HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/24/1984Present
Absent
Motion
Ayes
Absent
FANVMN Nt" REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PLACE: City Council Chambers
! x TIME: 7:30 p.m.
DATE: pM�a�y�244, 1.9984Bey.h
F
Motion
Ayes x x
Absent
0
I*
xjx
x
*Arrived at 8:10 p.m.
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT
James D. Hewicker, Planning Director
Robert D. Gabriele, Assistant City Attorney
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT .
William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator
Donald Webb, City Engineer
Joanne Baade, Secretary to the Mayor /Administration
* * *
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Minutes of May 10, 1984
MINUTES
Motion was made for approval of the Planning Commission
minutes of May 10, 1984 as written, which MOTION CARRIED.
Request for Continuance
Planning Director Hewicker advised that staff had origi-
nally suggested that Agenda Item No. 1 (Use Permit No.
1581 (Amended) be continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of June 7, 1984. He added, however, that the
owner of the Red Onion Restaurant has indicated that he
will not be in town on that day and has, therefore,
requested that the application be continued to the Plan-
ning Commission meeting of June 21, 1984.
Motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended)
to the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 1984, which
MOTION CARRIED.
inutes/
/10/84
for
I r + COMNUSSIO�M] May 24,' 1984 M NffES
i
•
Motion
Ayes
Absent
•
Ex
C
0 d p x
+�+� O
3� o S a
X
Ix
i
W
00
1 _!L .1
Use Permit No. 1581 (Amended) (Continued Public Bearing)
Request to amend a previously approved use permit which
permitted the establishment of the Red Onion Restaurant
with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live entertainment
so as to allow the expansion of the "net public area"
for the purpose of constructing a dance floor and to allow
dancing in conjunction with the existing live entertain-
ment. The proposal also includes a request to pay an
annual in -lieu fee to the City for all of the additional
required off - street parking spaces.
LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 57 -25
(Resubdivision No. 375) located at
2406 Newport Boulevard, on the
easterly side of Newport Boulevard,
southerly of 26th Street, on the
Balboa Peninsula.
ZONES: C -1 and C -2
APPLICANTS: Steve and Rick Loomis (The Red Onion),
Newport Beach .
OWNER: Mrs. Jean Belden, Newport Beach
Planning Commission continued this agenda item to its
x x meeting of June 21, 1984.
-2-
ism
Item #1
U.P. #1581
Continued
to 6 21 84
i
i
ROLL CALL
n
U
am
o m
a
May 24, 1984
Use Permit No. 3095 (Continued Public Hearing)
NUWTES
Request to permit the establishment of a restaurant with
on -sale alcoholic beverages on property located in the
retail service commercial area of the Mariner's Mile
Specific Plan Area. The proposal also includes a request
to pay an annual in -lieu fee to the City so as to allow
a portion of the required off - street parking spaces to be
located in the Mariner's Mile Municipal Parking Lot. A
modification to the Zoning Code is also requested so as
to allow the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in
conjunction with a valet parking service, and to waive
a portion of the required landscaping within the off -
street parking area, and the acceptance of an environment
document.
LOCATION: A portion of Lot F, Tract No. 919,
located at 2800 West Coast Highway,
on the northwesterly corner of
West Coast Highway and Riverside
Avenue, in Mariner's Mile.
ZONE: SP -5
APPLICANT: Yu -Ter Mau, Newport Beach
OWNER: Francis J. Seitz, Tigard, Oregon
Dennis O'Neil, 3200 Park Center Drive, Costa Mesa appeared
before the Planning Commission on behalf of the.Applicant.
Mr. O'Neil relayed that the Applicant and he have reviewed
the staff report and are in concurrence with most of the
terms and conditions contained therein. Mr. O'Neil stated,
however, that there are a number of issues that the Appli-
cant would like clarified by the Commission.
Mr. O'Neil brought notice to the proposal for extensive
improvements to the Riverside Avenue /Pacific Coast Highway
intersection being recommended by staff. Mr. O'Neil
stated that the principal part of said proposal is to
provide for two left -turn lanes off of Pacific Coast High-
way to Riverside Avenue and two right -turn lanes from
Riverside Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway. Mr. O'Neil
stated that this would involve an additional dedication
-3-
.P. 93095
•
i
A M
r
so a
=3g
0
MINUTES.
May 24, 1984
of 6' along Pacific Coast Highway to provide for the neces-
sary 18' of right- of�way. He added that the Applicant is
in agreement with the additional 6' purchase acquisition
by the City; however, the Applicant is concerned with the
proposed 24' corner cut -off inasmuch as it will interfere
with the current design of the restaurant plans and will
necessitate a total redesign thereof.
Mr. O'Neil advised that the Applicant has a long -term
leasehold interest in the subject property, and noted,
therefore, that the Applicant does not own the underlying
fee. Mr. O'Neil consequently suggested that it-may be
unfair to require Mr. Mau tfee ..taMr.tO'Neildstateddthation
rights from the underlying that interest in the
Mr. Mau can only dedicate or convey
property that is under his control.
proposing that 13
Mr. O'Neil noted that staff is in-
parking spaces be purchased from the City on an annual
in-lieu
basis. He advised that the Applicant has been requested
to not permit parking in the first four spaces on his lot
to,allow T stated hissbeliefcthattthe Applicant
be Riverside
given credit for the loss of the four parking spaces.
Mr. O'Neil discussed the proposed widening Of Pacific
Coast Highway and urged that the resultant sidewalk repair
for the stretch of sidewalk adjacent to the oApplicant
property be the responsibility of the City
Beach, rather than the Applicant.
