Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/22/1982A ? yr W X G REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 p.m. DATE: April 22, 1982 Of X I XI XI XIXIXIXI All Present. Beach x x x EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney x x x STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator Donald Webb, City Engineer Pamela Woods, Secretary MINUTES INDEX Request to permit the construction of a single family Item #1 • residential dwelling on property located in the C -1 -H District where a portion of the development exceeds the basic height limit within the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District, and the acceptance of an environmental document_. USE PERP N0. 1981 LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 59 -6 (Resub- division No. 418), located at 1900 West Coast Highway, on the.northerly side of West Coast Highway, across from the Balboa Bay Club. DENIED ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: Ficker & Ruffing Architects, Newport Beach OWNER: Tract 1210, Ltd., Corona del Mar Planning Director Hewicker presented background information on this continued item. He stated that the applicant has run a balloon test on the property to delineate the area of the roof structure which will have the greatest impact on properties as viewed from above. _1_ MINUTES April 22, 1982 a m m m. City of Newport Beach INDEX Planning Director Hewicker referred to the memo from Mr. Don Webb, City Engineer, dated April 16, 1982, which relates to a revision of Condition No. 6, pertaining to the construction of a retaining wall, as suggested by the Planning Commission at their last hearing on this item. Mr. ,Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, suggested that the Planning Commission impose the following three additional conditions if this application is to be approved: 1) That the applicant shall provide all commercial uses on the property with sufficient on -site parking to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2) That the applicant shall not create a new or different parcel for the purpose of the sale, lease or financing. • 3) That the applicant shall prepare and execute an agreement, approved in form and content by the City Attorney, whereby the applicant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from any claims, loss, damage or law suits which may result in the approval. Said agreement shall be recorded. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. William P. Picker, architect for the proposed project, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Picker stated that the proposed revision to Condition No. 6, pertaining to the construction of the retaining wall, is most acceptable. He presented conceptual drawings depicting the proposed structure and the proposed retaining wall. Mr. Picker then delivered a slide presentation which depicted the results of the balloon test which was run on Tuesday morning, April 20, 1982. Mr. Picker reiterated that the proposal provides for dramatic under - development to the property, as well , as a dramatic reduction in the traffic that would be N1MIKJNtKS April 22, 1992 �x � r c m � m m W y. City of Newport Beach generated by any other development. He also stated that the proposal is far more compatible with the adjacent park and residential property. He then stated that the conditions as proposed by staff are acceptable to the applicant. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Picker stated that the members of the Cliff Haven Community Association were invited to the balloon session, but that none of the members were present. Commissioner Kurlander asked if there were any plans for the total redevelopment of all of the property owner's property, easterly of the residential site. Mr. Picker stated several redevelopment plans have been considered, but because of the various mixed leases on the property, it will be quite a long time before any of the plans can be implemented. Mr. Thomas O'Keefe, attorney representing Beverly Ray of Beverly and Partner, appeared before the Commission. • Mr. O'Keefe stated that approval of this project will cut the lessee's parking lot in half. He referred to the City's Zoning Code, Section 20.33.020, Permitted Uses in a Commercial- Residential District, and stated that it is not the intent of this district to allow uses which are purely residential in character. He stated that this proposed use is purely residential in character and therefore is in violation of the Ordinance. He further stated that the proposed structure is very massive and would be an eyesore to the area. Mr. Dick Stevens, the property owner, stated that this is a unique proposal and a massive under - development for this particular parcel. He further stated that he will be dedicating a 12 -foot right -of -way to the City along West Coast Highway for street and highway purposes as a condition of approval. Commissioner Beek asked staff to comment on..Mr. O'Keefe's interpretation of the Zoning Code. Planning Director Hewicker stated that Mr. O'Keefe's comments were directed toward the C -R Zone. He stated that the zoning on the property in question, is the C -1 -H Zone and a residential use is permitted subject to securing a use permit. He also stated that the Commission has • approved other free standing single family homes in the C -1 District. -3- MINUTES ►9191 Q -- - - -- __ April 22, 1982 X c m m x H T City of Newport Beach Commissioner King stated that the location is not a proper setting for a residential use. He also stated that the increase in the projected traffic volume of West Coast Highway will further impact the proposed residence. However, he stated that he has no objections with the design of the proposed project. Chairman McLaughlin concurred. Motion I I I IXI I I I Motion was made for denial of Use Permit No. 1986, subject to the findings of denial in Exhibit "A ". Substitute Substitute Motion was made for approval of Use Permit Motion X No. 1986, subject to the findings and conditions of approval in Exhibit "B ", and subject to the additional conditions as proposed by staff. FINDINGS: 1. That the construction of a 7,070 .sq. ft. single family residential dwelling on the subject property is inconsistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan which designates the site for "Retail Service Commercial" and "Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial" uses. � IIIIIIII _4- MINUTES INDEX Commissioner Balalis stated that this proposal presents an opportunity to stop some of the commercial • development in this location. He stated that the