Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/07/1984Present Motion Ayes Absent • irv•u_snv�a.w REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City. Council Chambers n x TIME: 7:30 p.m. m m DATE: of 7, 1984 Newport Rp��+ '5410-W i VI Beach xi xi xlx *Commissioner McLaughlin arrived at the meeting at 7e40 p.m. *Commissioner Winburn left the meeting at 9:25 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 24, 1984 MINUTES Consideration of the Planning Commission minutes of May 24, 1984 was deferred to the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 1984. Requests for Continuances Staff recommended that Item No. 2 (Use Permit No. 3071 (Amended) - Newport Beach Tennis Club) be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 1984 and that Item No. 6 (Use Permit No. 1965 (Amended) (Revocation) , A. T. Leo's) be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 19, 1984. ' Motion was made to continue Item No. 2 (Use Permit No. 3071 (Amended) to the Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED, Chairman King stated that he is' concerned with the continu- ance of Item No. 6 (Use Permit No. 1965 (Amended) (Revoca- tion). Planning Director Hewicker explained that Al F. Mayo, of A. T. Leo's, has requested the continuance inas- much as he will be out -of -town on July 5, 1984, E INDEX 5/24/84 Con- Motion Ayes Abstain Absent • 40 3 C f r' v o a c °o �cXfa g o _ x June 7, 1984 Y Motion was made to continue Item No. 6 (Use Permit No. 1965 (Amended) (Revocation) to the Planning Cormnission meeting of July.19, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED. A. Resubdivision No. 765 (Continued Public Hearing) MINUTES Request to resubdivide three existing lots and eliminate interior property lines so as to.create a single building site for the purpose of converting and remodeling the existing.commercial building on the property into a res- taurant. AND B. Use Permit No. 3076 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the conversion of an existing two -story commercial building into a restaurant with on -sale alco- holic beverages, live entertainment, and dancing" on property located in the.0 -1 District. The.proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunctii with a valet parking service, the acceptance of an off -si parking agreement for a portion of the required parking spaces, and the acceptance of an environmental document,. LOCATION: Lots 4 -6, Block 3., Balboa.Bayside Tract, located at 503 Edgewater Place, on the southeasterly corner of Edgewater Place and Adams Street, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Howard Properties, Newport Beach OWNERS: � Ron. Franklin and James Ray, Corona del Mar Chairman King stepped down from the dais and refrained from deliberation on this agenda item, First Vice Chairman Winburn assumed the duties of the Chair. Planning Director Hewicker stated that staff has distribu- ted an addendum to the staff report which recommends two additional Findings pertaining to the waiver of 32 off- -2- INDEX AND P. #307( • Kotion Ayes Abstain • e �c � � S 9 a m c °O� zaxQa 0 Ix -L June 7, 1984 MINUTES street parking spaces in conjunction with this particular project. In addition, Mr. Hewicker advised that staff is recommending two additional conditions pertaining to the prohibition of a dance floor and acknowledging the waiver of 32 off - street parking spaces. Planning Director Hewicker advised that staff had been requested to provide information relating.to the hours of operation which were approved by the City Council for the Palm Street Cafe. Mr. Hewicker explained that two condi- tions of interest were imposed on that particular project, to wit: 1) That there-be no amplified music; and 2) That the closing time for the subject operation would take place at 12:30 a.m. on weekdays and Sundays, and 1:00 a.m. on Saturdays.. Planning Director Hewicker reviewed that Resubdivision No. 765 and Use Permit No. 3076 were - continued from the Planr ning Commission meeting of May 10, 1984, so as to allow the Applicant additional time to meet with the concerned residents in the area and explain his proposal for the redevelopment of the property. ' Hardy Strozier;.3151 Airway Avenue, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that he is the planner for the Art's Landing project. Mr,` Strozier indir cated that he will require approximately 15 minutes for his presentation; Planning Commission discussed the length of time.that should be allotted to this agenda item. Motion was subser quently made that the Planning:Commission allot one hour for the public hearing and then make a.decision to either continue the item or take action thereon. -In addition, it was suggested that Mr. Strozier limit his presentation to no more than 15 minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Strozier stated that the proposal in question is for a first -class dinner house, comparable to Antonello's in South Coast Village: Mr. Strozier described the project and commented that the proposed restaurant represents the first stage in a clean -up of the waterfront area situated in the vicinity of this project. Mr. Strozier indicated his hope that the clean -up efforts will he extended to also include the Bayview and'Pun Zone areas. Mr.,Strozier then referred to the proposed Conditions of Approval recommended by staff and voiced concern with the following Conditions; -3- INDEX n x � r V � m Rol CAU June 7, 1984 ��: � :►1 I elf, i:. s . . MINUTES -4- .a Condition No. 10 (Resubdivision No. 765) - which provides that the existing deteriorated concrete sidewalk and curb along the Adams Street frontages be reconstructed and that any unused driveway aprons be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk, and that the adjacent alley apron be reconstructed.in order to conform with City Std, 142 -L, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department, Mr. Strozier stated that the BayviewLanding project may damage or destroy portions of the reconstruction efforts undertaken by the Applicant, Therefore, Mr. Strozier sug- gested that the Condition be revised to stipulate that any reconstruction be deferred for twelve months, to'allow time for the completion of the.Bayview project, - Additionally, Nr, Strozier.suggested that the improvements. at Art's Landing be secured with appropriate bonds. Condition No. 11 (Resubdivision'No. 765) r which.provides that the existing.overhead utilities along Adams Street . and the alley'frontages be-undergrounded. Mr.,Strozier stated that the Applicant.is concerned with this Condition for the same reasons described in connec- tion with Condition No. 10. Condition No. 17 (Resubdivision No. 765) which provides that a minimum 11 -foot clear area be maintained within that portion of the easement area be the existing.restaur -,, ant building and the existing building located in Edgewater Place; and further that a minimum 15 "foot clear area maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the.proposed raised patio area. The exact location and design of said area shall be subject,to the approval of the Planning Depart - ment,.Public Works Department, and Parks, Beaches and Rec- reation Department. Mr. Strozier voiced concern with the portion of Condition No. 17 that provides that a minimum 15 -foot clear area be maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the proposed raised patio area. Nr. Strozier urged that the subject stretch of sidewalk be maintained at an average of 11' in width inas - • much as 1) the adjacent sidewalks are 11' in width, 2) a 15' clear area would reduce the available area for outdoor seating, 3) the Applicant desires to keep the deck intact, and 4) an 11' width could reduce and deter loitering and -4- .a � x � r ym m Y m c o CL p m • • June 7, 1984 MINUTES congregation in the area. Mr. Strozier