Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/19/1990COMMISSIONERS Ah 1W REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: April 19, 1990 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES R CALL INDEX Present *'- Absent Commissioner Debay was absent. x x x EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney x x x William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary x x x Minutes of April 5 1990: Minutes of 4 -5 -90 n Motion was made and voted on to approve the April 5, 1990, A s * Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Absent x x x Public Comments: Public Comments James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that the Planning Commission take appropriate agenda action so as to review Variance No. 1125, property located at 802 South Bay Front, Balboa Island. He explained that a meeting was held between staff and representatives of the property owners, and it was determined that the Planning Commission review the subject variance and take proper action. Motion Commissioner Pers6n made a motion to add Variance No. 1125 Ayes * * to the Planning Commission Agenda with the provision that the Absent * Planning Commission recess prior to reviewing the Variance. Commissioner Edwards abstained because of a conflict of interest. Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. x x x RI COMMISSIONERS .o A � d�Y dd d, d D� c'� Aft CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES CALL LL I I I I I INDEX Posting of the enda: Posting of the Agenda James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, April 13, 1990, in front of City Hail. Request for Continuance,,: Request for Mr. Hewicker recommended that Item No. 5, Planning continuance Commission Review No. 12, Mr. and Mrs. Jim Beauchamp, applicants, property located at 2719 Shell Street, be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1990, to allow staff additional time to review the project. He further requested that Discussion Items No. 1, Amendment No. 708, to amend Title 20 to establish the Retail and Service Commercial District, and No. 2, Amendment No. 709, to amend Title 20 so as to establish the Residential Overlay District, be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 1990. On Planning * Motion was made and voted on to continue yes * * Commission Review No. 12, and Discussion Items No. 1 and No. bsent * 2 to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Final Map of Tract No. 14186 (Discussion) Item No.1 Request to subdivide two existing lots into a single lot for a 15 FTM 14186 unit residential condominium development on property located in the MFR (2178) SPR District. Approved LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Tract No. 1718, located at 2101 15th Street, on the southeasterly comer of 15th Street and Irvine Avenue, in Cliff Haven. ZONE: MFR (2178) SPR APPLICANTS: James G. White, Lawrence M. Campeau and Wayne A. Fraser . OWNER: Newport Harbor Foundation, Newport Beach -2- COMMISSIONERS '� `d d� d O �n p� �d O� N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R CALL INDEX ENGINEER: Robin B. Hamers & Associates, Inc., Costa Mesa Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve the Final Map of Ayes * * * Tract No. 14186, subject to the finding and condition in Exhibit Absent * "A ". MOTION CARRIED. Fin in : 1. That the Final Map of Tract No. 14186 substantially conforms to the Tentative Map of said Tract and with all changes permitted and all requirements imposed as conditions to its acceptance. Condition: 1. That all conditions imposed by the City Council in conjunction with its approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 14186 shall be fulfilled. Use Permit No 1514 (Amended).(Public Hearinel Item No.2 UP1514A Request to amend a previously approved use permit that allowed the construction of a temporary sales pavilion and model complex within the Villa Balboa portion of the Versailles Planned Approved Community. The proposed amendment involves a request to delete a previous condition of approval of said use permit which required the removal of the building at the conclusion of the project sales activity, so as to allow the structure to be retained as a private community recreational facility. LOCATION: Lot 7, Tract No. 8336, located at 900 Cagney Lane, on the southerly side of Cagney Lane between Stare Lane and Paris Lane, in the Villa Balboa portion of the Versailles Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Villa Balboa Community Association, • Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant -3- COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Phil Bias, representing the Villa Balboa Community Association, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1514 Ayes * * * (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Absent * MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the retention of the subject building for a private community recreational facility is consistent with the General Plan and with the Versailles Planned Community. 2. The project will not have a significant environmental impact. • 3. Adequate off -street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the Planned Community development. 4. That the proposed use of the subject building for a private community recreational facility is logical and reasonable and is a desirable addition to the Villa Balboa Condominium development. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1514 (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 and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 1. That the proposed private community recreational facility shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, plot plan, and floor plan, including the provision of seven additional parking spaces on Cagney Lane, in front • 11111111 of the community recreational building. -4- COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES \�\� q� AM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R CALL 2— 4bat the laGility shall "Q1 be 11117--d INDEX p4vMe Feefoadefial for commercial purposes, nor shall any portion of the complex be rented for any purpose. 