Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/18/1976COMMISSIONERS T < p P< Z V CALL Present Absent Motion Ayes Absent 0 CITY. OF NEWPORT BEACH Regular Planning Commission Meeting Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:00 P.M. Date: March 18. 1976 MINUTES i 0Y .n V6A X X X X X X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director — Planning Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney Benjamin B. Nolan, City Engineer STAFF MEMBERS Shirley Harbeck, Secretary Chairman Beckley introduced Bill Frederickson who will replace Bill Tiernan on the Planning Commission at the next meeting. Item #1 Request to establish a restaurant facility with USE on -sale beer and wine in an existing commercial PERMIT building, and the acceptance of an offsite park- N0. 1778 ing agreement for a portion of the required parking spaces. CONT. TO Location: Lots 5 and 6, Block B, Tract No. 470, and a portion of Lot 9, Block 730, Corona del Mar, located at 2441 East Coast Highway and Carna- tion Avenue in Corona del. Mar. Zone: C -1 Applicant: Randall H. Johnson, Balboa Island Owner: Jim Wood, Corona del Mar X Planning Commission continued this matter to the X X X X X X meeting of April 1, 1976. X Item #2 Request to establish a yacht club facility in the M -1 District, and the acceptance of an offsite USE VNMIT parking agreement for the required parking spaces. NO. 1779 CONT. TO f Page 1. AA R. 1 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P p 7 Y Motion Ayes Absent 0 • MINUTES March 18, 1976 ,.,,,cY Location: Lots 7 and 8 of Block 425 of Lancasters Addition to Newport Beach, located at 2814 Lafayette Avenue, on the easterly side of Lafayette Avenue between 29th Street and Villa Way in "Cannery Village." Zone: M -1 Applicant: Voyagers Yacht Club, Newport Beach Owner: Woodco Investment Co., Long Beach Planning Commission continued this matter to the X X X X X X meeting of April 1, 1976. X Item #3 Request to change the name of New MacArthur STREET Boulevard. NAME CAGE Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach Chairman Beckley reviewed the staff report with the Commission. Commissioner Heather commented that should the street name be changed to San Miguel Drive, there may be some confusion until the link between San Joaquin Hills Road and the existing San Miguel Drive was completed and suggested the possibility of a signing program to help alleviate this confusion. Commissioner Williams questioned whether or not the City of Irvine would use the name of San Miguel when the northerly end of the street was constructed through that city as well as the way it would join up with old MacArchur Boulevard. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that the Master Plan of Streets and High- ways indicated a continuation of the street throug the City of Irvine and although there was no guarantee that the name San Miguel would be used, it would seem desirable for the sake of continuity He also commented on the encouragement by Orange County that cities use the same street name on Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y Motion Ayes Absent MINUTES March 18, 1976 unev continuing streets. He reviewed the allignment of New MacArthur Boulevard as indicated on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways. The public hearing was opened in connection with this matter and there being no one desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Seely commented on his preference with the name Harbor Hills Drive because of the local terrain as well as the Fire Department's recommendation. He also commented that the street seemed far removed from the existing San Miguel Drive and it may be premature to change the name at this time. Also, he did not feel that a change in the street name as it crosses MacArthur Boule- vard should be of great concern because San Miguel Drive is considered one of the spokes in the Newport Center wheel. Commissioner Williams commented on the local aspects and confusion which already exist because of similarity in names and suggested that the_ word "Harbor" not be used in anyway. Commissioner Parker felt that street continuances should bear the same name and that San Miguel Drive would cause the least amount of confusion in the long run since the alignment will eventuall be connected with the existing San Miguel Drive. X Following discussion, motion was made recommending X X X X X X to the City Council that 'the name Arth6r X !Boulevard be changed to San Miguel Drive. Item #4 Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of AMENDMEN' the Newport Beach Municipal Code which would 90. 464 allow "Home Occupations." APPROVED Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker presented a letter which was received from the Eastbluff Homeowners Community Association advis- ing that their C.C.& R.s prohibited businesses in residences and although they had no objections to the proposed ordinance, pointed out the possibilit Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T y x Z 7 < P e, m March 18, 1976 MINUTES wnew of a misinterpretation and therefore felt that the City should advise anyone applying for a business license within a residence in Eastbluff that such activities are not permitted. Planning Commission discussed Item 5 under General Requirements and voiced concern that the wording would preclude such normal deliveries as parcel post, bottled water, or any other deliveries which are made in residendial areas. The Commission als discussed the procedures relative to enforcement and regulation of such an ordinance. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. J. H. Rutledge, 419 E. Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the Commission to comment on the ordinance and felt that home occupations would not cause problems to people in the area and would be a source of supplemental income especially to retired people. • J. R. Blakemore representing Harbor View Hills appeared before the Commission and voiced concern with potential conflicts between the proposed ordinance and various C.C.& R.s which prohibit such activities. Assistant City Attorney Coffin advised that C.C.& R.s are privately enforceable restrictions and the proposed ordinance would not create an inherent conflict or have any effect on valid C.C.