explained that considerable landscaping is proposed within-the walkway area which would occasionally intrude into the ll' side - walk; therefore, Mr. Strozier.suggested that the Condition be revised to provide that a clear area, averaging 11' in width,.be permitted-since the clear zone would be less then.11' in some areas and wider in others.. Condition No. 29 (Use Permit No, 3076) which provides that Use Permit No. 3076 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as it pertains to off - street parking, prior to the issuance of building permits for the Bayview Landing project or at'such.time is the Planning.Commission con- siders an amendment to Use Permit No, 3018. Mr. Strozier suggested that this Condition be deleted to enable the matter of the off - street parking agreement to be determined by staff and /or City Council. Planning Director Hewicker clarified that this Condition does not pertain to the issue of an off -site parking agreement,, He explained that the Condition requires that .the use permit for Art's Landing be referred to the Plan- ning Commission for review at:such time as the Applicant for the..Bayview Landing project.applies' for building per- wits, or at such time as an amendment to Use Permit No. 3018 is processed through the City, Mr. Hewicker advised that the intent of the subject.Condition.is to assure that there is adequate parking for both the Art's Landing site and the Bayview Landing site. ' Condition No. 35 (Use Permit No..3076) - which provides that the proposed patio area, located on Edgewater Place shall be permitted provided that no food or beverages shall be served within.the patio, and that seating be limited to benches only with no tables'. Mr. Strozier suggested that this Condition be revised to read that, "Food and beverage service shall be permitted within the outdoor dining area if an equal number of tables are closed within the enclosed restaurant, or until such time as additional off -site parking is provided." Addi- tionally, Mr. Strozier suggested that tables be permitted -5- INDEX x � r v � p II�40100111 • June 7, 1984 MINUTES within the patio area so as to maintain a formal environ- ment. Mr. Strozier pointed out that the outdoor area will be open to the public and will be adequately signed and policed. Commissioner Balalis inquired as to whether the Applicant would be agreeable to a variation in the hours of opera - tion permitted for the exterior and interior dining areas of the restaurant. Mr. Strozier responded that a differ- entiation in hours of operation would be agreeable with the Applicant. Condition No. 45 (Use Permit No. 3076) - Mr. Strozier noted that this Condition is a repeat of Condition No. 17 of . the Resubdivision*, which addresses the maintenance of 11' and 15' clear areas.. Mr. Strozier suggested that this Condition be revised as per his comments on Condition No; 17 of the Resubdivision. In response to residents' concerns, Mr. Strozier indicated that the Applicant has agreed to the following concessions and.is agreeable to same being incorporated into the Condi- tions of Approval for the project: 1. The proposed dance floor will be eliminated. 2. Music will be limited to mood music with low ampli- fication. 3. The Applicant agrees to meet every six months with residents. 4. The Applicant suggests that an additional Condition be imposed to require that noise not emanate above 65 CNEL at the property line. In response to Planning Commission inquiry, City Engineer Webb stated that the intent of Condition. No. 10 of the Resubdivision was to primarily replace the curb, gutter, and sidewalk located adjacent to the Art's Landing build- ing; however, Mr. Webb added that staff is aware that the alley approach is in a poor state of repair and noted that this would be part of the area that would be replaced if the'Bayview Landing development were to occur. Mr. ME COMMISSO'B6 June 7, 1984 MINUTES a x r eve m r1 L_J is Webb then suggested possible additional wording for both Conditions Nos. 10 and 11 of the Resubdivision as Follows: "The work is to be completed within one year after occu- pancy is granted. A bond shall be posted to guarantee the completion of the work." City Engineer Webb . referred to the Applicant's dents - relating to Condition No. 17 of the Resubdivision. which pertains.to the required width of clear areas. Mr. Webb reviewed the intent-,of the.proposed condition, commenting that staff is attempting to maintain consistency with adjacent walkways. During the.course'of his remarks, Mr. Webb commented that the placement of landscaping and benches as proposed by the Applicant would effectively reduce the width of the sidewalk. Hence, Mr. Webb suggested that the 15' sidewalk area be maintained within that por, tion of the.easement area between the existing restaurant building and the proposed raised patio area, with the understanding that landscaping would be. permitted to pro, ject into a portion of this area so long.as a minimum ll" or ll' foot clear area.is' maintained. Immediately adja -. cent to the building., however, Mr. Webb suggested that a minimal amount of landscaping be provided in order to assure a minimum 11 or ll�L clear area, The public-hearing was opened in connection with this item and Bob Shrimmer, '407 East Edgewater, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Shrimmer. stated that his major objection to the proposed Art's Landing project relates to the increased density that it will bring to the Penn, sula area, Mr. Shrimmer discussed the ramifications associated with area congestion and opined that the pro, posed project will further add to the congestion situation. Additionally, Mr. Shrimmer voiced concern that there are at least 15 commercial establishments within two blocks of the subject project that sell liquor and reviewed the noise and crime problems associated therewith. Mr. Shrim- mer also commented on the high degree of pedestrian and vehicle traffic that utilize the alley behind Edgewater, particularly when the area bars close'at 2:00 a.m. Mr. Shrimmer stated that Council Member Plummer is of the opinion that a study should be made relating to the intensity of development for the subject area before any further projects are developed. Mr. Shrimmer urged that the City grant a moratorium on any further area develop- ment until such a study is completed. -7 INDEX Cx c° o W M p O • June 7, 1984 MINUTES L� I,l� �,•l�l �1 _I � Commissioner Balalis referred to Mr. Shrimmer's' comments relating to the degree of traffic occurring on the alley behind Edgewater, and questioned whether the City has investigated the possibility of redesignating the alley for 'one -way' traffic towards Adams. Commissioner - Balalis noted that such a redesignation would eliminate use of the alley by individuals leaving the Peninsula commercial area. Traffic Engineer Webb replied that this possibility has never been raised for discussion. Mr. Webb suggested that the block residents.may wish to request that the City Traffic Affairs Committee investigate this possi- bility. Commissioner Goff suggested investigation into the possi, bility of striping the parking lot'so that Palm Street would provide the only points of ingress and egress. It was noted that such a situationy if determined to be desirable, may alleviate the problem'of individuals util- izing the alley behind the residential area. Mr. Shrimmer voiced.concern with the waiver of 32 parking spaces. Commissioner Balalis responded that the Municipal Code provides that, when property is redeveloped, credit be given for the number of parking spaces that the pre, existing use would have been required to provide if it were built today. If such credit were not given, Commis- sioner Balalis explained, many older properties would not be redeveloped. Linda Brannon appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that she presently is Public Relations Director for the Balboa Pavilion,.President of the Newport Beach Convention and Visitors Bureau, and is also active in the Balboa Improvement Association. Ms. Brannon added that she will be speaking this evening on her own behalf. Ms. Brannon spoke in support of the proposed project and the high - caliber clientele that will be attracted to the subject operation. Harry Kalin appeared before the Planning Commission and expressed his support for the project inasmuch as he felt it would enhance the area, SL ea COMANSSIONERS June 7, 1984 MINITf �x r a s c o o 0 0 of t Beach ROIL CALL INDEX Phil Campbell, 413§ Edgewater, appeared before the Plan -' ning Commission and stated that he is speaking on behalf of the area residents who signed a petition relating to the subject project. .Mr. Campbell voiced concern with the proposed density of the project, as well as the time of day the highest density will occur. Additionally, Mr. Campbell relayed his belief that a density study should be prepared for the Peninsula area. Lindsay Novey, 301 Edgewater, appeared before the Planning Commission and relayed her concerns relative to music amplification and ramifications associated with the res- taurant closing at 2:00 a.m. Tuck Rabbitt,, 310 Buena Vista, appeared before the Plan- ning Commission and expressed his support.for the pro- posal. Additionally, Mr. Rabbitt expressed his belief • that,low amplification of music should be permitted. . Jay Evarts, 916 East Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission and'spoke in support of the pro- ject inasmuch as the proposed project is a permitted use for the,property and will provide an aesthetic improve- ment to the area. Pat Harrison, 2270 Channel Road, appeared before the,Plan- ning Commission and stated that most area residents are in favor of a development such as the one proposed. However, Ms. Harrison added that the residents are con- cerned with the amplification of music and feel that live entertainment. should be limited to a piano player.' Commissioner Person pointed out that the Planning Commis- sion can impose a Condition of Approval to require that noise emanating from the establishment not exceed an established CNEL. Commissioner Person questioned whether Ms. Harrison had discussed this possibility with any area residents. Ms. Harrison responded that she has not discussed such a Condition with area residents. She added that the residents are concerned with the provision of "low" ampli- fication due to variations in opinion as to what consti- • tues "low" amplification. She suggested that perhaps a Condition that would limit the CNEL would be a possible solution. -9- f a • m C a s O d O � i 090, June 7, 1984 MINUTES MROLLCALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I INDEX • J Byron Kough, restaurant manager and.partner for the pro - posed establishment; appeared before the Planning Commis- sion. Mr. Kough explained that the proposed restaurant will be a dinner house, with dinner prices ranging from $10 to $20. He added that the restaurant would include a controlled bar and commented that mood music would be provided. In answer to a question posed by Commissioner Goff' Mr, Kough explained that dinner will be served during the week until midnight, with the oyster bar remaining open until closing time. Mr. Kough added that the restaurant management is willing to meet with area residents every six months relative to the restaurant's operation. Mr. Strozier reappeared before the Planning Commission and urged that the Applicant be given the benefit of doubts relative to the operation, and conniented.on the availability of abatement procedures to rectify any nuisances that may occur. Mr. Strozier stated that the Applicant would like to proceed with the hours of operation as proposed and indicated concurrence with the imposition of an additional Condition of Approval to require that noise not exceed 65 CNEL at the property line of the establishment. Commissioner Goff-pointed out that in order for the Art's Landing and'Bayview projects to be built to the extent originally envisionedy a larger parking structure will be required. Additionally, Commissioner Goff noted that an increase in size of the parking structure can only be approved by an amendment to the Use Permit for the Bay - view Landing project, He further stated that the Use Permit for the Bayview Landing.project was denied by the Planning Commission and was subsequently overruled by the City Council; therefore, Commissioner Goff suggested the potential difficulty that may be involved in obtaining an amendment to the use permit to allow a larger parking structure. Commissioner Goff advised that approval of the project in question does not imply, nor is tantamount to, approval of any amendment to the Bayview Landing use permit. -10- ex £ r s m S I S n June 7, 1984 MWUTES -11- Mr. Strozier responded that the Applicant hopes to enter into escrow on the Bayview project and advised that some additional properties have been acquired in the block. He added that the Applicant recognizes any risk involved relative to seeking an amendment to the Bayview Landing use permit and relayed his belief that a positive record on the part of the Applicant will help them prevail on any future submissions. In answer to a question posed by Commissioner Goff rela- tive to the provision of 'parking for the restaurant during the 'construction of the Bayview Landing project, Mr. Strozier noted that this issue will be reviewed in relation to the Bayview project; however, he pointed out that short -term parking shortfalls can usually be aug- mented by additional off -site parking, or in some cases by a reduction in the intensity of the operation. Commissioner Balalis opined that Mr. Campbell's suggestion • that a study of the area be performed has some merit. Commissioner Balalis suggested that Mr. Campbell and his fellow residents approach the City and request that an investigation be made relative to the R -3 property adjacent to the area and suggest that the subject zoning be changed. Commissioner Balalis referred to Condition of Approval No. 52 of the use permit, which provides that -the Planning Commission may add 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 communi- ty. Commissioner Balalis questioned whether the Applicant understands the Condition and is aware that the use permit can be revoked if the'Conditions of Approval are violated. Mr. Strozier responded that the Applicant does understand the power and authority of the City to revoke the use permit. _ Gordon Barienbrock, 3000 West Qcean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Barienbrock commented that he is a long -time resident of Newport Beach and opined that the proposal would be an asset to the area. • Phil Campbell reappeared before the Planning Commission and spoke in support of an 11' clear area being maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the proposed raised patio area. -11- • Motion Ayes Abstain ox r o m y m a y g p m � w June 7, 1984 MINUTES Commissioner Person referred to Condition of Approval No. 33 of the use-permit which provides, in part, that outlining of the proposed structure shall be permitted in a manner consistent with that of the Pavilion with the understanding that the outlining, if accomplished, shall use smaller and dimmer bulbs than the Pavilion. Commis- sioner Person acknowledged the close proximity of the sub- ject structure to the residential area and voiced concern with the potential for light intrusion into the residen- tial area. Consequently, Commissioner Person questioned whether the Applicant would be agreeable to the deletion of the second and third sentences of the subject condition which relate to the lighted outline of the structure. Mr. Strozier