Mr. O'Neil referred to Page Commission may to waive
suggests that the Planning
the fair -share contribution in this case it iscless than
fair -share contribution for the prop
for the existing service st ation. eCt'fees sand umake an
the Planning Commission waive sub.
additional Finding to this effect.
Mr. O'Neil suggested that the Planning Commission relay
its positions regarding the aforementioned
item toeallowtthe
then this agenda Applicant and pportunitynto further meet with staff.
Applicant an o
-4-
I COMNUSSK)ISM May 24, 1984 MINUTES
U
EX
C
r
cc° OSi"S_
'a 3 I. o �a
Mr. O'Neil commented that a number of the Applicant's
friends, customers and neighbors are in the audience to
support the application. In the interest of time, Mr.
O'Neil advised that only a few of the individuals will
address the Planning Commission this evening.
In answer to a question posed by Commissioner Person,
Mr. O'Neil advised that neither the Applicant nor he has
had an opportunity to discuss the proposed Conditions of
Approval with the property owner.
Commissioner Person advised that the City has been evalu-
ating the $150 -per -space annual fee currently charged
for in -lieu parking spaces and questioned whether the
Applicant is aware that the subject fee could increase to
a greater amount. Mr. O'Neil responded that the Applicant
is aware of this possibility and added that the Applicant
would like the Planning Commission to waive those fees in
consideration of dedicated rights -of -way.
Commissioner Salalis questioned whether the Applicant has
investigated the possibility of entering into an off -site
parking agreement with the adjacent shopping center. Mr.
O'Neil responded that this possibility has not been
studied, but added that they will look into the feasi-
bility of this suggestion.
City Engineer Don Webb reviewed that this agenda item was
continued for two weeks to enable staff to prepare a more -
complete traffic analysis of the area. Mr. Webb reported
that staff has been studying the Coast Highway area,
utilizing data available through the environmental docu-
ment prepared in connection with the widening of Pacific
Coast Highway as well as the traffic phasing study associ-
ated with the redevelopment of the Rosso's property. Mr.
Webb reported that the 1983 traffic counts for the inter-
section, which do not take into consideration the redevel-
opment of the Rosan's property, produced an ICU of .79 at
the intersection. He added that the 1983 traffic counts
for the intersection, which take into consideration the
redevelopment of the Rosso's property, produced an ICU of
.9000. In addition, Mr. Webb reported that the 1984
traffic counts for the intersection, which do not take
into consideration the redevelopment of the Rosso's
property, produced an ICU of .89 at the intersection.
-5-
INDEX
•
a
•
NX
r
� v � m
s 'a o a-
a
May 24, 1984
x-11
0' 1
MfNUTES
Mr. Webb reviewed the developments that have been approved
in the Mariner's Mile area and commented that these devel-
opments alone will add 3200 trips per day to the area
within the next three to four years.
Mr. Webb stated that the current demands for the inter-
section are significant, and pointed out that the right -
turn movement from Riverside Avenue to.Pacific Coast
Highway currently accommodates 450 to 500 vehicles per
hour during the peak hour. He added that.the left -turn
movement from Pacific Coast Highway to Riverside Avenue
presently accommodates 350 to 400 vehicles per hour during
the peak hour. Mr. Webb advised that the City commences
investigation re installation of double turn lanes when
a turn lane experiences 250 vehicles per hour. Mr.
Webb opined that the installation of both the double left -
turn lanes and right -turn lanes are justified, and com-
mented that even with the installation of both double
turn lanes, the intersection will just barely work by the
year 1987.
Mr. Webb referred to the wall exhibit which delineated the
proposed intersection configuration and then reviewed in
detail the proposal for the Riverside Drive /Pacific Coast
Highway intersection.
During the course of his presentation, Mr. Webb answered
Commission questions relative to the major traffic genera-
tors in the area. Mr. Webb commented that the post office
is probably the biggest individual traffic generator in
the vicinity and speculated that the post office will
likely remain at this location for a lengthy period.
Mr. Webb advised that approximately 400 to 500 students
travel through the Riverside Avenue /Pacific Coast Highway
intersection on bicycles daily. In addition, Mr. Webb
discussed the high volume of pedestrian traffic experi-
enced in the area and commented that this pedestriand
traffic contributes to Coast Highway congestion.
Mr. Webb advised that staff is recommending 1) the instal-
lation of double left -turn lanes and double right -turn
lanes; 2) the provision of a corner cut -off to allow
sufficient room for pedestrians and bicyclists to congre-
gate and to allow sufficient room for the installation of
I COMMi5510NW May 24, 1984 MNJrE$
e;i x
F r a
it m
•
•
0
m
a standard handicap ramp; and 3) the intersection con-
figuration on display this evening.
Mr. Webb stated that it is important for the subject sec-
tion of Pacific Coast Highway to be widened within the
next five years, so as to coincide with the completion of
the widening project easterly of Bayside Drive, and the
widening of Pacific Coast Highway from Newport Boulevard
westerly to Huntington Beach.
Mr. Webb reviewed the parking arrangements associated with
area businesses.
Commissioner Person noted that some of the other businesses
in the area are more significant in size than this par-
ticular business and voiced concern with the extraction
being asked of the Applicant as opposed to other businesses
in the Mariner's Mile district.
In answer to a question posed by Commissioner Person, Mr.
