be if the mobile home overlay zone would be removed and the property would be developed under the new zone. Mr. Lenard clarified the zone change from U -2178 MHP, (mobile home overlay zone), to MFR 2178 (MHP). In response to a question posed by Mr. Bendetti, Mr. Lenard explained that the density will remain at 20 units per acre. Mr. Lou Vondyl, representing the Board of Directors for Newport Bay Towers and 49 homeowners, 310 Fernando, • -14- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES 0 ��.�. u CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Vondyl expressed the homeowners concerns regarding the appraising of legal nonconforming buildings damaged by catastrophic causes. Discussion ensued regarding what form of discretionary action the homeowners would take to reconstruct the building if the building were destroyed as a result of a catastrophic disaster. Mr. Lenard explained that the Supplemental Staff Report shows the Newport Bay Towers density to be the same as the existing number of units. He said the only change would be the Development Standards. Mr. Lenard explained that 90% damage of the appraised value allows the City to potentially approve buildings that are inconsistent with the Development Standards or density standards. Ms. Ellie Burns, 4208 and 4216 Patrice Road, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Burns opposed the MFR District. on the basis that the rezoning would limit development, and additional development standards would diminish the value of the property. She indicated the MFR District combines different areas of the City which should be subject to different density and • development standards. Mr. Barney Flamm, Long Beach, property owner at 869 - 875 ni 15th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Flamm addressed the number of units that could be developed on his property. He also indicated his concern that all of his parcels are not listed on the chart, and he requested a clarification of how the easements could be considered in the land calculation. Mr. Lenard replied that 9 units could be developed at 869 W. 15th Street, and easements are not deductible from the gross lot size. Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner, explained that more than one address was identified for the entire parcel in the Assessor's Parcel Records and only one address was selected to represent the parcel. Mr. Hewicker explained that there is a provision in the Zoning Code that does not allow additional units to be built as a result of combining parcels. Mr. Carlson indicated that two parcels - 869 - 875 15th Street and 871 - 15th Street are shown on the Assessor's Parcel Map. • -15- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INQEX Mr. Timothy Randall, Attorney on behalf of the Channel eef Community Association, 2525 Ocean Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Randall addressed his concerns regarding reconstruction after a catastrophic disaster that would destroy the building 100 %, and the property owners being able to meet the parking requirements in the MFR District. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Lenard explained that in the discretionary action, the City would review the project and existing parking regulations in the event of a 100% disaster. Mr. Michael Mack, 2524 Seaview Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the MFR District since the new zone would only permit a single family dwelling. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the, public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Commissioner Pers6n made a motion to approve adopt A.Ayes Resolution No. 1214, recommending that the City Council approve Amendment No. 698. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Request to appeal the decision of the Cif+ Traffic Engineer Discussion regarding the minimum driveway width on property located at Items 3430 -3438 Irvine Avenue. No. 1 Don Webb, City Engineer, stated that when the Building Permit plans were reviewed to convert a single family dwelling to. an 3430 -3438 office use on the subject property, it was noticed that the existing Irvine Ave driveway on Irvine Avenue is approximately 17 feet wide which is less than the required 24 foot wide standard driveway. Mr. sustained Webb stated that based on the Irvine Avenue traffic, the Staff's driveway should be widened to at least 24 feet which would Decision require the building to be cut back approximately three feet so there would be adequate ingress and egress. Mr. Webb distributed photographs of the site, wherein he pointed out that a power pole needs to be relocated and the driveway flared out for safety purposes. Mr. Webb indicated that the change from ,. -16- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX a residential use to a combination of residential and business use on the site would bring more activity to the driveway. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, `Mr. Webb explained that all access to several residential units and an existing garage at the back of the property is from Irvine Avenue. Mr. Webb commented that the front dwelling unit is being converted from a residential use to a commercial use. Mr. Paul Koshi appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Koshi indicated that the subject property is in escrow for commercial development. Mr. Koshi described from a diagram the existing driveway and the proposed driveway that could be divided for ingress /egress. He stated that the existing 4 unit building at the rear of the property provides 6 parking spaces, and adequate parking would be provided for the converted office building. He explained that a total of 15 parking spaces would be provided on the site. Discussion ensued between Mr. Koshi, Commissioner Debay, and • Mr. Webb with respect to how the landscaping, curb, power pole, and existing driveway could be modified to improve traffic circulation and egress /ingress. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Webb replied that a loop driveway does not currently exist; however, he said that staff would not object if the property owner could provide . said driveway. Commissioner Merrill maintained that it would be difficult to turn from Irvine Avenue to the property as Mr. Koshi described from the diagram. Commissioner Di Sano and Mr. Webb discussed the widening of Irvine Avenue into northbound three lanes. Commissioner Di Sano expressed his concerns regarding the safe access to the driveway from Irvine Avenue. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Koshi explained that he has a desire to utilize the building without remodeling the existing rooms. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Webb replied that the right tam lane on Irvine Avenue in front • 17 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX of the subject property will not be striped for about six months. Commissioner Edwards, Chairman Pomeroy, and Mr. Webb discussed the feasibility of moving the power pole. Commissioner Pers6n commented that the Planning Commission should not encourage situations that would slow down the traffic Motion * inasmuch as the City is attempting to improve vehicular circulation by widening Irvine Avenue. Motion was made to support staff s decision to require a minimum driveway width of 24 feet in conjunction with the intensification of use proposed for the subject site. Commissioner Glover concurred with the foregoing statement. All Ayes Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. . s s s Request to appeal the denial of Approval In Concept 2805 -89 Item 2 AIC 2805 -89 for the construction of a duplex on property located at 309 East Edgewater Avenue in the R -1 District on the Balboa Peninsula Mr. Timothy Randall, Attorney, representing Louis Sands IV, property owner, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Randall indicated that subsequent to filing the appeal of the denial of Approval in Concept 2805 -89, Mr. Sands is no longer requesting a duplex on the subject location; however, Mr. Randall requested that Mr. Sands be allowed to develop a single Denial Sustained Aal of Approval family structure in accordance with the R -3 development standards. Commissioner Pers6n referred to the staff report which states that "any further development must be done under the R -1 standards ", which is a statement of fact, and the Planning Commission shall only consider the appeal of the denial of the Approval in Concept. Commissioner Pers6n explained that Mr. Sands had the opportunity to develop a single family structure under the R -3 development standards until December 13, 1989. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Randall replied that new plans were not submitted for Approval • -18- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES ,o ° 6f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX in Concept before February 14, 1990. Commissioner Debay referred to the staff report wherein it is stated that Mr. Sands received an extension to submit plans for a single family structure meeting the R -3 development standards to February 14, 1990, and that Mr. Sands continued to refuse to design a conforming structure. Mr. Randall explained that Mr. Sands was in the process of examining whether a duplex would be allowable during that time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, replied that the Planning Commission would not be required to make a finding to sustain the denial of an Approval in Concept. Motion * Motion was made to sustain the denial of Approval in Concept. All Ayes 2805 -89 for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Avenue. Commissioner Pers6n supported the motion on the basis that the • R -3 density standard has remained on the property since 1959 and Mr. Sands was given ample opportunity to construct a duplex. Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. : : s Amendment No. 700 Item 3 Request to consider possible revisions to Title 15 and Title 20 of A700 the Newport Beach Municipal Code related to Report of Residential Building Records. set for PH 4 -5 -90 Motion Motion was made and voted on to set this item for public All Ayes hearing on April 5, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. s s s -19- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES p0 A '\\' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Planning mmi ioner' Institute- Planning Commission Meeting of March 22 1990 and Joint Study Session Cancelled with the City Council on March 26, 1990, 3 -22 -90 PC Meeting The Planning Commission cancelled the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of March 22, 1990, because of the Planning Commissioner's Institute in San Diego. Additional Business Additional Business Debay Excused Motion All Ayes Motion was made and voted on to excuse Commissioner Debay from the March 8, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: 10:20 p.m. Adjournment JAN DEBAY, SECRETARY CTI'Y OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION • -20-