suggested.the. possibility of a performance standard being incorporated into the Condition. Commissioner Kurlander suggested that Commissioner Per- son's concern with Condition No. 33 be voted.orn separately inasmuch as he did not feel the entire Commission concurs with the concerns mentioned. Planning Director Hewicker pointed out that approximately eleven years ago, the City was involved in litigation to prohibit -private encroachments onto the public easement in the block westerly of the subject property. He advised that the City was successful in that litigation effort, and pointed out that the City has continually attempted to provide for pedestrian circulation throughout this area. He noted that a restriction of access at this time would be contrary to the past direction of the City. There being no others desiring to appear, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made that the Planning Commission accept the Environmental Document and approve Resubdivision No. 765, subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A ", with the clarification that Condition No. 17 would remain intact as recommended by staff with the under standing that landscaping will be permitted to project into the 15' sidewalk area, so long as the sidewalk is not thereby limited to anything less than 11's and with the revisions that Conditions Nos. 10 and 11 be expanded to provide that the subject work is to be completed within one year after occupancy is granted and that a bond be posted to guarantee the completion of the work, which MOTION CARRIED. -12- �x a_ • June 7, 1984 e' ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Findings: s 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. M NLFfES 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the pro- posed project, all feasible mitigation measures dis- cussed in the environmental document have been incor- porated into.the proposed project. 4. That the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study have been incorporated into the proposed pro- ject and are expressed as conditions. S. That based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, Negative Declaration and supportive materials thereto, that if the mitigation measures are incorporated into the project, it will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. The Findings made in regard to the Environmental Document described above also apply to the action taken for Use Permit No. 3076. RESUBDIVISION NO. 765 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: -13- Ex � r y m c p p - � • • June 7, 1984 Nn MINUTES 4. That the public has historically used the area between the building and the bulkhead and that the adjacent development is providing a clear area for pedestrian uses and that it is desirable to continue to provide public access to the bay. Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record the parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That all work within the public right -of -way be com- pleted under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 5. That the off -site and on -site parking circulation and pedestrian circulation systems he subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 6. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 7. That a study of existing public water, sewer and storm drain facilities available to the site be made by the developer prior to recording the parcel map to determine their capacities. Any upgrading modifi- cations or extensions to'the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to he required shall be the responsibility of the developer. All work on the public sewer, water and storm drain systems shall be completed or bonded for prior to issuance of any building permits. 8. That a condition survey of the existing bulkhead along the bayside of the property be made by a civil or structural engineer and that the bulkhead be repaired in conformance with the recommendations of the condition survey and to the satisfaction of the Building and Marine Departments and that the existing bulkheads be raised to elevation 9.0 (L.L.W.). -14- ■ INDEX 3 x f 6 W cc° � C6 a to a June 7, 1984 • =9 f: i' j MINUTES ROLL CALL 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 I NM • 9. That an additional street light be installed on Edge- water Place between Palm Street and Adams Street as approved by the Public Works Department and Utilities Department. Unless otherwise approved, high pressure sodium -vapor luminares with multiple wiring shall be provided. 10. That the existing deteriorated concrete sidewalk and curb along.the Adams Street frontages he reconstructed and that any unused.driveway aprons be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk, and that the adjacent alley apron be redonstructed in order to conform with City Std. 142 -L, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. The work.is to be completed within one year after occupancy is granted. A bond shall be posted to guarantee the completion of the work. 11. That the existing overhead utilities along Adams Street and the alley frontages be undergrounded. The work is to be completed within one year after occu- pancy is granted. A bond shall be posted to guarantee 'the completion of the work: 12. That there be no permanent underground structural encroachments into the public right -of -way without the approval of an encroachment permit and that any temporary encroachments be subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. 13. That during the construction period, a minimum 12- foot -wide surface pedestrian way be maintained along the bay on weekends and holidays between April 1 and June 15 and September 15 and October 15; and that the 12 -foot pedestrian way be maintained at all times between June 15 and September 15. 14. All activities that require full or partial street closures, parking prohibition, heavy truck traffic, large or heavy loads or similar activities shall be approved by the Police Department and City Traffic Engineer. 15. The owner shall grant public access rights to the City and enter into an agreement with the City to keep the area from the bulkhead to the proposed structure free from hindrances to public access and to repair and keep the area in good and safe condi- tion at their sole cost and expense. -i5- e x r c v • m Sn��a o _ • r1 L_J June 7, 1984 M NUrES 16. The applicant shall enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of all damage to the public street system and /or utilities that might be caused by the construction process. 17. That a minimum 11 -foot clear area be maintained' within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the existing building located in Edgewater Place; and further that a minimum 15 -foot clear area be maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the proposed raised patio area. The exact location and design of said area shall be sub- ject to the approval of the Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department.. (Note: Planning Commission clarified that landscaping or benches will be permitted to project into the 15' sidewalk area, so long as the sidewalk has.a clear. width of at least 11'.) 18. That a title report be obtained to ascertain the status of title to Edgewater'Place. If it is determ- ined that the landowner has the underlying fee inter- est, then an easement for pedestrian and public utilities purposes shall be granted to the City over and under Edgewater Place estimated to be 35.0 feet wide and across the frontage of Parcel 19.' If Edge- water Place is determined to he under public domain, then the applicant /landowner shall quitclaim to the City any right he might have to Edgewater Place or other portions of the property shown to be public. 