3. That all previous conditions of approval for Use Permit No. 1514 shall be null and void. Use Permit No 3009 (Amended) (Public Hearin) Item uo.3 Request to amend a previously approved use permit that UP3009A permitted the service of beer and wine in conjunction with an existing restaurant on property located in the C -O-Z District. Approved The proposed amendment involves a request to expand the interior dining area and enclose and expand an existing outdoor dining area which will result in an increase in the "net public area" of the restaurant. The proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the additional required parking spaces. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 6939 -90, 91 • (Resubdivision No. 179) located at 2931 East Coast Highway, on the southwesterly side of East Coast Highway between Iris Avenue and Heliotrope Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -O-Z APPLICANT: Anju Kapoor, Corona del Mar OWNER: J. Ray Property Management, Irvine William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, referred to the addendum that was distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the public bearing, requesting that Condition No. 19 stating that the "net public area" of the restaurant shall not exceed 547 square feet be added to Exhibit 'B ". The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Craig Yamasaki, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Yamasaki indicated that the intent of the applicant is to move the waiter's station so as to increase the indoor dining area and to enclose the existing . outdoor dining area; however, the increased "net public area" would require a waiver of parking spaces. Mr. Yamasaki -5- April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX illustrated the number of automobiles that were parked in the allotted spaces during the lunch and dinner hours. He concluded that there are an adequate number of parking spaces for restaurant patrons based on the staggered operating hours of the adjacent businesses in the area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner PersGn determined that the request is minimal, that the restaurant has been a good neighbor, that there have not been any problems with respect to the restaurant's operation, notion and many of the patrons walk to the restaurant. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3009 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". I I I I ( In response to a question posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Laycock replied that staff visited the subject site on several occasions and observed an adequate number of available parking spaces during the lunch hour. Mr. Laycock further replied that the reference in the staff report with respect to "concerns regarding the adequacy of parking in the vicinity" relates to the entire area and not the specific site. Ayes * * * Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3009 Noes * (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Absent MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Elements of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That adequate parking is available on -site to accommodate the proposed restaurant facility inasmuch as a majority of the patrons either work or reside or are otherwise already visiting in the vicinity. 1111 4. That the waiver of the development standards as they pertain to circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot 0 COMMISSIONERS Am '4� �O_d �� N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX (4 spaces) will not be detrimental to adjoining properties. 5. 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. 6. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3009 (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 and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. CONDJ I NS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plans, except as noted • below. 2. That the development standards pertaining to parking lot illumination, circulation, walls, landscaping and utilities, and a portion of the required parking (4 spaces) shall be waived. 3. That a minimum of one parking space for each 48 square feet of "net public area" shall be provided on -site for any enclosed dining areas. 4. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains unless otherwise approved by the Building Department and the Public Works Department. 5. That a trash compactor be provided in the restaurant facility. 6. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems, unless otherwise approved by the • Building Department and the Public Works Department. -7- COMMISSIONERS Am 1W CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R&OFCALL INDEX 7. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 8. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. That no live entertainment or dancing shall be permitted in the restaurant unless the Planning Commission approves an amendment to this Use Permit. 10. That all applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3009 (Amended) shall remain in effect as a part of this approval. 11. That no temporary "sandwich" signs shall be permitted to advertise the approved restaurant facility. 12. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from the adjacent street, alley and adjoining • properties, and that said trash shall be stored at the rear of the site. 13. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 14. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the on -site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self - parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 15. That the sidewalk in front of the subject facility shall be kept clean and regularly maintained. Said sidewalk shall be swept, vacuumed, or washed in such a manner that any debris or wastewater does not enter the storm drain system or the Bay. 16. That one bathroom accessible to the handicapped shall be provided for each sex, unless otherwise approved by the . Building Department. -8- COMMISSIONERS • is April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 17. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to the use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit, cause injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the community. 