Webb stated that the Public Works staff would recommend
the installation of the double left -turn lanes, rather than
the double right -turn lanes, if only one of the two double -
lane proposals could be accommodated.
Mr. Webb reported that the City Council made the determina-
tion that the right -of -way for the Pacific Coast Highway
widening would be taken off of the inland side of the
Highway inasmuch as the lots on the Bay side are narrower
and contain less square footage than the lots on the inland
side.
In answer to a question by the Planning Commission as to
whether the double right -turn lanes would work without the
dedication of the corner cut -off, Mr. Webb advised that
the Public Works Department would not recommend such a
situation inasmuch as the turning radius would be only
eight feet without the corner cut -off, as opposed to
35 feet with the corner cut -off. Mr. Webb opined that
an eight -foot radius would be insufficient to enable
cars on the inside lane to adequately maneuver the turn.
-7-
n 7[
c °mss r 7s p o
r
0
•
May 24, 1984
MINUTES
Commissioner Goff brought notice to the last paragraph
on Page 4 of the staff report, wherein it relays staff's
opinion that the proposed parking will be adequate for
the subject restaurant inasmuch as the applicant's existing
restaurant has demonstrated that the parking demand is
lower than other restaurants of comparable size and charac-
ter. Commissioner Goff noted that the proposed restaurant
would have significantly more visibility than the existing
restaurant and hence suggested that the popularity of the
restaurant and the associated parking demand may increase.
Planning Director Hewicker opined that the degree of
visibility does not have a great deal to do with the
popularity of this particular restaurant. Mr. Hewicker
suggested that the restaurant's popularity is due to its
owners, the fact that it provides consistently well -
prepared food, as well as the fact that satisfied patrons
have passed the word along.
Commissioner Goff stated that he has observed that the
parking lot is generally full and, therefore, suggested
the possibility of patrons parking elsewhere.
Mr. Hewicker responded that he has visited the restaurant
during the lunch hour as well as in the evening and
has never experienced a problem locating a parking space
in the restaurant's lot.
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and Richard Schaefer, 404 -40th Street, appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Schaefer commented
that he leases space in the Tokai Bank Building, which
is located across the street from the China Palace. Mr.
Schaefer felt that it would be inequitable to require
the Applicant to provide for the extensive circulation
improvements being recommended by staff, and suggested
that such requirements would render the property unprofita-
ble. Mr. Schaefer questioned the accuracy of the traffic
figures associated with peak -hour occurrences inasmuch as
no distinction was made between business -hour peak and
recreation -hour peak. Additionally, Mr. Schaefer voiced
his concern that the circulation improvements suggested
by staff would result in an increase in traffic throughout
the Newport Heights residential area.
IC . �c
E 5
• m
c an�ms
•
•
May 24, 1984
Larry Pettet, 1632 Dorothy Lane, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Pettet stated that the China
Palace is a credit to Newport.Beach. In addition, Mr.
Pettet advised that he has never experienced a problem
parking in the restaurant's lot and opined that the
widening of Pacific Coast Highway would merely move the
bottleneck to another location. Mr. Pettet discussed
his belief that the two right -turn lanes are unnecessary
and suggested that the number of students who bicycle
through the subject intersection will decrease inasmuch
as school enrollment is on the decline.
Qiil�
Bill Fisher, 1915 Port Bristol, appeared before the Plan-
ning Commission. Mr. Fisher explained that he is a regu-
lar patron of the restaurant and has never experienced a
problem parking in the restaurant's lot. Mr. Fisher
speculated that the reason parking problems do not exist
at the China Palace is because groups of people typically
travel to the restaurant in one car. Mr. Fisher stated
that he does not believe Riverside Avenue needs two right -
turn lanes and commented that he has seen many near-
accidents associated with double turn lanes.
Dr. Michael Gleck appeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that the China Palace and its owners are an
asset to the community and consequently urged that the
restaurant be permitted to expand.
Brian Stapleton, 706 Avocado, appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated that the need for two right -turn
lanes can be eliminated by adequate timing of the traffic
signals in the area. Mr. Stapleton spoke in support of
the China Palace and explained that there are no parking
problems associated with the restaurant and stated that
the restaurant patrons are never rowdy.
Howard Larsen, 407 Kings Place, appeared before the Plan-
ning Commission and spoke in support of the China Palace.
Mr. Larsen stated that it is unreasonable to expect the
Applicant to solve the traffic problems associated with
the Mariner's Mile area.
Francie Hansen, 1214 Nottingham Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission and urged that the China Palace be
permitted to expand.
-9-
b
9
•
Ex
r
May 24, 1984
nk
Henry Haas, 501 -31st
Commission. Mr. Has
timing of the traff
would eliminate the
of Riverside Avenue.
that the corner cut -
by 10' so as to all
taurant.
Street, appeare
as stated his bel
is signals in the
need for two rig
In addition, M
off be reduced t
ow for a superior
d before the Plan
ief that adequate
Mariner's Mile a
ht -turn lanes off
r. Haas suggested
MINUTES
Wing
rea
approximately 10'
design of the res-
Commissioner Balalis suggested that the Planning Commissiot
consider means of enabling the Applicant to develop the
property in a viable manner, while at the same time pro-
viding for the proposed circulation system improvements.
Commissioner Balalis then suggested possibilities as fol-
lows: 1) That the Applicant consider redesigning the
restaurant in such a manner as to net the same square
footage being proposed, but at the same time allow for the.
necessary circulation system improvements; 2) That in lieu
of a dedication of land, that the Planning Commission
consider some sort of payment for the use of the land; and
3) That the Planning Commission consider the matter of
in- lieu.fees in relation to the extraction being requested
of the Applicant.