19. That an encroachment permit be obtained from the Publ Works Department, with City Council approval, for the existing'structure and proposed patio located within the Edgewater Place right -of -way. 20. That all applicable conditions of Use Permit No. 3076 shall be fulfilled. -16- June 7, 1984 MINUTES � x e �5 v3eo � 7tpm NeNWt Beadi 7 J 7 m d P ROLL CALL J I I I I I IINM Motion x Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3076, sub- ject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A ", as well as the supplemental reports, dated.May 10, 1984 and June 7, 1984, with the clarification that Condi- tion No. 45 would remain intact as recommended by staff with the understanding that landscaping will be permitted . to project into the 15' sidewalk area, so long as the side- walk is not thereby limited to anything less than 11'; and with revisions as follows: 1) That Condition No. 33 be expanded to provide that outlining of the structure shall be permitted, provided there is no light intrusion into the residential area; 2) That Condition No. 35 be altered to provide that tables may be situated on the pro- posed patio area, and.further that food and beverages may be served within the subject area until 10:00 p.m. on all nights, provided that either additional parking is pro, vided, or that a corresponding amount of seating is eliminated from the interior of the restaurant; and 3) • that an additional Condition be added to provide that noise emanating from the structure shall not exceed.65 db CNEL at the property lines. Commissioner Goff questioned whether the maker of the mo- tion would consider expanding Condition No. 30 to read: "That the off -site parking areas shall be repaved with asphalt, concrete or other street surfacing material of a permanent nature and shall be marked with 4 -inch white lines in accordance with the approved parking design, and Amended the circulation in and out of these areas shall be further Motion x reviewed by the Traffic Engineer." Commissioner Balalis accepted this amendment to his motion. Planning Commission discussed the motion on the floor and agreed to vote separately on the proposed alterations to Conditions Nos. 33 and 35. Commissioner Balalis expressed his belief that the Traffic Affairs Committee should investigate the possibility of redesiqnating the alley behind Edgewater Place for 'one- way' traffic towards Adams Street. Motion x Motion was made to expand Condition No. 33 to provide that outlining of the structure shall be permitted, provided there is no light intrusion into the residential area. -17- Ayes Nays Abstain Motion Ayes Nays Abstain Motion • � x r a °3 snF pm 0 7, tole Ix Ix June 7, 1984 M Commissioner Person stated that the Balboa Pavilion was recently designated an official historical landmark and commented that the Pavilion serves.as the focus of the Balboa community. Inasmuch as the Balboa Pavilion is outlined in lights, Commissioner Person opined that the outlining of other buildings.in the area would detract from the Pavilion. MINUTES Commissioner Balalis' motion, pertaining to Condition No. 33, was then voted on and FAILED. Motion was made that Condition No, 33 be revised to read as follows, "Nighttime lighting shall be limited to that which is customary for normal business operations and consistent with the.proposed project design and archi- tectural style. Said lighting shall be approved by the Planning Directbr.v' . Planning Director Hewicker pointed out that the reason the subject application is before the Planning Commission is because it requires a use permit. He pointed out that there are numerous buildings in Central Balboa that could be outlined with lights, without Planning Commission approval, if the owner desired to do so,' Mr: Hewicker commented that he recognizes the attempt by the Planning Commission to.provide some focus for the Pavilion, but stated that this effort could be.negated.by anybody desirous of putting lights on their building, Commissioner Person's motion was then voted on"and CARRIED. Motion was made that Condition No, 3 5 be altered to pro- vide that tables may be situated on the proposed patio area, and further that food and beverages may be served within the subject area until 10:00 p.m. on all nights, provided that either additional parking is provided, or that a corresponding-amount of Seating is eliminated from the interior of the restaurant. -1s- INDEX ;x f v o m C 3 n o Motion Ayes x Nays Abstain N6on Ayes x Abstain Motion Ayes x Abstain Ayes Abstain • Ix Ix Ix June 7, 19134 M NUTES Substitute motion was made that Condition No. 35 be revised x x to read, "That the proposed patio area, located on Edge - x water Place shall be permitted provided that no food or x beverages shall be served within the patio, unless the use permit is amended accordingly;" which MOTION CARRIED. City Engineer Webb.questioned whether the intent of the. motion relating to Condition No. 35 was that the patio area would be used only for restaurant use or general pub - lic use. Commissioner Person stated for the record that he opposed the motion concerning Condition No..35 inasmuch as he felt it was unclear re.the placement of tables and chairs. A general discussion ensued, during which time it was noted that the Bayview Landing and Fun Zone projects are being required to provide tables and chairs for public use without being able to provide food and beverage ser- vice. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that .this project should be consistent with the Bayview Landing and Fun Zone projects. x Motion was made that the Planning Commission reconsider x :. x x the vote relating t6 Condition No. 35, which MOTION CARRIED. x Motion was made that Condition No. 35 be revised to read x .as follows "That the x x x ' Proposed patio area, located on Edgewater Place shall be permitted provided that no food x or beverages shall be served within the ag patio unless the use permit is amended accordingly. Seating shall be limited to benches and /or tables." MOTION CARRIED. x x x Commissioner Balalis' main motion for conditional approval x of Use Permit No. 3076,.as revised by subsequent Planning Commission action relating to Conditions Nos. 33 and 35, was then voted on and CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3076 was thereby approved, subject to the following Findings and Conditions: Findings: 1. That an initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Envi- ronmental Quality Act, and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 2. That based on the information contained in the Negativi Declaration, the project incorporates sufficient miti- gation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. -19- 0 7C � � 5 � a m cc °n aax�o_ • • June 7, 1984 3. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan; the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program as conditionally certified by the Coastal Commission and accepted by the City Council; and is compatible with surrounding land uses. MINUTES 4. The reduced width of parking aisles and the tandem and compact car spaces.will not, under the circum- stances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safetyi 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 modifications are consistent with the legis- lative intent of Title 20 of this Code. 5. The approval of.Use Permit No. 3076 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. 6. That the proposed use is in keeping with the desired character of the specific plan area as identified in the General Plan. 7, That the off -site parking areas are located so as to be useful in connection with the proposed use on the building site. B. That the parking on the of£,site locations will not create 'undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. 