18. That this use permit shall expire if not exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Eli] Modification No. 3664 (Appeal)(Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of an attached four car garage which will maintain a setback of 12 feet from back of sidewalk where the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community District Regulations require that at least two of said garage spaces maintain 5 to 7 feet average or a minimum average of 20 feet (or 18 feet with roll -up type garage doors), measured from back of sidewalk. The construction is in conjunction with the construction of a single family dwelling. LOCATION: ZONE: APPLICANTS: OWNERS: APPELLANTS: Lot 5, Tract No. 11491, located at #1 Huntington Court, on the southwesterly comer of Huntington Drive South, in the Planned Community. P -C Court and Belcourt Aeronutronic Ford Mr. & Mrs. Glen Simonian, Yorba Linda Same as applicants Same as applicants The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. and Mrs. Simonian, applicants and appellants, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein they concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A'. I, INDEX Item No.4 Mod 3664 (Appeal) Approved COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX Mrs. Simonian distributed photographs of the subject site depicting the irregular shaped lot. Mrs. Simonian indicated that the Management Company, the Architectural Board of the Belcourt Master Association, and the neighbors support the 12 foot front yard setback for the garages. She stated that the visual affect would be enhanced, and a minimum 5 foot to 7 foot front yard setback would have an impact on the front yard landscaping. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Di Sano with respect to the architectural design, Mr. Dennis Cherry, architect, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he explained that based on the unusual shape of the lot, it would be advantageous to have a 12 foot front yard setback at the corner. James Hewicker, Planning Director, indicated that the depth of the driveway could be increased on the two garage spaces that are closest to the library so as to allow an 18 foot apron, and leave two garage spaces at the suggested 12 feet from the sidewalk. Mr. Hewicker stated that the staffs concern is that with • four garage spaces 12 feet from the sidewalk, there is a possibility of one automobile pulling onto the apron and blocking the sidewalk. Mr. Cherry suggested that two garage spaces could be situated 5 feet from the front property line and two garage spaces could be located 12 feet from the front property line. Mr. Hewicker concurred; however, he said that the adjacent neighbor has requested that there be a 12 foot front yard setback. In response to a question posed by Mrs. Simonian, Mr. Hewicker explained that an automobile parked on a 12 foot deep driveway could block the sidewalk; however, an 18 foot apron would allow an automobile to park on the driveway without creating a parking problem. He indicated that his suggestion could be accomplished without altering the building by much because the two garage spaces closest to the library are 27 feet deep, 8 feet deeper than a garage space requirement. Mrs. Simonian and Mr. Cherry stated that if the driveway was uniform for all four garage spaces, it would be more conducive to the site. Mr. Hewicker explained that the purpose of the zoning regulation is to either set the garages back for adequate distance to get the automobiles parked in front of the garages fully onto the site or make the garage setbacks shallow enough to discourage automobiles from blocking the sidewalk. Commissioner PersBn concurred that the subject lot is an unusual shape; however, he indicated that Mr. Hewickees foregoing -10- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19,, 1990 MINUTES INDEX Motion I * I I I I I I suggestion should be considered prior to implementation. Motion was made to approve Modification No. 3664 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit W. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Commissioner Pers6n clarified his motion. Mr. Hewicker indicated that if the plan were implemented as he suggested, a modification to the Planned Community Regulations would not be necessary. Mr. Laycock explained that the Planned Community Development Standards require that only two parking spaces require a 5 to 7 foot or an 18 foot front yard setback with roll-up type garage doors. Commissioner Merrill considered the exhibits that were presented by the applicants to the Planning Commission, the unusual shaped lot, and he concluded that the requested garage setbacks -11- would prevent automobiles from extending onto the street. Ayes * * * Motion was voted on to approve Modification No. 3664, subject N to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A'. MOTION * CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposal will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or increase any detrimental effect of the existing use and is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. That the proposed building location will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or increase any detrimental effect of the existing use. 3. That the proposed garage encroachment will not in itself encourage persons to park vehicles across the sidewalk. 4. That the proposed garage encroachment will not adversely obstruct views from adjoining residential properties any more than a permitted structure. 5. That the Belcourt Master Association has supported the proposed 12 foot front yard setback as measured from the • back of sidewalk to the garages on the subject property. -11- COMMISSIONERS 'd S' o, O O� N An CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations. 2. That the garages located within 12 feet of the back of sidewalk adjacent to Huntington Court shall be equipped with a roll-up type garage doors or other type garage doors approved by the City Traffic Engineer. t i i Planning Commission Review No 12 (Continued Discussion) =ten, No.5 PC Review No. 12 Request to review 3 chimneys which exceed the 24 foot basic height limit in the R -1 District and which exceed the minimum height required by the Uniform Building Code. Cont'd to LOCATION: Lots 5 and 17, Block C -33, Corona del Mar, 5-10-90 located at 2719 Shell Street, on the southwesterly side of Shell Street between Fernleaf Avenue and Way Lane in China Cove. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANTS: Martha and Jim Beauchamp, Corona del Mar OWNERS: Same as applicants James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be continued to the meeting of May 10, 1990, inasmuch as staff has requested additional information from the applicants prior to reviewing the project. Motion Ayes * * * Motion was made and voted on to continue this item to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Absent • -12- COMMISSIONERS 'd W � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES RdWCALL INDEX A. Traffic Study No. 66 (Public HeariWj Item No.6 Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the TS No. 66 construction of a drive -in and take -out restaurant facility on property located in the Koff Center Newport Planned ur 3375 Community. 'Approved AND B. Use Permit No. 3375 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a drive -in and take -out restaurant facility with indoor and outdoor seating areas and a request to waive a portion of the required off - street parking spaces. The proposal also includes a modification to the sign provisions of the Koll Center Newport Planned Community Development Regulations so as to allow a 26 square foot menu sign in addition to two permitted wall identification signs and one ground sign. LOCATION: Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map 84 -702 (Resubdivision No. 772), located at 4101 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, northeasterly of MacArthur Boulevard, in Koll Center Newport. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Taco Bell Corporation, Irvine OWNER: The Koll Company, Newport Beach Commissioner Pers6n asked if the subject project is similar to the restaurant facility that was approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting of November 19, 1987. James Hewicker, Planning Director, responded that it is essentially the same use and floor plan; however, the architectural style has changed substantially. He explained that the project has been reduced inasmuch as the original facility proposed by the applicants was not economically feasible. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Steve Abbott appeared before the Planning Commission on • behalf of the applicants wherein he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". -13- April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Mr. Chauncy Beck, Manager of Design for Taco Bell, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Beck explained the negotiation of leases with The Koll Company regarding the subject site and the site of the Corporate Headquarters of Taco Bell in the City of Irvine, and the impact that the negotiations had on the previously approved restaurant facility. Mr. Beck stated that the architectural change consists of the materials that were originally proposed for the structure, and the kitchen layout and interior have been reduced by approximately 200 square feet. Commissioner Merrill and Mr. Beck discussed the location of the Taco Bell Corporate Headquarters in Irvine and additional restaurant sites that the applicants negotiated with The Koll Company. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public bearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Traffic Study No. 66 Ayes and Use Permit No. 3375 subject to the findings and conditions Noes in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. 0 A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Findings: 1. That all significant environmental concerns for the proposed project have been addressed in a previously certified environmental document, and that the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document for the subject project, and further that there are no additional reasonable alternative or mitigation measures that should be considered in conjunction with said project. 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 9 11111111 have been incorporated into the proposed project and are expressed as Conditions of Approval. -14- COMMISSIONERS Am 1A � d, O .Pow �N 'Y„�, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R&TFCALL INDEX 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. 6. That the findings made in regard to the Environmental Document described above also apply to the action taken on Traffic Study No. 66 and Use Permit No. 3375. 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 four of the five study intersections and that the ICU analysis for the fifth intersection indicates an acceptable ICU value of less than 0.90. C. USE PERMIT NO, 3375 Findings: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the waiver of the take -out restaurant development standards as they relate to perimeter fencing and a portion of the required parking will be of no further detriment to adjacent properties inasmuch as the proposed drive -in and take -out restaurant is part of a larger integrated -15- COMMISSIONERS � s o. o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R CALL INDEX development which is not conducive to such standards, but is designed in a way that meets the purpose and intent of such design standards; and adequate parking is being provided on -site inasmuch as many customers will walk to the site from the surrounding offices. 3. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with airy easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 4. Adequate provision for traffic circulation is being made for the drive -in and take -out restaurant facility. 5. That the proposed modification to allow a 26 square foot menu sign in addition to the two permitted wall identification signs an one ground sign, 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, and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3375 will not, under the circumstances of the case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or 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 development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plan and elevations except as noted below. 