Chairman King commented that a
to help the City-as well as the
discussed his belief that the p
improvements are necessary ina
already operating at capacity.
he would be willing to consider
spaces if the corner cut -off re
size of the business to make it
In addition, Chairman King rela
gestion to request that the App
the structure.
unique opportunity exists
Applicant. Chairman King
roposed intersection
smuch as the intersection is
Chairman King advised that
waiving the 13 parking
sults in a reduction in the
economically less viable.
yed his support of the sug-
licant consider redesigning
Commissioner Person indicated that he concurs with the
suggested redesign of the restaurant, but opposes a waiver
of in -lieu fees inasmuch as he felt that such an action
could be precedent- setting.
Commissioner Goff stated his opinion that the two left -
turn lanes off of Coast Highway onto Riverside Avenue are
necessary. With respect to the double right -turn lanes,
Commissioner Goff questioned whether the volume of pedes-
trians who cross the Highway contributes to a slow -down
of.vehicles desiring to turn onto Coast Highway from
Riverside Avenue and consequently creates the need for a
second right -turn lane.
-10-
•
COMMISSK)I Ml May 24, 1984 iNui E$
e;i 7c
f �
3 o CO of Newport Beach
w
I
City Engineer Webb responded that pedestrian traffic does
add to area congestion n, but.added that the volume of
vehicles which turn from Riverside Avenue onto Coast
Highway would still warrant the installation of a second
right -turn lane. With respect to possible installation
of a pedestrian bridge, Mr. Webb discussed the difficulty
associated with selecting a suitable location for such a
bridge and commented on the significant amount of space
which would be required. In addition, Mr. Webb advised
that a pedestrian bri ge would necessitate an additional
right- of-way acquisition to install a ramp and /or stair
system.
Commissioner Person noted that Mr. Mau has a leasehold
interest in the property and questioned the effect of an
offer to dedicate, as opposed to an actual dedication.
Assistant City Attorney Gabriele gdvised that he will
review the matter and will report back to the Commission.
Chairman King clarified the Planning Commission's direction
concerning this agenda item as follows:
1) The Planning Commission suggests that the Applicant
consider the possibility of redesigning the restaurant
so as to net the square footage being proposed, while
at the same time accommodating the needs of the circu-
lation system. If the Applicant agrees to redesign
the restaurant in such a manner, it is likely that the
Planning Commission will require the payment of in -lieu
parking fees.
2) If the Applicant desires to maintain the existing
configuration of the structure, except for reducing
the floor area at the corner of the property, it is
likely that the Planning Commission will waive the
in -lieu parking fees inasmuch as the viability of the
business will be reduced due to the required corner
cut -off.
3) It is the consensus of the Planning Commission that
the setbacks from Pacific Coast Highway are warranted
and will probably be taken at no cost to the Applicant.
The Planning Commission understands that the land-
scaped area of.the restaurant will consequently have
to be reduced.
_11_
C NV May 24, 1984 WNRES
n x
55100=0, C4 of NewWt Beach
'Pin- i
CALL NM
•
Motion x
Ayes x x
Absent
•
Dennis O'Neil reappeared before the Planning Commission
and stated that a redesign'of the structure, which would
contain the same square footage being proposed and also
accommodate the circulation system improvements, would
likely necessitate the addition of a second story. Mr.
O'Neil then discussed problems associated with a two -story
restaurant.
Mr. O'Neil suggested that the issue at hand could be
resolved with the provision of a single right -turn lane
onto Coast Highway and a reduction in the corner cut -off
by approximately 50%. 'Mr. O'Neil explained.that such.plan
revisions would enable Mr. Mau to build the restaurant as
proposed and would also enable the City to proceed with
circulation system improvements. Mr. O'Neil pointed out
that if problems were to subsequently arise, the'City
possesses police powers and condemnation rights to address
such problems.
Commissioner Balalis discussed various design possibilities
for the structure.
Commissioner Goff.noted that if the building.were to be
redesigned as a single -story structure with the same square
footage currently proposed, the number of on -site parking
spaces would obviously be diminished. In addition, Commis-
sioner Goff noted that the parking demand for this particu-
lar restaurant appears to be less than typical and further
noted that lunch -time parking demand is generally less than
evening parking demand. In addition, Commissioner Goff
advised that he would be willing to waive a portion of the
required parking spaces to offset lost square footage
due to the corner cut -off during the restaurant's day -time
hours of operation. During evening hours of operation,
however, Commissioner Goff felt that those parking spaces
should be offset by an off -site agreement with the shopping
center located behind the property. Commissioner Goff
stated his opinion that the restaurant employees should
still be required to park off -site at the municipal lot
and indicated a willingness to.waive the related in -lieu
fees.
Motion was made to continue this agenda item to the Plan-
ning Commission meeting of June 21, 1984, which MOTION
CARRIED.
Planning Commission recessed at 9:20 p.m. and reconvened
at 9:30 p.m.
* s
-12-
x
r�
s
°sue xo r
�J
•
May 24, 1984
71
t -•. 1
MINUTES
Use Permit No. 1865 (Amended) (Public Hearing)
Request to amend a previously approved use permit that
permitted B. J. Grunt's Restaurant facility with on -sale
beer and wine in the C -1 District, so as to add a take -out
window on the Main Street side of the restaurant use.
LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 130-50
(Resubdivision No. 589) located at
106 Main Street, on the easterly
side of Main Street, between East
Balboa Boulevard and East Ocean
Front, in Central Balboa.
ZONE: C -1
APPLICANT: . Bristol Restaurants, El Toro
OWNER: Four Sails, Balboa
The public hearing was opened.in connection with this
item and Bill Cunningham, 106 Main Street, appeared before
the Planning Commission on behalf of the Applicant.
Mr. Cunningham explained that B. J. Chicago Pizzeria
currently operates a carry -out service from inside the
restaurant, which creates congestion in the entry -way of
the restaurant due to the presence of carry -out customers
as well as customers who plan to dine inside the restaurant
Mr. Cunningham advised, therefore, that the Applicant pro-
poses to utilize the currently existing take -out window
so as to rectify congestion problems associated with the
interior of the restaurant.
During the course of his presentation, Mr. Cunningham
commented that bicycles, skateboards and roller skates are
prohibited on Main Street and relayed his belief that the
utilization of a take -out window will not cause area con-
gestion. Mr. Cunningham commented that the restaurant has
provided an improvement to the area and pointed out that
the restaurant has provided park benches, which he felt
are used more often by the general public than restaurant
patrons.
Mr. Cunningham voiced his concurrence with the Findings
and Conditions of Approval recommended by staff.
-13-
INDEX
Item #3
U.P. #1865
Denied
Motion
•
COMAWWONW51 May 24, 1984 MINUTES
i�
Substitute
Motion
Ayes
Nays
Absent
•
C a
m
e �fa}�t pa
Commissioner Goff noted that a congestion problem does
exist in the area and stated that he has personally
observed bicycles on the Main Street sidewalk -- including
bicycles lying on said sidewalk.
Mr. Cunningham responded that the existence of bicycles
at the subject location is not a desirable situation for
the Applicant. $e added that he can't stop individuals
from riding their bicycles in this area or stop them
from parking their bicycles in the vicinity. Mr. Cunning-
ham stated, however, that he can stop individuals from
lying their bicycles on the sidewalk, which he believes
causes an obstruction of traffic.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the
public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for Approval of Use Permit No. 1865.
(Amended), subject to the Findings and Conditions contained
in Exhibit "A ".
Commissioner Person stated that he will not support the
motion on the floor. Be pointed out that a congestion
problem exists on the area sidewalk and relayed that a
take -out window would further add to that congestion
problem inasmuch as patrons would be relocated from the
inside of the restaurant to the Main Street sidewalk. In
addition, Commissioner Person voiced his concern with the
setting of a precedent which would result in a prolifera-
tion of take -out windows in the Peninsula area.
Commissioner Balalis concurred with the remarks made by
Commissioner Person and stated that a take -out window
would create additional problems in an area that experi-
ences significant congestion, particularly during the
x summer months and on weekends. Therefore, substitute
motion was made for denial of Use Permit No. 1865 (Amended;
subject to the Findings contained in Exhibit "B ", which
x x MOTION CARRIED.
x
x Findings
1. That the installation of the proposed take -out window
will be detrimental.to pedestrian circulation on
Main Street.
-14-
I' �� May 24, 1984 MICTES
0
•
#.
•
e it
f �
Zia a` 2 X
a 91
M
or j
2. That the take -out food and related.plastic containers
and paper goods may increase the problem of trash and
litter on adjoining streets, sidewalks and the beach.
3. The approval of Use Permit No. 1865 (Amended) will,
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 and be detrimental or injurious to
property and improvements in the neighborhood and the
general welfare of.the City.
Use Permit No. 2081 (Amended) (Public Hearing)
Request to change the operational characteristics of an
existing take -out restaurant (i.e., Rib -Stak Bar B.Q. Co.),
on property located in the commercial area of the Newport
Shores Specific Plan Area, so as to add the incidental
service of on -sale beer and wine in conjunction with the
restaurant operation.
LOCATION: Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Seashore
Colony Tract Addition, located at
213 62nd Street, Unit A on the
southwesterly corner of 62nd
Street and Newport Shores Drive,
in the Newport Shores Specific
Plan Area.
ZONE: SP -4
APPLICANT: Rib -Stak Bar B.Q. Co:, Newport Beach
OWNER: Creative Ways, Inc., Costa Mesa
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and Norm Steckler, Owner of the Rib -Stak Bar B.Q.
Co.,appeared before the Planning Commission and concurred
with the Findings and Conditions of Approval recommended
in the staff report.
-15-
Item ti4
U.P. #2081
Approved
Condi-
tionally
Motion
Ayes
Absent
11
•
A �
X
=l_
May 24, 1984
r
loll
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,
the public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2081
(Amended), subject to the Findings and.Conditions c
in Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED.
Findings:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land
Use Elements of the General Plan and the Adopted
Local Coastal Program, and is compatible with sur-
rounding land uses.
2. The project will not have any significant
impact.
MINUTES
3. That the proposed change in the operational character-
istics of the existing take -out restaurant, so as to
include the service of beer and wine as an incidental
use, will not increase the parking demand of the res-
taurant.
4. That the Police Department has no objections to this
request, providing that the sale of beer and wine is
incidental to the service of food.
5. The approval of Use Permit No. 2081 (Amended) will
not under the circumstances of the case be detrimental
to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to propert)
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 and floor plan.
2. That the parking lot shall be lighted in such a manner
as to provide adequate illumination to all areas of
the lot without causing any light or glare to impact
adjacent properties.
