The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/05/1987COMMISSIONERS ROLL CALL Present Absent 0 Ayes Absent • X REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7 :30 p.m. DATE: March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH xlCommissioner Kurlander was absent. x x x EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney x x x William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator Craig Bluell, Senior Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary x x x Minutes of February 19, 1987: Motion was made to approve the February 19, 1987, Planning Commission Minutes. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. x x x Public Comments: No persons came forth to speak on non - agenda items. x x x Report from the Planning Director Confirming 'the Posting of the Agenda: Planning Director Hewicker stated that the Planning Commission agenda was posted on Friday, February 27, 1987, in front of City Hall. x x x MINUTES INDEX Minutes of February 19 1987 Public Comments Posting of I Agenda COMMISSIONERS MINUTES �a � c March 5 1987 .o�\k�o�oe d 90 �yc`�°`RCITY OF NEW PORT BEACH 9 ROLL CALL INDEX A. Use Permit No. 3255 (Public Hearing) Item No.l Request to permit the construction of a two -unit UP3255 residential condominium development and related garages and carports on property located in the R -2 District. R842 AND Approved B. Resubdivision No. 842 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single - parcel of land for residential condominium purposes on property located in the R -2 District. LOCATION: Lot 6, Block 429, Corona del Mar,located at 422 Acacia Avenue, on the south- easterly side of Acacia Avenue, between First Avenue and Second Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Harold Russell, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Harold J. Russell, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Russell stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3255 and Ayes x x x x x X Resubdivision No. 842 subject to the findings and Absent x conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3255 FINDINGS: 1. That each of the proposed units has been designed as a condominium with separate and individual utility connections. -2- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES °A n March 5, 1987 A • �G9 9�°Z�� (y�yy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 Z c^,D ROLL CALL INDEX 2. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. 3. That an adequate number of on -site parking spaces will be provided for the residential condominium development. 4. The project will comply with all applicable standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of ap- proval. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3255 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, floor plans and elevations. 2. That one garage space and one carport space for each dwelling unit shall be maintained for vehicu- lar storage at all times. 3. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 842 shall be fulfilled. 4. 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. Resubdivision No. 842 FINDINGS: ' 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of . the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific -3- COMMISSIONERS $Gpy N9 fGfgL MINUTES March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivi- sion. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompa- nying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit be served with an indivi- dual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless other- wise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That the sidewalk be reconstructed and the brick pavers be raised to grade or removed along the Acacia Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley. 7. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 8. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the • Planning Commission. -4- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo �30°� March 5, 1987 y m�9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX A. Use Permit No. 3256 (Public Hearing) Item No.2 Request to permit the construction of a two -unit UP3256 residential condominium development and related garages and carports on property located in the R -2 District. R843 AND .Approved B. Resubdivision No. 843 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land for residential condominium purposes on property located in the R -2 District. LOCATION: Lot 1, Block 433, Corona del Mar, located at 421 Goldenrod Avenue, on the northwesterly corner of Goldenrod Avenue and First Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 • APPLICANT: Harold Russell, Corona del Mar OWNER: same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Harold J. Russell, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Russell stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3256 and Motion Resubdivision No. 843, subject to the findings and Ayes x x x x K K conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION Absent CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3256 FINDINGS: 1. That each of the proposed units has been designed as a condominium with separate and individual utility connections. 2. The project is consistent with the adopted goals • and policies of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. -5- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That an adequate number of on -site parking spaces will be provided for the residential condominium development. 4. The project will comply with all applicable standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of ap- proval. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3256 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, floor plans and elevations. 2. That one garage space and one carport space for each dwelling unit shall be maintained for vehicu- lar storage at all times. 3. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 843 shall be fulfilled. 4. 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. Resubdivision No. 843 FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific • plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A G fo March 5; 1987 ydG 9� 9y9f a y� yyy�1.� �! O �iyyoa ��9y �, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivi- sion. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompa- nying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements • if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit be served with an indivi- dual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless other- wise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That a 10 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner of Goldenrod Avenue and First Avenue be dedicated to the public. 6. That the deteriorated and displaced curb, gutter and sidewalk be reconstructed along the Goldenrod Avenue frontage; that the deteriorated curb and gutter be reconstructed along the First Avenue frontage and that the drive apron be removed and sidewalk be constructed along the First Avenue frontage. All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 7. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a . licensed civil engineer. • 8. That an access ramp be constructed per City Standard 181 -L at the intersection of Goldenrod -7- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yA A�g�7<G FAA t+ March 5, 1987 AG 9 9��C p I. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9Zt�� ROLL CALL INDEX Avenue and First Avenue under an encroachment permit issued by the Public works Department. 9. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley. 10. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 11. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. x e : Use Permit No. 1547 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which UP1547A permitted the expansion of the existing 349 room Sheraton- Newport Hotel to include: a new ten -story Approved • addition which includes 119 guest rooms, a kitchen addition, small meeting rooms, and relocated lighted tennis courts and pool. The proposed amendment in- volves a request to extend the subject use permit for a period of two years beyond the original expiration date of April 25, 1987. LOCATION: Parcels 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 40 -11 (Resubdivision No. 483) located at 4545 MacArthur Boulevard, on property bounded by MacArthur Boulevard, Birch Street and Corinthian way, in the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Newport Inn Joint Venture, Boston OWNER: Bay Colony Property Company, Inc., Boston The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. David Neish appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Neish stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". The public hearing was closed at this time. -8- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Zq Ai"'ti��G�po n March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL. CALL INDEX Motion K Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1547 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Koppelman asked the maker of the motion to Amendment include an amendment to Condition No. 28 that would to Motion require a traffic study prior to the issuance of the building permit. The maker of the motion accepted the amendment to Condition No. 28. Commissioner Koppelman explained that the amendment requires a new traffic study and amendment to the approved traffic phasing plan prior to the issuance of the building permit if this permit is not exercised prior to December 10, 1987, when the current traffic study expires. Ayes x x x K K Motion voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1547 Absent (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the recommended amendment to Condition No. 28. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the project and certified by the City in November, 1983, in compliance with the California Environ- mental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That based on the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report, the project incorpo- rates mitigation measures to reduce potential- ly- significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environ- mental impacts. Further, the economic and social benefits to the community override any presently anticipated negative environmental effects of the project. 3. That the project is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Newport Place Planned Community. 4. That a Traffic Study and Traffic Phasing Plan Amendment have been approved for the project. 5. The project will comply with all applicable City . and State Building Codes and Zoning requirements for new building applicable to the district in -9- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A 00 j�G Fp .6 F March 5, 1987 $B 9 9 y Cf Z C S CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX which the proposed project is located, except those items requested in conjunction with the proposed modifications. 6. The Police Department has indicated that it does not contemplate any problems. 7. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 8. The approval of Use Permit No. 1547 (Amended) will not under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS • 1. That the proposed development shall be in substan- tial conformance with the approved plot, floor plans, etc., except as may be modified by the below Conditions. 2. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 3. That a grading plan, if required, shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 4. The grading permit shall include, if required, a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 5. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. . -10- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo � ",�G�oo t+ March' S, 1987 c^9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 6. The velocity of concentrated run -off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as a part of the project design. 7. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engi- neering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Depart- ment. 8. That erosion control me sures shall be done on any exposed slopes within irty days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engineer. 9. Control of infiltration to the groundwater system for the project shall be provided as part of the project design. . 10. That existing on -site drainage facilities shall be improved or updated to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Building Department. 11. Any modification of existing on -site drainage systems or extensions of culverts for contributory drainage from surrounding areas shall be studied during project design and necessary improvements installed in conformance with local ordinances and accepted engineering practices and in a manner acceptable to the City Public Works and Building Departments. 12. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist shall evaluate the site prior to commencement of con - struction activities, and that all work on the site be done in accordance with the City's Council Policies K -5 and K -6. 13. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall waive the portions of AB 952 related to the City of Newport Beach responsibil- ities for mitigation of archaeological impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. 14. Fugitive dust emissions during construction shall be minimized by watering the site for dust -11- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES $a 0 March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX control, containing excavated soil onsite until it is hauled away, and periodically washing adjacent streets to remove accumulated materials. 15. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape archi- tect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accor- dance with the prepared plan). 16. The landscape plans shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments. 17. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and • pesticides. 18. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegetation and be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 19. 'The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire - retardant vegetation. 20. Street trees shall be provided along the _public streets as required by the Public Works Department and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department. 21. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of woods and debris. All vegetation shall be regu- larly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 22. The timing of construction in parking areas shall be approved by the Grading Engineer and Planning Department. 23. That a standard use permit agreement and accompa- nying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. -12- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Fpq March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 24. That the water system be provided as required by the Irvine Ranch Water District. 25. That the displaced concrete sidewalk be replaced at the Birch Street entrance and that access ramps be constructed at the intersections of Birch Street and MacArthur Boulevard, MacArthur Boule- vard and Corinthian Way and Corinthian Way and - Birch Street, and at each street entrance to the hotel parking lot where none exist. Access ramps and walks shall also be constructed in the median island at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Corinthian Way and on the southwesterly curb return. 26. That prior to the issuance of any building permits a specific soils and foundation study shall be prepared and approved by the Building Department. 27. That all conditions of the approved Traffic Phasing Plan be met, if the use permit is ex- • ercised prior to December 10, 1987 28. That a new Traffic Study and amendment to the approved Traffic Phasing Plan shall be required prior to the issuance of a building permit if this use permit is not exercised prior to December 10, 1987. 29. Bus turnouts and shelters shall be installed on Birch Street and MacArthur Blvd. at locations approved by the Traffic Engineer and the Orange County Transit District. The shelters shall be located outside the right -of -way, shall be min- imized by the applicant and shall display no advertising. 30. Sight distance at all intersections shall be provided in accordance with City Std. Swg. 110 -L with Birch Street as a secondary arterial. 31. That a study be provided prior to issuance of any building permits showing that adequate sewer facilities are available, if required by the Public Works Department. Any modifications to the existing facilities shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the develop- er. -13- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo 0yG Fpq t+ March 5, 1987 9 9y o I. Gy . yp`y� ;'yp� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9yF,� ROLL CALL INDEX 32. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 33. Prior to occupancy of any building, the applicants shall provide written verification from Orange County Sanitation that adequate sewer capacity is available to serve the project. 34. Any construction on the site should be done in accordance with the height restriction for the area. Said should apply to any landscape mate- rials, signs, flags, etc. as well as structures. 35. That the final design of all on -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation, and parking be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer and Planning Department. 36. All parking areas shall be subject to further review and approval by the Traffic Engineer. All parking spaces shall be a minimum 9' x 18' unless • a modification is approved to allow compact parking spaces. 37. That the lighting system shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent uses. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a Licensed Electrical Engineer; with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 38. The applicant shall provide energy - conserving street and parking lot lighting and minimize decorative or non - functional lighting in a manner acceptable to Planning Director. 39. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review by the Police Department to ensure adequate lighting of pedestrian walkways and parking areas. 40. The proposed project shall incorporate an internal security system (i.e. security guards, alarms, access limits after hours) that shall be reviewed by the Planning Department. • 41. That all buildings on the project site shall be equipped with fire suppression systems approved by -14- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yA twe March 5, 1987 � F'y O' ;'y0' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9ZFA ROLL CALL INDEX the Fire Department. Dependent upon the connection of new structures to the existing buildings, the Fire Department may require fire sprinkler systems for all buildings to be interconnected. 42. That all access to the buildings be approved by the Fire Department. 43. That all on -site fire protection (hydrants and Fire Department connections) shall be approved by the Fire and Public Works Departments. 44. That fire vehicle access shall be approved by the Fire Department. 45. On -site water mains and fire hydrants locations are to be approved by the Fire and Public Works Departments. 46. Final design of the project shall provide for the • incorporation of water - saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities. 47. The project shall incorporate the use of alterna- tive energy technology into building designs and systems for heating pools and spas at the hotel. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for said the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the concerns of this condition have been met. 48. A grease trap system shall be designed and incor- porated into the hotel site design, to the satis- faction of the City of Newport Beach Building and Utilities Departments. The location of the grease trap shall be easily accessible and a city rep- resentative shall be allowed access to inspect the system at all times. The applicant shall also supply to the City for approval a grease trap maintenance program that provides for ongoing maintenance and inspections. 49. Openable windows* for guest rooms shall be used to allow cooling by normal breezes unless it is • determined for certain area by the City that said are not appropriate for safety of securing rea- sons. -15- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o9L�yGS0A e+ March 5, 1987 �G 9N 99y� .o S� y oyCVyCy4 a y ` °�; CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 50. Interior noise levels in the proposed project shall not exceed 45 CNEL in any habitable space. 51. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a program for the sorting of recyclable material from solid wastes shall he developed and approved by the Planning Department. 52. All proposed development shall provide for weekly vacuum sweeping of all surface parking areas. 53. The applicant shall plan and implement a program to encourage the use of high- occupancy vehicles and alternate transportation modes for employees and visitors to the Sheraton Hotel, in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. Said program shall include hotel employees being encouraged to use the OCTD Transit system through the provision of subsidized bus passes or other appropriate means. • 54. Transportation to the John Wayne Airport for hotel patrons shall be provided and encouraged. 55. That any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 Dba at the property line and that any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view. 56. Signage and exterior lighting shall be of similar design theme throughout the project and shall be approved by the Planning and Public Works Depart- ments. 57. The applicant shall provide energy - conserving street and parking lot lighting and minimize decorative or non - functional lighting in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. 58. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. • 59. The "Life Safety System" in the existing hotel shall be upgraded to current code require - -16- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 0' March 5, 1987 ?9 cyC9ylyy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX ments. The entire Life Safety System in the existing and new buildings shall be integrated into one system reporting to one fire control room. 60. 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. 61. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.08.090 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • A. Use Permit No. 3093 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.4 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which UP3093A permitted the construction of a retail commercial building on the subject property located in the Unclas- UP3252 sified District. The proposed amendment is a request to modify the approved plan and to allow the approval Approved of an exception permit so as to permit the installation of a fourth wall sign whereas the approved plan and the Zoning Code allow only three wall signs. APPLICANT: Southland Corporation, Garden Grove OWNER: Same as applicant AND B. Use Permit No. 3252 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a dry cleaning facility in an existing building located in the Unclas- sified District. LOCATION: Lot 717, First Addition of the Newport Mesa Tract, located at 1495 Superior Avenue, on property bounded by Superior • Avenue, Placentia Avenue, and 15th -17- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o a March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9yt^� ROLL CALL INDEX Street, within the West Newport Tri- angle. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: Chic Cleaners, Newport Beach OWNER: Southland Corporation, Garden Grove The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Al Kaufenberg, 3413 Plaza Drive, Santa Ana, General Manager of the subject establishment, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Kaufenberg stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3093 Motion x (Amended) and Use Permit No. 3252, subject to the Ayes K K x x findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3093 (Amended) FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed amendment to Use Permit No. 3093 and exception to the Sign Ordinance so as to permit an additional wall sign is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed signs will not have any signifi- cant environmental impact. 3. That the total area of all wall signs on the building will be only 66 square feet, whereas up to 576 square feet of wall signs would be permit- ted under the Sign Ordinance. 4. That the proposed sign will aid in the identifica- tion of the building in an area with a potentially confusing address system. 5. That the approval of this amendment to Use Permit • No. 3093 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, -18- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES F° F March 5 1987 .y oy C, , CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improve- ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, nor will the granting of this excep- tion to the Sign Ordinance be contrary to the purpose of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code, and nor will it be materially detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood, or detri- mental or injurious to property or 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, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3093 as approved by the Planning Commission on April 19, 1984 shall remain in effect. 3. That the new wall sign on the southerly side of the building shall be designed to be similar in style to other on -site signs (i.e. framed in wood) and shall be limited to external illumination. 4. That on -site signage shall be limited to 4 wall signs and 1 ground sign and that any alteration in the type and location of signs shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications-Committee. 5. That a landscape plan shall approved by the Planning Director and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department. The plan shall indicate additional trees or shrubs adjacent. to Placentia Avenue so as to adequately screen the building from the residential development to the west across Placentia Avenue. Said landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, and shall be permanently maintained. • 6. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of -19- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 Gtr p9i t��y - yy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 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. 7. This amendment to Use Permit No. 3093 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. Use Permit No. 3252 FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. . 2. The project will not have any significant environ- mental impact. 3. That the Police Department does not anticipate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 3252, under the circumstances of this case, will not 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. 2. That any boilers shall be isolated in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 3. That the use of chemicals shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. 4. That there shall be no outside storage of mate- rials or other paraphernalia. -20- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo ;��G 1oq t+ March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9yc^,9 ROLL CALL INDEX 5. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. 6. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from view. 7. That the proposed dry cleaning equipment shall be installed and operated in conformance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 8. That all employees shall park on -site. 9. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of 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. 10. 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. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Item No.5 Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the construction of 19,400± sq.ft. marine commercial TS — buildings on the subject property, and the acceptance SP R41 of an environmental document. ... - R841 AND B. Site Plan Review No. 41 (Public Hearing) Approved Request to permit the expansion of the Mariner's Mile Marine Center located in the "Recreational Marine Commercial" area of the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan. The proposed expansion will include a new and expanded shipyard, a marine supply store, a marine rigging company, and marine related offices. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact parking spaces and a request to allow a portion of the required off - street parking -21- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Nx\_Poo March 5, 1987 \Irr yC�y . 1 011 09 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX to be provided through the annual purchase of in -lieu parking spaces in the Mariner's Mile Municipal Parking Lot. AND C. Resubdivision No. 841 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide two parcels of land and elimi- nate an interior property line so as to establish a single parcel of land for marine commercial purposes. LOCATION: A portion of Lot H, Tract No. 616 and Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 196 -29 ( Resubdivision No. 795) located at 2431, 2439, 2505, and 2507 West Coast Highway, on the southerly side of West Coast Highway between Tustin Avenue and the Balboa Bay Club in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area. • ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Turnstone Corporation, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant is deficient four on -site parking spaces for the amount of square footage that the applicant is permitted, however, Mr. Hewicker explained that one additional compact parking space could be gained by redesigning the new parking area. Mr. Hewicker suggested that the Planning Commission could recommend that a Parking Demand Study be prepared because a shipyard use may require less parking than a retail or office use. Mr. Hewicker commented that the applicant has requested the issuance of a building permit prior to the recordation of a parcel map. Mr. Hewicker stated that the proposed Floor Area Ratio is higher than what is permitted for this type of use on one parcel, and if the applicant would be allowed a building permit to be issued prior to the recording of the parcel map, then • there would be a use on the property which would exceed the permitted Floor Area Ratio. He said that constructing a building with openings on an interior -22- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo pgt`�, March 5, 1987 �G 9N �9�C o Sin ��'y �, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX property line would be in violation of the Uniform Building Code. Chairman Person, Mr. Hewicker, and Don Webb, City Engineer, discussed how the applicant could obtain a building permit prior to the recordation of a parcel map. Mr. Hewicker concluded that a building permit may be issued after the map has been approved by the City, the map has been delivered to the County Recorder and the applicant returns with a receipt from the County Recorder's Office indicating that the map has been delivered and is in the process of being recorded. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person regarding credit for boat slips, Mr. Hewicker replied that only restaurant regulations provide for credit of guest dock facilities. Commissioner Koppelman and Mr. Hewicker discussed the .5 Floor Area Ratio as proposed for the subject property. • In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn regarding Condition No. 11 of the Resubdivision, requesting "that a 15 foot wide easement for storm drain purposes be dedicated to the City between West Coast Highway and the bay" as opposed to a 10 foot wide easement previously approved on the subject property, Mr. Webb explained that when the 10 foot wide easement was approved there was not enough space for the 15 foot wide storm drain easement; however, the proposed project has a 26 foot wide driveway that could accommodate a 15 foot wide easement. Mr. Webb stated that the City Council has not budgeted the funds to install the storm drain. He suggested that the applicant provide a hole in the bulkhead that would permit the City to put the storm drain through the bulkhead, which would allow the City to install the storm drain across the property. In response to a further question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Webb replied that because the driveway is an important access into the facility and the installation period would disrupt the applicant's business, the City would have to schedule the installation when there would be minimum impact, and then the installation would not take much longer than a week. • In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill regarding Site Plan Review No. 41, Condition No. 15, -23- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES io o��t�FG�p4 March 5, 1987 BG 9N yy9f .o y�, 9 ?