2. That the parking lot shall be lighted in such a manner as to prove adequate illumination to all areas of the lot without causing any light or glare to impact adjacent properties. Said lighting shall include fixtures which match • the existing light fixtures currently located on the site. -16- COMMISSIONERS • • April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjoining properties and from adjoining streets. 4. That the development standards pertaining to walls and 11 of the required parking spaces shall be waived. 5. That only two wall identification signs, one monument identification sign and one drive- through menu sign shall be permitted. 6. That the proposed directional signs shall not exceed 6 sq.ft. and shall not include the restaurant name or logo. 7. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the on -site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self - parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 8. That the service of any alcoholic beverages in the take- out restaurant facility is prohibited unless an amended use permit is approved by the City. 9. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 10. That landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and Public Works Department. 11. That 74 off - street parking spaces (including 10 spaces in the drive -up stacking lane) shall be provided. 12. That all employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 13. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review and approval by the Traffic Engineer. 14. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be located in convenient locations inside and outside the building. -17- INDEX April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 16. That grease interceptors shall be provided on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 17. That exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 18. That one bathroom for each sex shall be provided and shall be made readily available to patrons of the facility during all hours of operation. 19. That a trash compactor shall be in installed and maintained. 20. That all mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated to 55 dBA at the property lines. 21. That all conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 849 shall be fulfilled and that the parcel map shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits. 22. That the light system shall be designed, directed, 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. 23. That the County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. 24. 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. • 25. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R CALL INDEX to the City Council 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. Use Permit No. 3378 (Public Hearing) =ten, No . 7 UP3378 Request to permit the establishment of a retail flower shop with outdoor display within the Via Lido Plaza Shopping Center on property located in the C-1-1-1 District. Approved LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 85 -1 (Resubdivision No. 516), located at 3423 Via Lido, on the southerly side of Via Lido between Newport Boulevard and Via Oporto in Central Newport. • ZONE: C -1 -1-1 APPLICANT: Fritz Duda Company, Orange OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Russell Hardt, Vice President of the Fritz Duda Company, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants wherein he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3378 Ayes * * * subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". MOTION Assent * CARRIED. Findingso 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. -19- COMMISSIONERS Ah1W CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES R CALL. INDEX 2. The project will not have a significant environmental impact. 3. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 3378 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 the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans, elevations and sections, except as noted below. • 2. That the final size and location of the proposed outdoor display area shall be subject to further review and approval by the Fire Department and the Planning Department. 3. That the flower display area located outside of the westerly entry of the Pavilion's Place building shall be discontinued. 4. 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. 5. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 6. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application. -20- COMMISSIONERS Aft W CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES ROL CALL INDEX 7. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Use Permit No. 2018 (Amended)(Public Hearing) Item Ro.6 Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit which UP2018A permitted the installation of three off -site directional signs on Continued three sites, all of which are located on property in the to Unclassified District. The proposed amendment involves a 8 -23 -90 request to permit revised copy on the existing signs located at the southwesterly comer of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard (3666 Jamboree Road); the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, between San Joaquin Hills Road and Ford Road (1851 Jamboree Road); and on the northerly side of East Coast Highway, westerly of Jamboree Road (980 East Coast Highway). The proposal also includes a request to permit a larger and taller sign than permitted at the southwesterly corner • of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, and a request to extend the period of approval for Use Permit No. 2018. LOCATION: Properties located at the southwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard; the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, approximately 1,500 feet southwesterly of Ford Road; and the northwesterly comer of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant AND Use Permit No. 3176 (Amended) .( Public Hearing) UP3176A Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit which Continued permitted the installation of an off -site, directional sign on to property located in the Unclassified District. The proposed 8 -23 -90 amendment involves a request to install revised copy on the -21- April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A ,p O �d� Y. o�� A& �' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX comer of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street. The proposal also includes a request to permit a larger and taller sign than permitted, and a request to extend the period of approval for Use Permit No. 3176. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 146, Block 51, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 3501 Jamboree Road, on the southeasterly comer of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street, northerly of the North Ford /San Diego Creek Planned Community. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant AND . Exception Permit No. 9 (Amended) (Discussion—) EP No. 9A Request to amend a previously approved Exception Permit which Continued permitted the installation of a temporary, off -site directional sign to and a modification of an existing off -site, temporary directional 8 -23 -90 sign on property located in the P -C District. The proposed amendment involves a request to install revised copy on the existing off -site, directional sign located at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard. The approved sign located at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road has been deleted. The proposal also includes a request to extend the period of approval of Exception Permit No. 9. LOCATION: Property located at 2500 East Coast Highway, on the northeasterly corer of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant -22- COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH = RO=CALL J 1 j !ill I INDEX The Planning Commission agreed to address Items No. 8, 9, and 10 simultaneously inasmuch as the three items concern off -site directional signs of The Irvine Company on various sites. The public bearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. David Dmohowski appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Dmohowski addressed the reason for the applicants' non - compliance with the previously approved conditions for the directional signs. Mr. Dmohowski indicated that the conditions of the subject use permits would be observed on the basis that his office would monitor the activities involved in the maintenance and operation of the sign program. Mr. Dmohowski stated that the purpose of the signs are to direct traffic to a specific project as quickly and efficiently as possible, and he indicated the need for directional signage for significant commercial destinations such as Newport Center or Fashion Island. Mr. Dmohowski stated that there is a need for a sign program • located in the vicinity of Newport Center that would guide visitors to their destination. He indicated that Villa Point and Newport North are residential projects that are currently under construction, and inasmuch as the rental projects include the City's affordable housing program, the City could perform a service to potential tenants at no cost to the City by providing appropriate directional signs. Commissioner Pers6n asked if The Irvine Company intends to make a request or proposal to the City that would include The Irvine Company funding a sign program concerning the commercial developments. Mr. Dmohowski stated that The Irvine Company would be willing to participate financially in a sign program where the signs would be located in the public right -of -way similar to the directional signs The Irvine Company is currently providing to the Police Department and the Newport Center library. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that The Irvine Company contribute to a sign program that would be initiated by the City. Chairman Pomeroy concurred that it would be to the public's benefit if the City had a sign program that would address major points -of- interest. • Mr. Hewicker asked if, as a public service, that a line be added to the residential directional signs indicating "affordable housing ". -23- COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX Mr. Dmohowski explained that the intent would be to only assist the public in finding projects and not to advertise a residential development. Commissioner Di Sano and Commissioner Edwards discussed the feasibility of removing the directional signs at the subject locations until the implementation of a sign program is inaugurated between The Irvine Company and the City. Commissioner Glover addressed her concerns regarding The Irvine Company's lack of compliance to the conditions of approval with respect to the signs; the size of the sign located at MacArthur Boulevard and Bristol Street; and that there is a need for signs to direct traffic to Fashion Island and Newport Center. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the use permit and exception permit applications be continued so as to allow the applicant an opportunity to meet with staff regarding a sign program. He suggested that signs indicating rental and sale is properties and property identification signs be addressed and reviewed by the Planning Commission at a future Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Dmohowski agreed to the foregoing recommendation. Mr. Hewicker stated that a sign in a public right -of -way would require the approval of an Encroachment Permit by the City Council. Chairman Pomeroy and Commissioner Pers6n addressed the development in the Downcoast Area and the need for directional signs to destination points in the City, particularly the Newport Center area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 2018 (Amended), Use Permit No. 3176 (Amended), and Exception Permit No. 9 (Amended) to August 23, 1990, so as to allow the applicant and staff additional time to recommend a sign program to the Planning Commission. • Commissioner Glover recommended that when the use permit and exception permit applications come back to the Planning Commission for review, that the proposal be returned as one -24- COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH agenda item. INDEX Mr. Dmohowski stated that the applicants have agreed to comply with a request by The Edison Company to reduce the size of the sign located at MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that The Irvine Company coordinate the concerns regarding the sign with staff. Ayes * * * Motion was voted on to continue Use Permit No. 2018 Absent * (Amended), Use Permit No. 3176 (Amended), and Exception Permit No. 9 (Amended) to the August 23, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. The Planning Commission recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 P.M. Discussion Items: Discussion Amendment No. 708 Items A708 Request to amend Title 20 of the Municipal Code so as to establish the Retail and Service Commercial (RSC) District. cony d to 5 -10 -90 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be continued to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Amendment No. 708 Ayes * * * * * * * to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION Absent CARRIED. Amendment No. 709 1 A709 Request to amend Title 20 of the Municipal Code so as to cont ' d to • establish the Residential Overlay District. 