The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/05/1994COACM88I0NERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: , u H YY-9 — May J, tyy4 ROLL CALL INDEX Present * All Commissioners were present. EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of Aril 21 1994 Minutes of 4/21/9 Motion All Ayes * Motion was made and voted on to approve the April 21, 1994, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Public Comments. Public CortaOnts No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non - agenda items. Postinu of the A enda: Posting of the James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Agenda., Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, April 29, 1994, in front of City Hall. i i : OWN O� \01A". 1O • MINUTES cc CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Request for Continuances: Request for Director Hewicker stated that the applicant, McDonald's Continue Corporation, has requested that Item No. 3, Traffic Study No. 93 and Use Permit No. 3516 regarding property located at 2807 Newport Boulevard, be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 19, 1994 to allow additional time to make further revisions to the project. Director Hewicker requested that Item No. 4, Traffic Study No. 100, Amendment No. 787, and Use Permit No. 3524 regarding the Balboa Bay Club, be continued to June 9, 1994. Following a discussion regarding the pending agenda for May 19, 1994, the Planning Commission elected to reschedule the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan to the June 23, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 4, the All Ayes Balboa Bay Club, to the June 9, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3, All Ayes McDonald's Corporation, to the May 19, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Motion Motion was made and voted on to continue the Central Balboa All Ayes Specific Area Plan to the June 23, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. •-2- •� �c�c �dk�'s CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH F5 UFFUM Mav 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Resubdivision No. 1004 (Public Hearing) Item No. Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land R1004 . for two unit condominium development on property located in the R -2 District. Approved LOCATION: L.ot 3, Block 1, Newport Bay, located at 204 East Ocean Front, on the southwesterly side of East Ocean Front, between Medina Way and Coronado Street, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Mark D. McGwire, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant, Newport Beach ENGINEER: South Coast Surveying, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Todd Schooler, 500 North Newport Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Schooler concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Resubdivision No. All Ayes 1004 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any . easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. • _3_ COMMISSIONERS *X7 41 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5 1994 ROLL CALL DMEX 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to occupancy. That the parcel map be prepared so that the bearings relate to the State Plane Coordinate System (NAD83) and that prior to the recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall submit to the County Surveyor a digital- graphic file of said map in a manner described in Section 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. 2. That prior to the recordation of the parcel map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Sections 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set on each lot corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of the construction project. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That each dwelling unit shall 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 and the Building Department. • -4- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL MDEX 5. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 6. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical. 7. That a park dedication fee for one dwelling unit shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code. 8. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. . 9. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. Use Permit No 3529 (Public Hearing) stem No. Request to permit the continued operation of an existing massage UP3529 establishment in a beauty salon within the Neiman Marcus Approved Department Store, on property located in the Fashion Island Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 67/2 -3 (Resubdivision No. 466) located at 601 Newport Center Drive, on the southerly side of Newport Center Drive, between Santa Cruz Drive and Santa Rosa Drive, in Fashion Island. ZONE: P -C L COnMMSSIONERS 00 IQ 0 "1 �l�+P CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH l�It►uyw�� May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX APPLICANT: Premier Salons International, Inc., Minnetonka, Minnesota OWNER: Neiman Marcus, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item. There being no one to appear before the Planning Commission, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3529 All ayes subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the existing massage establishment is in conformance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 5.50 and Chapter 20.68 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. That the project is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. That the Police Department has indicated that there are not any police problems associated with the subject operation. 4. That the continued operation of the existing massage establishment will not be contrary to the public interest or injurious to nearby properties, and that the location requirements for massage establishments will be observed. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3529 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -6- 4 COMMISSIONERS .,00 `�r''lpcjs+�d�dr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX CONDIT IONS: 1. That the existing massage establishment shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That the hours of operation shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. daily as provided in Chapter 5.50 of the Municipal Code. 3. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 5.50 shall be fulfilled. 4. That all signs shall conform to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 5. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community, or that the massage operator or any massage technician is found to be in violation of any condition of said use permit or any other provision of Chapters 5.50 or 20.68 of the Municipal Code. s s s A. Traffic Study No. 93 (Continued Public Hearing) item No.3 Request to approve a traffic study for a proposed McDonald's take -out restaurant facility; and the acceptance of an environmental document. TS93 uP3516 .Cont'd to AND 5/19/94 -7- AN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX B Use Permit No 3516 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to establish a McDonald's take -out and drive through restaurant facility on property located in the "Retail and Service Commercial" area of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan area. The proposal includes a building design with two exterior walk -up order windows as well as an enclosed ancillary eating area. The proposal also includes a modification to the Sign Code so as to allow: a greater amount of total sign area than which is permitted by Code; the addition of a second pole identification sign and a ground mounted menu sign on the property, whereas the Sign Code allows only one pole or ground sign per site; and the use of the McDonald's logo on each of the proposed directional signs. LOCATION: Lots 11 and 12, Block 227, Section A, and Record of Survey 76 -46, located at 2807 Newport Boulevard, on the northerly side of 28th Street, between Newport Boulevard (northbound) and Newport Boulevard (southbound), in the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -6 APPLICANT: McDonald's Corporation, San Diego OWNER: Bedford Road, Inc., Irvine James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant requested that this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 19, 1994, to allow additional time to make further revisions to the subject project. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3 to the May All Ayes 19, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. s s s CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL MDEX A Traffic Study No 100 (Public Hearing) Item: No.4 Request to approve a traffic study for the proposed expansion of TS100o the Balboa Bay Club; and the acceptance of an environmental document. A787 AND UP3524 Cont'd:. B. Amendment No. 787 (Public Hearing) to 6/9194 Request to reclassify property from the R-4 (Multiple - Family Residential) District to the PC (Planned Community) District and to approve a Planned Community Development Plan for the Balboa Bay Club. AND iC. Use Permit No. 3524 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of buildings that exceed the basic 26 foot height limit on property located in the proposed 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 171, Block 54, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 1221 West Coast Highway, on the southerly side of West Coast Highway,.between Dover Drive and Tustin Avc nue. ZONE: R -4 APPLICANT: Balboa Bay Club, Newport Beach OWNER: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be continued to the June 9, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. -9- ATift►�lI1ly "I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mav 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 4 t the June All Ayes 9, 1994, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. s e t Discussion Items: Discussio: Items Amendment No. 785 No. I Request to consider initiating an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, so as to allow balconies within A 7ss required front yard setbacks on residential lots along East Ocean Not Front and West Ocean Front on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Initiated Newport. Commissioner Ridgeway requested a clarification of the proposed Amendment. James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that because there are a number of encroachments in the ocean front setbacks along the ocean front letters were mailed to the property owners requesting the removal of the encroachments. Subsequently, the City Council requested a study concerning the encroachments along East Ocean Front and West Ocean Front inasmuch as the City had previously done a study concerning encroachments in the public owned rigbt -of -way along the ocean front that extended beyond the residential lots onto the public beach. The setbacks that are addressed in the subject Amendment are located on private property, and there are encroachments in the front yard setbacks between the front of the dwellings and the front property lines. In response to comments by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Hewicker replied that many of the encroachments were constructed without the approval of the Modifications Committee. Commissioner Ridgeway stated, and Mr. Hewicker agreed, that the purpose of the Amendment is that the City is attempting to enforce the removal of certain balconies that . encroach onto public property but to permit such construction in the required front yard setbacks. • -10- COMMISSIONERS •��o�t��P'iO��o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Gifford determined that the proposed Amendment would make it possible to enforce the removal of certain presently nonconforming balconies, and to make other nonconforming balconies conforming. Mr. Hewicker concurred. He said that the proposal would prohibit encroachments into the ocean front setbacks; however, there are existing encroachments that would be allowed to remain subject to securing a building permit because the encroachments would meet the proposed standards, and there would be encroachments that would have to be removed or modified. Commissioner Ridgeway determined that if the Commission ultimately initiated and approved this amendment, some of the encroachments would become legal conforming encroachments, and they would not have to go through a Modifications Committee hearing for review. Mr. Hewicker concurred. . In response to questions posed by Commissioner Gifford, William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, referred to the photographs of the existing encroachments along East and West Ocean Front that were distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing. He explained that many of the encroachments have existed for 30 to 40 years with no building permit history. He pointed out that said encroachments would not be required to be removed; however, the building permits that were issued with plans that did not show encroachments into the front yard setbacks would be pursued. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Laycock explained that many of the building permits that were issued 30 -40 years ago did not require surveys of properties, and because the front property lines were not clearly identified, it was difficult for the property owners to know where the property lines were located. In response to questions posed by Chairman Merrill, Mr. Laycock explained that the proposed Ordinance would allow other property owners to construct decks that encroached to the front property -11- COMMISSIONERS db CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES low May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX lines, similar to the encroachments that are currently existing along East Ocean Front and West Ocean Front. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that it is feasible that the proposed Ordinance would reward property owners for intentionally encroaching into required front yard setbacks, and he indicated that he has a philosophical problem with that action. Commissioner Glover concurred that she also had concerns regarding the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Laycock explained that the Zoning Code currently allows certain encroachments into the front yard setbacks without Modifications Committee review, such as fireplaces, chimneys, bay windows, and eave overhangs. Commissioner Ridgeway commented that there is a lenient framework now and if property owners want to go beyond what is currently permitted in the Zoning Code, the property owners could go to the Modifications Committee with their encroachment requests. Mr. Laycock and Commissioner Ridgeway addressed the . requests that the Modifications Committee has denied. In response to a comment by Commissioner Edwards, Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, stated that based on the current number of front yard encroachments, it was pertinent for the City to review the requirements. Commissioner Edwards asked what would happen if the existing standards are maintained? Ms. Flory replied that the City would attempt to enforce the illegal encroachments that have been reported via complaints. Commissioner Edwards expressed his concerns that the new standards would not accomplish what the City is trying to achieve. Commissioner Gifford and Ms. Flory discussed the enforcement of the existing and new encroachment standards. Mr. Hewicker reviewed the procedure that was followed when the City addressed the issue of encroachments into the public right -of -way on the ocean front. He explained that an inventory was taken on every property along the ocean front and a standard was developed . whereby certain types of encroachments would be allowed to remain on the public right -of -way and others were required to be removed that did not conform to the standards. The • -12- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX encroachments that remained were required to obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City on an annual basis. He referred to the photograph inventory of the encroachment violations into the front yard setbacks on residential lots along East Ocean Front and West Ocean Front, and he stated that if the ultimate decision would be made by the Planning Commission and the City Council to not change the standards, then staff would be required to obtain compliance with each violation that is photographed. If the standards would be changed, then staff would review the photographs to ascertain which violations would comply with the new standards, and the violations that would not comply would be required to be removed. Commissioner Gifford stated that new encroachments that were added that are not a part of the aforementioned survey would be a basis for future enforcement. She concluded that nothing would change except the standard that would be enforced. Mr. Hewicker suggested that a photograph inventory could be taken each year of new construction along the ocean front properties, and if there were no building permits, and if the construction did not comply with the existing standards or the new standard, then an enforcement action would be initiated. Commissioner Gifford determined that what is being considered is the standard for enforcement. Commissioner Pomeroy referred to specific photographs in the survey of canvas awnings whereby he determined that.the awnings are permitted encroachments because they are temporary structures that could be removed or reattached. He questioned if a permit would be required for the canvas awnings? Mr. Laycock replied that the specific canvas awnings would be permitted inasmuch as an eave overhang of 2 -1/2 feet into the required 5 foot front yard setback is allowed. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that good planning is if a 5 foot front yard encroachment for balconies is appropriate, then that is how the standard should be revised, and it would aid in the enforcement because it would be a uniform standard that could be applied to existing encroachments and to proposed encroachments in the future. • -13- i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner DiSano concurred with Commissioner Pomeroy. He said that it is an amnesty issue and that it is a stringline setback where the encroachments would be permitted. Mr. Laycock stated that the photographs also indicate that planter boxes, decorative wrought iron railings, and patio covers also encroach into the front yard setbacks, and he stated that the Planning Commission has the ability to include additional encroachments besides balconies into the proposed Amendment. Commissioner Pomeroy suggested that trellises, patio covers, and awnings on fixed pipe structures also be added to the proposed Amendment. Motion Commissioner Edwards made a motion to not initiate Amendment No. 785. stitut a Commissioner Pomeroy made a substitute motion to set ion Amendment No. 785 for public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting of July 7, 1994. Commissioner Glover did not support the substitute motion. She stated that the City does not have the resources to enforce the illegal encroachments. Chairman Merrill supported the substitute motion. He said that the Planning Commission should support the City Council in their deliberations. Commissioner Edwards did not support the substitute motion. He said that it would ultimately cost the City more in time and resources under the proposed Amendment, and there is a basis for conformity under the existing Zoning Code regulations. Ayes * * Substitute motion was voted on, MOTION FAILED. Noes Ayes Motion to not initiate Amendment No. 785 was voted on, Noes MOTION CARRIED. # i # • -14- COMMISSIONERS c�cl Ilk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH u l►f LEMM, s May 5 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Amendment No. 804 No. 2 Request to consider initiating an amendment to Title 20 of the A 804 Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to increase the allowable to patio height limits within required front yard setbacks on set for ph 6/9/94 residential lots along North Bay Front and South Bay Front on Balboa Island. James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that the City Council recently amended the fence height requirements on Balboa Island and other areas of the City, and they also changed the requirements under the Council Policy regarding encroachments into the public right -of -way along North Bay Front and South Bay Front. He said that the heights of patios and fences allowed on private property are different from the heights of patios and fences allowed on public property along the two . sides of Balboa Island. Motion was made to set Amendment No. 804 for public hearing on June 9, 1994. The Planning Commission and staff discussed the change in the Council Policy requirement. Mr. Laycock explained that only North Bay Front and South Bay Front on Balboa Island would be affected by the proposed Amendment inasmuch as there is a wider area between the existing sidewalks and the front property lines in those areas than other streets on Balboa Island. Motion All Ayes Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. s a s ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Ada ' 1 Business The Planning Commission suggested that the following issues be considered as future discussion items: that the Planning Pc Commission not open new public hearings after 11:30 p.m. and the Procedure decision to not open the public hearing be determined when the • -15- s ` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES May 5, 1994 ROLL CALL INDEX Planning Commission meeting commenced shortly after 7:30 p.m.; that the presentation of an agenda item be limited by motion to a spec time limit. Motion A motion was made and voted on to direct staff to place the Rules All Ayes of Procedure of the Planning Commission on the Planning Commission Agenda of June 9, 1994, so as to review updating the procedures to be consistent with the Brown Act, and to discuss other revisions suggested by the Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. # R Y ADJOURNMENT: 8:45 p.m. Adjourn R Y Y ANNE K GIFFORD, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -1.6-