Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/05/1983 (2)YCH • MANSSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council.Chambers TIME: 7:30 p.m. c m DATE: May 5, 1983 m m H City of Newport Beach XJXIXJ *I Commissioner Allen was absent. * * * EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, City Attorney _ * STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator Donald Webb, City Engineer Pamela Woods, Secretary * * * APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Minutes of April 21, 1983 Motion Motion was made for approval of the April 21, 1983, All Ayes X. X X X * Planning Commission Minutes, as written, which MOTION CARRIED. Staff stated that the applicant for Item No. 9 - Resubdivision No. 746 has requested that this item be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983. Staff requested that Item No. 14 - General Plan Amendment No. 82 -1 be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983. Motion IXIXI Motion was made to continue these items to the Planning All Ayes X X X. * Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983, which MOTION CARRIED. * * * -1- MINUTES. INDEX COMMd5NUNtKS MINUTES may 5, 1983 . City of Newport Beach VROLLAU INDEX Presentation by the Police Department (Discussion) Discussion with a representative of the Police Department concerning police related problems with various land uses on the Balboa Peninsula. The discussion opened in connection with this item and Chief Gross of the Newport Beach Police Department, appeared before the Commission. Chief Gross referred to a report by the Police Department dated July 24, 1980, entitled, "Trends in the Beach Areas" which contained specific and objective material relating to beach activity and cruising, analysis and projections for the future, and positive actions which can be taken by the Police Department. He discussed the problems which the Police Department encounter with the use of alcohol and the young people's perception with society's response to the use of alcohol. He stated • that historically, the community has consistently required a strong enforcement position in relationship to alcohol related activity. Chief Gross stated. that the adoption of Proposition 20 by the Coastal Commission, has brought about a psychological mobility and a significant change in the character of the day visitors to the City of Newport Beach. He stated that a. significant number of the day visitors are no longer coming to the City for the unique water- oriented, recreational activities, but are bringing a recreational culture which is alcohol oriented to a more comfortable location. He stated that this has caused increasing conflicts in the beach area. Chief Gross stressed that the Police Department has taken no position relating to the licensing of premises for alcoholic beverages. Realistically however; he stated that if the City were to reduce or eliminate the sale and dispensing of alcoholic beverages, the number of alcohol related incidents would decrease. He stated that the Planning Commission makes these decisions on an individual basis with the City's long range goals in • IIIIIIII mind. PRESEN- POLICE DEPARTMENT May 5,.1983 � r c m W m w. City of Newport Beach Chairman King asked if a large portion of the alcohol is transported to the beach area, or if it is purchased in the beach area. Chief Gross stated that of the 952 alcohol related offenses since June 1, 1982, 241 incidents have occurred in the beach area which have been directly related to on -site alcohol purchased on the premises, resulting in persons driving under the influence of alcohol and the common drunk. He stated that 80 percent of these offenses are caused by out-of-towners, and not primarily generated by persons residing within the City. He stated that the problems occur year round, but increase during the summer months. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Chief Gross stated that the law prohibits the possession of open containers of alcoholic beverages and the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the • beach. Commissioner Balalis stated that many of the take -out facilities which feature the sale of beer and wine, serve the transient population as well as a large segment of the existing community. However, he stated that in many of these facilities, the prices are inflated to the point where the transient population is discouraged from purchasing their alcohol at these facilities. He stated that it is cheaper to purchase alcoholic beverages at a convenience market, grocery or liquor store. Commissioner Balalis asked if limiting the number of take -out restaurants which sell alcoholic beverages, would have much affect on the number of alcohol related incidents. Chief Gross stated that the more difficult it is to obtain alcoholic beverages at a certain location, the involvement of alcoholic beverages at that certain location is discouraged. He stated that the use of alcohol or drugs lessens a person's inhibitions and lowers their frustration level. • IIIIII11 -3- MINUTES INDEX May 5, 1983 � x � r c m � m m m w. City of Newport Beach In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Chief Gross stated that the 241 incidents in the beach area occurred mainly between 32nd Street and "G" Street on the Peninsula. He stated that the persons arrested in alcohol related offenses ranged from age 13 to 35. He expressed his concern that a significant number of juveniles are involved in alcohol related offenses. Commissioner Kurlander asked Chief Gross if he has any preference for on -sale or off -sale alcoholic beverages. Chief Gross stated that this would depend upon the individual establishment. He stated that certain establishments have sufficient staff which can regulate and contain the alcohol use. However, he stated that there are on -sale uses which can also sell a six -pack of beer to go. He stated that the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control will permit certain . restrictions, which can be recommended by the Planning Commission, upon the alcoholic beverage licenses. Chief Gross discussed his personal experience with Hollywood Boulevard from 1962 to 1975 and the problems which were encountered. He stated that at the present time, the only way in which to correct the problems with Hollywood Boulevard, would be to close it down for five years and start over again. Chief Gross stated that cruising and alcohol use provides negative opportunities. He stated that the neighborhood customers begin to shop elsewhere to avoid the cruising and alcohol use, which in time, the local businesses suffer losses. Then, he stated that new cruising oriented businesses replace the local failing business establishments, which attracts more cruisers as the businesses begin to cater to them. He stated that at this point, neighborhood customers cease all shopping within the area, the neighborhood businesses disappear and the surrounding residential neighborhood begins to deteriorate as the expanding problems negatively impact the quality of life. • 11111111 -4- MINUTES INDEX COMAhISSIONERS MINUTES May 5, 1983 R m � m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Chief Gross stated that the problems in the McFadden Square Area can be resolves} when the total community decides to do, something about it. He stated that the licensing or non - licensing of businesses will not resolve the problems. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander, Chief Gross stated that he would prefer not to comment on individual establishments and specific violations which have occurred. Chief Gross stated that when an applicant applies for an on -sale alcoholic license, an off -sale alcoholic license can automatically be received, unless the City conditions the license otherwise. Chairman King asked if the beat officers patrolling the area provide a deterrent to the alcoholic use. Chief Gross stated that the current public attitude towards • the use of alcohol in public, has very little impact upon the crowd once the police officer leaves the. scene. Commissioner Goff asked what the impact would be, if the Planning Commission were to hypothetically, never approve another beer.and wine application in the beach area. Chief Gross stated that the problem would still continue to be compounded, as long as the only solution to the problem is the law enforcement efforts to make the arrests. He stated that the alcoholic beverage licenses are only one aspect of the problem in the area. Chief Gross stressed that the applications to be considered by the Planning Commission must be determined on an individual basis, with long range goals in mind. He stated that in certain instances, the consumption of alcohol on the premises, may be an enhancement to the use and may lend itself to the rehabilitation of the area. Commissioner Goff asked if the problems of the McFadden Square area are reversible. Chief Gross stated that the problems are reversible because of the strong • community interest. -5- May 5, 1983 MINUTES y City of Newport Beach INDEX Commissioner McLaughlin asked Chief Gross if his comments were also directed to the Lido Marina Village area. Chief Gross stated that the same problems do not generally apply to the Lido Marina Village area. Planning Director Hewicker made reference to live entertainment and dancing permits and asked Chief Gross if these permits, in conjunction with alcohol consumption, present problems for the Police Department in all instances, or in specific areas of the community. Chief Gross stated that in one particular area of the community, there is a critical mass of such combined activities. whereas, he stated that in other areas of the community, the combination of such activities does not present a problem. Commissioner Goff asked if more alcohol related incidents take place during the daytime or the evening hours. Chief Gross stated that there is always more • alcohol related activity during the evening hours between 9:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. However, there is also a great deal of activity during the mid- afternoon hours of the summer months. Commissioner Goff hypothetically asked if a discontinuance of the service of beer and wine at 6:00 p.m. would be helpful. Chief Gross stated that this would present a traffic problem of persons leaving Newport Beach and arriving at Costa Mesa establishments which serve beer and wine. Ms. Sue Picker, resident of 110 9th Street, and a member of the Central Newport Beach Community Association, appeared before the Commission and stated that persons who do not live in the area can not fully realize the negative impact of the alcoholic distribution and consumption in the area. She stated that the area is headed for a disaster and the efforts of the Police Department should not be further burdened. Ms. Terry Harrison, resident of 2270 Channel Road, asked Chief Gross if the majority of the problems occur with on -sale alcohol, rather than with the take -out restaurant sale of alcohol. Chief Gross stated that he • has been stressing the total problems, rather than commenting on the on -sale versus off -sale issues. IM May 5,.1983 X . m m y. City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCALLI III J i l I INDEX Mr. Rex Chandler, the proprietor of The Rex Restaurant located in the McFadden Building, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Chandler stated that the problems which Chief Gross has addressed occur on a daily basis. He stated that he operates a quality restaurant which has expensive prices and adheres to a dress code. He stated that the quality business establishments in the area are concerned with the problems and are trying to participate in resolving these problems in a positive manner. Commissioner Balalis suggested that Mr. Chandler participate in the Regional /Urban Design Assistance Team (R /UDAT) program which is currently taking place in the McFadden Square /Cannery Village Area. Mr. Chandler stated that he is aware of the program and will participate in same. . Ms. Angela Ficker White, resident of 1132 West Bay Avenue, appeared before the Commission and stated she has watched Hollywood Boulevard deteriorate and expressed her concern that the same may happen in Newport Beach. She stated that the Police Department does an excellent job and needs the support of the total community. D Ms. Sue Ficker stated that the City's population has grown tremendously during the past few years. She expressed her concern that budget constraints do not allow for an increase in the number of police officers and the time element in which it takes for the limited police force to respond to the reported complaints. She stated that the Planning Commission must take into consideration what is being denied to the remainder of the community and the proper police services, when