9. That the off -site parking areas and the building site are in the same ownership or will be under long -term lease, by the owner of the building site. 10. That the waiver of a portion of the required parking spaces 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 without required parking. -20- e x r a c 4 0 3 � m a` • June 7, 1984 MINUTES 11, That 46 offstreet parking spaces and four boat slips on a short -term Basis) and 54 offstreet parking spaces and four boat.slips (on a long -term basis) will be provided for the proposed - restaurant use where only five parking spaces are now provided for the existing uses on -site, Conditions: 1. That all development shall be in substantial conform- ance with the approved plot plan, flooir.plans, ele- vations.and sections except as noted below. 2. That all applicable conditions of Resubdivision No, 765 shall be fulfilled: ' 3. During construction, noise producing equipment shall be enclosed by barriers or baffled in a manner estab- lished by a qualified acoustic engineer to the satis, faction-of the Planning and Building Departments. 4. The location or relocation of public utilities shall be coordinated with and.approved by local utility companies and public agencies as appropriate, 5, During any closure of.adjoining streets which may be required during the proposed construction phases, alternative pedestrian circulation shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach Plan- ning and Public Works Departments. 6. All activities that require full or partial street closures, parking prohibition, heavy truck traffic, large or heavy loads or similar activities shall be approved by the Police Department and City Traffic Engineer. . 7. That construction workers shall use the existing off site parking areas, 8. The applicant /owner shall grant public access rights to the City and enter into an agreement with the City to keep the area from the bulkhead to the proposed, structure free from hindrances to public access and to repair and keep the area in a good and safe condition at their sole cost and expense. -21- F r m c s p m • June 7, 1984 MINUTES 9. The landscape plan for the restaurant site and the off -site parking area shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, the Public Works Department and approval of the Planning Department. 10. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire - retardant vegetation. 11. Street trees shall be provided along the public streets as required by the Public Works Department and the Parks, Beaches.and- Recreation Department. 12, Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 13. All trash areas, mechanical.equipment, vents, and other service equipment shall be shielded or screened by architectural design. 14. Maintenance agreements shall be required for all non - standard landscape improvements and materials and will be subject to approval by the Parks, Beaches & Recreation, Planning, and Public Works Departments. 15. Street signs, tables, benches, planters, and other similar features.onsite or adjacent to the project site shall be designed with a common theme and shall be approved by the Public.Works, Parks, Beaches & Recreation, and Planning Departments. 16. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated to be no greater than 55 dba at the property lines. 17. That all access to the buildings be approved by the Fire Department. - 18. That all on -site fire protection (hydrants and Fire Department connections) shall be approved by the Fire and Public Works Departments. 19. Fire vehicle access shall be approved by the Fire Department for all public rights- of-way and ease- ments improved by the applicants. -22- INDEX COMMISSIONERS June 7, lgsa MINUTES Xx r n j p g m • �J M i' j 20. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. 21. The Fire Department access to the site shall be approved by the Fire Department. 22. That a minimum of one parking space /40 sq. ft. of "net public area" shall be provided for the restaurant use 'except that a parking credit of 32 parking spaces for the previous non - conforming uses on the subject property shall be-permitted. 23. That the second floor private dining area and adjoin- ing deck shall not be used for dining or drinking purposes until additional off- street parking is pro - vided in accordance with Condition No. 22.' 24. Valets and /or attendants shall be provided at all times during the restaurant operation and that the valet pick -up and delivery station shall not be located in any public right -of -way. 25. The valet parking service shall not preclude the use of a portion of the independently accessible spaces by patrons wishing to park their own car. The self - park spaces shall be clearly designated. . 26. That a maximum credit of four parking spaces shall be given for the proposed four guest dock facilities, Should the guest docks be used for any use other than guest docks for the restaurant, the owner shall be required to provide four parking spaces in a location meeting the approval of the Planning Commission, or reduce the net public area of the restaurant accord- ingly. 27. The final design of off -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation.shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works and Planning Departments prior to issu- ance of a grading permit. -23- n x r c ra n x 0 m j O _ • • June 7, 1984 •, MINUTES 28. That an off -site parking agreement shall be approved by the City Council guaranteeing that a minimum of 60 parking spaces shall be provided on Lots Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, Block 3, Balboa Bayside Tract for the duration of the restaurant use or until such time as other parking arrangements are approved by the Planning Commission. 29. That Use Permit No, 3076 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as it pertains to off - street parking, prior to the issuance of building permits for the Bayview Landing project or at such time as the Planning Commission considers an amendment to Use Permit No. 3018. 30, That the off =site parking areas shall he repaved with asphalt, concrete or other street surfacing material of a permanent nature and shall be marked with four- inch white lines in accordance with the approved parking design, and the circulation in and out of these areas shall be further reviewed by the Traffic Engineer. 31. That the applicant shall provide raised landscaped planter boxes within those portions of the off -site parking areas adjacent to`Edgewater Place, so as to prevent vehicles from entering the public walkway, 32. That all restaurant employees shall park their vehicles in the off-site parking area. 33. Nighttime lighting shall be limited to that which is customary for normal business operations and consis- tent with the proposed project design and archi- tectural style, Said lighting plans shall be approved by the Planning Director, 34. Fugitive dust emissions during demolition and con - struction shall be minimized by watering the site for dust control, containing excavated soil on -site until it is hauled away, and periodically washing adjacent streets to remove accumulated materials. -24- y ex i r c o _ • • June 7, 1984 Z� a G �M 35. That the proposed patio area, located on Edgewater Place shall be permitted provided that no food or beverages shall be served within the patio, unless the use permit is amended.accordingly. Seating shall be limited to benches and /or tables. MINUTES 36. That during the construction period, a minimum 12- foot wide surface pedestrian way be maintained along the bay on weekends and holidays between April 1 and June 15 and September 15 and October 15; and that the 12 -foot pedestrian way be maintained at all times between'June 15 and September 15. 37. Handicapped parking shall be provided in a manner and quantity approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The handicapped parking shall be available for self - parking. 