-16-
y
CCM AAESONW5 May 24, 1984 MIIaJTES
A C
Z : C
C g;g V O X 2
•
M
I
3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall
be screened from adjoining properties and from
adjoining streets.
4. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of
Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code.
5. That the two restaurant employees shall park on site
during evening hours of the day.
6. That the seating capacity shall not exceed 29 persons,
or what is permitted by the Fire Department, whichever
is less.
7. That thw subject restaurant shall not be open to the
public before 11:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m. daily.
8. That no off -sale beer, wine, or other alcoholic
beverages shall be permitted in conjunction with the
restaurant.
9. That the on -sale service of beer and wine shall be
incidental to the primary food service operation of
the restaurant.
10. That the Planning Commission may add or modify condi-
tions of approval to this use permit, or recommend
to the City Council the revocation of this use per-
mit, 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.
11. That a minimum of four on -site parking spaces shall
be provided for the subject restaurant.
12. That the original Use Permit No. 2081 shall become
null and void in conjunction with the approval of this
application.
-17-
. i
0
•
F
Motion
Ayes
Absent
r1
u
M1VVMR AM3%3 May 24, 1984 E$
A �
m
£ z a 3 -e i City Of ���w•� t Beach
a : o " 3` 1`r VI � vlCtlr`JIJ�
ix
Use Permit No. 3009 (Amended) (Public Hearing)
Request to amend a previously approved use permit that
permitted the service of beer and wine in conjunction
with an existing restaurant in the C -O-Z District. The
proposal includes the expansion of the interior dining
area and the addition of an outdoor dining area to the
existing restaurant facility.
LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 6939 -90,
91 (Resubdivision No. 179) located
at 2931 East Coast Highway, on the
southwesterly side of East Coast
Highway between Iris Avenue and
Heliotrope Avenue, in Corona del
Mar.
ZONE: C -O-Z
APPLICANT: Anup Mohindra, Diamond Bar
OWNER: James D. Ray, Costa Mesa
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and Anup Mohindra, Applicant, 2931 East Coast
Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission and
concurred with the Findings and Conditions recommended
in the staff report.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,
the public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3009
(Amended), subject to the Findings and Conditions con-
tained in Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED.
Findings:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land
Use Element of the General Plan and the adopted
Local Coastal Plan, Land Use Program and is compati-
ble with surrounding land uses.
2. The project will not have any significant environ-
mental impact.
-18-
Item #5
U.P. #3009
Approved
Condi-
tionally
A x
r c
• m
•
•
May 24, 1984
M
a
NNUTES
3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not
anticipate any problems.
4. That there is adequate expanded on -site parking for
the proposed restaurant use.
5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3009 (Amended) will
not under the circumstances of the case be detrimental
to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood or be.detrimental or injurious to propert
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 and floor plan.
2. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas for
this restaurant shall be screened from adjoining
properties and from adjoining streets.
3. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of
Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code.
4. That the restaurant employees shall park on site
during all hours of operation.
5. That a minimum of one parking space for each 48 sq.
ft. of "net public area" shall be provided on site
for the subject restaurant.
6. That the subject restaurant shall not be open after
11:00 p.m. daily.
.7. That the striping plan for the on -site parking area
shall be subject to further review and approval by
the City Traffic Engineer.
8. That the expanded restaurant facility, including the
outdoor patio area in front of the restaurant, may
be used for dining and drinking purposes, to include
the service of incidental beer and wine with meals.
-19-
e x
n
U
•
May 24, ,1984
M
it I
MINUTES
9. That no off -sale service of alcoholic beverages
shall be permitted.
10. That the Planning Commission may add or modify condi-
tions 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.
Use Permit No. 3098 (Public Hearing)
Request to remodel and expand an existing, nonconforming
duplex in the C -1 District. The proposed development also
includes the construction of a cupola that exceeds the
height limit in the 26135 Height Limitation District.
LOCATION: Lot 25, Block 9, Section 1 of the
Balboa Island.Tract, located at 124
Agate Avenue on the easterly side
of Agate Avenue between Park Avenue
and South Bay Front, on Balboa
Island.
ZONE: C -1
APPLICANTS: Julie and John Peterson, Balboa
Island
OWNERS: Same as applicants
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and John Peterson, Applicant, 124 Agate appeared
before the Planning Commission. Mr. Peterson discussed
the background of the application, advising that the
City granted a use permit for an identical proposal in
1981; however, that permit has since expired. Mr.
Peterson then discussed his concern with Condition No. 8,
which relates.to the provision of individual sewer lateral
and water service connections.
-20-
e
•
Motion
Ayes
Absent
• t
May 24, 1984 MWUTES
� x
� m Beach
n x O i City of } Beach
i 3: b o M (�
xi
x
City Engineer Webb responded that the City's standard
practice is to request separate dwelling units to.-have
separate water and sewer connections because of the possi-
bility of the units being converted to condominiums at a
later date. Mr. Webb explained the advantages of separate
connections and commented that if the duplex were to be
constructed without separate connections; it would be
extremely costly to separate those connections if the
units were subsequently converted to condominiums.
Mr. Peterson responded.that he has no plans for a condo-
minium conversion and suggested the possibility of the
Planning Commission imposing a condition which would
require the separation of sewer and water connections
if the units were to be converted to condominiums.
Commissioner Balalis suggested the possibility of one
sewer lateral being installed from the City connection
to the property line, and then branching off into separate
laterals for each of the two dwelling units. Commissioner
Balalis noted that the water connections can be installed
in this same fashion. It was noted that such arrangements
would enable a condominium conversion to take place at a
lesser cost.