� py C 9y f yy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX stating "that the use of the boat slips bayward of the site shall be limited to the tenants and businesses ", Mr. Hewicker replied that to have a charter business at the subject site the applicant must obtain a Harbor Permit and show that adequate parking and support facilities are provided. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. James Evans, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Evans emphasized that the subject corporation is only a marine - oriented company, and he presented a brief summary of the company's projects. In reference to the previously approved marine development on the subject property, Mr. Evans distributed literature pertaining to the Title Report that explains the access easement from West Coast Highway to the bay, and he discussed the parking restrictions that have been set up on -site and the employees parking in the Municipal parking lot across the street on west Coast Highway. • In reference to Site Plan Review No. 41, Condition No. 3, regarding parking spaces, Mr. Evans stated that he has requested additional in -lieu parking for the proposed project, that .5 Floor Area Ratio is satisfactory on West Coast Highway, that the shipyard contains_9,000 square feet and if the shipyard would be taken away, there would be no problem in satisfying the parking requirement, that adding a compact parking space could be done, and in summary he stated that he has a concern with the current and future parking problems in Mariner's Mile. In reference to Resubdivision No. 841, Condition No. 1, regarding the recordation of a parcel map, Mr. Evans explained that it would be difficult to record a parcel map prior to the issuance of a building permit because of the existing loans on the property. Mr. Evans proposed that a Certificate of Occupancy not be issued until the parcel map has been filed. In reference to Resubdivision No. 841, Condition No. 10, regarding the public walking easement from the bay to West Coast Highway, Mr. Evans explained that the second floor balcony is an access area with a public . view deck which would keep the public out of the parking lot. -24- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES !� • ym a �; F y `9; % � March 5, 1987 4F y . 0 y X *101;�y yF9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX In reference to Resubdivision No. 841, Condition No. 11, regarding the storm drain easement, Mr. Evans opposed the condition for the following reasons: that the subject easement would contain land worth $500,000.00; that no development could be built on the easement in the future; that it will take more than one week to install the storm drain which would make his tenants and lenders unhappy and the financial hardships could end up in lawsuits; who would construct the storm drain if it would be built now ?; and that the traffic studies have delayed the project and the short notice regarding the construction of a storm drain would delay the project longer which could cause a financial hardship. In conclusion, Mr. Evans stated that the project would bring good economic balance to the marine - oriented uses in Newport Harbor, that there are many boats to be serviced, and the architectural design would enchance the community. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy regarding the recommended storm drain easement, Mr. • Evans replied that he does not want the construction on -site, and he does not feel that the easement_ is necessary. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person and Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Evans replied that there are four 30 foot wide by 120 foot deep boat slips. He said that the on -site businesses lease the boat slips and are used for brokerage docks and service docks. Mr. Evans pointed out that there is a potential to bring in a 120 foot boat to be serviced. Chairman Person asked Mr. Evans if he would oppose a condition that a boat charter operation shall not exist on the premises unless there is an amendment to the subject Site Plan Review to provide parking. Mr. Evans agreed with Chairman Person's suggested condition. In response to a request by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Evans withdrew to the public display area and explained the balcony's public access area. Mr. Joseph Minney, representing Josh Slocum's Restaurant, 2601 West Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Minney stated that he has • no objections to the project after reviewing the proposal. Mr. Minney stated that he has a concern regarding the in -lieu parking; however, if the Planning -25- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commission would approve the request, that the fees go toward a parking structure adjacent to West Coast Highway. Chairman Person pointed out that Mr. Minney's suggestion regarding a parking structure is a popular point -of -view. He commented that staff is not recommending in -lieu parking, but that in -lieu parking is only requested by the applicant. The public hearing was closed at this time. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Eichenhofer and Chairman Person, Mr. Webb replied that the Public Works Department receives the Plan Review Request approximately two weeks before the public hearing wherein the staff's recommendations are made. He said that staff requested a storm drain easement be granted along the property line between the two developments in a previous application proposed for the site. Mr. Webb stated that staff has not indicated on • the site where the storm drain easement should be located. He further explained the layout of the pipes currently along West Coast Highway, the bay, and the adjacent areas, and he emphasized that the City is trying to implement a master plan. Mr. Webb described the size of the drain pipes. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Roppelman regarding the installation of the storm drain, Mr. Webb replied that if there would be funding, the City could construct the storm drain on the subject property at the same time that the proposed buildings are constructed. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy regarding the permanent impact that the storm drain easement would have on the subject property, Mr. Webb replied that staff has requested that there be a 14 foot clearance above the ground level which would restrict what could be constructed over said easement; however, there would be no restrictions to the surface area. Mr. Webb stated that the easement could be located down the middle of the driveway. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn regarding the timeframe for the storm drain if it would • not be installed now, Mr. Webb replied that if the storm drain would not be installed at the present time, -26- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES k ;�yGyG t, March 5, 1987 A yaa 9 9 9 'O G9 N�y9�C�L � �yy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX it would not be installed for at least five years. He explained that if the City installed the storm drain on -site now, the connection would probably not be installed across West Coast Highway until a later date. Mr. Webb agreed with Commissioner Merrill's statement that the easement requested would be shown on the recorded parcel map. Motion was made to approve the Traffic Study, Site Plan Motion x Review No. 41 and Resubdivision 841 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the following amendments and additions: Site Plan Review No. 41, Condition No. 3 be amended to state "...Three (3) new in -lieu parking spaces shall be permitted in addition to the existing 11 in -lieu parking spaces ", Condition No. 5 be amended to state "That all employees and tenants shall be required to park on -site except for 14 designated employees.. ". Commissioner Winburn suggested an amendment to Condition No. 1, Resubdivision No. 841, recommending the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or a parcel- map be filed prior to the issuance of building permit. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Webb replied that the parcel map goes to the City and to the County simultaneously inasmuch as the City is plan checking and verifying that the map conforms to the conditions imposed, and the County is checking to make sure that the map is correct. Mr. Hewicker suggested that Condition No 1, Resubdivision No. 841 be amended to state "That if it is the desire of the applicant to obtain a building permit prior to the recordation of the parcel map, that he enter into an agreement and post a surety to be approved by the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of the building permit and that the map be recorded prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy." Mr. Hewicker explained that by issuing a building permit in this situation, that the Building Code is being violated. Discussion followed between the Planning Commission and • staff regarding the subject condition relating to the recordation of the parcel map, the recordation of a covenant, the waiver of a parcel map, and the affects of foreclosure. In conclusion to the discussion, Mr. -27- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Hewicker recommended that the foregoing Condition No. 1 include the approval of the Building Department. In addition to the aforementioned amendments to the conditions of approval, the maker of the motion requested that Condition No. 11, Resubdivision No. 841, be amended to add to the condition: "that the developer provide an opening in the bulkhead of sufficient size to allow for the installation of a storm drain pipe by the City. The City shall be allowed sufficient time and space to install the storm drain, if the City Council appropriates funds to the storm drain within sixty days from the issuance of a building permit. "; and add Condition No. 29 to Site Plan Review No. 41 stating "that a boat charter operation shall be prohibited unless an amendment to the Site Plan Review No. 41 is approved by the City. Commissioner Koppelman referred to Resubdivision No. 841, Condition No. 10, recommending "that a 10 foot wide public walking easement be provided between the • West Coast Highway sidewalk and the bay sidewalk. ", and asked the maker of the motion if the intent is to allow the public access to be along the proposed second floor walkway with a public viewing area? Discussion followed between the Planning Commission and staff. Mr. Webb pointed out that the proposed walkway width is 6 feet wide that could be widened to 10 feet or the required access could be reduced to a width of 6 feet. He questioned if the access would be accessible to a handicapped person,and he asked the applicant if there is an elevator proposed to be located in the buildings? James Evans, applicant, informed the Planning Commission that no elevators are proposed. Commissioner Winburn concluded that Condition No. 10 remain as recommended by staff because the location and configuration can be determined by the Public Works Department; however, she stated that the second story balcony being considered for public viewing would not be accessible for a handicapped person because elevators are not proposed. Ayes x x x x x x Motion was voted on to approve Site Plan Review No. 41, Resubdivision No. 841, Traffic Study and Environmental Absent x Document subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including Site Plan Review No. 41 amended • Conditions No. 3, and 5, and add Condition No. 29, and Resubdivision No. 841 amended Conditions No. 1 and 11 as previously stated. MOTION CARRIED. _28_ COMMISSIONERS • • o 9y oy !l�ycl� yo CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 CALL INDEX A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project; 4. That the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study have been incorporated into the proposed project and are expressed as Conditions of Approval; 5. That based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, Negative Declaration and supportive materials thereto that if the mitigation measures are incorporated into the project it will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. B. TRAFFIC STUDY FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak -hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S -1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major', 'primary- modified', or 'primary' street. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of any critical intersection. -29- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 0�3�7zG10 n March 5, 1987 G�tAON4l9�`�Z f�y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX C. SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 41 FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation will be provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 3. The proposed development is a high - quality proposal and will not adversely affect the benefits of occupancy and use of existing properties within the area. 4. The proposed development does not adversely affect the public benefits derived from the expenditures of public funds for improvement and beautification • of street and public facilities within the area. 5. The proposed development will not preclude the attainment of the specific area plan objectives stated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan or the Local Coastal Program. 6. The proposed development promotes the maintenance of superior site location characteristics adjoining major thoroughfares of City -wide importance. 7. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 8. The proposed number of compact spaces is within limits generally accepted by the Planning Commission relative to previous similar applications. 9. The proposed use of compact and tandem spaces will not, under the circumstances of this particular • case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and -30- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yA 00 March 5, 1987 A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as may be noted below. 2. That the proposed project shall be redesigned so as not exceed a Floor Area Ratio of 0.5 times the buildable area of the site. 3. That a minimum of one parking space for each 250 sq.ft. of office floor area and one parking space for each 2,000 sq.ft. of workshop and storage areas shall be provided. Three (3) new in -lieu parking spaces shall be permitted in addition to • the existing 11 in -lieu parking spaces. The new parking lot shall be redesigned so as to provide one additional compact parking space, for a total of 7 compact spaces on -site. Sixty -three (63) parking spaces shall be required on the new parking lot. 4. Handicap parking shall be provided in accordance with the state handicap parking provisions and shall be located and identified on the subject property in a manner approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 5. That all employees and tenants shall be required to park on -site except for 14 designated employees permitted to park in the Mariner's Mile Municipal Parking Lot. 6. That the proposed tandem parking spaces shall be posted for "employee parking" only. 7. That all parking areas shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. • 8. That the final design of on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer. -31- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES pA March 5, 1987 .e 'f�, db ;may �� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 9. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from West Coast Highway and adjoining properties. 10. That all proposed signs shall be in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an exception permit is approved by the City. Said signs shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer if located adjacent to the vehicular ingress and egress. 11. That the applicant shall prepare a landscape plan which identifies the size, type and location of all plant material and the design and location of a permanent irrigation system. Said landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, Public Works Department and the Planning Department. • 12. That the applicant shall provide 5161 sq.ft. of additional landscaping within the uncovered parking area of the project and 2621 sq.ft. of additional landscaping within the front yard setback area. 13. That the intersection of the private drive shall be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 45 miles per hour. Buildings, landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight distance line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. 14. That all conditions of Resubdivision No. 841 shall be fulfilled. 15. That the use of the boat slips bayward of the site shall be limited to the tenants and businesses located on the subject property and shall not be rented to general public unless adequate upland support facilities are provided in accordance with • Sections 17 through 19 of the Harbor Permit Policies of the City of Newport Beach (i.e. parking, safety, and restoom requirements). -32- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ;��G�0 \r; March 5; 1987 9y �` 10001c, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH t^,9 ROLL CALL INDEX 16. That adequate provisions be taken to insure that no excessive debris or foreign material be permitted to enter the bay during demolition and construction. 17. That a siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall be submitted and be subject to approval by the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. This shall be a complete plan for temporary and permanent facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 18. That the siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, waterings, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 19. That facilities for boat hauling and repair shall be designed in a manner to minimize the introduction of pollutants into Newport Bay to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. 20. That a weekly cleanup program around the docks and boat hauling /repair areas shall be conducted on a regular basis. During construction, basins, barriers, or other devices shall be installed to prevent waste and debris from falling into or entering Newport Bay. 21. That an Army Corps of Engineers permit, in addition to a Harbor Permit, shall be obtained prior to any alteration to and construction of the bulkhead. 22. That prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall agree to participate in a compensation program for the loss of intertidal area which shall be commensurate with the replacement costs of the intertidal habitat, not to exceed $3,000,.00, provided that the City and the various agencies involved in regulation of Newport Bay have established such a program. 23. That the applicant shall insure that all tenants shall disclose to the Newport Beach Fire Department any hazardous or flammable chemicals or -33- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yo °0�ce¢GF4p��c+ March 5, 1987 dG 9 99 .e 4� db X �'�z `��F vyyo� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX substances stored upon the site and conform to all Fire Department requirements pertaining to storage of these materials on- site. 24. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. 25. That boat delivery to the site be permitted only if supervised by the Newport Beach Police Department. 26. That development of the site not be allowed to encroach into the areas required for setback yards as established by the California Coastal Commission and /or the City of Newport Beach, whichever is greater. 27. That the project is located within the Coastal Zone and will require State Coastal Commission • approval, in addition to all necessary City and other approvals heretofore mentioned. 28. This site plan review shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 J of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 29. That a boat charter operation shall be prohibited unless an amendment to Site Plan Review No. 41 is approved by the City. D. RESUBDIVISION NO. 841 FINDINGS: 1. That the parcel map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission sat- isfied with the plan of subdivision. • 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. -34- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES q�i�FG1 c+ March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivi- sion. CONDITIONS: 1. That if it is the desire of the applicant to obtain a building permit prior to the recordation of the parcel map, he shall enter into an agreement and post a surety to be approved by the Planning, Public Works and Building Departments, and the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of said building permit, and that the map shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard Subdivision Agreement and accom- panying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That full width sidewalk be constructed along the West Coast highway frontage, the unused drive depressions be removed and replaced with curb, gutter, and sidewalk; and that the proposed drive apron be constructed per City Standard 166 -L. All work shall be completed under an encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department and the California Department of Transporation. 5. That hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the parcel map. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility • of the developer. =35- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 y F� ao% dG9�9��99C�� f �yS 0, ;6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 6. That a condition survey of the existing bulkhead along the bay side of the property be made by a civil or structural engineer, and the the bulkhead be constructed and repaired in conformance with the recommendations of the condition survey and the satisfaction of the Building Department and Marine Department. The top of the bulkhead is to be a minimum of elevation 9.00 above M.L.L.W. (6.27 MSL). 