applicant is well aware of the traffic and noise associated with West Coast Highway. He stated that a commercial development at this location would be devastating to the City. Ayes X X X Substitute Motion for approval of Use Permit No. 1986 Noes X X X X was now voted on, which SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED. Ayes X X X X ommissioner King's original motion for denial of Use Noes ermit No. 1986, subject to the findings for denial in Abstain X xhibit "A" was now voted on as follows, which MOTION CARRIED: - - FINDINGS: 1. That the construction of a 7,070 .sq. ft. single family residential dwelling on the subject property is inconsistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan which designates the site for "Retail Service Commercial" and "Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial" uses. � IIIIIIII _4- MINUTES INDEX F r c ro Co c a F W w D and April 22, 1982 of Newport Beach 2. That the proposed project is inconsistent with the Locations of Structures Policy included in the Land Use Element of the General Plan inasmuch as the project includes the establishment of a residential use in an area impacted by noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL and that a major portion of, the proposed development will occur on .a coastal bluff. 3. That the magnitude of the proposed residential use, in relationship to the existing commercial uses on the site, prevents reasonable consideration of the project as.a "mixed use ", similar to those previously approved in other areas of the City. 4. That the location of the subject property directly • adjacent to West Coast Highway, which has projected daily traffic volumes of 69,000 average daily trips, makes the site unsuitable for residential development. 0 5. That the approval of -the subject application will establish a residential use adjacent to West Coast Highway that can be expected to be diametrically opposed to the future widening of West Coast Highway. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 1986 will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, and comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood.or the general welfare of the City. � • x -5- MINUTES INDEX • • April 22, 1982 MINUTES Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to consider a Traffic Study in conjunction with the expansion of an existing church facility located in the R -1 and R -2 District. mil Use Permit No. 822 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a new church sanctuary building in the R -1 and R -2 Districts which includes meeting rooms, a banquet room, classrooms, administrative offices and a kitchen facility. A new education building is also proposed. The proposal also includes a request to allow a portion of the proposed sanctuary building and a building - mounted cross, to exceed 35 feet in height; a request to waive a portion of the required on -site parking spaces for the proposed sanctuary; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND Resubdivision No. 723 (Public Hearing) Request to establish a single parcel of land for the expansion of an existing church facility, where 10 .lotsi a portion of one lot, and a proposed abandoned alley presently exist. LOCATION: Lots 31 -35, Tract 1220F. Lots 142 -146, Tract 1218; a portion.of Lot 171, Block 54, Irvine's Subdivision; and a 20 foot wide alley located at 600 St. Andrews Road, on property bounded by St. Andrews Road, Clay Street, and 15th Street, across from the Newport Harbor High School, in Cliff Haven. ZONE: R -1 and R -2 APPLICANT: St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, Newport Beach. OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, Newport Beach INDEX ALL CONTINUED TO JUNE 24 X982 � r � . m m City of Newport Beach Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to consider a Traffic Study in conjunction with the expansion of an existing church facility located in the R -1 and R -2 District. mil Use Permit No. 822 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a new church sanctuary building in the R -1 and R -2 Districts which includes meeting rooms, a banquet room, classrooms, administrative offices and a kitchen facility. A new education building is also proposed. The proposal also includes a request to allow a portion of the proposed sanctuary building and a building - mounted cross, to exceed 35 feet in height; a request to waive a portion of the required on -site parking spaces for the proposed sanctuary; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND Resubdivision No. 723 (Public Hearing) Request to establish a single parcel of land for the expansion of an existing church facility, where 10 .lotsi a portion of one lot, and a proposed abandoned alley presently exist. LOCATION: Lots 31 -35, Tract 1220F. Lots 142 -146, Tract 1218; a portion.of Lot 171, Block 54, Irvine's Subdivision; and a 20 foot wide alley located at 600 St. Andrews Road, on property bounded by St. Andrews Road, Clay Street, and 15th Street, across from the Newport Harbor High School, in Cliff Haven. ZONE: R -1 and R -2 APPLICANT: St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, Newport Beach. OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, Newport Beach INDEX ALL CONTINUED TO JUNE 24 X982 April 22, 1982 MINUTES X r a m � m m W. City of Newport Beach INDEX Agenda Items No. 2, 3 and 4 were heard concurrently due to their relationship. Commissioner winburn stated that she occasionally attends church services at the St. Andrews Presbyterian Church. Mr. Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, stated that Commissioner Winburn is entitled to participate and vote on these matters. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, explained the critical p.m. peak hour activity which was utilized. Mr. Talarico also explained how the capacity of the proposed church was calculated. The public hearing opened in connection with these items and Mr. Milan Dostal, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Dostal delivered a presentation which outlined their need for the proposed facilities. He stated that an overwhelming 80 percent of the congregation voted in favor of the proposed design for the church. He stated that they have also • had meetings with the neighbors of the area to discuss this proposal. He stressed that the church has strived to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Dr. John A. Huffman, Jr., Pastor of the St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, appeared before the Commission. Dr. Huffman stated that St. Andrews Presbyterian Church is a community church which has a membership of approximately 2,900 members. He stated that the attendance of the Sunday worship services averages between 1,300 to 1,800 persons. He described the various programs of the church which aid and serve the community. Commissioner Beek asked Dr. Huffman if the expanded facilities of the church can be accommodated without the proposed corporate office tower. Dr. Huffman stated that for the past 15 years, the church has needed expanded sanctuary, education and office space. He stated that the offices must occupy the steeple because as much space as possible is needed for the church parking. I I I I I Commissioner King asked Dr. Huffman if it would be feasible to upgrade the existing structures and provide • more worship services. Dr. Huffman stated that this -7- April 22, 1982 a X M m F m City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I I 1 I I I I 1 I INDEX may be difficult because the existing structures would have to meet the Code. Further, he stated that they are a family church and they would like for the entire family to participate together in the worship experience, rather than having many numerous worship services. He stated that their theme has been "growing towards wholeness" in a spiritual, mental /intellectual, social and physical growth towards a balanced living. Mr. C. Edward Ware, of C. Edward Ware Associates, Inc., Architects, and also representing Irwin and Associates, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Ware described how the proposed design of the church was developed. He stated that the highest point of the church has been located at the center of the site. He presented a model and colored renderings which depicted the proposed project and landscaping plan. He stated that the structure will be sound attenuated and the outdoor activity will be screened from the surrounding neighborhood. He stated that they have attempted to make the design of the church compatible with the • existing neighborhood. Mr. Ware stated that the meeting rooms and offices in the tower will accommodate approximately 50 persons. He stated that only 8 percent of the proposed tower is above the 35 foot height limit. He then described the various heights included in the proposal. He stated that the buildings will be constructed of brick which will be painted a soft gray/beige to match the existing wood frame buildings. Mr. Ware presented a drawing depicting the plotted pattern of the sun in the summer and the winter months in relationship to the proposed project and the surrounding area. Commissioner Beek stated that since the tower contains only 8 percent of the office space, it may be possible to redesign the structure so as to keep the office space within the legal height limit. Mr. Ware stated that this may be possible, but in doing so, the aesthetic value of the building is lost. Mr. Ware stated that detailed traffic and environmental studies have been performed for the proposal. He stated that there will only be a one percent increase • in the total traffic. He stated that every effort has -8- CALL • E WAISSICINERS April 22, 1982 MINUS 3 � � r c m m City of Newport Beach mm INDEX been made to acquire as much off- street parking as possible. He stated that they have even included a lower level in the proposal in order to obtain more of the needed fellowship space. He stated that the tower will be subtly lit during the evening and that the hours of the lighting will be regulated. Commissioner Balalis suggested that the applicant consider redesigning the tower, so as to reduce the tower's height to 65 feet, therefore eliminating the problem with the shadows. He stated that the office space which would be lost through the height reduction, could possibly be located elsewhere on the site. Mr. Peter Gendron, President of Cliff Haven Community Association, appeared before the Commission and stated that over 213 homeowners in the area are opposed to the current plans for the St. Andrews Presbyterian Church. Mr. Gendron presented a map of the surrounding area which depicted the residences which are opposed to this proposal. Mr. Gendron then referred to the petition which was submitted by the property owners and residents which states, "That any further development of the church property be done in strict compliance to the thirty -five foot height. limitation as provided in Ordinance No. 1454 of the City of Newport Beach. Further, that any such development be required to provide adequate on -site parking at grade level or sub -grade level only." He concluded that this proposal will have an impact on the surrounding neighborhood because of its density, height and intensified traffic and parking problems. Mr. George West, resident of 412 Snug Harbor Road, distributed complete copies of the petition to the Commission and stated that the petition contains more than 460 valid signatures in opposition to the current proposal. Mr. West expressed his concern that the proposed office tower will have a fantastic view of the ocean, yet homeowners in the area do not have the same opportunity to exceed the height limit to obtain such a view. He then stated that the homeowners of the area will only get to view the proposed office tower from their residences. He further stated that the height of cm ro a am -o.x atm a • r1 April 22, 1982 of Newaort Beach peak on the sanctuary will be 46 feet which also exceeds the height limit. He stated that there is more than enough space on the site to accommodate the office space without exceeding the height limit. He further stated that the mass and magnitude of the proposed structure is overwhelmingly out of scale with the surrounding area. He stated that the high school and its tower are a landmark and should not be compared to the proposed office tower. Mr. Willard Courtney, resident of 611 St. James Place, stated that the construction of a parking lot will not provide new on -site parking, it will only replace the parking which is being lost in other areas. He stated that traffic jams with arrivals, departures and drop -offs will be created if access to Clay Street is denied. Further, he stated that the computation for the needed parking is in error. He stated that all discussion regarding parking, mentions only the sanctuary use and that no mention has been made of the parking required for the uses which run concurrently with the main service, such as bible study groups, sunday school classes and choir activities. He also stated that the developer should not be able to claim a major portion of the parking requirements, 265 spaces, on the Newport Harbor High School property that