Mr. Peterson concurred with Commissioner Balalis' sugges-
tion.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the
public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3098, sub-
ject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit
"A ", which MOTION CARRIED.
Findings:
1. That the project will not have any significant ecrviron-
mental impact.
2. With the exception of the minor encroachments into the
front and rear setbacks, the proposed development meets
or exceeds all of the development standards of the
C -R District.
-21-
A x
few
1
L
May 24, 1984
M
,I
MINUTES
3. That the expanded residential duplex is an approved
use in the C -1 District subject to the securing of the
subject use permit.
4. That the approval of this project with only two
off - street parking spaces will not, under the circum-
stances of this particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and
general welfare of the persons residing or working
In the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detri-
mental or injurious to property and improvements in
the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City.
5. That the existing deck encroachment into the required
10 -foot rear yard setback is minor in nature and 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 detri-
mental or injurious to property and improvements in
the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City.
6. That the height of the proposed architectural features,
in excess of the basic height limit, will not be
objectionable to surrounding property owners and are
reasonable additions to the structure as they relate
to the architectural style of the building.
7. The Police Department has indicated that they do not
contemplate any problems.
The approval of Use Permit No. 3098, 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 neigh-
borhood or be detrimental or injurious to property
and improvements in the neighborhood or the general
welfare of the City.
Conditions:
That development shall be in substantial conformance
with the approved plot plan, floor plans, elevations,
and sections except as noted below.
-22-
i
i
E
e �c
f I- 5 as
vioa7cp=
�$ ILIaR
May 24, 1984
MINUTES
2. That two on -site parking spaces.shall be provided for
the proposed project and.that said parking spaces
shall be designed in accordance with the City's resi-
dential parking standards.
3. That the proposed development.shall . be limited to two
dwelling units.
4. That all improvements be constructed as required by
Ordinance and the Public Works Department.
5. That all vehicular access be provided from the adjacent
alley.
6. That.the existing drive apron on Agate Avenue be
removed and replaced with curb, gutter, and sidewalk
and that all work be completed under an encroachment
permit issued by the Public Works Department.
7. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying
surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory completion
of the public improvements if it is desired to obtain
a building permit prior to completion of the public
improvements.
8. That individual sewer lateral and water service con-
nections to each unit shall be further reviewed by
the Public Works Department.
-23-
4 C
� � 5
2 g4 s X o=
2
•
Motion
Ayes
Absent
•
May 24, 1984
W
:003 M
Resubdivision No. 778 (Public Hearing)
NNUrES
Request to resubdivide three existing lots into two parcels
for single - family or two - family residential development on
property located in the R -1.5 District. An exception to
the Subdivision Code is also requested so as to allow the
creation of two interior parcels that are less than 50
feet wide and less than 5,000 sq. ft. in area.
LOCATION: Lots Nos. 3, 4 and 5, Block 4, Sec-
tion 5, Balboa Island, located at 1804
South Bay Front, on northerly side of
South Bay Front, between East Bay
Front and Jade Avenue, on Balboa
Island.
ZONE: R -1.5
APPLICANT: Jerome H. Thompson, Riverside
OWNER: Same as applicant
ENGINEER: Duca- McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and Jerome H. Thompson, Applicant, 5175 Myrtle
Street, Riverside, appeared before the Planning Commission
and concurred with the Conditions of Approval recommended
by staff.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,
the public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for approval'of Resubdivision No. 778,
subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in
Exhibit "A ", which 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.
-24-
A F
Sc r
c $3�iX 00
0
•
May 24,. 1984 MINUTES
2. That the proposed reaubdivision presents no problems
from a planning standpoint.
3. 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.
4. That the proposed reaubdivision will not have any
significant environmental impact.
5. That the provision for coastal public access in con-
junction with the proposed resubdivision is not appl,
able inasmuch as adequate access exists nearby.
6. That if the exception were denied; the petitioner
would be deprived of a substantial property right
enjoyed by others in the area.
7. That the granting of this exception is compatible with
the objectives of the regulations governing light,
air and the public health, safety, convenience, and
general welfare.
8. That the granting of an exception to the Subdivision
Code will not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property in the vicinity in
which the property is located.
Conditions;
1. That a parcel map be recorded.
2. That all improvements be constructed as required by
ordinance and the Public Works Department.
3. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Depar
ment in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of
the public improvements if it is desired to record a
parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to com-
pletion of the public improvements.
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.
-25-
n 7c.
X $
m
C 33
•
•
May 24, 1984
M
AMNUTES
5. That the displaced sidewalk be reconstructed along the
South B,ay Front frontage under an encroachment permit
issued by the Public Works Department.
6. That all vehicular access to the property be from the
adjacent alley.
7. That prior to the issuance of any Building Permits,
the applicant shall pay Pair -Share for circulation
system improvements and noise walls.
Resubdivision No. 779 (Public Hearing)
Request to establish one building site and eliminate an
interior lot line where portions of two lots presently
exist so as,to.allow the construction of a multiple use
development on property located in the Mariner's Mile
Specific Plan Area.
LOCATION: Portions of Lots G and H, Tract No.
919,'located at 2901 West:Coast Highw
on the southerly side of West Coast
Highway, between Riverside Avenue and
Newport Boulevard in Mariner's Mile.