& R.s Chairman Beckley pointed out that home occupations do exist at the present time and as such are illegal, however, the proposed ordinance would change that, if adopted. Problems encountered by the City Manager were also reviewed as well as the fact that the ordinance would provide additional revenue for the City. J. R. Blakemore requested that consideration be given to excluding the ordinance from the R -1 District because of enforcement problems. • There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the hearing public was closed. Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T T ` P P< Z N A CAL March 18 1976 MINUTES INDEX Motion X , Following discussion as to the wording of Item 5 Ayes X X X X X of General Requirements, motion was made recom- Absent X mending to the City Council that Amendment No. 464 be adopted with the revision that Section. 20.10.040 C. 5. read as follows: 5. The home occupation shall not generate vehicular or pedestrian traffic or use of commercial vehicles for delivery of materials to or from the premises greater than normal for the district. Item #5 Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of AMENDMENT the Newport Beach Municipal Code which would add N06 465 a "Historical Combining District" to the Zoning Ordinance. APPROVED Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach Planning Commission discussed possible candidates for the proposed ordinance which included the Pavillion and the Lovell House. Assistant Commun- ity Development Director Hewicker pointed out that the proposed ordinance was intended to provide the enabling legislation -in the event a property owner or the City felt it was desirable to apply the overlay to property with historical significance at some future time. The effect of the optional clause was discussed and whether or not it would be in the best interest of the City to grant property owners the exclusive right to decide what may or may not be of historical significance. Planning Commission also discussed the limited development which could occur on a property once it was established as a historical site, as well as the fact that up- grading could take place without destroying the historical value. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Phil Tozer, President of the company which owns th • Pavillion, appeared before the Commission and advised that at the present time he could see no advantage to this type of zoning, however, he felt that the basic ordinance was sound as long Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A CALL N Motion El Ayes Noes Absent 0 MINUTES March 18. 1976 unaw as the optional clause remained a part of the ordinance. J. R. Blakemore commented that the ordinance should not become a means of taking property with - out compensation and, therefore, the optional clause should be made a part of the ordinance. X There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made recommending to the City Council that Amendment No. 465 be .approved with the revision that Section 20.03.030 read as follows: "Application. Land may only be included in the "Historical" Combining District upon written a reement between the ro ert owner and the City an w ere certain structures or areas ave een determined by the Planning Commission to be of special character or special historical ...... etc." In opposition to the motion, Commissioner Agee commented on his doubt that the proposed ordinance was really needed, however, if the ordinance was to be adopted, the City should have the discretion of making the decision as to the historical significance of a site. Commissioner Seely concurred with Commissioner Agee, as he felt that the proposed ordinance would serve a useful purpose provided the City had the right to initiate historical districts without a written agreement from the property owner. Commissioner Heather advised of her opposition to the motion and questioned the procedure by whic the ordinance would be implemented. Staff advised that application of the ordinance to a particular site would be through the Zone Amendment procedure which includes a public hearing, recommendations by the Planning Commission and decision by the City Council. X Following discussion, the motion was voted on and X x X X X failed. X Commissioner Seely commented that the City did not exercise its zoning powers in an arbitrary and capricious manner and he could see little differ- ence between the proposed ordinance and those Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y� Rik CALL Motion Ayes Noes Absent 0 MINUTES dn.1..6 10 107G m ncv X X X X X X X 1'1411 M11 IV IJIV already in effect, therefore, a new motion was made recommending to the City Council that Amendment No. 465 be approved as proposed without the optional provision relative to written agreement between the property owner and the City. Commissioner Parker commented on the limited number of parcels which would come under the purview of the proposed ordinance and in view of the action on the first motion, felt there was no need for the ordinance. Request to amend Condition No. 8 of Tentative Map No. 8725 so as to increase the size of the play Item #6 TENTATIVE MAP TRACT area proposed at the northeast corner of E1 NO. $-7 Capitan Drive and Spyglass Hill Road from one - MENDED half acre to approximately one acre and to decrease the size of the proposed park site at APPROVED the southeast corner of Spyglass Hill Road and New MacArthur Boulevard from 6 acres to approxi- mately 5 -1/4 acres. Location: Portions of Blocks 91, 92, 97 and 98 of Irvine's Subdivision, in an area bounded by the existing "Spyglass Hill" development, the "Bren III" development, New Mac Arthur Boulevard, and the San Joaquin Reservoir site (Sector IV of "Harbor View Hills "). Zone: P -C Applicant: The City of Newport Beach Owners: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach; Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles Engineer: Simpson - Steppat, Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker reviewed a map indicating the changes in the park sites. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Page 7. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A p Z N & CALI Motion Ayes Absent 0 Marrh 1R_ 1Q70; MINUTES Dave. Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission to answer questions and concurred with the staff report and change to Condition No. 8. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X. X X X X X following finding: X 1. That the ,proposed amendment to Condition No. 8 will better serve the recreational needs of the residents of Harbor View Hills and espe- cially the residents of Spyglass Hill, and that the proposal is consistent with all appli cable elements of the City's General Plan and the Planned Community Text. and approve the amendment to Tentative Map Tract- No. 8725 and the-, ch-i to Condition tio� to read-as follows: 8. That the property owner shall dedicate and the City shall accept a park site approximately 5 -1/4 acres in size at the southeast corner of Spyglass Hill Road and New MacArthur Boulevard and a play area approximately 1 acre in size at the northeast corner of E1 Capitan Drive and Spyglass Hill. Road. Item #7 Request to permit the extension of a previously TENTATIVI approved tentative map subdividing 170.3 acres MAP�TRX—C into 95 numbered tots for single - family develop - Nom. $i2T ment, 12 numbered lots for condominium development 3 numbered lots to be developed as open space and EXTENSI01 public park sites, 3 numbered lots to be developed GRANT` -D as private recreational sites, 7 numbered lots to be developed as landscape open space areas, and 20 lettered lots to be developed as private street . Location: Portions of Blocks 91, 92, 97, and 98 of Irvine's. Subdivision, in an area bounded by the existing "Spyglass Hill" development, the "Bren III" development, New Mac Arthur Boulevard, and the San Joaquin Reservoir site (Sector IV of "Harbor View Hills "). Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH K T p A Z N 141 CALL Motion Ayes Absent 0 0 MINUTES March 18 1976 Zone: P -C Applicant: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach. Owners: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach;. Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine The Metropolitan Water District.of Southern California, Los Angeles Engineer: Simpson - Steppat, Newport Beach Mike Mohler, Irvine - Pacific, answered questions relative to the density of the project. Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff report. X Motion was made that Planning Commission approve X X X X X X the extension of Tentative Map Tract No. 8725 to X. June 13, 1978, subject to the original conditions of approval and the amendment to Condition No. 8 which was taken on the previous item. Item #8 Request to establish one building site and elimir- RESUB- mate an interior lot line where one lot and a DIVISION portion of a second.lot now exist so as to permit 07-57T- the expansion of the Bank of America facilities on the property. APPROVED CONDI- Location: Portion of Lot 2, Tract No. 1117 TIONALLY and Lot 9, Tract No. 1235, located at 3444 Via Lido, on the north - easterly corner of Via Lido and Central Avenue in "Lido Village." Zone: C -1 -H Applicant: Continental Service Co., Los Angele Owner: Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, Los Angeles Engineer: Raub, Bein, frost and Associates, Newport Beach Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Page 9. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m a P p 1 3 s. rsO, N March 1R_ 1976 MINUTES iuncv Tom Ketchen, Continental Services Company, agent for Bank of America, appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff report and recommenda- tions. He answered questions relative to employee parking and advised that the bank has access to parking in the structure, however, they do not pay for employee parking. Also, they do not intend to increase the number of people presently employed, however, one addition employee may be required. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,.the public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. . 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substan- tial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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 subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control . Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. and approve Resubdivision No. 514, subject to the Page 10. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y R� CALL 0 0 MINUTES March 18, 1976 INDEX following condition: 1. That a parcel map be filed. Items No. 9 and No. 10 were heard concurrently because of their relationship, however separate actions were taken on each. Item #9. Request to establish a sales facility for new and used boats. USE PERMIT N 780 Location: A portion of Lot A, Tract 919, located at 2510 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway,: easterly of Tustin Avenue- on Mariner's Mile." APPROVED C NED�- TrUNK LY Zone: C -1 -H Applicant: TransPac Yachts, Inc., Newport Beach Owner: Roy V. Shafer, Santa Ana Item #10 Request to create three parcels for commercial development. RESUB- D ISION W6-.-5-T,2- Location: A portion of Lot A, Tract 919, located at 2510 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway, easterly of Tustin Avenue APPROVED CONDI— TIONALLY on "Mariner's Mile." Zone: C -1 -H Applicant: TransPac Yachts, Inc., Newport Beach Owner: Roy V. Shafer, Santa Ana Engineer: Garner, Tracadas and Troy, Inc., San Bernardino Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES e� ,.,,,, N March 18, 1976 INflCY Planning Commission discussed policies, if any, relative to acquisition of 12 feet along Coast Highway for street widening and the basis for requiring such dedication on this project whereas the requirement for the "burned -out" block was waived. Staff reviewed the policies and requirements relative to dedications for street widening pur- poses including those contained in Chapter 13 of the Municipal Code. Planning Commission questioned the basi.s for the recommendation that the access easement be increas- ed from 20 feet to 24 feet and staff advised it would better provide for two -way traffic and increase the level of service.' As to whether or not the increased access easement would cause a loss of parking, staff advised that no parking layout for "Henry's" restaurant could be located in the Community Development Department files. At this point, the property owner presented a diagram of the parking,dated 1962, to the staff . and Commission for review. Public hearing was opened in connection with, this matter. Dickson Shafer appeared before the Commission on behalf of the property owner, Roy Shafer, and advised they do not want to widen the access easement because it has been adequate to serve the six tenants for over twenty years and would eliminate 15 parking stalls from Henry'_s parking.. Planning Commission reviewed the parking layout for Henry's in detail. City Engineer Nolan commented that the Public Works Department did not feel too strongly about increasing the ease- ment to 24 feet and certainly widening should not be done at the expense of making good parking spaces anything less than usable.. Ken Watanabe, Civil Engineer for the project, appeared before the Commission and pointed out that two -way traffic was not necessary for the rear of the property because of the one -way exit. He advised that a 24 foot wide access easement for approximately the southerly 50 feet was acceptable and the remainder left at 20 feet. In • this was the parking for Henry's would not have to be relocated or made into substandard spaces. Tom Stemfer, owner of TransPac Yachts, appeared before the Commission and advised of the type of Page 12. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T = 0 < Z p P Z N -i rAll Marrh 1R_ 1Q76 MINUTES operati.on proposed which would include the retail sale of new boats and installation of minor equip- ment in connection with the. sale. Dickson Shafer commented further on the egress across the rear of the adjacent property to the west which was used only by mutual consent and not through a formal easement. He also advised of their strong opposition to the 12 foot dedica- tion for street widening purposes and felt it should be purchased by the City rather than.taken as a requirement of the development. City Engineer Nolan commented on the City's policies and requirements for dedication as well as provisions whereby an exception could be made based on certain findings which were specified in the Municipal Code. He reviewed the provisions of the Code with the Commission. Assistant City Attorney Coffin further commented that the Municipal Code also required that Plan- ning Commission secure substantially the objec- tives of the regulations to which the exceptions are granted as to light, air, public health, safety, convenience and general welfare. There- fore, it may be difficult to waive the dedication requirements because of the need for strong and compelling facts to grant the exception. Ken Watanabe, with Garner, Tracadas and Troy, appeared before the Commission and requested that the condition requiring utilities to each parcel be amended since Parcel 2 will be used only for parking and they do not intend to provide utilitie to that particular parcel. City Engineer Nolan advised that no stub -out would be required at this time, however, an easement to Parcel 3 would be needed since any future develop- ment may require installation of utilities. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearings were closed. Commissioner Heather voiced concern with the possible use of the site for something other than new boat sales and suggested an additional condi- tion prohibiting such things as boat repair, bottom cleaning, and manufacturing. Page 13. COMMISSIONERS p P 2 N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Marrh 1R_ 1970; MINUTES ,unev - Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following findings in connection with Use Permit Absent X No. 1780: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is similar to other boat sales businesses along West Coast Highway on Mariner's Mile. 2. Adequate parking will be.provided for the proposed development. 3. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1780 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. • and approve Use Permit No. 1780, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be insubstantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations. 2. That a landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. Said landscaping shall consist of minimum 15 gallon sized trees in the four proposed landscaped planter boxes in addition to shrubs or groundcovers, and shall be continuously maintained. 3. All signing shall be approved by the Diredtor of Community Development. 4. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from West Coast Highway or adjoining properties. 5. That this approval shall be for a period of three years, and any extensions shall bq • subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee. 6. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivi- sion No.512 shall be fulfilled. Page 14. COMMISSIONERS Y� T in D T T m i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Marrh 1R_ 1Q76 MINUTES auncy 7. New boat preparation and outfitting shall be permitted; however, repair, bottom cleaning, manufacturing and rental storage shall be prohibited on the site. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the following findings in connection with Resubdivi- Sion No. 512: 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. . 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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 subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. and approve Resubdivision No. 512, subject to the following conditions: Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES �. March 18. 1976 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That all public improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That each new parcel be served by individual water and sewer connections in a manner satis- factory to the Public Works Department. Satisfactory easement or easements shall be.. provided for such connections, however, they need not be constructed until needed. 4. That any work within the West Coast Highway right -of -way be in accordance with an approved encroachment permit issued by CALTRANS. 5. That a 12 -foot wide st�ip along the northerly side of West Coast Highway be dedicated for street and highway purposes. The existing building projecting into the additional right - of -way on Parcel 1 and the boat display and landscaping proposed on Parcel 3 shall be . allowed to remain under a license or authorize( encroachment arrangement. Construction of the street widening improvements compatible with the additional 12 feet of right -of -way will be accomplished in the future.at no expense to the adjacent property owners. (Note: Condition No. 5 was amended by a subse- quent motion which carried.) 6. That vehicular access rights to West Coast Highway be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach except for one common driveway;.the exact location of the driveway shall be shown on the parcel map. 7. That the width of the access easement shall be increased from 20 feet to 24 feet for the southerly 80 feet provided it does not impair the use of the parking spaces required for the existing restaurant use on Parcel 1. Prior to submittal of the parcel map required under Condition No. 1 above, the property owner shall submit to the Department of Community Development and the Parking and Traffic Engineer a plan which demonstrates that all • of the required parking for Parcel 1 can be provided on -site and that the proposal to widen the easement will not burden the use of these spaces. Page 16. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH aM ` A Z March 18, 1976 MINUTES ,uftcY Motion X The motion was amended to delete Condition No. 5 which would require that 12 feet be dedicated for street and highway purposes along the northerly side of West Coast Highway. (Note: This amendmen was subsequently revised.) At this point the requirement for dedication. of 12 feet along the northerly side of Coast Highway was discussed. Commissioner Agee did not feel the highway would ever be widened and if so, some other means of . acquisition should be explored. Commissioner Beckley felt that the 12 feet should at least be reserved for any possible street widening purposes. Commissioner Heather felt that anything less than dedication of the 12 feet was a regressive step and that every effort should be made to bring Coast Highway up to the "major" designation indicated in the Master Plan of Streets and '. Highways. Other ways of securing the additional 12 feet were discussed. One would be the initiation of an amendment whereby a building setback line would be established along Coast Highway. Another would be as provided by the Municipal Code dealing with Mapped Streets. At this point the findings and special circum- stances which must be made in order to grant the exception to the 12 foot dedication were discussed. It was pointed out that even though the Planning Commission may waive the dedication requirement, the applicant was still faced with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Municipal Code. Existing policies and the possible need for new policies as to what procedure should be followed relative to the implementation of the General Plan to widen Coast Highway were discussed. Planning Commission discussed reserving the 12 feet as opposed to eliminating the requirement Revised for the dedication, following which Commission X Agee revised his amendment to the motion so that �tion instead of deleting Condition No. 5, it would now read as follows: 5. That a 12 foot wide strip along the southwest - Page 17. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES m MA"&k In tour uwnev war �.wrr v a mvcn erly side of Parcels 1 and 3 shall.be reserved for street and highway purposes. The method of acquisition by the appropriate public agency shall be determined at a later date. Commissioner Heather advised she could not support the amendment to her motion because this action would abrogate the responsibility of following through with the implementation of the Circulation Element and development of the Master Plan of .Streets and Highways in a timely manner and in a manner within which the City has the power to act. Commissioner Beckley advised that his vote would reflect the fact that white he concurred with the necessity of gaining the 12 feet, the method of compensation must be fair and equitable for all the property owners and in view of the previous action. - taken in connection with the "burned -out" block, felt the revised condition was appropriate. . Planning Commission made the following findings in connection with the revision to Condition No. 5 as • follows: 1. That there are special circumstances and conditions affecting the property in that the Planning Commission and the City Council did not require the owners of the property to the west between Riverside and Tustin Avenues to dedicate any additional right -of -way in con- junction with the redevelopment of that block and because of the relative similarity of this property to the burned out block property. 2. That the exception is necessary for the preser vation and-enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner because of existing improve ments which will be affected by the dedication of the right -of -way and because of the amount and value of the land which would be involved with the dedication and because of the configu a- tion of the subject property. 3. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the property is located inasmuch as it is very . unlikely that any of the right -of -way required for West Coast Highway will ever be dedicated to the City. Ayes X X x X x The amended motion as revised was voted on and Noes X carried. Absent X Page 18. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A P Z N L CALL Ayes Absent 0 Motion Ayes Absent 0 MINUTES March 1R_ 1A7F, - - -- --- mvcn X X X X X X The original motion to approve Resub.division No. X 512 as amended was then voted on and carried. Planning Commission recessed at 10:05 P.M. and reconvened at 10:20 P.M. Item #11 Request to permit a drive -up teller facility in conjunction with the construction of a bank complex in "Koll Center.Newport." USE PERMIT NN77781 Location: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 60 -17 APPROVED ( Resubdivision No. 434), located C —DI- at 4699 Jamboree Road, on the TITI —ALLY westerly corner of Jamboree Road and Campus Drive in "Koll Center Newport." Zone: P -C Applicant: Eugene E. Hougham,'AIA Architect, Los Angeles Owner: California Canadian Bank, San Francisco Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Eugene E. Hougham, Architect for the California Canadian Bank appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff report and recommendation . There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X X X X X X following findings: X 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the General Plan and the Planned Community Development Standards of . "Koll Center Newport, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Adequate offstreet parking spaces are being provided for the proposed development. 3. Adequate provisions for traffic circulation Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p P Z U OLL CALL LJ MINUTES Marrh 7R_ 1Q7f, are being made for the drive -in teller facilit . 4. That the proposed development will not have any significant environmental impact. S. The approval of Use Permit No. 1781 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals,::= .comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1781, subject to the, following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and parking layout. 