7. That prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, that applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and the Planning Department that adequate sewer facilities will he available for the project. Such demonstration shall include verification from the City's Utilities Department. 8. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 9. That a 10 foot -wide easement be granted to the City for unobstructed public access across the bay side of the parcel except in front of the boat yard. A 10 foot -wide easement will be dedicated to the City at the boat yard at such time as the boat yard ceases operation in accordance with an irrevocable offer to dedicate executed in conjunction with Resubdivision No. 795. 10. That a 10 foot -wide public walking easement be provided between the West Coast Highway sidewalk and the bay sidewalk. The location and configuration shall be approved by the Public Works Department. - 11. That a 15 foot -wide easement for storm drain purposes be dedicated to the City between West Coast Highway and the bay. A minimum of a 14 foot vertical clearance shall be maintained above the easement for access. The developer shall also provide an opening in the bulkhead of sufficient size to allow for the installation of a storm drain pipe by the City. The City shall be allowed sufficient time and space to install said storm drain, if the City Council appropriates funds for • the storm drain within 60 days from the issuance of a building permit. -36- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 12. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. ♦ x The Planning Commission recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 p.m. x r x Amendment No. 646 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to consider amending Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, adding Chapter 20.64, the Santa Ana Heights Specific Area Plan, SP -7; amending Districting Maps No. 34, 42, 61, and 67; and the acceptance of an environmental document. • INITIATED BY: The City Newport Beach of _ James Hewicker, Planning Director, presented a review of the staff report and the supplemental staff report that were distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the subject public hearing, emphasizing the circulation system to support the nearly one million square feet of Business Park that was approved by the Board of Supervisors. He addressed the proposed realignment study of Mesa Drive and Birch Street, the environmental document, and the resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors on October 15, 1986, setting forth the Board of Supervisors action in respect to the Specific Plan that was approved by the County of Orange. Mr. Hewicker referred to the memorandum from Robert H. Burnham, City Attorney, dated March 5, 1987, addressed to the Planning Commission wherein the memorandum discusses the relationship of the Airport Agreement, the County Land Use Compatibility Program, and the Specific Plan. Mr. Hewicker read the first paragraph of the said memorandum as follows: "This office has been asked if the City is bound by terms of the John • Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement to accept and adopt the Specific Plan for Santa Ana Heights developed by the County of Orange. It is our conclusion the City is -37- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX • • not bound by the Settlement Agreement to accept or adopt specific circulation improvements outlined in the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan. However, the City may not change land use designations specified in the Land Use Compatibility Program ( "LUCP ") if those changes would impede implementation of the LUCP or the Airport Master Plan." In reference to letters and petitions received from interested individuals and parties to the Specific Plan, Mr. Hewicker addressed the issues and responded to those issues by stating that the Specific Plan does talk about the need for the realignment at the intersection of Mesa Drive /Birch Street; however, the City does not have any particular alignment, and the City does not know at the present time if there will be any homes which would be affected by the realignment of that intersection. The City is not discussing the conversion of any properties from Business Park to Residential or Residential to Business Park under the Specific Plan. There are no industrial land uses being proposed by the City; however, there has been a suggestion to widen some of the roads going through the Business Park to handle the traffic that would be generated. Craig Bluell, Senior Planner, referred to the Specific Plan land use map, and he pointed out the areas designated for the Business Park, low density residential, medium density residential, general commercial, and professional - administrative. Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to the Specific Plan map and addressed concerns pertaining to the circulation system. He said that the Business Park is projected to produce between 13,000 to 15,000 additional trips because of the intensification of use. Mr. Webb stated that the roadways in the area could not accommodate the traffic without impacting the area that is being developed, and surrounding the development. He further stated that the City has tried to keep the through traffic out of the residential area, primarily easterly of Birch Street. He recommended that the cul -de -sac as proposed by the County on Cypress Street be implemented. Mr. Webb explained that when Irvine Avenue becomes congested, people will stray over to the Santa Ana Heights area; therefore, Birch Street needs to provide adequate capacity. He also stated that there has been discussion to complete University Drive to relieve some of the east to west traffic; however, -38- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES y10 March 5, 1987 �9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the Santa Ana Heights residents have opposed the suggestion. He said that if University Drive is not constructed then there needs to be a consideration that Santa Ana Heights will be a heavily impacted area that would need to have some relief. Mr. Webb explained how the County's Mesa Drive/Birch Street Plan would substantially increase the congestion from Irvine Avenue to the Acacia Street /Orchard Street intersection. Mr. Webb stated that Birch Street has a proposed 80 foot right -of -way with a 64 foot curb to curb separation. Mr. Webb further stated that Birch Street would vary in volume from about 7,000 to 13,000 automobiles per day which would qualify the street as a County industrial collector street cross section. He described how the proposed two left turn lanes on Birch Street would make the street safer for ingress /egress. Mr. Webb advised that Orchard Street and Acacia Street would have a 70 foot cross section and have a 58 foot curb to curb separation. • In response to questions posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Webb described how the realignment of Mesa Drive /Birch Street could cross a portion of the golf course and a vacant corner of property to attempt to protect the houses on Mesa Drive. Mr. Webb further described how the redesign of the said intersection would provide for more of an intersection coming in at an angle which would discourage traffic traveling easterly on Mesa Drive. Mr. Webb described how the 1,000 automobiles traveling north on Cypress Street would circulate if "hamburger alley" would be constructed between Cypress Street and Birch Street. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Webb replied that the 1,000 automobiles is an existing count. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Webb replied that the distance at the light at Birch Street and Bristol Street is approximately 250 feet, and he described the circulation of the left turn lane on Birch Street. Mr. John O'Flynn, 20331 Cypress Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the County plan, • and in opposition to annexation if the City's plan is -39- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES yq q�aj��G�� Z — March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX implemented. Mr. O'Flynn referred to the supplemental staff report stating the advantages and disadvantages of the City and County plans. In reference to the City's plan regarding the through connection of Birch Street with Mesa Drive westerly to Irvine Avenue, Mr. O'Flynn contended that the City plan advantages would encourage outside traffic to use the Santa Ana Heights area. In reference to the foregoing connection of Birch Street, County plan's disadvantages, Mr. O'Flynn replied that the inadequate access to west and south, and long cul -de -sacs pertain only to the outside commuters and not the local residents; that new construction on Birch Street negates the statement regarding the atmosphere for a business park; that the argument for no room in streets or on sidewalks for bicycles is inadequate because he is a bicycle rider; that the residents who occasionally use horse trailers on Cypress Street have not had any problems. Mrs. Betty Knox, 20402 Acacia Street, a resident of Santa Ana Heights for 38 years, appeared before the • Planning Commission to state her approval of the City's circulation plan. Mr. Andrew Buza, National Car Rental, 2222 Bristol Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the proposed alley between Cypress Street and Birch Street and in support of the Alternate Circulation Plan. He stated that his business would lose property to provide for the alley; that the customers would not utilize the alley; and there would be a problem with the traffic circulation going through the alley and at the traffic signal. Mrs. Beverly Mullan, 2031 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the County plan. She stated that the proposed residential entry monument is located on the other side of her house on Birch Street, the business monument is proposed on Acacia Street, and the industrial collector is in front of her residential property. Mrs. Mullan maintained that the City's circulation plan favors people who do not live in Santa Ana Heights, and the County plan's listed disadvantages are advantages to the local residents. Mr. Carl Hufbauer, 20241 Bayview, appeared before the • Planning Commission in support of retaining the cul -de -sac on Birch Street. He suggested that if -40- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 ROLL CALL V I J i l l I I INDEX Irvine Avenue would be widened then the traffic could be kept out of the Santa Ana Heights residential area. Mr. Murray Wishengrad, owner of Dollar Rent -A -Car, Bristol Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the alley. He questioned who would be served by the alley, because he said that his business would not take that route. Mr. Webb explained the number of trips projected on Cypress Street to the alley, and the customers from McDonald's Restaurant who would use the alley during peak hours. Mr. Webb commented that the greatest number of rent -a -car customers probably