Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/04/1996COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: MINUTES ROLL INDEX CALL Commissioner Kranzley was excused, all other Commissioners were present see EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney Patricia L. Temple, Acting Planning Director Rich Edmonton, Traffic Engineer Ginger Varin, Executive Secretary Darleen Kuhlmann, Planning Secretary • *ta Motion * Minutes of March 21, 1996: minutes 321/96 Ayes * * * * * Motion was made and voted on to approve, as amended, the March 21, Absent * 1996, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED - 5 Ayes, 1 Approved Abstain * Absent, I Abstain ass Public Comments: None public * * * Corments Posting of the A eg nda: Posting " Agenda Ms. Temple stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, March 29,1996, outside of City Hall. • of of COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL INDEX CALL SUBJECT: The Irvine Company Item 1 900 Dover Drive • AmendmentNo.843 A 843 Request for an amendment to the Upper Castaways Planned Community Approved District Regulations to change the required street setback along Dover Drive. Ms. Temple stated that this is a clean-up action to make the Planned Community Zoning for the Upper Castaways area consistent with the approvals of the Tract Maps that occurred earlier. It merely changes the setback along Dover Drive from 35 feet to 25 feet. Public Hearing was opened and closed. . Mo n * Motion was made to adopt Resolution 1430 recommending approval of A * * * * * * Amendment No. 843 to the City Council. MOTION CARRIED, 6 Ayes, 1 Absent. Absent * *s SUBJECT: 1 -Hour Cleaners (Jeff Yim, applicant) Item 2 3929 Birch Street • Use Permit No. 3579 UP 3579 Public Hearing was opened. Approved In response to Commission inquiry, Mr. Jeff Yim, applicant, stated that he understands and agrees to the terms and conditions of the Use Permit No. 3579 procedures as set forth in Chapter 20 of the Municipal Code. Public Hearing was closed. Motion Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3579 subject to the Ayes * * findings and conditions in Exhibit A. MOTION CARRIED, 6 Ayes, 1 Absent Absent. 2 COMMISSIONERS �9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Findings: 1. That the proposed application is support service in nature and not an intensificationof square footage of the existing structure, and as such, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed dry cleaning facility, with on -site cleaning equipment, does not pose any significant environmental impact. 3. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3579 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. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance 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. There shall be no outside storage of materials, supplies or other paraphernalia likely to be objectionable to the adjacent tenants and/or property owners. 5. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be screened from view and shall be sound attenuated to be no greater than existing sound levels at the property lines. • 3 COMMISSIONERS 4 L F,9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL INDEX CALL 6. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from view of adjoining properties and the public streets 7. That the cleaning operation shall be installed and operated in conformance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 8. 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. 9. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. *ra SUBJECT Hooter's Restaurant Item 3 2406 Newport Boulevard • the interpretation of Use Permit No. 1581 Op: 1581 (Amended) Ms. Temple reported that this discussion item was brought before the Continu Commission by the Planning Staff to seek direction regarding certain 'to: 4/18 conditions of approval for this project. First, the location of the approved outdoor eating deck. The original approval shows the deck at ground level next to the parking lot at the restaurant entrance. That particular deck had a roof cover on it. The applicant has reconsidered that particular design and is seeking to construct the outdoor deck on the second floor, not structurally covered but allowing for shade umbrellas to protect patrons. Staff's concerned that it would be beyond staff authority to approve a relocation of this nature without the concurrence of the Planning Commission. Second, the interpretation of the condition 4 ed /96 COMMISSIONERS • `oc�h'9p`��� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX applied on the project regarding the parking lot and the required amount of parking and landscaping contained within. Ms. Temple referred to exhibits on the board of a parking lot layout devised by the applicant and submitted with this package. After considering the package, Commissioner Selich asked the Planning staff to look at an alternative parking lot layout that provided a different internal circulation pattern. Both of those layouts have been reviewed by the Traffic Engineering Division and both plans would need some work. At this time, the applicant and Traffic Engineering Division are working out the design of the parking lot in terms of the number of handicap spaces, aisle width, access to certain of the spaces, etc. Staff is asking for Commission direction in terms of the condition itself. Is it more important to achieve the 1,500 square feet of landscaping within the parking lot, or achieving a higher number of parking spaces? The amount of landscaping approaches 1,500 square feet but does not achieve it as proposed by the plans submitted by the applicant. The direction from Commission would answer whether 1,500 square feet of landscaping is actually the number, or rather if some lesser number would suffice if it meant saving additional parking spaces. Chairperson Ridgeway asked staff about the relocation of the outdoor dining and if notification had been given to the people within 300 feet about the relocation? Ms. Temple answered, no. The question on the part of staff is, since the original deck was covered with a structural element, and this proposed application is actually a second floor deck, does it constitute a significant change in the project to warrant an amendment to the existing use permit? Commissioner