2. The traffic flow pattern to the drive -up teller units shall be from a northwesterly to a southeasterly direction. 3. That the type of the driveway approaches as well as the exact width and location be in . accordance with an approved encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 4. That an appropriate instrument be executed and recorded which provides for the relocation and substitution of the two driveways along Jamboree Boulevard shown on the recorded maps for Tract 7953 and Resubdivision 434 for the single driveway shown on the site plan for the proposed bank development. 5. That the developer be responsible for relocat- ing the interfering Southern California Edison facilities along Jamboree Boulevard in order to construct the driveway at the desired location. Item #12 Request to establish a restaurant facility with ma on -sale wine in an existing building in "McFadden PERMIT Place." The proposal also includes the paying of N7,1783 an annual fee to the City for a portion of the required restaurant parking spaces in.the adjoin- APPROVED ing Municipal Parking Lot. _ fiTbWLY Page 20. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Z N s�.�.. Marrh 1R_ 197A MINUTES una Location: Lots 4 through 7, Block 120, First Addition to Newport Beach, located at 112 McFadden Place and Court Street in "McFadden Place." Zone: C -1 Applicant: Raymond W. Smith, Newport Beach Owner: Marian M. Smith, Newport Beach Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Raymond Smith, applicant, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter. He reviewed the proposed operation of the restaurant and commercial uses and felt that the intensity would be much less than when the building was. used as a market. He commented on parking in the area and advised of the additional parking secured on the Associated Brokers Servottes site, however, it was on a month to month basis and, • therefore, an offsite parking.agreement as requir- ed by Condition No. 6 and the City could not be obtained. He also requested that the closing hour indicated in Condition No. 9 be extended to 8:00 P.M. Planning Commission discussed offsite parking agreements and questioned the necessity to always require long -term leases and agreements. They also discussed the effect that any loss of parking obtained through an offsite agreement could have on a business which obtained parking on a month to month basis, especially in an area where extra parking was at a minimum. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that the parking in the Associated Brokers lot could be considered as supplemental parking without the need for a formal parking agreement. He also commented on.the "in lieu" parking spaces which could be purchased from the City to meet the parking requirements. John Shey, 2214 Ocean Front, appeared before the Commission to voice concern with the lack of parking in the area and questioned the status of • developing a Specific Area Plan. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Page 21. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH YC T T D� T 4 Mawrh 1R 107 r. MINUTES ..Vii Y..& v, Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make.the following findings: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact, providing that parking demands are met. A Municipal lot is directly in front of the proposed restaurant facility, and may be useful to said business during daytime hours. Adequate parking spaces will be provided for the restaurant use during the evening hours if a supplemental offstreet parking agreement is provided for at least 12 parking spaces in the location proposed by the applicant. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The proposed background music will not be • detrimental to any surrounding land use so long as the music is confined to the interior of the restaurant. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1783 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 6. It is the intent of the applicant to obtain a supplemental parking agreement guaranteeing that a minimum of 12 parking spaces shall be provided on the Associated Brokers Service building site for the duration of the restau- rant use on the property in question. and approve Use Permit No. 1783, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan. 2. That all exterior lighting and signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. Page 22. COMMISSIONERS P P N e- reu CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 18, 1976 MINUTES lu�v 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from public streets, alleys, or adjoining properties. . 4. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 50 of the Air Pollution Control District. In Addition, the kitchen hood system shall have an automatic fire protection system installed. 5. That this approval shall be for a period of two years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee 6. That 20 "in lieu" parking spaces shall be purchased from the City on an annual basis for the duration of the restaurant use on the site. 7. That the proposed background music shall be confined to the interior of the facility. 8. That the retail shops in the building shall close by 8:00 P.M. daily. Planning Commission discussed the matter of .offsite parking at length. Commissioner Parker advised that he did not feel improvements and developments.'such as this should be delayed just because the City has not had time to prepare a Specific Area Plan. Commissioner Heather advised that she liked the .proposed development and did not want to discour- age it just because parking could not be secured on a long term lease basis. She felt that an agreement on a month to month basis was adequate. Commissioner Beckley commented that he could not support a restaurant without providing some amount of its own parking. Commissioner Agee felt that the intent of the applicant to provide supplemental parking because of his recognition of the problem should be given some consideration and the applicant should not be penalized with a condition which would require • additional parking, especially since a substantial investment was being made to up -grade the property as well as the fact that any other business in the area could obtain parking merely through purchase Page 23. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T (� ?