they do not own or control. Mr. Courtney submitted his written report to the Commission. Mr. George Lackey, resident of 612 St. James Place, stated that he has participated in the traffic control program for the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven areas during the last four years. He stated that the proposed project and office tower will create double the traffic during the weekdays, and more than double the traffic on the weekends through the surrounding residential area. He stated that the church should remain a community church, but the proposal must be scaled down and adequate parking must be provided in order to reduce the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. -10- MINUTES April 22, 1982 n 7c City of Newport Beach Ms. Barbara Whitford, resident of 406 Snug Harbor Road, expressed her concerns with the inadequate parking of the proposal and the increased traffic flow which it will create through the residential neighborhood. She stated that the proposed structure is not consistent with the surrounding land uses and the increased building height will. result in an undesirable and abrupt scale relationship between the structure and the existing developments. She further stated that the proposal will be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of the neighborhood. Mr. Steven Dobbie, President of the Newport Heights Community Association, referred' to his letter dated April 20, 1982 and stated that the 105 -foot height of the proposed sanctuary /office tower will have a negative and overpowering effect on the surrounding residential community. He stated that the increase in scale and capacity will also increase the traffic and parking loads in the adjoining neighborhood. • I I I 1 I ( I Mr. Robert Craig, resident of 418 Snug Harbor Road, i stated that the current proposal is eleven feet higher than the Crystal Cathedral which is only 94 feet high. Ms. Catherine Cowden, resident of 2024 Winward Lane, spoke in favor of the proposal. _Mr. Craig Porst, resident of 321 Kings Road, stated that if the height and mass of this development is approved, future developments will also be requesting the same. Mr. Joe Robinson, resident of 315 Pirate Road, stated that he is not entitled to have an ocean view from his house or office. He suggested that the proposed office tower of the church be turned so that it can view their members in Irvine. Mrs. Kay Spurgeon, resident of 436 Snug Harbor Road, stated that she has lived in this area for over 34 years and it has always been a nice and quiet neighborhood, to live in. She stated that she can understand why the church must enlarge, however, she expressed her concerns with the extent of the expansion and the height of the proposed tower. • MINUTES INDEX nIV%1u1� April 22, 1982 X r m m Q Z N City of Newport Beach Mr. Steve Double, resident of 507 Kings Road, expressed his concern that the increase in traffic may create a danger for the children coming. to and from school. Chairman McLaughlin suggested that this item be continued to a later date, in order to give the Commission adequate time to study and evaluate the additional information which has been presented at the public hearing. Commissioner Balalis stated that, as indicated in the public testimony tonight, there are many different reasons for the opposition. He again suggested that the applicant consider eliminating the top three floors, or approximately 45 . feet of the proposed tower. He stated that he would like further time to study the traffic issue. Commissioner Kurlander stated that he shares the concerns expressed by Commissioner Balalis. • In response to a question posed by Commissioner. Beek, Mr. Dostal stated that a six week continuance would be acceptable and give the applicant adequate time to scale the project down and meet further with the neighbors. Commissioner King expressed his concern with the height of the proposed structure and the availability of the parking. Commissioner Winburn concurred. Commissioner Beek stated that the comments made by Mr. Courtney, relating to the parking, are a main concern and need to be studied further. Commissioner Allen concurred and requested that the staff and the applicant's architect respond to Mr. Courtney's comments. She stated that real traffic ,counts will make a big difference in the evaluation of this project. She further stated that a realistic parking number must be calculated for the site and a 'legitimate off -site parking agreement must also be considered. She also expressed her concern with the proposed height of the tower. • 1!111111 -12- MINUTES INDEX April 22, 1982 MINUTES INDEX Commissioner Balalis also suggested that specific figures be obtained from the applicant relating to the use of the facilities during the weekdays and weekends, which may coincide with functions of the Newport Harbor High School. Chairman McLaughlin expressed her concerns relating to the parking issue. Motion X Motion was made to continue these items to the Planning All Ayes X X X X X X Commission Meeting of June 24, 1982, which MOTION . CARRIED. x x 11111111 The Planning Commission recessed at 9:50 p.m. and • reconvened at 10:00 p.m. Request to consider a Traffic Study for a proposed Item #5 65,269 sq. ft. medical office building. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 169, Block 2 of Irvine's Subdivision, located at 351 TRAFFIC Hospital Road on the northeasterly STUD!— corner of Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue, opposite Hoag Memorial Hospital. ZONE: A -P APPROVED CONDI- APPLICANTS: Park Lido, Ltd., Robert Wish, TIONALLY General Partner, Santa Ana OWNERS: Same as applicants Planning Director Hewicker discussed the background information related to this item. He stated that this is a request for approval of a Traffic Study and that there is no way in which the Commission can legally • bind the applicant, or a future owner of the property, -13- � m 5 c. m m mW 3. F City of Newport Beach N INDEX Commissioner Balalis also suggested that specific figures be obtained from the applicant relating to the use of the facilities during the weekdays and weekends, which may coincide with functions of the Newport Harbor High School. Chairman McLaughlin expressed her concerns relating to the parking issue. Motion X Motion was made to continue these items to the Planning All Ayes X X X X X X Commission Meeting of June 24, 1982, which MOTION . CARRIED. x x 11111111 The Planning Commission recessed at 9:50 p.m. and • reconvened at 10:00 p.m. Request to consider a Traffic Study for a proposed Item #5 65,269 sq. ft. medical office building. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 169, Block 2 of Irvine's Subdivision, located at 351 TRAFFIC Hospital Road on the northeasterly STUD!— corner of Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue, opposite Hoag Memorial Hospital. ZONE: A -P APPROVED CONDI- APPLICANTS: Park Lido, Ltd., Robert Wish, TIONALLY General Partner, Santa Ana OWNERS: Same as applicants Planning Director Hewicker discussed the background information related to this item. He stated that this is a request for approval of a Traffic Study and that there is no way in which the Commission can legally • bind the applicant, or a future owner of the property, -13- April 22, 1982 MINUTES INDEX to a conceptual design or to a project plan which does not exist. Mr. Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney concurred. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Dennis O'Neil, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. O'Neil stated that they. have prepared a conceptual plan which complies with the zoning. He stated that the structure will be built within the height limit and will have subterranean parking which satisfies many of the concerns expressed by the surrounding property owners and residents. He stated that they are committed to the signalization at Placentia Avenue and Hospital Road and improvement of the traffic circulation through the. use of signs. He stated that they concur with the recommendations of the staff report. • Mr. Dick Hogan, representing the residential property. owners of the area, which include 140 apartment units in Mediterranean Village and 99 condominiums in the . Park Lido Association, appeared before the Commission. In addition, he stated that he is also representing Mr. Ralph Gray, who owns 44 of the apartment units. Mr. Hogan stated that they have viewed the conceptual plan which appears to be satisfactory and is certainly a substantial improvement over the original proposal. He referred to the Traffic Phasing Plan and expressed his concern that it does not cover the local traffic systems. He suggested that the traffic exit onto Flagship Road be controlled in such a way to prohibit right turns. He stated that this is a safety concern of the residents and the occupants of the convalescent homes. Mr. Hogan stated that the applicant is agreeable in providing a left turn requirement from the parking lot and that there be a stop sign on Placentia Avenue. He stated that the City's traffic consultant has indicated that because of the projected traffic on Placentia Avenue, this would be a reasonable consideration. 9 11111111 -14 -. � r c m City of Newport Beach INDEX to a conceptual design or to a project plan which does not exist. Mr. Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney concurred. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Dennis O'Neil, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. O'Neil stated that they. have prepared a conceptual plan which complies with the zoning. He stated that the structure will be built within the height limit and will have subterranean parking which satisfies many of the concerns expressed by the surrounding property owners and residents. He stated that they are committed to the signalization at Placentia Avenue and Hospital Road and improvement of the traffic circulation through the. use of signs. He stated that they concur with the recommendations of the staff report. • Mr. Dick Hogan, representing the residential property. owners of the area, which include 140 apartment units in Mediterranean Village and 99 condominiums in the . Park Lido Association, appeared before the Commission. In addition, he stated that he is also representing Mr. Ralph Gray, who owns 44 of the apartment units. Mr. Hogan stated that they have viewed the conceptual plan which appears to be satisfactory and is certainly a substantial improvement over the original proposal. He referred to the Traffic Phasing Plan and expressed his concern that it does not cover the local traffic systems. He suggested that the traffic exit onto Flagship Road be controlled in such a way to prohibit right turns. He stated that this is a safety concern of the residents and the occupants of the convalescent homes. Mr. Hogan stated that the applicant is agreeable in providing a left turn requirement from the parking lot and that there be a stop sign on Placentia Avenue. He stated that the City's traffic consultant has indicated that because of the projected traffic on Placentia Avenue, this would be a reasonable consideration. 9 11111111 -14 -. April 22, 1982 MINUTES iX W ' W X F. City of Newport Beach INDEX Commissioner Beek asked Mr. Hogan if they are asking for a signal or a stop sign. Mr. Hogan stated that they are requesting a stop sign in both directions at the intersection of Placentia Avenue and Flagship Road. Commissioner Allen stated that the Planning Commission is only considering the request for the proposed Traffic Study, not the plans which have been shown by the applicant. She suggested that the Commission find a way in which to condition the project, which will satisfy the concerns of the surrounding residential area. In response to a question .posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Hogan stated that they prefer the parking structure as proposed, not an above ground parking structure. Mr. Hogan suggested that the Commission accept a copy of the applicant's plans, as informational plans, which will represent the intent of the applicant. • Commissioner Allen suggested that perhaps a private solution could be considered between the applicant and the residents of the area. Mr. Hogan stated that they feel that the items which they have requested are consistent with the Traffic Phasing Plan. In response to a question posed by Commissioner King, Mr. Don Webb, City Engineer, stated that he would not foresee a problem with the requested left turn only sign on Flagship Road. Mr. William Kunzman of Kunzman Associates, the City's Traffic Consultant who performed the traffic impact analysis for this project, appeared before the Commission. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Kunzman stated that Figure 2 of the report was utilized in determining the ingress and egress of the project. Mr. Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, stated that Figure 2 shows the current, pre- existing driveways on the site. Commissioner Balalis expressed his concern that the traffic distribution of the existing project may be totally different than the traffic distribution of the proposed _ project, particularly if one of the driveways is eliminated. 