commute to the airport, and the alley could reduce the trip length by 75 percent, and he further commented that any trips off of Bristol Street going through the intersection at Jamboree Boulevard is worthwhile. Mr. Wishengrad stated his concern regarding the traffic that would be created at the Birch Street and Bristol Street traffic signal. • Mr. Robert Jump, owner of the property located at 2222 South Bristol, appeared before the Planning Commission, and stated that if any of his property would be lost to construct the alley that it would be a financial hardship. He stated his concerns regarding the traffic signal at Birch Street and Bristol Street, and that it is not fair for the taxpayers to pay for an alley and close a street that has been used by the residents for over thirty years. Mrs. Marilyn Reich, 2182 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the County plan. Mrs. Reich stated that she has not observed traffic congestion from Mesa Drive to McDonald's Restaurant. Mrs. Sharon Trexler, property owner of two one -half acre lots on the southern end of Birch Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the City's realignment of Mesa Drive and Birch Street. Mr. James Maynard, Trustee for the property at 2362 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to a request for a clarification regarding the Airport Settlement Agreement pertaining to land use, Chairman Person stated that the subject public hearings are an implementation of the land uses that were adopted by the General Plan Amendment. Chairman Person further stated that any proposed land use changes would have to go through General Plan Amendment -41- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX public hearings. Mr. Maynard stated that his concern regarding the City's circulation plan would be for the City to attempt to maintain the separation of the residential areas from the encroachment of the commercial uses. Ms. Julie Panky appeared before the Planning Commission representing Ms. Beth Bath, 2161 Mesa Drive. Ms. Panky stated that Ms. Bath opposes the realignment. of Mesa Drive/Birch Street as proposed in the City's plan. Mr. Michael Beveridge, 2332 Azure Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the City plan. He concurred with the previous testimony that the City plan caters to the outside commuters at the expense of the Santa Ana Heights residents, and the residents would like to keep the residential traffic away from the commercial traffic. Mr. Beveridge alleged that the residents who favor the City plan are planning on selling their property for commercial use. • Ms. Joan Hulse, a resident who has lived on Birch Street for 18 years, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the City plan, and to state that she was opposed to the airport and is opposed to the traffic currently on Birch Street. Mr. Harvey Shaw, 2391 Azure Street and the owner of the property at the southwest corner of Birch Street and Orchard Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Shaw expressed his support of the widening of Birch Street because of the traffic that is proposed for the area, and to enhance the ingress /egrees of the residential driveways on Birch Street. He stated that to avoid "gridlock" at the intersection of Birch Street and Orchard Street, he would be willing to give 252 feet of frontage property. Mr. Shaw emphasized that the residents must "not bury their heads in the sand" and think that the traffic is going away. He maintained that the City's realignment on Mesa Drive/Birch Street is about the most sensible thing that could be accomplished. In conclusion, Mr. Shaw stated that the County plan did not have the input that the City plan has. Mr. Jim Orelup, 2411 Orchid Hill, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Orelup asked for a clarification of the Business Park and Residential entry monuments. Mr. Bluell explained that the entry -42- COMMISSIONERS sp, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 ROL rCALL INDEX signs would identify the entryways into the residential or the business park areas. In response to Mr. Orelup's concern regarding the traffic hazards currently at the Mesa Drive/Birch Street intersection, Mr. Webb replied that the City intends to provide the type of realignment that would try to correct the current situation, and that would allow the traffic to move in a safe manner. Mr. Orelup referred to the County plan, and he asked what would force the people down Orchard Street and Acacia Street, because he is inclined to drive down Birch Street? Mr. Webb explained that the County proposed cul -de -sac on Birch Street would cause a concentration of traffic on Orchard Street. Mr. Orelup asked how do the people turn around after they have driven down Birch Street and have found out that there is a cul -de- sac? Mr. Webb replied that was one of the problems with the County's alignment plan. Mr. Orelup concluded that would be a real problem because people are going to drive in that area and go straight through, and there would be nothing to force them onto Orchard Street. • Mr. James Maynard, representing 2362 Mesa Drive, reappeared before the Planning Commission. In reference to the Specific Plan adopted by the County, Mr. Maynard indicated that the plan states "that the Birch Street realignment be studied incorporating adequate setbacks and removal of the cul -de -sac when appropriate", and he concluded that the County plan would not protect the intersection at Mesa Drive /Birch Street because the plan provides for the possible elimination of the cul -de -sac. Mr. Jack Mullan, 2031 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Mullan distributed minutes, information and resolution passed by the Project Area Committee, the redevelopment committee for Santa Ana Heights. Mr. Mullan reviewed the Orange County Development Agency Budget and the available funding. Mr. Mullan stated that he opposes the City plan that shows the realignment of Mesa Drive/Birch Street that would go through his front yard, and that he opposes annexation until there is a precise alignment of the change in the intersection. Mr. Mullan expressed his concern that the landscape standards would be expected to change in front of his house to Business Park landscaping. He said that he is opposed to rezoning • and opposed to anything that would harm residents who have asked to remain and live on Birch Street. -43- COMMISSIONERS O- A 9ZF,� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Discussion followed between Mr. Mullan, Chairman Person, and Mr. Webb regarding the landscaping treatment required for Mr. Mullan's property. In conclusion, Mr. Webb stated that Mr. Mullan's property is within a residential zone, and that Mr. Mullan probably would not be required to relandscape his property unless he would redevelop his property as a business parcel wherein Mr. Mullan would have to rezone his property. Mr. Mullan asked if there would be any assurance that the realignment of Mesa Drive /Birch Street would cross through the golf course? Chairman Person replied that the Planning Commission is considering the recommendation, however, the precise alignment must come from the realignment study. Mr. Mullan stated that the Orange County Development Agency budget has no current funds that would be available for purchase assurance for most of the houses, and that this is almost inverse condemnation if the City's proposed realignment goes through the residential property. • The Planning Commission recessed at 10:00 p.m. and reconvened at 10:10 p.m. Mr. Bruce DiMauro, 20322 Cypress Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to approve the City plan. Mr. DiMauro stated that the cul -de -sac on Birch Street would re -route the traffic onto Cypress Street and to Orchard Street, and that he favors the realignment of Birch Street rather than Acacia Street. Mr. DiMauro further stated that the cul-de -sac on Cypress Street would eliminate the current heavy, high speed traffic on that street. Mr. DiMauro alleged that the proposed traffic light on Irvine Avenue will slow the traffic down to the point where the traffic will flow into the Santa Ana Heights area. Ms. Christine Thagard representing The Roll Company, owner of the northern parcels on Cypress Street and adjacent to the proposed alley, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the alley. Ms. Thagard stated her concerns regarding the projected daily trips proposed, for "hamburger alley ", and the overflow parking onto Cypress Street. She further stated that in addition to the foregoing concerns and the cost and safety, that the alley would not be in the best interest of the Specific Plan or in the best -44- COMMISSIONERS e G�Q\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 5, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX interest in meeting the objectives of the Specific Plan. Mr. Bob Hopkins, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Jack Mullan, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the City plan, Alternate Circulation Plan "B ". Mr. Hopkins stated that he has reviewed staff's comments to his letter that he distributed to the Planning Commission during the public hearing on February 19, 1987, regarding the Environmental Impact Report, and that he stands by his ultimate conclusions as to the inadequacies of the document overall. Mr. Hopkins maintained that the Specific Plan contains a new major mixed -use project comprising of residential and commercial uses. He said that Alternate Plan "B" is a better plan for the residents who live east of Acacia Street and who intend to remain residents. Mr. Hopkins pointed out that the Santa Ana Heights area is a unique area that will never be replaced; however, the area is feeling the spread of the commercial area from across the Corona del Mar freeway. In reference to the staff report regarding the CNEL contour, Mr. Hopkins • replied that the existing residential, fully insulated, would be a compatible use and could fit within the CNEL line, and that the residential is not precluded based solely on that line. In conclusion, Mr. Hopkins stated that Alternate Plan "B" monitors the realignment of Mesa Drive/Birch Street, the proposed one million square feet would not be developed immediately, the circulation system would not have to be in place immediately, and the plan would leave it to time and to future residents and a future Planning Commission. Mrs. Martha Durkee, 20311 Cypress Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. She stated her approval regarding the suggestion that the realignment of Mesa Drive /Birch Street would include a portion of the golf course so as to save the Mullan home on Mesa Drive, and the suggested curve on Mesa Drive would keep the traffic out of the residential area. She opposed the inclusion of the Acacia Street alignment because the circulation would encourage the traffic through the residential area, and she opposed the cul -de -sac on Birch Street. Mrs. Patricia Cox, 2612 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mrs. Cox indicated that her • primary concern is to protect the residents in Santa Ana Heights. She stated her objections to the City's -45- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES y ;SSG 1p �i„ March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9Zc�,a ROLL CALL INDEX circulation plan and requested consideration of the Acacia Street alignment proposal. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mrs. Cox replied that she would confer with her husband and adjacent property owners before she could approve a cul -de -sac at the end of Mesa Drive. Chairman Person explained that the small residential cul -de -sac, with a 40 foot radius, would eliminate concerns about Mesa Drive being pushed through and the cul -de -sac would give a nice treatment at the end of the street. Mr. Ray McCullough, 2211 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of Alternate Circulation Plan "B" as opposed to Plan "A ", which he objected to because of the commercial area driveway circulation system. He opposed the widening of Birch Street and Mesa Drive because the widening would encourage more traffic through the area. Mr. Fred Peterson, 20361 Birch Street, appeared before the Planning Commission emphatically stating that he • will remain as a resident on Birch Street, and he asked if there could be something done around the residential area. In response to Chairman Person, Mr. Peterson stated that he has measured the proposed width of Birch Street and that there would he seven feet remaining from the front of his door to the street. In response to an inquiry posed by Chairman Person regarding the cuts across Acacia Street as proposed by the County plan, Mr. Webb replied that all of the parcels on Acacia Street would have to be re- parcelized which would involve a purchase by an interested party, then the resale of the properties after the parcels were recreated, or all of the property owners would agree to get together and change all of their property lines which would necessitate that maps be filed. Mr. Webb stated that his experience has been that it would be difficult to get an agreement from the property owners of the 11 parcels involved, which would mean that an interested party, or the City or County would have to appraise, purchase, and resale the parcels. Chairman Person commented that it was his understanding through the redevelopment agencies that parcels that are not affected directly by the path of such a right -of -way could be subject to purchase also, because • of the impacts on the surrounding lots. Mr. Webb replied that it may be within the limits of the agency. -46- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 51 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9yt`q ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Fred Peterson reappeared before the Planning Commission, and stated that the idea of Purchase Assurance is to be able to put the parcels together, and then the County would buy the properties necessary to do something major. He commented that the 11 lots are owned by three absentee property owners. Ms. Joan Hulse reappeared before the Planning Commission to state that she does not currently live on Birch Street because of the traffic. She said that the majority of the people want the area to go Business Park because the area is not safe for horses, and the only horses remaining on Birch Street are in Mr. Peterson's backyard. Mrs. Gloria Terry, 2061 Mesa Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission requesting that the Specific Plan be resolved as soon as possible because she has attempted to sell her property and she cannot do anything with the property as the situation stands, and she cannot afford to keep the property. • There being no others to testify before the Planning Commission, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1157 recommending approval of Amendment No. 646 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, adding Chapter 20.64, the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan, SP -7, with the staff recommended circulation plan with reservations; amending Districting Maps No. 34, 42, 61, and 67; and acceptance of an environmental document. At such time as the City performs the realignment studies for the intersection of Mesa Drive and Birch Street, that among the alternatives to be considered, it is recommended to straighten out the existing bend in Mesa Drive westerly of Birch Street and move the alignment toward the golf course. Such an alignment shall attempt to only affect the lot on the northwest corner of Birch Street and Mesa Drive, and minimize the impact on residential lots on the northeast corner. Further, under this scenario, the remaining easterly portion of Mesa Drive shall intersect with Birch Street in such a fashion as to discrouage through traffic easterly on Mesa Drive. Mesa Drive shall not extend beyond the Specific Area Plan except as needed to cul -de -sac the easterly end of Mesa Drive. -47- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES y.p � �q y March 5, 1987 �G9 9N �9C`9 AC �yti CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9yF� ROLL CALL INDEX Within the circulation system of the specific Area Plan there are several improvement features: the traffic signal at Irvine Avenue and Orchard Street would be left in; the cul -de -sac on Cypress Street would remain; the alley between Cypress Street and Birch Street would be eliminated because of the concern about the left hand turn coming out south from the alley. The remaining features specified within the circulation system would stay in. Amendment Chairman Person asked the maker of the motion if she would accept an amendment to eliminate the Business to Motion Park entry monument sign located at the westerly corner of the Specific Plan area as designated in Exhibit 2 of the March 5, 1987, staff report, and leave the residential monument where it is? The maker of the motion agreed with the recommended amendment. Amendment Chairman Person asked the maker of the motion to accept to Motion language to the affect that Birch Street shall not • extend southerly beyond Mesa Drive. The maker of the motion agreed with the recommendation. Commissioner Winburn stated that she studied the alternate plan proposed by the County that cuts through from Acacia Street directly to Birch Street. She further stated that after reviewing that plan she was sure that would not be the correct alignment. Commissioner Winburn also stated that she made the decision to propose the staff recommended Mesa Drive/Birch Street realignment with the, addition of a recommended possible alignment after reviewing the staff prepared advantages and disadvantages for the adopted County circulation plan, and the City's proposed circulation plan. The adopted County alignment follows Acacia Street, Orchard Street and then Birch Street, which does in fact, impact the intersection at Acacia Street /Orchard Street because of the stop light on Irvine Avenue, and creates a dog leg connection between Mesa Drive and Birch Street. The realignment proposed by the City provides a continuous connection between Mesa Drive and Birch Street which crosses the Corona del Mar Freeway and goes up to Jamboree Boulevard and MacArthur Boulevard. This circulation plan also avoids the Acacia Street /Orchard Street intersection. • -48- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES i p ° c March 5, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner winburn agreed with Chairman Person that the motion includes the most recent maps distributed by the staff. Chairman Person stated that he would support the motion but not with ease based on the conflicting testimony. He commented that the Planning Commission has to formulate a plan which will look at the traffic that would be generated by the additional square footage that will be developed by the implementation of the Business Park and uses, and the Planning Commission must attempt to make the system work. Chairman Person advised that given the scenario of nearly one million square feet of additional commercial space in the area between Acacia Street and Birch Street, northerly of Mesa Drive, and the traffic that will be connected with that type of commercial use, the Birch Street cul -de -sac proposal which was considered temporary would be inappropriate. Chairman Person further stated that the motion attempts to recognize the needs of the • residents on Mesa Drive between Acacia Street and Birch Street, and gives some thought as to how the roadway should be constructed and further allows the City to do good planning. He indicated there would be a change from the plan adopted by the County; however, he opined that the change would be productive. Commissioner Pomeroy pointed out that the Planning Commission heard testimony from the residents with varied points of view; however, the Planning Commission must be concerned about trying to look at the long term solutions to a condition that is, in fact, going to worsen over the years as development in the area changes from residential to commercial uses. Commissioner Pomeroy explained that from his personal experience, exiting onto a properly improved road was safer then onto a two -lane road, and the traffic increase was controlled in a much better manner. He pointed out that the major difficulty was seeing the change happen. Commissioner Pomeroy alleged that the suggestion of realigning Mesa Drive further south into the golf course satisfies most of the concerns of the residents, yet provides for a much improved circulation system over the County plan where there would have been a cul -de -sac on Birch Street. Chairman Person referred to the Mesa Drive/Birch Street • realignment, and he stated that Mesa Drive going easterly could be designed so as to keep the traffic -49- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES °A March 5, 1987 A A ° �°Z C ` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 Z c^,D ROLL CALL INDEX from going easterly, except for the traffic that has a purpose for entering. Ayes Absent K K x x x x Motion voted on to adopt Resolution No. 1157 recommending approval of Amendment No. 646 to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, adding Chapter 20.64, the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan, SP -7, with the staff recommended circulation plan with reservations, amending Districting Maps No. 34, 42, 61 and 67; and acceptance of an environmental document. MOTION CARRIED. D I S C U S S I G N I T E M Discussion Item The Planning Commission proposed agenda items to be discussed at the Joint City Council - Planning Joint CC- Commission meeting on March 23, 1987. Motion was made to direct the Planning Director to list possible agenda PC Meeting n x items and return the list to the Planning Commission x x x x x x during the March 19, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. t x Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach A D J O U R N M E N T: 10:55 p.m. Adjournment PAT EICHENHOFER, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -50-