5 -10 -90 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach -25- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH April 19, 1990 MINUTES James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be continued to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Amendment No. 709 Ayes * * * * to the May 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION Absent CARRIED. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Commissioner Edwards stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that Variance No. 1125 was approved by the Planning Commission on August 4, 1988, authorizing alterations and additions to an existing single family residence which exceeded 1.5 times the buildable area of the lot and a 1 foot second floor encroachment into the required westerly side yard to match an existing encroachment on the first floor. The request also included the construction of a new carport that would encroach 2 feet 6 inches into the required alley setback similar to the existing garage. Mr. Hewicker stated that to convert a garage into a carport would allow a transfer of buildable area from the garage area to the living area on the second floor. He explained that the structure consisted of a FAR of 1.81, the proposed project would have increased the FAR to 1.83, but the Planning Commission permitted a FAR of only 1.81. He said that the permitted square footage under the Zoning Code allowed a building of 2,520 square feet, the existing building was 3,037 square feet, and the proposed project as it was presented to the Planning Commission was 3,069 square feet. Mr. Hewicker stated that the Planning Commission approved the Variance (5 Ayes, 1 No). Mr. Hewicker stated that a 3 -1/2 foot rear yard setback and a 3 foot side yard setback, where the existing garage maintained a 3 foot side yard setback, was approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hewicker stated that the single family dwelling has been 1111111 built in accordance with the plan that was approved by the 0 1 Planning Commission. He explained that it was the opinion of staff that when the Planning Commission approved the variance -26- INDEX Add'1 Business Variance No. 1125 April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX that the second floor was going to be removed; however, staff was under the impression that the first floor would substantially remain in place whereas the second floor was removed and the first floor was also removed with the exception of the two story fireplace and chimney of masonry construction, studs remained in the corner of the building on the east side at the alley, and the existing first floor structure remained. Mr. Hewicker stated that the construction exceeds what was originally proposed to the Planning Commission. He explained that the subject construction was brought to the attention of the Planning Department after a neighbor contacted the Planning Department requesting a similar project. Mr. Hewicker stated that as a result of meetings with members of the City staff and representatives of the applicants, the City Attorney has distributed a memorandum requesting that the Planning Commission determine if the applicant has proceeded in good faith and the building has been constructed in conformance with the submitted plans. • Mr. Hewicker stated that the project has a correction notice issued on it by the Building Department wherein he described the construction that has been completed on the structure to date. Mr. Hewicker further stated that after a Building Department's initial inspection to approve the footings and foundations on a site, the inspector does not return until the roof sheeting is on the building which may be several months from the original inspection. Commissioner Glover contended that the applicant should have requested a new structure instead of applying for a variance inasmuch as the applicants have reconstructed a non - conforming structure. Mr. Hewicker explained that staff would not have recommended a variance if it were known the amount of demolition that would occur. Mr. Paul Watkins, Attorney with Drummy Garrett King & Harrison and representing Dr. and Mrs. Rich, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Watkins submitted photographs of the subject property as it existed before and during construction. Mr. Watkins reviewed the variance application wherein he explained that there was a misunderstanding between the City and the applicants with respect to how much the original structure, built in 1929, should have been retained during _27_ COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH the remodeling and rebuilding process. He said that work was stopped by the Building Department on March 27, 1990. Mr. Watkins stated that the original structure deteriorated in recent years, and the termite infestation became visible at the time of demolition. Mr. Watkins stated that between January 2, 1990, and March 27, 1990, when the work was stopped, there were eight separate Building Department approvals of the construction work. He referred to a letter from the Director of the Building Department regarding the work stoppage on the basis of the demolition and failure to comply with building plans. Mr. Watkins indicated that the previous owners, Mr. and Mrs. Ackerman, applied for Variance No. 1062 in 1977 that was subsequently approved to increase the FAR to 1.81 times buildable, totalling 3,037 square feet. He said that the subject variance was requested when the previous owners sold the property to