1 1 1 1 1 -15- VXNMJ0 -)NtKZ) April 22, 1982 X Cr � r c � ' W 0 . m NOR City of Newport Beach m Mr. Don Webb stated that in this particular analysis, the intention of the City Traffic Engineer was that all of the existing driveways would be utilized and would have equal ability to handle the traffic. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, stated that it is his understanding that questions of access do not have any impact upon the numbers of the traffic study. Planning Director Hewicker stated-that the staff has not had the opportunity to view the conceptual plan as developed by the applicant. Commissioner Winburn asked why Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue were not involved in the Traffic Study. Mr. Kunzman stated that these intersections are not on the critical list. Mr. Talarico stated that the critical list specifically refers to signalized • intersections. Commissioner King suggested that the project description contained on Page 1 of the Traffic Study should be accepted as identifying the proposed development. He stated that this description is what the Traffic Study addressed in its analysis of the project. Mr. Burnham stated that this would not impose a requirement that the project be built in that manner. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Beek, Mr. Webb stated that Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue are secondary streets. Commissioner Beek stated that Figure 2 of the Traffic Study is irrelevant, because the project traffic distribution is based on Figure 3 which shows that all of the traffic will be exiting on Flagship Road and none of the traffic will be exiting on Hospital Road. ------------------------------------------------------- At this point, members of the staff took a recess to determine if this item could be resolved. • I I I I i l 11 -16- MINUTES INDEX r � U April 22, 1982 3 z yr W m m x y. City of Newport Beach =a m� Planning Director Hewicker stated that the traffic distribution in the analysis of the Traffic Study is based upon the utilization of the driveways on Flagship Road and Hospital Road. He stated that the Commission does not have the authority to direct that there be right or left turns out of the driveways, or to close any of the driveways. Mr. Burnham concurred and stated that a private agreement as suggested by Commissioner Allen would not be feasible either. I I I I I In response to a question posed by Commissioner Beek, Mr. Kunzman referred to Appendix C of the ICU work sheets, Page 39, and explained how the figure .8929 was calculated. Ms. Nancy Skinner, resident of 724 Highland Drive, suggested that if the applicant were to design this building a few inches higher than the height limit, the application would then have to be approved by the Commission and these requirements could be legally imposed. Mr. Mike Johnson, resident of 220 Nice Lane, stated that this area is very congested with traffic. He expressed his concern that the cumulative affects of the traffic impacts for all of the developments in the West Newport area must be considered. He stated that if the Beeco /Banning Ranch proposal is approved by the voters, it will have a tremendous impact on the traffic and will change all of the traffic counts that have been presented. Commissioner King stated that the committed projects are included in the projections of the Traffic Study. He stated that the.Beeco /Banning Ranch proposal is not a committed project because of the referendum. Planning Director Hewicker explained the committed projects in the area. Mr. Webb stated that if the Beeco /Banning Ranch proposal were to be included as a committed project, the distribution would change substantially because it provides for an additional intersection which would cause a diversion of traffic off of Superior Avenue and lower the ICU, which would allow more capacity in the intersection. • I I� I I� I I -17- MINUTES INDEX Motion fes Noes • � r 3 c.S m C S 0 X April 22, 1982 of Newport Beach Motion was made for approval of the Traffic Study, subject to the findings and conditions as indicated in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Allen stated that she would be voting against this item because this particular area needs to be studied in terms of the traffic. She stated that medical office buildings are big trip generators. She stated that the applicant has developed.a project which attempts to deal with the concerns of the doctors and the residents of the area. However, she stated that the Commission is considering the requested Traffic Study, not the conceptual plan of the project. Commissioner Beek stated that he can not support the motion. He stated that the traffic distribution figures are indefinite because they have been rounded to 5 percent figures in every direction. He further stated that an indepth traffic study is needed for the entire County triangle area. Commissioner King's motion for approval of the Traffic Study, was now voted on as follows, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study on the proposed project has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code and City Policy S -1. 2. That based on that Traffic Study, the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major ", "primary- modified ", or "primary" street. CONDITIONS: 1. That prior to the occupancy of the proposed project the applicant shall contribute his fair share as determined by the City to the Circulation System Improvements for the intersection of Superior Avenue and West Coast Highway described in the Traffic Study, Page 11, Table 5. 6 MINUTES INDEX 11 April 22, 1982 MINUTES i x p m m m ' City of Newport Beach INDEX 2. The Circulation System Improvement described in Condition 1 above and the City -State improvements to the intersection of Dover Drive and West Coast Highway described in the Traffic Study, Page 11, Table 5 shall have been made (unless subsequent project approvals require modification thereto). The Circulation System Improvements shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic .Engineer. x x x Request to delete Condition No. 9 of a previously Item #6 approved use permit that allowed a change in the operational characteristics of an existing restaurant to include the service of alcoholic beverages. Said condition presently restricts the service of alcoholic beverages at a bar or bar type lounge in conjunction USE PERMIT with the restaurant operation. _N (T 2005 ND ED LOCATION: Lots 74 and 75, Tract No. 1011, located at 4001 West Coast Highway, on the southerly side of West Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard, adjacent