ZONE: SP -5
APPLICANT: Senator D.G. Anderson, Honolulu
OWNER: Same as applicant
ENGINEER/
ARCHITECT: Lancor Architects, Del Mar
The public hearing was opened in connection with this
item and Senator Anderson, Applicant, appeared before the
Planning Commission. Senator Anderson explained that
this resubdivision request conforms with Condition
No. 89 of Use Permit No. 3086, which was approved by the
Planning Commission on April 19, 1984.
-26-
CCAfAJSSK)?4ERSJ May 24, 1984. MINUTES
p 7C
m
v'�ISaxpS
a it
Motion
Ayes
Absent
n
U
n
U
In
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,
the public hearing was closed.
Motion was made for approval of Resubdivision No. 779,
subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in
Exhibit "A ", which 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.
2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems
from a planning standpoint.
3. 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.
Conditions:
1. That a parcel map be filed.
2. That all conditions of Use Permit No. 3086 be
3. That all improvements be constructed as required by
ordinance and the Public Works Department.
_Y7_
COMA May 24, 1984 ibQi TE$
Ic
r. S
City of t Beach
R51 M71 ice(.
0
r 1
U
Final Map of Tract No. 11604 (Discussion)
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 11604 being
a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11604, subdi-
viding 6.947 acres of land into seven lots for residential
condominium purposes.
LOCATION: A portion of Tract No. 11041, located
on the southeasterly corner of Bison
Avenue and Jamboree Road, commonly
known as Belcourt Area 8, of the
Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community.
ZONE: P -C
APPLICANT: J.M. Peters Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
ENGINEER: Van Dell and Associates,.Irvine
=
Final Map of Tract No. 12164 (Discussion)
Request to approve a Final Map of Tract No. 12164 being
a portion of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11604 subdi-
viding 4.530 acres of land into 4 lots for residential
condominium purposes and l lot for private recreational
purposes.
LOCATION: A portion of Tract No. 11041, located
on the southeasterly corner of Bison
Avenue and Jamboree Road, commonly
known as Belcourt Area 8, of the
Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community.
ZONE: P -C
APPLICANT: J.M. Peters Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
ENGINEER: Van Dell and Associates, Irvine
-28-
Motiorl
Ayes 7
Absent,
•
•
x
Ex
n S
a
D
May. 24, 1984
M
Agenda Items Nos. 9 and 10 were discussed concurrently
because of their relationship.
MINUTES
Bob Trapp, of the J.M. Peters Company, appeared before the
Planning Commission and stated that he has no questions
on the staff report.
Motion was made for approval of Final Map of Tract No.
x 11604 and approval of Final Map of Tract No. 12164, sub-
ject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit
"A ", which MOTION CARRIED.
FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 11604
Finding
1. That the proposed Final Map substantially conforms
with the Tentative Map and with all changes permitted
and all requirements imposed as conditions to its
acceptance.
Conditions:
1. That all.remaining conditions of the Tentative Map
of Tract No. 11604 as approved by the City Council on
October 24, 1983 be fulfilled.
2. Thaf the approved street names shall be indicated on
the recorded map.
FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 12164
Finding:
1. That the proposed Final Map substantially conforms with
the Tentative Map and with all changes permitted and
all requirements imposed as conditions to its accep-
tance.
-29-
• C0M NTjk I0f�S� May 24, 1984 MINUTES
EX
f
yy s
'oRo �7Cpv
e z
Conditions:
„1. That all remaining conditions of the Tentative Map of
Tract No. 11604 as approved by the City Council on
October 24, 1983 be fulfilled.
2. That the approved street names shall be indicated on
the recorded map.
Amendment No. 607 (Public Hearing) Item #11
Request to amend the Newport Place Planned Community D_is- Amendment
trict Regulations so as to establish a specific limit on No. 607
hotel rooms for Hotel Sites IA and 1B, and the acceptance
• of an environmental document. Approved
LOCATION: Parcel 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 40 -11
(Resubdivision No. 483 located at 4545
MacArthur Boulevard,.bounded by Mac-
Arthur Boulevard, Birch Street and
Corinthian Way, in the Newport Place
Planned Community.
ZONE: P -C
OWNER: Bay Colony Property Company, Inc.,
Boston, Massachusetts
INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
Planning Director Hewicker explained that Amendment No.
607 is a proposal, initiated by the City of Newport Beach,
to establish a specific limit on hotel rooms within the
Newport Place Planned Community District. Mr. Hewicker
explained that this proposal results from direction given
by the Planning Commission to staff at the time of approva
of the second expansion of the Sheraton Hotel.
I I I I f The public hearing was opened in connection with this item
Iand there being no one desiring to appear and be heard,
the public hearing was closed.
-30-
I .-,.
May 24, 1984
MMES
s�
A a
a Pt
eo
O f C: t Beach C
ROLL CALL MDEX .
Motion
Ayes
Absent
r�
U
0
x
18
In answer to a question posed by Commissioner Person,
staff reported that the Sheraton Hotel had been notified
of this public hearing and has relayed no communication
to the City relative to the proposal.
Motion was made that the Planning Commission accept the
Environmental Document and approve Amendment No. 607,
subject to the Findings contained in Exhibit "A ", which
MOTION CARRIED.
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
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. The project will not have any significant environmental
impact.
AMENDMENT NO. 607
Findings:
1. That the project will not result in any additional
development within the Newport Place Planned Community.
2. That the hotel room limit will clearly define future
hotel development rights in the Newport Place Planned
Community.
There being no further business, the Planning Commission
adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
James Person, Secretary
Newport Beach City
Planning Commission
-31-