considering a request for a liquor license. -7- May 5, 1983 MINUTES r c m City of Newyrxort Beach t#�LCALL INDEX Request to amend a previously approved use permit that permitted the establishment of E. Gads Restaurant facility with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live entertainment in the McFadden Building on McFadden Square in the C -1 District. The proposed amendment is a request to change the operational characteristics of the subject restaurant facility so as to allow dancing in conjunction with said use. LOCATION: Lot 19, Block 21, Newport Beach Tract, located at 2100 West Ocean Front, on the northwesterly corner of West Ocean Front and McFadden Place, in McFadden Square. ZONE: C -1 DENIED APPLICANT: Barrett Saloon and Restaurant, Inc. (dba E. Gads), Newport Beach • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OWNER: - Francis C. Hertzog, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Brad Barrett, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Barrett stated that he is requesting dancing after 8:00 p.m. in conjunction with the restaurant facility. He then referred to the Citizens Reporter for April /May, published by the City Managers Office, and stated that the bulletin urges persons to shop in the City of Newport Beach in order to generate additional sales tax revenue. He stated that his business constitutes a beginning in the rehabilitation of the McFadden Square area. Mr. Barrett stated that as a businessman, it is necessary to offer dancing to the restaurant patrons. He stated that there are a number of establishments within the City which currently allow dancing. He then referred to his letter dated May 4, 1983, and stated that his facility, E. Gads, requires very little policing which can be verified by the local beat patrolmen in the Newport Pier area. He stated that he operates a quality establishment which adheres to a dress code. -8- May 5, 1983 � r c H City of Newport Beach Mr. Barrett referred to Condition No. 6 and requested that the requirement to purchase an additional four in -lieu parking spaces be waived, in that the request for the dancing would not begin until after 8:00 p.m. He stated that after 5:00 p.m. the metered parking spaces are no longer a problem. He stated that the dancing would not begin until after 8:00 p.m. when the parking and traffic problems in the area have subsided. Commissioner McLaughlin asked if dancing has occurred on the premises during the recent past. Mr. Barrett stated that dancing is not currently offered, but that dancing had occurred in the past. He stated that he had discovered that the use permit specifically prohibited dancing, therefore the use permit must be amended. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Mr. Barrett stated that considerable time and money have been spent on the sound attenuation for 40 the building and explained the sound attenuation measures which were a requirement of the previously approved use permit. He stated that the recommendations made by the acoustical engineer have been adhered to. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Mr. Barrett stated that the windows are not normally open during the evening when the live entertainment is being performed. He stated that the windows in the area of the live entertainment front onto a parking lot and the ocean. He stated that there are no residential structures for a considerable distance. Planning Director Hewicker asked if the premises are air conditioned. Mr. Barrett stated that the building has air conditioning. Planning Director Hewicker stated that if the windows are cracked or if the door is open during the live entertainment, there will be sound escaping the building. MINUTES ..I Planning Director Hewicker stated that prior to the opening of the facility, the Planning Department worked with the applicant to make sure that the sound" . attenuation conditions were complied with. �L v m 7C C N D May 5, 1983 Z Mr. Barrett stated that several hundred yards residential uses. MINUTES M'. E INDEX the sound would have to carry to be heard by any of the Planning Director Hewicker asked Mr. Barrett if he had been issued a cafe dance permit by the City. Mr. Barrett stated that he had applied for a cafe dance permit which he thought had been cleared by the City. He stated that he then discovered at a later time, that dancing was specifically prohibited by the use permit. Mr. Robert Burnham, City Attorney,.asked Mr. Barrett if anyone in the License Department had authorized dancing in the facility. Mr. Barrett stated that the License Department had not authorized dancing in the facility. Commissioner Balalis asked Mr. Barrett to explain the type of music which would be performed and the dress • code which would be enforced in conjunction with the dancing. Mr. Barrett stated that modern, contemporary music would be performed. He stated that dress code requires shirt and shoes and allows reasonably prudent casual attire. He stated that the facility attracts an upper scale clientele. Mr. John Shea, resident of 2214 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Shea stated that the building may be properly sound attenuated, but expressed his concern that once the doors and windows are open, the sound of the live entertainment travels to the surrounding residential uses. He stated that the music provides a nuisance to the area and encourages groups to gather in the parking lot and continue with their parties. Mr. Barrett stated that the issue is not the live entertainment, but the addition of dancing to the previously approved use permit which allows live entertainment. Chairman King stated that the concern is with increasing the number of persons at this location and the temptation of opening the windows during the hours which dancing may occur in order to • take advantage of the cool ocean breeze. -10- May 5, 1983 � c m City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I I I I III I I INDEX • 0 Mr. Barrett stated that the building contains five separate air conditioning units and reiterated that the windows front onto the parking lot and the ocean, not residential uses. He stated that the windows are open during the afternoon and not during the hours of the live entertainment. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Barrett stated that he is leasing the premises from Mr. Rick Lawrence. Commissioner Balalis stated that the Planning Commission has repeatedly made it clear that dancing would not be permitted on the premises, by adding specific conditions to the previously approved use permits which prohibited dancing. Mr. Barrett stated that this issue was not made clear in the discussions he has had with Mr. Lawrence. Commissioner Balalis suggested that if dancing were to be approved for the facility; the following conditions be imposed: 1) All windows and doors to remain closed at all times when the dancing and music is being performed. The air conditioning units shall be utilized during these times; and, 2) This application shall be reviewed in (1) one year by the Planning Commission. Mr. Barrett stated that these additional conditions would be acceptable. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Barrett stated that although his facility is smaller than Bobby McGee's, his facility would be similar in nature and attract clientele similar to that of Bobby McGee's. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Planning Director Hewicker explained the previously approved condition relating to maintaining the outside sound at the existing ambient level. He stated that the building is designed so that the sound levels inside the building will not increase the ambient noise level outside the building. Mr. Barrett stated that many of the existing buildings in the area are not sound attenuated. -11- • c ? a s o m a Motion • • May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach Commissioner Kurlander stated that he feels as though the applicant is making an effort to improve the area, however, he stated that he concurs with the Police Department concern that the addition of dancing to this facility would add to the existing problems of the area. He stated that great effort was made to sound attenuate the building, but the sound attenuation is broken when the windows and doors are open. Motion was made for denial of Use Permit No. 1717 (Amended), subject to the Findings of Exhibit "B ". Commissioner McLaughlin stated that she would be supporting the motion for denial because of the concerns which have been expressed by the Police Department. Commissioner Goff stated that the condition on the existing use permit relating to the ambient noise levels shall continue to exist. Planning Director Hewicker concurred. Commissioner Goff stressed that the existing condition be enforced and that the applicant not allow the windows and doors to remain open during the live entertainment. He stated that if the existing condition is adhered to, he may look favorable, in the future, to the addition of dancing to the facility. MINUTES Commissioner Balalis stated that he would not support the motion for denial. He stated that he can understand the concerns which were expressed by Chief Gross of the Police Department, however, he stated that there are certain establishments in which the addition of dancing would enhance the use and improve the general area. He stated that he feels as though the applicant operates a quality restaurant which already provides live entertainment. He stated that the applicant has agreed to a one year review by the Planning Commission to ensure that the atmosphere of, the facility is maintained. -12- INDEX n F m � m 'om xci ? May 5, 1983 MINUTES of Newport Beach Planning Director Hewicker suggested an additional Finding for Denial as follows, "Based upon testimony offered at the public hearing, there is evidence that perhaps the applicant is not adhering to the required conditions of approval. The Planning Commission may look more favorably upon a request of this nature at Amendment sometime in the future." Commissioner Kurlander amended his motion for denial to include the additional finding. Chairman King concurred with the comments made previously by Commissioner Balalis. However, he stated that he is concerned with the overall increase in the traffic to the area which the request would generate, therefore, he stated that he would be supporting the motion for denial. s X X. X Commissioner Kurlander's amended motion for denial of I Use Permit No. 1717 (Amended), was now voted on as Absent follows, which AMENDED MOTION CARRIED: • FINDINGS: 1. That the Police Department has indicated that approval of this request to permit dancing at the subject restaurant would further contribute to the problems of congestion and alcohol . related incidents of the area. 2. The approval of Use Permit No. 1717 (Amended) will, under the circumstances of this 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. 3. Based upon testimony offered at the public hearing, there is evidence that perhaps the applicant is not adhering to the required conditions of approval. The Planning Commission may look more favorably upon a request for dancing sometime in the future. a * x -13- INDEX • Motion Ayes Noes Absent • May 5, 1983 MINUTES � r c ro = m m m ° y. City of Newport Beach INDEX The Planning Commission recessed at 9:10 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m. Request to amend a previously approved use permit which Item #3 allowed the establishment of a take -out restaurant (i.e. The Yogurt Connection) and the waiver of a portion of the required off - street parking spaces. The proposed amendment is a request to add on -sale beer and wine in conjunction with a new Mexican style take -out restaurant with incidental dining. USE PERMIT NO. 1849 LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 59 -17 (Amended) (Resubdivision No. 416) located at 3408 Via Oporto #2, on the northeasterly side of Via Oporto in Lido Marina Village. ZONE: C -1 -H - APPLICANT: Mohamad S. Faez, Newport Beach Continued to May 19, OWNER: Traweek Investment, Torrance 1983 Chairman King noted that the applicant, or a representative of the applicant, was not in attendance of the public hearing. Commissioner McLaughlin stated that she would prefer to take action on this item, rather than continue the item. X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning X X Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983, which MOTION 111 X CARRIED. _ a -14- C.UMANNN Nt" MINUTES May 5, 1983 � x m m m w > City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Request to change the operational characteristics of an existing take -out restaurant which included take -out Item #4 . sandwiches and a retail bakery so as to operate the facility as a take -out sea food center with incidental dining and on -sale beer and wine. The proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the required off - street parking. USE PERMIT NO. 3034 LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 79 -50 (Resubdivision No. 493) located at 110 McFadden Place, on the northeasterly corner of McFadden Place and Court Avenue in McFadden Square. - - Continued ZONE: C -1 to May 19, APPLICANT: Jin Ho Kim, Tustin 1983 - • OWNER: Raymond Smith, Long Beach Mr. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, stated that the applicant has requested a continuance on this item. Motion JXJX I I XI I I I Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning All Ayes X X X * Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983, which MOTION CARRIED. E -15- May 5, 1983 i z i r c = m _. m H g I City of Newport Beach Traffic Study (Continued Public Hearing) Request to consider a Traffic Study in conjunction with a 45,000 sq. ft. addition to the YMCA facility. AND Request to amend a previously approved use permit that permitted the establishment of a YMCA facility in the R -1 District. The proposed amendment is a request to construct a 45,000 ± sq. ft. addition that includes youth and family fitness facilities, a gymnastics center, a child care center, offices, a community meeting center and an illuminated roof top jogging /exercise area. The proposal also includes a . modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a portion of the proposed building, an enclosed trash area, and a 6 foot wall to encroach into the required 20 foot front yard setback, a portion of the required parking spaces to be compact spaces, and to allow a wall mounted identification sign in excess of 2 sq. ft.; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND Variance No. 1098 (Continued Public Hearing)- Request to allow a portion, of the proposed addition to the Orange Coast YMCA to exceed the maximum allowable height in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 -of Parcel Map No. 3 -35 (Resubdivision No. 215) located at 2300 University Drive, on the northerly side of University Drive, easterly of Tustin Avenue in the West Bay area. ZONE: R -1 • 11111111 OWNERC�T. SamegasCappli ant• Newport Beach -16- MINUTES INDEX Items.NO. 5,'6 & 7 ALL APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY May 5, 1983 z � r c City of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX Agenda Items No. 5, 6 and 7 were heard concurrently, due to their relationship. The public hearing opened in connection with these items and Mr. James de Boom, Executive Director for the Orange Coast YMCA, and resident of Newport Beach, appeared before the Commission. Mr. de Boom stated that the YMCA held an open house on April 30, 1983, to demonstrate the height of the proposed structure to all interested parties. He stated that one neighbor, one Planning Commissioner and several of the YMCA staff members attended the demonstration. He then submitted to the Planning Commission the invitations which were circulated to the surrounding neighborhood and a subsequent letter which was circulated which advised that the height of the proposed building would be reduced. He also submitted a petition containing approximately 93 signatures in support of the YMCA request and a petition containing 4 signatures opposed • to the YMCA request. Mr. de Boom delivered a slide presentation which depicted the existing facility and demonstrated with balloons, the reduced height of the proposed structure in relationship to adjacent properties, including Ms. Brown's residence, the Four Fours Condominium site, and Mesa Drive. Mr. de Boom stated that they are now proposing to lower the height of the proposed structure by dropping the structure into the ground by approximately 30 inches which will cost approximately $20,000.00. He stated that in order to lower the structure 49 inches into the ground, the cost would be approximately $109,500.00. He stated that it would not be feasible to lower the structure 49 inches into the ground because extensive excavation and hauling of earth would be required, it would be located below the water line, water - proofing would be necessary, additional drainage, catch basin systems and additional handicapped ramping would have to be installed. Mr. de Boom stated that the staff report indicates the revised heights in relationship to the originally • requested heights. He stated that the proposed gymnasium parapet has been reduced to 28 feet and the roof has been reduced to 28 feet 10 inches. He stated. that the corner extension has been reduced from 39 feet to 34 feet 10 inches. -17- May 5, 1983 MINUTES K x `L m + of y City of Newport Beach INDEX Mr. de Boom stated that the proposed heights are necessary in order to have a gymnasium facility that is usable for basketball and volleyball competition. He stated that the requested gymnasium height does not set a precedent for office buildings in the area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Mr. de Boom stated that the revised roof height of 28 feet 10 inches, includes lowering the structure into the ground by approximately 30 inches. He stated that if the structure were to be lowered more than 30 inches, water - proofing of the gymnasium floor would continuously be a problem. Commissioner McLaughlin asked why the corner extensions are essential to the design of the facility. Mr. de Boom stated that the corner extensions are necessary in order to break up the design of the flat roof for the • running track. Mr. Roy Knutson, resident of 2504 University Drive and an officer of the Four Fours Condominium Association, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Knutson expressed his concern with the traffic impacts which will be generated by the proposed expansion. He questioned the assumptions of the Traffic Study in general, and those relating to the intersection of Irvine Avenue and Santiago Drive. He further questioned the right turn lane solution on University Drive and stated that the traffic on University Drive will adversely impact the surrounding residential uses. In response to a question posed by Mr. Knutson, Mr. Donald Webb, City Engineer, stated that the adjacent office condominium was included in the traffic counts and the ICU calculations of the Traffic Study. Commissioner Goff asked Mr. Webb to comment on the assumptions for the intersection of Irvine Avenue and Santiago Drive /22nd Street. Mr. Webb stated that the assumptions do constitute a fine line, but that the analysis was performed under the same rules as apply to other developments. • -18- n x � r c c° nxGw a m 5 G - E May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES IIIIIIIIIIIIIJ R O L L CALL I I I I J i l l I INDEX Ms. Cynthia Brown, resident of 2275 Golden Circle, located directly behind the YMCA, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Brown stated that she attended the open house and that the YMCA has responded to her concerns. However, she stated that the, proposed expansion will adversely affect her residence and the value of her property. She stated that she has experienced security problems with her property and stated that she concurs with the proposed landscape plan for the back wall on her property. She suggested that the landscaping be heavy enough to prevent persons from gaining access to her property. She urged that the YMCA parking lot be required to be secured by a gate during non - business hours. She further expressed her concern with the height and the mass of the proposed facility. I I I I I I In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Ms. Brown stated that her property is • currently, sparsely landscaped on the back wall. Ms. Brown stated that the proposed landscaping plan should be able to give her privacy, yet be able to filter light through to her property. Ms. Kay Weist, resident of 2499 Anniversary Lane, appeared before the Commission and stated that the YMCA provides a needed service for the entire community. She stated that the current YMCA facility needs expansion for their programs. She further stated that the traffic problems have expanded in all areas of the City, not just in the area of the YMCA. Planning Director Hewicker referred to the Traffic Study and explained the sensitivity of the trip generation and the assignment of traffic to the intersection of Irvine Avenue and Santiago Drive.. He stated that there are three separate tests which each intersection goes through in a Traffic Study. He stated that in this particular Traffic Study, it was determined that it passed the first test. Mrs. Batham, resident of 20451 Upper Bay Drive, appeared before the Commission. Mrs. Batham expressed her concern with the height of the proposed facility • and the proposed skylights. She referred to the mitigation measures and stated that when modifications are being considered for the proposed facility, the -19- May 5, 1983 MINUTES m `` a City of Newport Beach INDEX public should be notified of same. She further stated that the State of California requires that any counseling facility be sound attenuated to a level of 45 dba. Ms. Ada Taylor, resident of 2514 University Drive, stated that she is in favor of the YMCA as an organization. However, she expressed her concern with the traffic impacts of the proposed expansion and the aesthetics of the project. She stated that the landscaping of the current facility needs improvement. She asked how the new conditions of approval relating to the landscaping plan will be enforced. In response to a question posed by Ms. Taylor, Planning Director Hewicker discussed how landscaping conditions of approval are enforced by the City. He stated that a complaint or a violation can be reported to the City's Code Enforcement Officer which will follow up on the • complaint. Ms. Beverly Mullen, resident of 2031 Mesa Drive in Santa Ana Heights, stated that she is in favor of the YMCA, however, she is opposed to the proposed requests. She stated that the proposal is situated in the unique, ecologically sensitive Upper Bay area. She stated that the proposed signs would be offensive to the Upper Bay environment. She further expressed her concern with the excessive height of the proposed building and stated that it will be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood. She stated that the structure should not be allowed to exceed the 28 foot height limit. Mr. Dave Lorenzini, the architect for the project, stated that 97% of the perimeter of the parapet wall will be established at 28 feet in height above the grade. He stated that the corner extensions and railings will be approximately 7 feet above the parapet. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Ms. Mullen stated that she is opposed to the structure exceeding the 28 foot height limit. She stated that the corner extensions and open railings will be at a height of 35 feet, which is objectionable • for a residential area. She stated that the running track should not be located on the proposed gymnasium. -20- May 5, 1983 3 x . m m m m w. City of Newport Beach Ms. Marguerite Butler, resident of the Four Fours Condominium Association, stated that she is in favor of the proposed expansion of the YMCA facility. She expressed her concern with the height of the parapet, however, she stated that the YMCA has tried to conform to the concerns expressed by the residents. Mr. Eli Elman, resident of Balboa Boulevard and President of the Y- Knots, a YMCA organization, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Elman stated that the residents of the City will be utilizing the expanded YMCA facility. He stated that the adjacent office condominium will generate three times the traffic than that of the YMCA facility. He stated that the YMCA facility will not generate a large volume of traffic during the peak traffic hours. He stated that the proposed expansion will enhance the community and not be detrimental to the community. • Mr. Michael Ashe, resident of 106 Via Xanthe and Chairman of the Board for the Orange Coast YMCA, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Ashe stated that the YMCA has, worked hard to propose a viable project for the community. He stated that due to a lack of funds in 1965, the gymnasium could not be constructed at that time. He stated that the proposed height request is not unreasonable. Mr. Sam Estonson, resident of 1770 West Balboa Boulevard, stated that the proposed expansion will allow him and his wife to utilize the facility at the same time during the evening hours, which will help to alleviate some of the traffic in the area. Mr. Don Gilium, resident of 13272 Weymouth Court, expressed his concern with the future expansion of University Drive. Mr. Don Webb, City Engineer, stated that the length of the right turn lane will be approximately 100 feet in length at the maximum. He stated that the City's