to Balboa Coves. APPROVED CC ND�I- ZONE: C -1 -H TI�LLY APPLICANT: Royal Thai Cuisine Inc., Newport Beach OWNER: Mary Howard; Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Sumet Tila, representing the Royal Thai Cuisine, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this application. • 11111111 "" on A es Noes i R April 22, 1982 of Newport Beach Commissioner Beek stated that the request for the bar was specifically excluded the last time this item was heard. He stated that the provision that the bar is only incidental to the service of food, is difficult to enforce. He stated that there is inadequate parking on the site and the addition of the bar will only increase the parking and traffic congestion in the area. Mr. Bill Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated that the bar currently exists, as it was to be a service bar only. He stated that the major concern at the last hearing on this item, was the opposition of the Balboa Coves Community Association He stated that the Balboa Coves Community Association has now indicated their approval of the applicant's request. # I IX [ I J I Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2005 X X X X (Amended) , subject to the following findings and conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed conversion of an existing dining area into a bar and bar type lounge, to be used in conjunction with, and incidental to, the existing restaurant use, will not increase the intensity of use of the subject restaurant. 2. That the Balboa Coves Community Association has indicated its approval of the applicant's request to establish a bar and bar type lounge in the existing restaurant, provided it is operated as an incidental use to the primary restaurant operation. -20- MINUTES INDEX r c m � W v -mi x W °' 3. C April 22, 1982 of Newport Beach 3. The approval of Use Permit No. 2005 (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. CONDITIONS: 1. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 2005 shall remain in effect, except as noted below. • I I I I I I 2. That the proposed customer bar and bar type lounge ({ shall be in substantial conformance with the submitted floor plan. 3. That the service of alcoholic beverages in the restaurant facility shall remain incidental to the primary function of providing food to customers. r x • 11111111 MINUTES INDEX NAMISSIONERS MINUTES April 22, 1982 � r c m m X x �. City of Newport Beach INDEX Request to subdivide 12.115 acres of land into seven Item #7 (7) lots for residential condominium development and three (3) lots for private street purposes. TENTATIVE LOCATION: Tract No. 11377, located at the .MAP OF southwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and TRACT NO. Belcourt Drive North, in Area 7 of the 11785 Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach - APPROVED CONDI- OWNER: Same as applicant TIONALLY ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost &. Associates, Newport Beach • The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. John Richards, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11785. Motion Motion was made for approval of the Tentative Map of All Ayes X X X X X Tract No. 11785, subject to the following findings and . .conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: CTNM TN1r_c . 1. That the subsequent changes in the proposed division of land will not require revisions to the Certified Final EIR for the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community development. 2. That the proposed division of land has no new significant environmental impacts, not previously considered in the Certified Final EIR. 3. That no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. • 11111111 . -22- April 22, 1982 n 7C � r c m � W F y' City of Newport Beach MINUTES M --6LL CALL X 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 INDEX I 4. That no new information of substantial importance related to the project has become available. 5. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans, and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 6. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 7. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. • 8. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. CONDITIONS: 1. That all applicable conditions of approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11377 shall be fulfilled. 2. That the Traffic Control Plan be submitted as a part of the street improvement plans. 3. That a note shall be placed on the final map which restricts the use of Lot No. 7 for private recreational purposes only. • I I I I I I I I -23- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES April 22, 1982 q City Of Newport Beach LL CALL INDEX Request to approve the Final Map of Tract No. 11785 Item #8 subdividing 12.115 acres of land into seven (7) lots for residential condominium development and three (3) lots for private street purposes. FINAL MAP LOCATION: Tract No. 11377, located.at the - OF TRACT southwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and NO 1`785 Belcourt Drive North, in Area 7 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPROVED APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach CC -N OWNER: Same as applicant TIONALLY - - ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, Newport Beach • The discussion opened in connection with this item and Mr. John Richards, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of the Final Map of Tract No. 11785. Motion Motion was made for approval of the Final Map of Tract All Ayes X IX X X X X .NO. 11785, subject to the following finding and condition, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDING! 1. That the proposed Final Map of Tract No. 11785 substantially complies with the Tentative Map and with all requirements imposed as conditions to its acceptance. 11 1 I I I I CONDITION: i 1. That all conditions of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11785 shall be fulfilled. COMMISSIONERS MINUTES April 22, 1982 � R c s a m m City of Newport Beach LL CALL INDEX Request to permit the establishment of live Item #9 entertainment and dancing in conjunction with an existing restaurant (i.e. Blackbeard's Galley and Grog). ZONE: P -C USE PERMIT NO. 2078 APPLICANT: Blackbeard's Galley and Grog OWNER: John Skoby, et al, Newport Beach - APPROVED CONDI- The public hearing opened in connection with this item TIONALLY and Mr. David Sowerby, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this application. 