♦ Rio � m 1 March 18 1976 MINUTES CALL , ,nuew of. "in- lieu" spaces in the Municipal Parking.Lot. Ayes X X X Followiny:;discussion, the motion was voted on and Noes X X Y failed. Absent X Notion X New motion was made that Planning Commission make Ayes X X X X X the following findings: Noes X Absent X 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses: 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact, providing that parking, demands are met. A Municipal lot is directly in front of the proposed restaurant facility, and may be useful to said business during day -.. time hours., Adequate parking spaces will be provided for the restaurant use during the evening hours if a supplemental offstreet parking agreement is provided for at least 12 parking-spaces in the location proposed by • the applicant. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The proposed background music will not be detrimental to any.surrounding land use so long as the music is confined to the interior. of the restaurant. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1783 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and Improvements in the neighborhood or the genera welfare�of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1783, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot.plan. 2. That all exterior lighting and signs shall be • approved by the Director of Community Develop - ment. 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas Page 24. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALI E 0 MINUTES Marrh 1A 107C. shall be screened from public streets, alleys, or adjoining properties. 4. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 50 of the Air Pollution Control. District. In addition, the kitchen hood system shall have an automatic fire protection system installed. 5. That this approval shall be for a period of two years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee 6. That a supplemental parking agreement shall . be provided satisfactory to the Director of Community Development and the City Attorney which provides for a minimum of 12 parking spaces. Said agreement may be on a month to month basis if necessary. 7. That 20 "in lieu" parking spaces shall be purchased from the City on an annual basis for the duration of the restaurant use on the site. 8. That the proposed background music shall be confined to the interior of the facility. 9. That the retail shops in the building shall close by 8:00 P.M. daily. Item #13 to permit the establishment of a synagogue USE in a relocatable building in "North Ford." PERMIT request to accept an offsite parking agree - IVd.�T85 the required parking spaces for .the sub - Lectsynagogue. CPP�ROV- : A portion of a residual parcel of THAN ELY Parcel Map 45 -39 (Resubdivision No. 357), located at 1001 Camelback Street, on the southeasterly corner of Camelback Street and Jamboree Road in "North Ford." Zone: P -C Applicant: Temple Bat Yahm, Corona del Mar Page 25. COMMISSIONERS TT ., y Z�{ A P Z U CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 18, 1976 MINUTES INUCA Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Commissioner Seely stepped down from the dais and refrained from deliberation on this item because of a possible conflict of interest in that he has performed services for the applicant's architect. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker: advised of a communication received from the Polic Department reiterating some of their concerns whic were also contained in the staff report relative to parking because of the distance between the temple and the offsite parking area. Mr. Hewicker also advised that subsequent to the distribution of the staff report, the applicant had revised the plan to alleviate the concerns expressed by the City relative to parking. Copies of the revised plans were distributed to the Commission for revie . Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Bernie Rome, President of the Congregation, • appeared before the Commission.on behalf of the applicant to answer questions relative to the request. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that Condition No. 7 could be deleted since a resubdivision would not be required under the revised plan. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X following findings: Absent x x 1. The proposed development does not conflict with the General Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. The project, as conditioned below, will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The proposed relocatable building is accept- able for the synagogue us,e on a temporary basis. • 4. That adequate parking can be provided on. -site or off -site immediately adjacent to the synagogue. Page 26. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 L A P N p� CALI March 18, 1976 MINUTES 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1185, as conditioned, will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to.the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious.to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1785, subject to the following.conditions: 1. That this approval shall be for a period of two years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval.of the Modifications Committee. 2. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations, except as noted in Condition No. 3 3. That a minimum of one parking space /5 occupant in the public assembly area shall be provided on site or off -site on the vacant property • directly east of the synagogue site. Vehicular and pedestrian access and design of the parkin layout shall be approved by the Traffic Engineer. Said parking area shall be paved with asphalt, plant mix, or other street surfacing material of a permanent nature. The parking spaces shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. An offsite parking agreement shall be approved by the City Council if the required parking spaces are located on the adjacent vacant property. 4. All signs shall be approved by the Director of . Community Development. 5. That landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. All landscaped areas shall be continuously maintained. 6: All.exterior illumination shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Communi.y Development. Commissioner Seely returned to the dais. . Page 27. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 7 'fin >pTpi m r� r m at CALL 0 Motion Ayes Absent MINUTES Marrh 1R_ 1976 YHCv Request to construct two duplexes in the C -1 District. The proposed development encroaches to within 5 feet of the rear property line (where the Ordinance requires a 10 foot rear yard setback in Item #14 USE PERMIT 9-0-771-786 the C -1 District when abutting an alley. APPROVED CONDr— Location: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 62 -14 TT —fbNAL Y (Resubdivision No. 411) located at 413 -415 East Balboa Boulevard, on the southerly side of East Balboa Boulevard, between Coronado and Adams Streets on the Balboa Peninsu a. Zone: C -1 Applicant: Properties West, Inc., Newport Beac Owner: Edward W. Kover, Newport Beach Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Webster Smith appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. „ J. H. Rutledge, 419 East Balboa, appeared before the Commission to comment on the setbacks and questioned the type of construction proposed. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X X X X X X following findings: X 1. That the proposed residential development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed development meets or exceeds all of the required Residential Development Standards (i.e. floor area limit, open space option, building height, parking, etc.). 3. That the establishment of a 5 foot 6 inch yard setback along the rear property line of the two parcels will not, under the circumstan es of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the Page 28. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH yn, M T 9 rNn T ACAII 0 0 MINUTES Marrh 1R- 107r. a INUCA neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improve- ments 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. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1786 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and _......... ... ._ i_Mp rovements in the Pe.i.4hborh.00d or general welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1786, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial. conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations. 2. That a resubdivision be approved and a Parcel Map filed and recorded. Item #15 Request to create two parcels of land for residen- tial development where one parcel now exists. RESUB- DI ION NO. 517 Location: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 62 -14 (Resubdivision No. 411) located at. APPROVED 413 -415 East Balboa Boulevard, on CONDI- the southerly side of East Balboa TIONALLY Boulevard, between Coronado and Adams Streets on the Balboa Peninsu a. Zone: C -1 Applicant: Properties West, Inc., Newport Beac Owner: Edward W. Kover, Newport Beach Engineer: Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Fullerton Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Webster Smith appeared before the .Commission on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. Page 29. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Dm '^ . s m Z y MINUTES Tc A P Z N A rp« March 18 1976 There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. . Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density.of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substanti 1 environmental damage or.substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their • habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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 subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. and approve Resubdivision No. 517, subject to the following condition: 1. That a parcel map be filed. • ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Chairman Beckley reviewed the actions of the Modifications Committee relative to approval of a i Page 30. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH M � 9 March 18. 1976 MINUTES INDEX sign for the City National Bank. In reviewing the action, there was a concern with the size of the sign and the basis for which the modification was granted, i.e. that the Coastal Commission allowed onl_y_one sign and that the applicant felt the sign -should be T -arge' enough to tie read from the dstanc the sign would be visible. Some of the Commission ers, at the afternoon study session, felt that perhaps the matter should be reviewed by the Plan- ning Commission. Commissioner Williams commented that the bank sign should not be more important than the sign which was recently approved for Hoag Hospital and requested a comparison of the two signs. Commissioner Seely felt that the matter should be reviewed by the Commission because of the location and size which may set a precedent for other signs. in the area. Tim Strader appeared before the Commission to comment on the matter. He advised that the sign • was requested by the City National Bank who are the main tenants of the building and, therefore, will have the only sign on the building. He felt that the decision of the Modifications Committee should stand as__the s_i_gn -is ,_9_oodlooking and _will -Veelp in gumming people t-o Lido Village. He commented on their compromise with the Coastal Commission to secure one sign where three signs were originally requested. Also, in view of the City's action in connection with Tokai Bank signs, Mr. Strader felt that any review of this sign would do nothing more than delay the instal- lation of the sign and that the Commission had more important matters to attend. He commented on the difference of opinion as to how the sign should be measured and advised that if the sign were on one line, rather than three, it would be similar to the one located in Koll Center Newport. He requested that the decision of the Modification Committee be permitted to stand without further review by the Commission. Tony Bollin, with Heath Sign Company, appeared before the Commission to comment on the sign and the degree of visability as it relates to size. He also commented on the amount of time it takes to establish a business if the signs are inadequat . Page 31. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 18, 1976 MINUTES INBC V Motion X Motion was made that no public hearing be set and Ayes X X X X no review be held by the Planning Commission and Noes X X that the decision of the Modifications Committee Absent X stand. Chairman Beckley advised the Commission of the joint meeting with the City Council to be held on March 29, 1976 and solicited the Commission's preparation in connection with the matters to be discussed. There being no further business, Planning Commis- sion adjourned the meeting. Time: 12:05 A.M. 000'e, AMES R. PARKER, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach • Page 32.