the current owners. Mr. Watkins stated that demolition work commenced on the subject property December 11, 1989, and construction started after January 2, 1990. Mr. Watkins explained that the variance states that the work shall include remodeling and rebuilding of the existing residence; however, the building permit states that there will be interior alterations to the home. Mr. Watkins stated that the plans and elevations submitted to the Planning Commission and the Building Department show extensive changes to exterior perimeter walls for installation of windows, doors, and balloon framing to accommodate a large spiral staircase; however, the submitted plans also indicated the walls that would remain and would be demolished. Mr. Watkins stated that the City did not request a demolition plan, and the applicants did not submit said plan to the City. He concluded that the cost of construction during the three months is $175,000.00. Mr. Watkins recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the City Attorney's recommendations as stated in the memorandum to the Planning Commission dated April 19, 1990. Chairman Pomeroy considered the appropriate procedures after discovering that a structure is not structurally stable and the covering has been removed from the walls. Mr. Hewicker addressed the Planning and Building Departments' No MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX concerns regarding the construction of non - conforming buildings. He addressed an amendment to the Municipal Code that was recently recommended for approval by the Planning Commission regarding legal non - conforming structures, and changes that are being discussed that will affect the applicable Departments and individuals directly involved with the projects so as to avoid similar future occurrences. Commissioner Pers6n and Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, discussed the City Attorney's Recommendations as stated in the foregoing memorandum. Motion * Commissioner Pers6n made a motion that would entitle Dr. and Mrs. Rich to proceed with construction in accordance with the approved plan's specifications based on the evidence that was presented to the Planning Commission. He explained that he opposed the variance when it was approved by the Planning Commission in 1988, and he would not support the variance if it were requested today based on what has recently occurred. Commissioner Pers6n explained that his statement of not supporting the variance, 'that the Planning Commission could not have made the necessary findings to grant a variance', was based on the evidence before the Commission. He explained that the variance approved a remodel of a house that is 60 years old which he said would automatically have substantial structural damage. Commissioner Pers6n included the City Attorney's recommendations in the motion, and he requested that said recommendations be implemented immediately. He further stated that non - conforming structures that are currently in the permit process be reviewed by the Planning Department. At the request of Commissioner Glover, Mr. Conrad Dadufalza, architect for the project, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Glover regarding remodeling, Mr. Dadufalza explained that remodeling is a general term that is not specifically defined. He explained that the subject project had was that were intended to remain and be restored for economic reasons; however, during construction it was found that the dry rot walls • were unsafe and they were termite infested. He said that a judgment was made to demolish the walls so as to preserve the structure and integrity of the building. -29- April 19, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX Discussion ensued regarding the necessity to define "remodel" in relationship with a legal non - conforming structure that is 60 years old. Commissioner Di Sano and Ms. Flory discussed Recommendation No. 1 and Commissioner Di Sano asked if after deleting "have acted in good faith, substantially complied with the provisions of Variance No. 1125 ", if "are entitled to proceed" could be challenged in the future by a property owner. Ms. Flory stated that it could be subject to challenge; however, applicants would apply for applications under individual circumstances to the City and to the Planning Commission for approval. Commissioner Di Sano concurred that Dr. and Mrs. Rich should be able to proceed with the construction. * * * * * Motion was made and voted on to approve the motion as stated. Ayes PP Absent * * MOTION CARRIED. RECOMMENDATIONS: • 1. That the Planning Commission determined that Dr. and Mrs. Rich are entitled to proceed with construction in accordance with approved plans and specifications. 2. That requests for variances or modifications to existing non - conforming structures be accompanied by drawings depicting the extent to which the existing structure is to be demolished and all such approvals conditioned to require no further demolition unless unanticipated conditions are encountered during construction and the additional demolition is approved by the Planning Director. 3. That the Planning and Building Directors develop a protocol for the processing of projects involving modifications or variances to existing non - conforming structures, with the protocol to include a preconstruction conference between the planner in charge, building inspector and, if appropriate, the property owner or building contractor. • I I I I I I I I The Planning Commission directed staff to submit the Planning Commission staff reports and excerpts of the Planning Commission minutes in conjunction with Use Permit No. 1816 -30- 0 is COMMISSIONERS April 19, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX and Variance No. 1087 for the Beachcomber Restaurant, located at 2633 West Coast Highway, as a discussion item on the UP No. 1816 Planning Commission Agenda of May 10, 1990. The Planning Commission directed staff to review the inadequate Landscaping landscaping at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway ECH /NacArth and MacArthur Boulevard with the property owner of the Point del Mar residential property. ADJOURNMENT: 9:50 p.m. I Adjournment JAN DEBAY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT -31-