4 Motion was made for a roval of Use Permit No. 2078 7 011 1'X PP A l Ayes X IX X I X X X subject to the following findings and conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and with the Planned Community Development Standards for "Newport Place ". 2. That the establishment of a dance floor and live entertainment will be compatible with the existing restaurant facility.. 3. That adequate parking exists in the common parking lot for the proposed addition of live entertainment and dancing to the restaurant operation. 4. The Police Department and Fire Department have indicated that they do not contemplate any problems with the proposed development. 0 11111111 -25- -- April 22, 1982 � r c m 07 m F City of Newport Beach 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 2078 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 restaurant operation shall be consistent with the approved plot plan and floor plan. . 2. That the live entertainment shall be confined to the interior of the building and the sound from said entertainment shall be controlled in such a manner that it does not become a problem for adjoining properties. • 3. That a Cafe Dance Permit for the proposed dancing shall be approved by the City. The dance floor shall be increased to a minimum size of 400 sq. ft: unless said permit is approved for a smaller floor. Request to permit the establishment of a yoga meditation center in the Unclassified District. LOCATION: A portion of Lot.1015,_First Addition to the Newport Mesa Tract, located at 1535 .Monrovia Avenue on the westerly side of Monrovia Avenue, between 15th Street and Production Place in the West Newport Triangle Area. ZONE: U APPLICANT: Siddh Yoga Meditation Center, Newport Beach OWNERS: Mr. & Mrs. John Craig Combs, • Newport Beach -26- MINUTES INDEX April 22, 1982 MINUTES a m F m City of Newport Beach INDEX The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Murton Willson, architect representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this application. Mr. Frank Ray, representing Permalite Plastics Corporation, located directly behind the proposed use, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Ray stated that Permalite's only method of entrance and exit to its property is by a 20 foot access road easement to Monrovia Avenue. He expressed his concern that this easement be kept clear at all times to assure access to his property. Commissioner Balalis suggested that a condition be imposed that parking shall be prohibited on the 20 foot easement at all times. Mr. Ray stated that this would be acceptable. Motion I I .IXI I I I I Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2079, Ayes I X1 X I X IX I subject to the following findings and conditions, with I I I the additional condition that parking shall be prohibited on the 20 foot easement at all times, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 2079 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. • 11111111 -27- 3 � � r c m � W > z CONDITIONS: April 22, 1982 MINUTES t Beach 1.1 That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 2. That the subject meditation center shall not be open between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. during the week, or during the business hours of any other uses on the subject property. 3. That parking shall be prohibited on the 20 foot access easement located on the subject property at all times. INDEX Request to appeal staff's interpretation of the Item #11 . definition of "dwelling unit" in conjunction with .the construction of a single family dwelling and a detached guest complex. LOCATION: Lot 147, Tract No. 1237, located at 940 APPEAL Rivera Terrace, on the southerly side of FROM Rivera Terrace,.. westerly of Seaward INTE-RPRE- Road, in Corona Highlands. ZONE: R -1 -B District APPLICANT: William Wegener, Corona del Mar APPROVED OWNER: - - Same as applicant The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. William Wegener, the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this appeal from interpretation. Commissioner Beek stated that the City ordinance on the definition of the term . "dwelling unit" is. insufficient: He stated that the City had at one time, amended the Ordinance to prevent bootleg building. He stated that the staff has attempted to cope with this problem. However, as it turned out, the amended- . Ordinance did not eliminate this problem. -28- April 22, 1982 3 � c W City of Newport Beach Commissioner Beek suggested that the applicant be required to record a covenant to the effect that the proposed detached "guest room" never be occupied as a separate dwelling unit. Commissioner Allen stated that the Commission also has the option to approve the proposed development based upon.the circumstances of this particular case. Commissioner Balalis suggested that the Commission consider, under Additional Business, recommending to the City Council that they study revising the term "dwelling unit ". Motion X Motion was made to approve_ the proposed development based upon the circumstances of this particular case. I� titute Substitute Motion was made to approve the proposed Moon K development and require the applicant to record a Ayes X X. X covenant to the effect that the proposed detached Noes X:X X "guest room" never be occupied as a separate dwelling -unit, which SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED. Ayes X X X Motion for approval of the proposed development based Abstain X upon the circumstances of this particular case, was now Noes X voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Electronic Video Games Motion X Motion was made to set for public hearing on May 20, All Ayes X X X K X X X 1982, a proposed amendment- to the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to electronic video games, which MOTION CARRIED. - -29- MINUTES INDEX ADDITIONAL BUSINESS COMMISSIONERS MINUTES: April 22, 1982 � r c W m y = City of Newport Beach t07MCALL INDEX DeAnza Mobile Home Park Motion X Motion was made to set for public hearing on June 10, All Ayes X X X X X X X 1982, an amendment of a portion of Districting Map No. 65 involving specific parcels at 300 E. Coast Highway, known as the DeAnza Mobile Home Park, from the P -C District to the P -C/MHP District, which MOTION CARRIED. Time -Share Developments Motion I IIXII Motion was made to set for public hearing on May 20, All Ayes X X X X X X X 1982, a proposed amendment to the Newport Beach Municipal Code pertaining to time -share developments, which MOTION CARRIED: x r • There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 11:20 p.m. to a Study Session at 2:00 p.m. on May 6, 1982. Joan Winburn, Secretary Planning.Commission City of Newport Beach