Selich asked about the status of the transfer of development intensity agreement and the off -site parking, and if they had been executed? • 5 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Staff _answered that all conditions of approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Commissioner Gifford asked staff about the original Use Permit requiring that all storage of trash be shielded from view within an area enclosed by a wall not less then six feet in height. Are there any changes to that requirement that staff is aware off as there are two dumpsters that sit out in full public view in front of the building. Ms. Temple answered that none of the conditions have been altered. If there are dumpsters on site, staff will see if they are there for construction or if they are there serving the building. It will be dealt with, if so. Commissioner Adams observed that, after having read the staff report regarding the positioning of this deck on the first level versus the second, there was no staff opinion presented in the report pertaining to a change in use. The staff report seems to address the discussion of noise requirement. Before, this was a combination bar /eating area that was adjacent to the waiting area. Apparently there has not been a revised first floor plan, so it is not clear how the reception is going to be configured with this change. It appears that the upper deck is more an extension of the dining room and does not contain a bar. It would not serve the waiting area due to access as well as no bar. Chairperson Ridgeway stated that as a Commissioner who lives on the Peninsula, he believes that at the Commission hearing of April 20, 1995 on Use Permit 1581, the Planning Commission gave the applicant the benefit of the doubt. He comes before the Commission tonight but has not shown good faith. The lot is still a dirt lot; there has been no attempt to create a situation where they are tied together; no attempt at the landscaping and now there is a request for a change. He concluded by stating that this lot has been an eyesore and has continued as an eyesore and this is an unfortunate situation. 6 COMMISSIONERS 4 1 i 4 k� , ,01 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Selich asked staff about the earlier comments on the site plan, has the site plan been presented to Commission without approval of the Traffic Engineer? Staff answered that it had not been previously approved by the Traffic Engineering. Commissioner Adams referenced the minutes of April 20, 1995 regarding an extended discussion about the construction of the deck. The previous proposal revolved around the need to have the deck, ".. a place where patrons can wait until they are seated in the restaurant. The idea is to create a controlled waiting area. The patrons could exit the restaurant and pick up their automobiles past the waiting area so as to avoid a conflict between the patrons entering and leaving the restaurant..... ". With this proposed change, they are completely changing the whole nature of the prior application. He does not agree with the staff report that moving the deck up a level is a relatively insignificant change, when you read the minutes. He pointed out that this is a significant difference. Chairperson Ridgeway agreed based on his recollection of the minutes, that this was a staging area. He agreed that the intent has been changed. The applicant was invited by Chairperson Ridgeway to comment on the discussion of the Commission even though this was not a Public Hearing. Mr. Ken Poole, of Hooter's Restaurant at 2406 Newport Boulevard commented on the Commission's discussion. He explained the reason he had not done anything with the parking lot is because of a lease he has with the owner, who had requested an exact pricing of the work to be done. Therefore, Mr. Poole would have to do an in depth process with drawings, etc. to get such a detailed estimate. The lease agreement he has states that the owner would have to pay half of the improvements on the property. He then reported to Commission the history of his application. He was not able to bear the expense since the summer months profits were over. He is hoping to get this current application done by summer in order to maximize his business opportunity. J COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX He commented that he has a staging area to be used for a waiting area that will be elevated per the exhibits displayed. This area has the same footprint as the original deck, it is just elevated to the second level without a covered roof portion on it. It is the same square footage, but has two different elevations. Commissioner Pomeroy asked Mr. Poole if the Commission was to require him to come back for the Use Permit procedure again, it was appealed by City Council and back to the Coastal Commission, then perhaps that the parking and landscaping would not be complete for another year? Is that possible? Commissioner Pomeroy stated that he sees here a scenario to repeat the reason it didn't get done last year one more time. Mr. Poole stated he will not go through the process another summer. He is paying $35,000 a year for that lot. The lot mayor may not benefit him. He parks employees only on this lot. Commissioner Gifford asked Mr. Poole, at this point, if he had a choice between implementing the plan that has already been approved, which could be done with no further discussion, or, asking for this plan where you go up to the second floor and so on, and run the risk that it might not either not be approved or go through the whole process of the City Council and Coastal Commission again. Which would be your choice? Mr. Poole stated he would rather have the original approval on the ground level and not go through the process again. What he has submitted here is a much nicer plan. He then referred to his architecture to address the parking situation and the landscaping. Mr. John Loomis, with 30th Street Architects, 2821 Newport Boulevard - addressed Commission on behalf of the applicant and gave a brief 8 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX business history. He then referred to staff meetings he has attended to present some changed options. The first issue of the previous deck was a split level situation. A portion of the deck was raised with a bar on