Local Coastal Plan does not provide for the extension of University Drive, however, the City's Circulation Element does provide for this. He stated that he can not say when, or if, this will happen. He also stated that he does not anticipate the widening of University Drive on the southerly side. • -21- MINUTES INDEX � r c May 5, 1983 MINUTES m a y City of Newport Beach INDEX Mr. David Tosh, resident of Corona del Mar, and the former Chairman of the Board for the Orange Coast YMCA, stated that he supports the proposed expansion for the YMCA facility. Mrs. Batham reiterated that she is not opposed to the YMCA itself, but she is opposed to the proposed height of the facility. She stated that the City has stated that it will maintain a low profile on the bay and the beaches. She stated that the proposed lighting should be conditioned at four feet so as not to adversely affect the surrounding area. Ms. Cynthia Brown reiterated that she is concerned with the height and the mass of the proposed structure. She suggested that the funds be raised in order to lower the structure further into the ground. • Mr, de Boom stated that the way in which the gymnasium has been designed, the corner extensions will not make the entire structure appear higher than the 28 feet. He referred to the landscape plan which also provides for the concerns expressed by Ms. Brown. He stated that they are also willing to increase the height of the block wall in the corner to 5 feet. He stated that the proposed expansion is needed in order to serve its members. Mr. de Boom stated that they are in concurrence with Condition No. 29, which relates to the lighting system. He stated that parking lot lighting is necessary in order to ensure the safety and security of its members during the evening hours. He stated that the proposed signs are only 50 square feet in size which will be recessed into the wall and not illuminated. He reiterated that it would not be feasible to lower the structure further into the ground because water - proofing and the gymnasium floor would continuously be a problem. Commissioner Winburn stated that many of the residents are opposed to the height of the corner extensions for • the proposed gymnasium and asked why the running track is necessary, as proposed. Mr. David Harding, Associate Executive Director of the Orange Coast YMCA, _22_ May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX explained that the organized jogging programs are geared towards persons who have undergone cardiac operations. He explained the importance that such programs must be monitored closely by members of the staff and held in a controlled environment. He stated that jogging around the existing dirt track or the gymnasium floor does not provide for a quality jogging program. Mr. de Boom stated that access to the running track will be controlled by electronic security cards. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Harding stated that the running track will be utilized by cardiac participants as well as other members of the YMCA interested in jogging fitness classes. Mr. Harding stated that the jogging fitness classes attract many participants, which is why the jogging track is necessary. Commissioner Balalis asked if it would be feasible to • construct the running track at ground level. Mr. de Boom stated that locating the running track around the pool would not be feasible with the amount of children utilizing the pool facilities. Commissioner Balalis stated that if a cardiac participant were to experience problems, it would be difficult to transport the person to the lower level of the facility and to the hospital. Mr. Harding reiterated that a controlled environment is necessary in order for the staff to monitor the jogging participants, so that injuries are prevented. Commissioner Balalis asked why the 7 foot high corner extensions are necessary, other than for architectural purposes. Mr. Harding stated that the corner extensions are necessary to prevent the runners from feeling as though they will run off of the rooftop. Commissioner Balalis asked if a minimum height of 42 inches would serve the same purpose. Mr. Harding stated that this may be acceptable, however, he stated that the height of the stairwell is at the height of the corner extensions which tie the building together. Commissioner Goff asked if it would be feasible to • locate the running track in an area of the site which is currently set aside for landscaping. Mr. Harding, stated that most of the landscaped areas will include -23- � r c D 7C y'1 y D C 3 May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX explained that the organized jogging programs are geared towards persons who have undergone cardiac operations. He explained the importance that such programs must be monitored closely by members of the staff and held in a controlled environment. He stated that jogging around the existing dirt track or the gymnasium floor does not provide for a quality jogging program. Mr. de Boom stated that access to the running track will be controlled by electronic security cards. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Harding stated that the running track will be utilized by cardiac participants as well as other members of the YMCA interested in jogging fitness classes. Mr. Harding stated that the jogging fitness classes attract many participants, which is why the jogging track is necessary. Commissioner Balalis asked if it would be feasible to • construct the running track at ground level. Mr. de Boom stated that locating the running track around the pool would not be feasible with the amount of children utilizing the pool facilities. Commissioner Balalis stated that if a cardiac participant were to experience problems, it would be difficult to transport the person to the lower level of the facility and to the hospital. Mr. Harding reiterated that a controlled environment is necessary in order for the staff to monitor the jogging participants, so that injuries are prevented. Commissioner Balalis asked why the 7 foot high corner extensions are necessary, other than for architectural purposes. Mr. Harding stated that the corner extensions are necessary to prevent the runners from feeling as though they will run off of the rooftop. Commissioner Balalis asked if a minimum height of 42 inches would serve the same purpose. Mr. Harding stated that this may be acceptable, however, he stated that the height of the stairwell is at the height of the corner extensions which tie the building together. Commissioner Goff asked if it would be feasible to • locate the running track in an area of the site which is currently set aside for landscaping. Mr. Harding, stated that most of the landscaped areas will include -23- May 5, 1983 3 � r{ r c m w. City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I I I I J i l l I INDEX parking spaces and sidewalks. He stated that locating the running track in these areas would not provide for a controlled atmosphere. He stated that there is no contiguous, unobstructed area on the site in which the running track could be located. He stated that restriping the parking lot would not be feasible or resolve the problem. Mr. de Boom stated that in order to make the project more viable, they would be willing to reduce the corner extensions to the height of the railing. Chairman King stated that Harbor View Hills overlooks the running track at The Sporting House and to his knowledge, there have been no complaints received from the adjacent residential uses regarding the running track. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the • open railing is illustrated on the plans as being an open pipe railing with horizontal members approximately one foot apart. Planning Director Hewicker stated that the heights for the various zone classifications are generally determined by the types of uses which would normally be found in the zones. He stated that uses such as churches, governmental buildings and institutional uses are permitted in residential zones, subject to securing a use permit. He stated that there are no different regulations for greater height limits which apply to such uses. However, he stated that such uses are generally not designed as that of residential uses. Planning Director Hewicker stated that the proposed 50 square foot signs are one - fourth of the size of a sign which would automatically be permitted in a commercial district. Planning Director Hewicker stated that it has been demonstrated at this facility in the past, that parking lot lighting at 4 feet in height is not feasible. He stated that current parking lot lighting technology can provide higher lighting for security which would be • more compatible with the surrounding residential uses. -24- May 5, 1983 � z � m m m � o. > City of Newport Beach MINUTES _ ROLL CALL I I I I J i l INDEX In response to a.question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Webb stated that reduction of the corner extensions to the height of the railing, reduces the height of the building from 35 feet to 31 feet 6 inches. In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the use permit has been conditioned so that there will be no illumination of the proposed signs. Commissioner Kurlander asked if a 5 foot high wall would be required where the 4 foot high wall currently exists. Planning Director Hewicker stated that adding one foot to the existing wall could be a problem in matching the brick and mortar. He stated that in some • instances, a wall becomes more unsightly when brick and mortar are added at a later date. Commissioner Kurlander stated that a higher wall may be necessary for security purposes for the surrounding residential uses. Chairman King stated that an alternative would be to intensify the density of the landscaping at this particular location. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander, Planning Director Hewicker stated that time limitations are not imposed upon Traffic Study approvals. He stated that the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance procedures would have to be amended in order to do so. He stated that uses such as churches and institutions rely upon private donations for their construction, which makes it impractical to guarantee the time frame in which the project will be completed. • IIIIII11 _25_ May 5, 1983 m m w. City of Newport Beach TRAFFIC STUDY Motion I XXI XIXIX`I *I a approval e Study, All X subject to andc nd tion,whch MOTION FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the 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 be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of the critical intersections, and will add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic • service at critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of greater than .90. 3. That the Traffic Studies suggest a circulation system improvement which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. 4. That the proposed project, including circulation system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major ", "primary- modified" or "primary" street. CONDITION: 1. That prior to the occupancy of the proposed project the circulation system improvements described in the Traffic Study dated April 1983 on Page 10 prepared by JEF Engineering, Inc., shall have been accomplished unless subsequent project approvals require modifications thereto. (The ultimate design of the intersection shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic • Engineer). -26- MINUTES INDEX May 5,.1983 � r c m m X City of Newport Beach USE PERMIT NO. 1128 (AMENDED) Motion X Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 1128 All Ayes X X X X X * (Amended) , subject to the following findings and conditions, with Condition No. 21 to be amended to reflect that the YMCA will intensify the landscaping adjacent to the Anniversary Lane Tract; and increase the wall and landscaping at the northwesterly corner of the site where the foot traffic is occurring which will preclude persons from gaining access at this location; Condition No. 34 be amended to include the wording, "permanent" amplified paging systems; Condition No. 36 be amended to reflect that the programs shall be modified by the YMCA in a manner approved by the Planning Department; and, an additional condition which would reflect that a gate be provided across the driveway to close off the parking lot during the non- business hours, which MOTION CARRIED: - • FINDINGS: - 1: That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 2. That based on the information contained in the Negative Declaration, the project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. 3. The project will comply with and State Building Codes and for new building applicable which the proposed project those items requested 'in o proposed modifications. all applicable City Zoning requirements to the district in is located, except injunction with the I I i 1 I I I 4. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land • Use Element of the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. -27- MINUTES INDEX COMAA SIONERS MINUTES May 5,.1983 m w. City of Newport Beach �L- CALL INDEX 5. The project lot size conforms to the zoning Code area requirements. 6. The Police Department has indicated that it does not contemplate any problems. 7. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 8. The proposed number of compact car spaces constitutes 19 percent of the parking requirements which is within limits generally considered acceptable by the City Traffic Engineer. 9. The approval of Use Permit No. 1128 (Amended) will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing • and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, revised elevations and sections, except as noted below. 2. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from University Drive and adjoining properties. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That vehicular access be provided to the existing storm drain easement access road located at the northeasterly corner of the parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 5. That the on -site vehicular and pedestrian • I circulation systems be subject to further review by the Public works Department. -28- May 5, 1983 r � m = m w. . City of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX 6. That the existing deteriorated drive apron and gutter on the University Drive frontage be replaced under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 7. That prior to the issuance of a building permit,, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and the Public Works Department, that sewer facilities will be available for the project at the time of occupancy. 8. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements. 9. That a master plan of sewer, water and storm drain facilities be prepared and approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of any building • permits. 10. Development of site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 11. That a grading plan, if required, shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 12. The grading permit shall include, if required, a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 13. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 14. The velocity of concentrated run -off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities • controlled as part of the project design. -29- • • May 5, 1983 � x rL r c m 00 m m y > 3 i I City of Newport Beach 15. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 16. That erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engineer. 17. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan). 18. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and approval of the Planning Department. 19. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. 20. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegetation and be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 21. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire - retardant vegetation. The final landscape plan shall be designed so as to intensify the landscaping for screening purposes, adjacent to the Anniversary Lane Tract, and to increase the wall and landscaping at the northwesterly corner of the site where the foot traffic is occurring, so as to preclude persons from gaining access at this location. -30- MINUTES INDEX May 5, 1983 m y City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I 111 Jill I I INDEX 22. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 23. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 Dba at the property line. 24. That any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view and noise associated with said installations shall be sound attenuated to acceptable levels in receptor areas. The latter shall be based upon the recommendations of a qualified acoustical engineer, and be approved by the Planning Department. 25. That all buildings on the project site shall be equipped with fire suppression systems approved by • the Fire Department. 26. That all access to the buildings be approved by the Fire Department. 27. That fire vehicle access, including the proposed planter islands, shall be approved by the Fire Department. 28. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water - saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities. 29. That the lighting system within the structure and in the off - street parking lot shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential 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. 30. That the final design for the parking area be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. • 31. That a minimum of 181 parking spaces be provided on -site at all times. -31- May 5, 1983 m City of Newport Beach MINUTES _ ROLLCALLI 111 INDEX 32. That a maximum of 19% ± (35 spaces) of the parking on -site may be compact parking spaces. 33. That no nighttime lighting shall be permitted on the running track /exercise area, except for pacing lights on the running track. 34. That no permanent amplified paging systems shall be permitted in any outdoor area on the subject property. 35. That the two proposed wall signs shall not be illuminated. • 36. It shall be the responsibility of the YMCA to monitor its programs for the proposed facility so as to not exceed the capacity of the proposed parking lot. If it is determined by the Planning Department that programs exceed the on -site parking spaces, they shall be modified by the YMCA in a manner approved by the Planning Department. 37. That a gate shall be required across the driveway to close off the parking lot during the non - business hours. • IIIIII11 -32- 3 � r m ^ 07 3 C 9 0 D Pon May 5, 1983 Beach MINUTES R O L L CALL I I I I I I I I INDEX . Motion All Ayes VARIANCE NO. 1098 Motion was made for approval of Variance No. 1098, X X X X x subject to the following findings and conditions, with an additional condition that the height of the parapet walls be limited to that required by Code which would be 42 inches, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building, and use proposed in this application, which circumstances and conditions do not generally apply to land, building, and /or uses in the same district inasmuch as the YMCA's gymnasium requires specific dimensions and height that do not apply to adjacent properties in the vicinity. 2. That the granting of a variance to the height • requirement is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as without the height, the YMCA could not offer programs necessary to sustain itself and serve the community. 3. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use, property, and building will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or detrimental or injurious to property and improve- ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, revised elevations and sections, except as noted below. 2. That all applicable conditions of Use Permit No. 1128 (Amended) shall be fulfilled. • 3. That the height of the parapet walls shall be limited to that required by Code, which would be 42 inches. The proposed stairwells shall be no higher than the approved height of the parapet walls. -33- May 5, 1983 � x ro m m m y. City of Newport Beach The Planning Commission recessed at 11:05 p.m. and reconvened at 11:15 p.m. * x Request to amend a previously approved use permit which allowed the interior remodel and expansion of an existing restaurant located in the SP -5 District. The proposed amendment is a request to expand the "net public area" of Tony Roma's Restaurant facility so as to add an outdoor waiting patio and expand the existing restaurant entry. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 35 -31 (Resubdivision No. 512), located at 2530 West Coast Highway, on the northerly • side of West Coast Highway, easterly of Tustin Avenue, on Mariners' Mile. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Roma Newport, Inc., Santa Monica OWNER: Dickson Shafer, Corona del Mar The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Philip Metson, attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Metson referred to his letter dated April 7, 1983, which outlined their reasons for the proposed request. He stated that they are requesting the amendment because of concerns expressed by the Alcoholic Beverage Control of the State of California (ABC) and the Police Department of the City of Newport Beach. He stated that the small addition has been approved by the ABC and will be utilized as a patron waiting area only. Mr. Metson referred to Condition No. 4, relating to the dedication of property, and stated that the applicant only has a leasehold interest in the property, and therefore, could not agree to such a condition. He .` stated that the 250 square foot minor expansion to the restaurant has no relationship to the widening of West Coast Highway. -34- MINUTES INDEX Item #8 USE PERMIT NO. 1875 (Amended) APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY May 5, 1983 r � ro = W w. City of Newport Beach MINUTES iiiiiiiiiiiiiiJ ROLLCALLI III Jill I INDEX Mr. Metson - stated that imposing such a condition constitutes the taking of property without proper compensation. He stated that in 1978, the restaurant facility was approved with a modification that the existing structure be allowed to encroach within 5 feet of the front property line. He requested that Condition No. 4 be deleted. Commissioner Balalis stated that when the modification was approved in 1978, the applicant was aware that the Ordinance required a 12 foot wide setback for the possible widening of West Coast Highway. Mr. Metson stated that the proposed addition will not be located within the 12 foot wide setback. Commissioner Balalis stated that the applicant has had total use of the setback since 1978. Mr. Metson stated that the restaurant was constructed according to the conditions which were imposed at the time. • Mr. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, stated that any condition to be imposed upon a use permit must rationally relate to the project under consideration. He stated that in this instance, the question is, the small expansion of the net public area without any additional seating capacity within the restaurant, and whether the condition is reasonable given the nature of the project. Mr. Metson reiterated that the proposed Condition No. 4 has no relationship to the project under consideration. Chairman King referred to the take -out window indicated on the plans and stated that there is a relationship between the encouragement of the use and the 12 foot setback. Mr. Metson stated that they would be willing to delete the take =out window as indicated on the plans. Chairman King also expressed his concern with the swinging doors which open onto the driveway area. Planning Director Hewicker referred to Condition No. 5 and stated that the four foot wide walkway would resolve this concern. In response to a question posed by Commissioner . I Kurlander, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the required parking is shown on the plans. -35- May 5, 1983 � r c m � m City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCAUJ I 1 1 Jill IINDEX Chairman King asked if the service of alcoholic beverages in the proposed addition constitutes an economic gain for the applicant and thereby relates to the dedication issue. Mr. Burnham stated that the Commission must determine if the proposed addition constitutes adequate consideration in exchange for the dedication. Mr. Metson reiterated that they are requesting the amendment because of concerns expressed by the ABC and the Police Department of.the City of Newport Beach. He stated that the patrons of the restaurant can then have their drinks in the outdoor waiting patio area. Planning Director Hewicker stated that the alternative would be for the restaurant operator to not allow drinks to be taken outside of the restaurant building. Chairman King stated that other restaurant facilities monitor the service of alcoholic beverages effectively. • Mr. Burnham stated that allowing alcoholic beverages outside the restaurant facility is not particularly germane to the issue of Condition No. 4 and whether the condition is appropriate, given the nature of the proposed enclosure. He stated that this particular project is the smallest application along West Coast Highway in which the subject condition has been recommended. Commissioner Balalis stated that he would be willing to consider a compromise on this issue. Mr. Metson suggested that at the appropriate time for the City to condemn the property in question, the City will not be charged for the additional value of the patio area expansion. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Metson stated that they concur with Condition No. 7 which relates to the expanded use which will not increase the need for on- street parking along West Coast Highway. Commissioner Balalis asked if at the time the City condemns the 12 foot right -of -way, would it be possible for the City to compensate the applicant with an . additional amount of square footage to be built on the site. Mr. Metson stated that such negotiations would occur at the time of condemnation. He stated that such a solution may be feasible. -36- May 5, 1983 � r c m � m . City of Newport Beach MINUTES K U u - U I N U 1 1 I I I I I I I INDEX Commissioner McLaughlin questioned how the amount of compensation is agreed upon at the time of condemnation. Mr. Metson stated that an appraiser would compute the value of the 250 square feet and not charge the City for the additional dollar value. Mr. Burnham stated that the condition would only relate to the lessee's interest in the additional net public area. He suggested that Condition No. 4 be revised as follows, "That if the City initiates an action to condemn the property for purposes of widening West Coast Highway, the value of the additional net public area authorized by this use permit will not be considered in determining the compensation to be paid to the lessee." Motion X Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 1875 Ayes X X X X (Amended), subject to the following findings and Dtain conditions, with the revision to Condition No. 4 as ent * suggested by the City Attorney and the deletion of the take -out window as indicated on the plans, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. That adequate parking exists on the subject property for the existing and proposed uses. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1875 (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. -37- � x m m a May 5, 1983 Z CONDITIONS: Beach 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and elevation, except as noted below. 2. That a minimum of one parking space for each 46 sq.ft. of "net public area" shall be provided. However, the applicant shall work with the City Traffic Engineer to redesign the parking plan so as to increase the number of parking spaces and to make better utilization of the available space. The parking lot shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide in accordance with the plans approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the proposed expansion. • I I I I I I I I 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. • 4. That if the City initiates an action to condemn the property for purposes of widening West Coast Highway, the value of the additional net public area authorized by this use permit will not be considered in determining the compensation to be paid to the lessee. 5. That a 24 foot wide drive with a four foot wide walkway adjacent to the enclosure, he maintained. 6. That both sides of the drive be posted and painted for "No Parking" within 80 feet of the West Coast Highway right -of -way line. 7. That the applicant shall agree that the expanded use will not increase the need for on- street parking along West Coast Highway, and that the applicant agrees to not contest the removal of parking for the restriping or widening of West Coast Highway on the grounds of loss of on- street parking. MINUTES INDEX CUMNa5NUANtKS MINUTES. May 5, 1983 UROILIL City of New ort Beach ALL I INDEX 8. That the subject lots shall be held in common during the life of the applicant's lease, and that severance of the lots shall constitute termination of the use permit. 9. That all applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 1875 shall be maintained. 10. The proposed take -out window indicated on the plans shall be deleted in conjunction with this approval. x x x Request to resubdivide an existing single parcel of Item #9 land into two parcels for single family residential purposes. The application also includes a request for exceptions to the Subdivision Code so as to allow the • creation of parcels containing less than 5,000 sq. ft. in land area, and one of the proposed parcels will also have a lot width of less than 50 feet. The existing RESUB- non- conforming lot depth of less than 80 feet will also DIVISIO] be maintained. NO. 746 LOCATION: A portion of Block 33, Corona del Mar, located at 2723 Ocean Boulevard, on the southwesterly side of Ocean Boulevard, between Fernleaf Avenue and Goldenrod Avenue in Corona del Mar. ZONE:. R -1 to May 19 1983 APPLICANT: Martin List, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Same as applicant Staff stated that the applicant for Item No. 9 - Resubdivision No. 746 has requested that this item be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983. M on JJJXJJJJ Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning Ayes X X X X X * Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983, which MOTION CARRIED. x x x -39- CVMNH551UNtICS MINUTES May 5, 1983 w. City of Newport Beach ROIL CALL INDEX Request to establish a take -out ice cream shop on Item #10 property located in the C -1 District and to waive all of the required off - street parking spaces. LOCATION: Lot 3, Block 23, Newport Beach Tract, located at 2304 West Ocean Front, on the northerly side of West Ocean Front, between 23rd Street and 24th Street, in USE PERMIT the McFadden Square area. NO. 3035 ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Lite -Line Design Corporation, Newport Beach OWNERS: Patrick and Marcia Hanifin and APPROVED Christopher Wynkoop, Irvine - CONDI- TIONALLY The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Johnson, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of the use permit. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Johnson stated that employee parking spaces should be waived, inasmuch as the employees of the take -out ice cream shop will be utilizing their bicycles. Motion Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3035, I I I I I subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ". Amendment X Amendment to the motion was made to add the provision that the applicant be required to purchase three in -lieu parking spaces in the Municipal parking lot. Commissioner McLaughlin stated that she would not accept this as an amendment to her motion. Ayes X Noes X X X Amendment to the motion was now voted on, which Absent * AMENDMENT FAILED. All Ayes X I I X X X * Original Motion for approval of Use Permit No. 3035, subject to the following findings and conditions, was now voted on, which MOTION CARRIED: • -40- 3 � r m - W cm ;K ) m D M May 5, 1983 t Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL 1 ( Jill I INDEX • • FINDINQF. - 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the waiver of the development standards as they pertain to parking, circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination and utilities, will be of no further detriment to adjacent properties inasmuch as the site has been developed and the structure has been in existence for many years. 4. That the proposed use does not represent an intensification of use that will result in an increased parking demand for the area. 5. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3035 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevation. 2. That the development standards related to all of the required offstreet parking spaces, circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination and utility requirements are waived. -41- � r c m = at c m m y Qm�xc�m_ May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES � ROLL CALL 11 I I I I I I I INDEX • E 3. 4. 5. That all exterior signs shall conform to Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. That a trash compactor shall be installed in conjunction with the proposed use. That all trash shall be kept inside the building until trash pick -up occurs. 6. That no cooking, or any food preparation other than ice - cream, pastries related products, or other approved items, shall be permitted in the take -out restaurant facility unless an amended use permit is approved by the City at a later date. Said amendment could require the addition of kitchen exhaust fans, washout areas for trash containers, and grease interceptors. 7. That the premises and the sidewalk on West Ocean Front shall be kept clean and regularly maintained. B. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be provided in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 9. That this approval shall be for a period of two years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee. � x -42- c vN�nmt� MINUTES May 5, 1983 � � c m � m m y. City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Items No. 11, 12 Request to consider a Traffic Study in conjunction with and 13 a 50 unit residential condominium development. ko Tentative Map of Tract No. 11935 (Public Hearing) Request to, subdivide a 3.67 acre parcel of land into 2 ALL lots for residential condominium purposes and 1 lot for APPROVED private recreational purposes on property located in CONDI- the R -3 -B District, and the acceptance of an TIONALLY environmental document. AND Use Permit No. 3037 (Public Hearin • Request to permit the construction of a 50 unit residential condominium development and related garage structures. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a portion of one open parking space to encroach into the 20 foot front yard setback area. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 52 -22, (Resubdivision No. 382), located at 2700 Pacific View Drive, on the easterly corner of San Miguel Drive and Pacific View Drive, across Pacific View Drive from the Harbor View Center. ZONE: R-3 -B APPLICANT: The Douglas Allred Development Company, San Diego OWNER: Roman Catholic Bishop of Orange, Orange ENGINEER: R.M.G. Engineering, Inc., Irvine • I I I I Agenda Items No. 11, 12 and 13 were heard concurrently due to their relationship. -43- 7 May 5, 1983 x � w m U 00 m m City of Newport Beach MINUTES _ R O L L CALL I III I I I I I INDEX Planning Director Hewicker referred to the Conditions of Approval on the.tentative tract and recommended the following revisions: 8. That the Final Map, CC &R's and the Final Subdivision Report note that future installation of control gates at the entrances is prohibited. 49. A minimum of (10 %) ten percent of the units to be developed on this site or an equal number of off -site units shall be "affordable units" as defined by the City's Housing Element. 50. That prior to the recordation of the final tract map an agreement shall be executed that guarantees the provisions of "affordable units" on -site or off -site in a manner and in a reasonable time frame related to the construction of other on -site • units. Said agreement shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and City Attorney's Office and approved by the City Council. 51. Delete. 53. Delete. 58. Delete. In response to a question posed by Chairman King, Planning Director Hewicker stated that Condition No. 58 should be deleted, because it is similar to existing Condition No. 34. The public hearing opened in connection with these items and Mr. Douglas Allred, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Allred delivered a presentation in which he described the proposed two -story townhomes, subterranean parking plan, security and landscaping. He referred to an artist's rendering of the project and stated that the proposed units and landscaping plan have been designed to be • compatible with the surrounding area. He stated that vehicles will be concealed from the surrounding neighborhood because of the proposed parking plan. -44- May 5,.1983 3 x � r c m " m m w. City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCALLI III Jill I INDEX Mr. Allred stated that the revised conditions of approval are acceptable, as well as the proposed conditions of approval as indicated in Exhibit 'W'. However, he referred to the tentative tract, Condition No. 18, relating to the traffic signal at the intersection of Pacific View Drive and San Miguel Drive, and Condition No. 32, relating to the sound attenuation barriers, and stated that these conditions only add to the costs of the project. Mr. Allred stated that the proposed project will only be adding 325 trips per day to the intersection of Pacific View Drive and San Miguel Drive and expressed his concern that the project should not be burdened with 508 of the costs for the traffic signal. He further expressed his concern with sharing in the costs for the sound attenuation barriers in Eastbluff and the Irvine Terrace areas. He then reminded the Commission that the project will be providing affordable housing • and contributing substantial park fees. Commissioner Balalis stated that he concurs that the applicant should not be required to contribute to the sound attenuation barrier on Jamboree Road. Mr. John Saginaw, resident of, and representing the Canyon Crest Estates Homeowners Association, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Saginaw stated that the homeowners association was first noticed of the project on April 22, 1983. He stated that the guidelines set forth for environmental impact reports require that adjoining landowners be notified earlier than was noticed. Initially, Mr. Saginaw stated that the homeowners association was requesting a continuance. However, he stated that the developer has contacted the homeowners association and discussions have taken place. He stated that the homeowners association is no longer requesting a continuance, but is requesting that the homeowners association comments to the Planning Commission and City Council be acknowledged and considered before the final approval by the City Council. Mr. Saginaw referred to the environmental impact report and stated that their concerns relate to the density • and limiting the project to a maximum of 50 units. He further expressed their concern with the height of the project and the impact it may have upon Canyon Crest Estates. -45- U 0 May 5, 1983 � r � m � m City of Newport Beach Mr. Saginaw stated that another concern relates to the proposed landscaping plan and how it will impact Canyon Crest Estates. He referred to Condition No. 64 on the tentative tract, relating to the landscaping along the southern side of the project, and stated that this is an acceptable condition. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kbrlander, Planning Director Hewicker explained the notification procedures which were utilized. He stated that the City's list of community associations which was utilized to prepare the mailing list for this project back in 1982, did not contain the name of the Canyon Crest Estates Homeowners Association. He stated that it was not until February of 1983, that the City was put on notice by the management association for the Association that they were desirous of receiving notification of proposed projects. He stated that all of the required notices of public hearing were sent to individuals within the 300 foot limitations regarding the proposed project. He stated that this is when the Association was first put on notice of the public hearing. Commissioner Balalis stated that Canyon Crest Estates Homeowners Association and Mr. Saginaw will have the opportunity to offer additional input before the City Council takes final action on the proposed project. Mr. Saginaw stated that this would be acceptable. Mr. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, discussed the CEQA guidelines relating to environmental impact reports and the Citys' practice thereof, and stated that there has been no prejudice to the homeowners association. MINUTES Commissioner Goff suggested that Condition No. 34, relating to the maximum sound level of 55 Dba, be combined with Condition No. 58, which requires the screening of the mechanical equipment. Planning Director Hewicker suggested that wording be added to. Condition No. 34 to require that any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view. -46- INDEX May 5, 1983 � x m X 0 5-. I I City of Newport Beach MINUTES Commissioner Goff referred to Condition No. 32 and asked how the dollar amount is determined for the applicant to contribute to the sound attenuation barrier. Mr. Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, stated that the cost is based upon the total trip generation of the proposed project to the area, in, relationship to the other projects in the area which have been approved. In response to a question posed by Chairman King, Mr. Talarico stated that the total cost of the Irvine Terrace wall is estimated at $205,000.00, with the Marriott Hotel being the only project required to contribute to the fund, at this time. Mr. Talarico stated that the total cost of the Jamboree Road wall in the Eastbluff area is estimated at $250,000.00, with approximately 12 projects required to contribute to the fund, at this time. • In response Winburn, Mr. Environmental reviewed the the project. to a question posed by Commissioner Talarico stated that The Citizens Quality Advisory Committee (CEQAC) has project in detail and has no comments on ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Motion X Motion was made for approval of the Environmental All Ayes X X X X * - Impact Report, which MOTION CARRIED, as follows: 1. Approve the "Draft EIR, City of Newport Beach, "Tentative Map of Tract No. 11935 - Allred Condominium Project" and supportive materials thereto; 2. Recommend that City Council certify that the Environmental Document is complete; 3. Direct staff to prepare a Statement of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and 4. Make the findings listed below: -47- � x � r c Z May 5, 1983 Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I I I I III I I INDEX i Motion All Ayes X • FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the State CEQA Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternative to the proposed project. 4. That the mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project and are expressed as conditions of approval. The findings made in regards to approval of the project EIR apply also to the approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11935 and Use Permit No. 3037. TRAFFIC STUDY Motion was made for approval of the Traffic Study as * follows, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter .15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S -1. coo May 5, 1983 x m m m y City of Newport Beach MINUTES _ R o l l CALL I 1 1 1 III I 1INax • Motion Q 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of the critical intersections, and will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at critical intersections which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of greater than .90. 3. That the proposed project, including circulation system improvements, will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major ", "primary-modified" or "primary" street. TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 11935 Motion was made for approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11935. Commissioner Balalis suggested that Condition No. 32, relating to the sound attenuation barriers, be deleted. Chairman King stated that future projects in the area of the sound attenuation barriers would have to contribute to the fund. Commissioner Balalis stated that it would be more appropriate for projects in the area of the sound attenuation barriers to contribute towards their construction. Mr. Burnham stated that the noise walls are mitigation measures in the environmental document. He stated that the Planning Commission has the power to select the appropriate mitigation measures to be imposed upon a project. Chairman King stated that the project will be providing affordable housing or in -lieu affordable housing. He stated that it does not seem logical to require the applicant to contribute to a fund for the construction of a. noise wall which is located on the other. side of town. Irm May 5,.1983 � r c City of Newport Beach Commissioner Goff stated that this is a continuing situation, where there are areas of town which did not receive proper planning at the time of their development. Consequently, he stated that the only way to rectify and address these oversights, is to share the costs with all new development within the City. Chairman.King stated that the proposed project is for a 50 unit residential development which is located in an area close to a major employment center and is providing a number of affordable units. He stated that he is supportive of other types of developments and commercial developments contributing to sound attenuation barrier funds. Commissioner Balalis concurred. Commissioner Goff stated that predicated upon the small size of the proposed project, their fair share would be commensurately small, yet fair. Adment X Amendment to the motion was made to delete Condition Ayes X I X x No. 32, relating to the sound attenuation barrier, Noes. X X which AMENDMENT CARRIED. Absent All Ayes x X x x x * Amended Motion for approval of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11935, was voted on subject to the following findings and conditions, with the following revisions: Conditions No. 8, 49 and 50 as revised by staff; Conditions No. 51, 53 and 58 be deleted as recommended by staff; Condition No. 32 be deleted; Condition No. 34 revised to reflect that any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view; which AMENDED MOTION CARRIED: - FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans, and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. • I I I I I I 2. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. -50- MINUTES INDEX May 5, 1983 MINUTES n x � � c m � W Po City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the site is physically suitable for the development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That an Environmental Document has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that its contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 6. That based on the information contained in the Draft EIR, the project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures to reduce potentially- significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. • 7. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 8. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 9. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 10. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control- Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 11. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. • IIIIIIII -51- May 5, 1983 g ;K MINUTES � c m ^ p7 m m City of Newport Beach INDEX 12. 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. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternative to the proposed project. 13. That the mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project and are expressed as conditions of approval. 14. That development on this site is not exempt from the provisions of affordable housing relative to low and moderate income housing units as defined by the Housing Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. 15. That the approval of this permit shall advise this • applicant and any successor in interest that the provision of affordable housing units on this site is feasible and needs to be assumed in any sale, lease, trade or other use of said property. 16. That it is not necessary to provide affordable housing related to this application on another site. 17. That the provisions of affordable housing related to this site may be provided at an off -site location and meet the intent of City Policy. CONDITIONS: 1. That a final map be filed. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a tract • map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. -52- May 5, 1983 � x MINUTES w City of Newport Beach INDEX 4. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That the on -site parking circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 6. That the design of the private streets and drives conform with the City's Private Street Policy (L -4), except as approved by the Public Works Department. The basic right -of -way width shall be a minimum of 32 feet. The location, width, configuration, and concept of the private street and drive system shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. • 7. That the California Vehicle Code be enforced on the private streets and drives, and that delineation acceptable to Police Department and Public Works Department be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and drives. B. That the Final Map, CC &R's and Final Subdivision Report note that future installation of control gates at the entrances is prohibited. 9. That easements for public emergency and security ingress, egress and public utilities purposes on all private streets and drives be dedicated to the City and that all easements be shown on the Final Tract Map. All easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide. 10. That all vehicular access rights to San Miguel Drive be released and relinquished to the City of Newport Beach except at the one entrance as approved by the Public Works Department. 11. That landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and Public Works Department . .and that appropriate site distance shall be provided at both drives for bicycles on the sidewalks. -53- May 5, 1983 MINUTES � r c m � m w . City of Newport Beach INDEX 12. That the deteriorated and displaced sections of sidewalk be reconstructed along the San Miguel Drive and Pacific view Drive frontages under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 13. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 14. That a hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the final map. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer. • 15. That the proposed private 18 inch storm drain be relocated and a new private easement conveyed prior to issuance of any building permits for structures over the existing facilities. 16. That a letter be provided from the Utilities Department stating that adequate sewer capacity exists in the existing mains for the proposed development. This letter must be provided to the Public Works Department prior to issuance of any building permit. 17. The grading and landscaping shall be done to provide sight distance in accordance with City Standard Drawing 110 -L at driveways. 18. Developer shall be responsible for 508 of the cost of the traffic signal at the intersection of Pacific View Drive and San Miguel Drive. These monies shall be deposited with the City prior to occupancy. 19. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. • IIIIIIII -54- May 5, 1983 � r c m City of Newport Beach 20. That the grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 21. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 22. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 23. The velocity of concentrated run -off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. • 24. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 25. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with 'the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan). 26. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Public Works Department, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and approval of the Planning Department. • 27. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. -55- MINUTES INDEX May 5, 1983 3 x � r � m = m m w City of Newport Beach 28. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegetation and be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 29. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire - retardant vegetation. 30. Street trees shall be provided along the public streets as a part of the landscape plan and shall be 'approved by the Public Works Department and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, 31. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 32. Deleted. • 33. That prior to the occupancy of any unit, a qualified acoustical engineer, retained by the City at the applicant's expense shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the noise impact from adjacent roads on the project does not exceed 65 db CNEL for outside living areas and the requirements of law for interior spaces (for future winter traffic conditions). 34. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 dBA at the property line. Any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view. 35. The Fire Department access to the site and all building shall be approved by the Fire Department, 36. That all on -site fire protection (hydrants and Fire Department connections) shall be approved by the Fire and Public Works Departments. 37. Prior to the occupancy of any buildings, a program • for the sorting of recyclable material from other solid wastes shall be developed and approved by the Planning Department. -56- MINUTES INDEX May 5, 1983 � m m m y City of Newport Beach MINUTES _ ROLL CALL I III Jill I INDEX E • 38. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist shall evaluate the site prior to commencement of construction activities, and that all work on the site be done in accordance with the City's Council Policies K -5 and K -6. 39. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water - saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities. 40. A dust control plan shall be prepared for the project, and shall be submitted and subject to approval by the Building Department prior to grading. The plan shall specifically address control of fugitive dust during construction, including such measures as watering the site for general dust control, containing excavated soil on -site until it is hauled away, and periodically washing or sweeping adjacent streets as necessary to remove accumulated material. 41. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the design engineer shall review and state that the discharge of surface runoff from the project will be performed in a manner to assure that increased peak flows from the project will not increase erosion immediately downstream of the system. This report shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building Departments. 42. The required erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed soils within thirty days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engineer. 43. Control of infiltration to the groundwater system shall be provided as part of the project design. 44. All proposed developments shall provide for weekly vacuum sweeping of parking areas. 45. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the project civil engineer shall provide evidence to the satisfaction and approval of the Director of Public Works that the established on -site grade and building elevations on the north and northeast sides of the project site provide adequate safety from potential inundation as shown in the "Big Canyon Reservoir Inundation Study" for the Public Safety Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. -57- � x c m m c N m a May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES _ ROLL CALL I J I I J I I I I INDEX 46. That all on -site drainage, connections to the existing storm drain system and any alteration of existing surface drainage patterns across or around the site shall be reviewed and approved by the Building and Public Works Departments. 47. That the streets widths shall meet City of Newport Beach requirements. 48. That prior to the approval of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall dedicate land or pay in -lieu fees in accordance with the Park Dedication Ordinance. 49. A minimum of (108) ten percent of the units to be developed on this site or an equal number of off -site units shall be "affordable units" as defined by the City's Housing Element. • 50. That prior to the recordation of the final tract map an agreement shall be executed that guarantees the provisions of "affordable units" on -site or off -site in a manner and in a reasonable time frame related to the construction of other on -site units. Said agreement shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and City Attorney's Office and approved by the City Council. 51. Deleted. 52. That in order to reduce any adverse environmental effects of development of this site, preference in the rental or sale of the "affordable units" shall be given to those persons employed in the City of Newport Beach or residents of the City of Newport Beach in a manner to be approved by the City Planning Director and City Attorney. 53. Deleted. 54. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and adjoining properties. 55. That all construction employees shall park their • vehicles on -site. -58- May 5, 1983 � r � m N. City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCALLI 11 1 Jill I INDEX 56. That all proposed signs shall be in conformance with the provision of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer if located adjacent to the vehicular ingress and egress. 5.7. Prior to the issuance of building permits for each of the planned units, an acoustical engineering study shall be performed, based on actual pad, property and roadway grades and building locations and orientations to assure that the exterior building shells of each structure will be sufficient to reduce existing and future noise levels to an acceptable intensity. 58. Deleted. 59. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler • protection. 60. All buildings on the project site shall be equipped with fire suppression systems approved by the Fire Department. 61. That the lighting system shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential 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. 62. Prior to beginning grading activities, the applicant shall construct an appropriate temporary barrier along the south property boundary to screen the adjacent residential uses from the construction activities. This barrier shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to its construction and shall be removed upon completion of construction or at some other time approved by the Planning Department. 0 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -59- May 5, 1983 MINUTES � r c Z m N. City of Newport Beach INDEX 63. Upon removal of the temporary construction barrier along the south property boundary, landscaping prescribed by the approved landscape plan shall be installed no later than 30 days after removal of the barrier. 64. Landscaping along the southern side of the project site shall be designed to provide visual privacy between the proposed development and existing residential uses along the south property boundary. This purpose shall be considered in the required review and approval of the landscape plan by the Planning and Parks, Beaches and Recreation Departments. 65. Improvements associated with the sound attenuation requirements on the perimeter of the project site, including a noise wall and /or landscaping, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planning Department prior to final design. USE PERMIT NO. 3037 Motion Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3037; All Ayes X X X X X * subject to the following findings and conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That each of the proposed units has been designed as a condominium with separate and individual utility connections. 2. The project will comply with all applicable standard plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of approval. 3. The project lot size conforms to the Zoning Code requirements in effect at the time of approval. 4. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan. May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES 5. That adequate on -site parking spaces are available . for the proposed residential condominium development. 6. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the use of building applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 7. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 8. 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. 9. That the establishment, maintenance of operation of the use of the property or building will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification so as to allow a minor parking space encroachment into the required front yard setback area is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 10. The Police Department has indicated that it does not contemplate any problems. 11. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. -61- INDEX � r c " m Q 10 3 m x C m D May 5, 1983 of Newport Beach MINUTES 5. That adequate on -site parking spaces are available . for the proposed residential condominium development. 6. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the use of building applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 7. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 8. 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. 9. That the establishment, maintenance of operation of the use of the property or building will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification so as to allow a minor parking space encroachment into the required front yard setback area is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 10. The Police Department has indicated that it does not contemplate any problems. 11. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. -61- INDEX � x c n 0 m a May 5, 1983 ity of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCALLI 111 1 1 1 1 1INDEX CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and elevations except as noted below. 2. That all applicable conditions of Tentative Tract No. 11935 be fulfilled. * * * General Plan Amendment 82 -1 (Public Hearin Request to amend the Land Use, Residential Growth, Recreation and Open Space, Circulation, and Noise Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan for the North Ford /San Diego Creek south site. I I I I I Staff requested that Item No. 14 - General Plan Amendment No. 82 -1 be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983. Motion JJ[JX Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning All Ayes X X X X X * Commission Meeting of May 19, 1983, which MOTION CARRIED. * * * �J There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 12:30 a.m. * * * Dave Goff, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach -62- Item GENERAL