it. Now that the tenant has had an opportunity to operate the restaurant for a year, he has realized that some of the decisions or approaches put into the plan at that time, are probably not necessary. The previous deck was raised 18 inches to 2 feet, we are now talking about raising that portion of the dining lounge deck up to the second level. It would relate and open from the second level out towards the parking lot. The same area is being maintained, the net public area in terms of seating. There will also still be an area of containment and entry at the lower level that is still a part of the function. He continued by discussing the porch entry of the restaurant as a type of trademark. He then discussed the reconfiguration of the parking lot. Staff led a discussion on the amounts of landscaping required/recommended by Planning Commission, City Council and recommendations from Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee. Regardless of the determination on the deck situation as to whether it would require a new public hearing or not, staff would like direction on the interpretation of the landscaping condition. That particular condition starts out as saying it is required to be 15 %, then it uses the term "rational application of 1500 square feet ". Ms. Temple asked if it is 1500 square feet or whether there is room for discretion. Beyond that, the design of the parking lot is really a matter between staff and applicant. Chairperson Ridgeway stated the Commission's dilemma for Mr. Loomis. That is, that the 28th Street Marina residents testified to the noise the previous time the application was heard. The Commission will not approve or interpret the change to the upstairs without a roof, without a hearing. It would not be fair to make a determination tonight, without the Marina people being given the opportunity to voice their concerns. The applicant will have to go through a new hearing, whether those people show up or not, is a risk of the applicant. He asked Mr. Loomis to submit a plan for landscaping. If it shows there is substantial 9 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX conformance, it can be dealt with. He also recommended that the applicant clean up the site. Mr. Loomis stated that these observations were reasonable and reiterated reasons why it had not been done before due to timing and economics. He continued by stating that the sound wall will be moved up to a height of 7 feet. Commissioner Adams commented he respects this notion, but in the previous meeting talking about the intention of that waiting area and so on, now that the restaurant has been in operation, maybe it has been recognized by the applicant that there is no need to have a large area adjacent to the waiting area. Frankly, maybe having the upstairs deck might be better in that it reduces the amount of a bar area within the restaurant. He states he would like to see a public hearing for the open upper deck even though there is an existing outdoor deck on the other side of the building. As to the parking lot landscape, sticking with strictly 1500 square feet is not that important, especially with the plan like the one in the staff report which is a token at providing landscaping in this parking lot. The parking areas within the up /down aisles are really going to be ineffectual as far as to what it will look like from the street. His interpretation is if some latitude in the planting area could accommodate a better circulation plan, then he would be willing to compromise a little bit. For example, the planting area parallel to the street could be just as effective if it were slightly less deep. Commissioner Gifford stated that the City Council had imposed, as part of its landscape condition, that the landscaping should have trees so that there would not be just 3 foot high landscaping that allows for viewing of the cars. She shares the concern about the people who at the previous • 10 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Commission meeting had expressed their concerns about the noise and the deck, and not providing an opportunity for them to come and comment on this item. Whether it is a good or bad idea, it is appropriate for them to have the opportunity to comment. Regarding the landscaping and parking issues, the evidence is for most of the year the applicant is more than adequately parked. The City has allotted $30,000 to be spent on design workshops to try to improve the look and the feel of the Peninsula and to upgrade it. When the Council made the decision to have the 1500 square foot allowance, it was really a minimum. With all this effort being made on the look and trying to improve the look and feel, and given that this plan has not been worked very hard yet to see what is the most that could be got out of it, she continued, that elevated planters on light standards and so on could count for the square footage. They do not have to come out of the ground necessarily, because part of what is trying to be achieved is not just to have a flat, low level appearance. She • suggested that this plan be re- worked and reviewed by the Traffic Department. Before the Planning Director, as one of the conditions, approves the landscape and parking plan, she would ask that it be reviewed with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Pomeroy concurs with staff s interpretations but asked if there was a way to set this item for a Public Hearing. The public could comment on whether or not this was a correct interpretation. Therefore, once the Public Hearing was over, this item would not go through the bureaucratic process again. If, as a result of this Public Hearing the public concurs that this is not a significant change, then the Commission would not need to put the applicant through the whole, long delay process. Commissioner Gifford suggested that a study session be held inviting the public to attend, as provided for in our rules. Ms. Clauson stated that the interpretation is the Planning Commission's but there would not be anything to prevent a notice to invite comments on the Commission's interpretation. The determination would be based • 11 COMMISSIONERS •ya \ 04\ix CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX upon. what is presented by the neighbors. Or, if the commission determines the change is not in substantial compliance then an amendment to the Use Permit would be necessary, especially since the applicant has indicated he does not plan on going through a Public Hearing. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that he is trying to accomplish public comment, but is not pushing it so it becomes again impossible for construction during the summer and the improvements do not get made. Chairperson Ridgeway asked Mr. Loomis how he felt about inviting the public to comment at a work session. Mr. Loomis stated he agrees to this and asks that the owner comment. Mr. Poole, after clarification from the Commission, agreed to a work session with public comments. Commissioner Pomeroy said he is suggesting we set this again, just as we have done now, to the next Planning Commission meeting with a requirement that it be noticed to the residents within 300 feet. Then, they will be here to make comments and the Commission can act. Commissioner Adams stated that the applicant would have time to come back with a revised parking layout and the neighbors would have the opportunity to comment. Commissioner Selich commented on the parking plan. He is convinced that they can get the 74 spaces and the 1500 square feet landscaping with no problem. The parking lot needs work and quality landscaping really needs to be done. Commissioner Adams stated he would like to see some trees on the plan instead of just planter areas. 12 COMMISSIONERS ryos 9� A �9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Poole agreed and that the best use is to get the landscaping on the front of the street, due to trampling of ground cover by customers. Motion * Motion was made to set this for Public Hearing for the next Planning Commission of April 18th. Ms. Clauson advised the Commission that the recommendation be that we continue this interpretation and direct staff to notify the public. Also, she pointed out that since this is an interpretation, there would not be the ability to change or modify the condition, only to determine whether the change was in substantial conformance with the plans. That would make it clear for the applicant that if there were any proposed changes to the application or to the approved Use Permit, it would have to be set again for Public Hearing. 'estated bt* * Commissioner Pomeroy restated his motion to be that this interpretation of Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended) be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting on April 18th and that the public will be notified by staff. Commissioner Adams asked staff if the notice would indicate that the proposed issues are requiring some interpretation? He suggested that the notice should say that a second story deck with no roof versus first story. Commissioner Pomeroy suggested that the applicant have a meeting with the Marina Management to explain what he is doing and also what is planned to make sure it does not become a noise problem which was the major complaint. Commissioner Gifford followed up on Commissioner Pomeroy's comment and mentioned to the applicant that if he intends to have a meeting he could show the proposal to the 28th Street Marina residents. A landscape design along the wall that would improve the view from their location, might help to win their confidence about the changes. • 13 COMMISSIONERS A •�o�`no 9����90< � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4, 1996 ROLL CALL INDEX Ms. Temple asked for clarification from the Commission about what is expected in regards to landscaping. This Commission does not normally get involved in the actual review of landscape plans. This particular question was in regards to the amount of landscape areas and not the actual design of the landscape which is normally handled at the staff level. Commissioner Adams responded by saying that the Commission's decision about the latitude and square footage is dependent on what the applicant is planning to put in. Ms. Temple asked if the Commission wants a landscape plan to be provided by the applicant. Commission said yes. They want a preliminary landscape design plan • showing the number, sizes and types of trees and materials that will be used. Mr. Poole answered that he would be able to have this available for Tuesday. Ayes * * * * * MOTION CARRIED, 6 Ayes, l Absent. Absent *s* ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Additi o Btzine a.) City Council Follow -up - A verbal report by the Acting Planning Director regarding City Council actions related to planning - no items on Council agenda b.) Verbal report by the Planning Department Manager regarding Outdoor Dining Permit, Specialty Food Permits, Modification Permits and Temporary Use Permit approvals- Specialty Food Service Permit was approved for Wally's Original Cookie Co., 3014 West Balboa Boulevard. • 14 nal ss COMMISSIONERS 4 00 9Lo' C \ \ L 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES April 4,1996 ROLL CALL INDEX C.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - reaffirmed joint meeting with the EDC on April 25th at 4:30 in the City Library. d.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee - Commissioner Gifford reported that the City has allocated $30,000 for a contract for a planning design type of contract that will come up with design standard suggestions to improve the Business Districts. Meetings and workshops are scheduled to integrate the stake holders within the community in each of the areas. A formal recommendation will be forthcoming that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and then probably the City Council. There is a substantial effort under way to really work at improving those areas. e.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - Commissioners Pomeroy and Gifford requested a report on the requirements and methods of operation from the ABC, authority of the Police Chief, and how they relate to the Planning Commission authority. (This report will be given at the May 9th Planning Commission Meeting). f.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report - none g.) Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Gifford asked to be excused from the joint meeting of the EDC and the Commission on 4/25/96 ADJOURNMENT: 8:55 p.m. Adjournment MICHAEL KRANZLEY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION 15