38. The applicant shall enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of all damage to the public street system and /or utilities that might be caused by the construction process. 39. Prior to the issuance of any building, grading and /or demolition permits for the project, the applicant shall agree to make such minor changes to the project as may be caused by revisions to the Central Balboa area overall circulation system. The agreement shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney's Office and Planning Department. 40. The applicant shall deposit with the City $1,918.36 for a feasibility study of a tram shuttle. The applicant shall also agree to participate in the implementation of a tram shuttle system, should it occur, on a pro rata basis, based on square footage equal to other merchants in the area. 41. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to con- trol odors and smoke. ,25- INDEX D 7C � r c a i a R O m j O _ June 7, 1984 `` t+ MINUTES Z-91KI 42. That a washout area for the restaurant trash con- tainers be provided in such a way as to insure direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or the storm drains. 43. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facilities where grease may be introduced into the drainagesystems in accord- ance with the provisions of the Uniform-Plumbing Code. 44. A cleanup program (weekly during the winter and daily during the summer) around the docks and public walks shall be conducted. During construction, devices shall be installed to prevent waste from entering Newport Bay in a manner approved by the Building Department. 45. That a minimum 11 -foot clear area be maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing • restaurant building and the existing building located in Edgewater Place; and further, that a minimum 15- foot clear area be maintained within that portion of the easement area between the existing restaurant building and the proposed raised patio area: The exact location and design of said area shall be sub - ject to the approval of the Planning Department, Public works Department, and Parks, Beaches and Recre- ation Department. I I I I I I (Note: Planning Commission clarified that landscaping or benches will be permitted to project into the 15' sidewalk area, so long as the'sidewalk has a clear width of at least 11'.) 46. Special Purpose signing for the project shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the Plan- ning Department. 47. The applicant shall cooperate with the City traffic Engineer and Public Works Department to determine the potential necessity for left -turn facilities on East Balboa Boulevard at Adams Street or at Palm Street. • I ( 48. Final design of the project shall provide for adequate security lighting in public areas and the off -site parking areas. -26- n x r. v m m c° � "L o _ • June 7, 1984 O 49. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water - saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities. MINUTES 50. The project lighting system shall be designed and maintained in such a manner so as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent area. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed electrical engineer, with a letter from the engineer stating that, in his opin- ion, this requirement has been met. 51. That live entertainment in the restaurant shall be limited to a trio, and shall be permitted only within the building with windows and doors closed during performances. 52. 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. 53. Handicap and compact parking spaces shall be desig- nated by a method approved by the City Traffic Engine and the Planning Department. The quantity and design of such spaces shall comply with City Codes. 54. That the height of the new roof structure shall be designed so as to comply with the requirements of the 26/35 Height Limitation District. 55. Prior to the issuance.of any Building or Grading Permit, the applicant shall pay Fair -Share for circu- lation system improvements and noise.walls. 56. That no dance floor shall be permitted on the premises, unless an amended use permit is approved by the City. 57. That 32 offstreet parking spaces are waived in -con- junction with the approval of this application. 58. That noise emanating from the structure shall not exceed 65 db CNEL at the property lines. -27- • Motion Ayes �nt X June 7, 1984 M e x x x Commissioner Winburn left the meeting at 9:25 p.m. x x x Planning Commission recessed at 9:25 p.m, and reconvened at 9:35 p.m. x x x Use Permit No. 3071 (Amended) (Public Hearing) MINUTES Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the expansion of the operational characteristics of the existing Newport Beach Tennis Club. The proposal consists of the deletion of Condition of Approval No. 10 which relates to the use of the Corona del Mar High School parking lots for additional parking during tennis tourna- ments; and the deletion of Condition of Approval No. 27 that now provides.that no on -street parking along East - bluff Drive shall be permitted, except for the existing parking spaces located directly in front of the tennis club property. LOCATION: Lot 66, Tract No. 6905, located at 2601 Eastbluff Drive, on the westerly side of Eastbluff Drive, between Vista Del Oro and Vista Del.Sol, in the Bluffs. ZONES: R -4 -B2, PRD and C -N-H APPLICANT: Newport Beach Tennis Club, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company Planning Commission continued this agenda item to its meeting of July 5, 1984. x x x -28- INDEX Item #2 U.P. #307 ' Continued to 7/5/84 n x m C m c� u� C >e Q 0 m o 3 a m w X June 7, 1984 M e x x x Commissioner Winburn left the meeting at 9:25 p.m. x x x Planning Commission recessed at 9:25 p.m, and reconvened at 9:35 p.m. x x x Use Permit No. 3071 (Amended) (Public Hearing) MINUTES Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the expansion of the operational characteristics of the existing Newport Beach Tennis Club. The proposal consists of the deletion of Condition of Approval No. 10 which relates to the use of the Corona del Mar High School parking lots for additional parking during tennis tourna- ments; and the deletion of Condition of Approval No. 27 that now provides.that no on -street parking along East - bluff Drive shall be permitted, except for the existing parking spaces located directly in front of the tennis club property. LOCATION: Lot 66, Tract No. 6905, located at 2601 Eastbluff Drive, on the westerly side of Eastbluff Drive, between Vista Del Oro and Vista Del.Sol, in the Bluffs. ZONES: R -4 -B2, PRD and C -N-H APPLICANT: Newport Beach Tennis Club, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company Planning Commission continued this agenda item to its meeting of July 5, 1984. x x x -28- INDEX Item #2 U.P. #307 ' Continued to 7/5/84 Motion Ayes Absent r, u �x � r 5 v m m g o , Jx June 7, 1984 Foe? • A. Resubdivision No. 780 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land for residential condominium purposes on property located in the R -2 District. EVRO B. Use Permit No. 3099 (Public Hearing) MINUTES Request to permit the construction of a 2 -unit residential condominium development and related garage spaces on property located in the R -2 District. LOCATION: Lot 3, Block 56, Ocean Front Tract, located at 5604 West Ocean Front, on the northerly side of West Ocean. Front, between 56th Street and 57th Street, in West Newport. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT:. Steve McCluer, Newport Beach OWNER: Monte V. Newson, Cambria ENGINEER: Hartge Engineering Corporation, Huntington Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this agenda item and Todd Schuller appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Applicant 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 Resubdivision No. 780, 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 satisifed with the plan of subdivision. -29- INDEX Item #3 Resub. #780 AND U.P. #305 Both Approved Condi- tionally • Motion Ayes Absent �x � r vS m cc °a °sn Rim g o _ ix Ix June 7, 1984 MINUTES 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 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 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 parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each 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. Motion was made for approval of use Permit No. 3099, sub- ject to the - Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A", 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 standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applica- ble 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 area requirements in effect at the time of approval. 4. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan. S. That adequate on -site parking spaces are available for the proposed residential condominium development. -30- Qx r S'axQm 0 June 7, 1984 M MINUTES 6. That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips.sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair -share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumula- tive affect of additional traffic generated by the resi- dential.development. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 3099 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: . 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted. 2. That one full -sized tandem garage space..and one carport space shall be provided for one unit,- and one full- sized tandem.garage space and one covered compact space shall be provided for the other unit. 3. That all plans shall be revised so as to provide the minimum amount of open space required by Code. 4. The proposed development shall not exceed two times the buildable area of the site. S. That all Conditions of Resubdivision No. 780 shall be fulfilled. 6. Prior to the issuance of Building and Grading Permits, the applicant shall pay Fair -Share for circulation system improvements and noise walls as established by Ordinance to be adopted by the City. -31- e x r 0 a = m o _ • Motion Ayes x Absent x • June 7, 1984 M NUiES 11 ax A. Resubdivision No..781 (Public Hearing) Item #4 Request to resubdivide an existing lot and a portion of a IResub. second lot into a single parcel of land for residential condominium purposes on property located in the R -2 Dis- AND trict. U.P. #3 AND B. Use Permit No. 3100 (Public Hearing) Request to permit construction of a two -unit residential condominium development and related garage spaces on property located in the R -2 District. LOCATION: Lot 16 and a portion of Lot 14, Block 237, Corona del Mar Tract, located at 314 Jasmine Avenue, on the easterly side of Jasmine Avenue between Seaview Avenue and Bayside Drive, in Corona del Mar.. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Conrad Cornfeldt, Los Angeles OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Duca- McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar The public hearing was opened in connection with this agenda item and Chris Hopper, 308 Jasmine, appeared before the Planning Commission.on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the Findings and Conditions contained 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 Resubdivision No. 781, 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. -32- • Motion Ayes Absent E �x r �vo to o_ Ix June 7, 1984 r � L17 2. That the proposed resubdivision.presents no problems from a planning standpoint. Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be recorded. MIMJTES 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 parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion.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. 5. That the existing tree damaged curb, gutter and side- walk be reconstructed and the trees' roots pruned or replaced as recommended by the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department along the Jasmine Avenue fron- tage. All.work shall be completed under an encroach- ment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley. Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 3100, sub- ject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A ", 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 complies with.all applicable standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applica- ble to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of approval, including the pro- posed roof design that meets the intent of the City's height regulations. -33- rD a x 7 � m p d C 7C O s a° 5.0 - S o w • • June 7, 1984 M NUTES 3. The project lox size conforms to the Zoning Code area requirements.in effect at the time of approval. 4. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan. 5. That adequate on-site parking spaces are available for the proposed residential condominium development. 6. That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair -share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by the residential development. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 3100 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: I. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor.plans and elevations. 2. That one garage space and one partially covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling unit. 3. That all Conditions of Resubdivision No. 781 shall be fulfilled. 4. Prior to the issuance of Building and Grading Permits, the applicant shall pay Fair -Share for circulation system improvements and noise walls as established by Ordinance to be adopted by the City. -34- �X r a ;Ev� m o _ • • June 7, 1984 Resubdivision No. 782 (Public Hearing) MINUTES Request to.resubdivide two existing lots into three lots for single - family residential purposes on property located in the R -1 District and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION: Lots 28 and 29, Block E, Tract No. 1219, located at 1011 and 1021 Kings Road, on the southerly side of Kings Road between St. Andrews Road and Signal Road, in Cliff Haven. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANT: Charles Winfield, Newport Beach OWNERS: Charles-Winfield and Mary Lee Walton, Newport Beach ENGINEER/ ARCHITECT: Brion Jeannette, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Brion Jeannette appeared before the Planning Commission and concurred with the Findings and Conditions recommended in the staff report. Rob Craig, 418 Snug Harbor Road, appeared before the Plan- ning Commission and expressed his opposition to the proposed lot split, even though.it is being presented in a different form than previous applications for the property. Mr. Craig then discussed his concern relative to the possibili- ty of a piecemeal change to the character of Cliff Haven. Commissioner Person asked Mr. Craig whether he understands that the lot split, as presently proposed, conforms to the development standards for the City.. Mr. Craig responded that he does understand this fact and voiced concern that other people in the area could also combine two 75' wide lots into three lots with 50' frontages. Commissioner Person pointed out that the development stan- dards provide that the lots must average 50' in width and be at least 5,000 sq. ft. in area, and 80' in depth. Mr. Craig responded that there are other lots in the area that could meet this requirement. -35- Item #5 Resub. #7f 1 Approved Condi- tionally s� f � v r m 'v 2S • r1 U June 7, 1984 MINUTES Joe Walton, 1011 Kings Road, appeared before the Planning Commission and advised that he resides immediately east of the Applicant's property and stated that he is the indi- vidual from whom the additional 10' of land would be pur- chased. Mr. Walton expressed his belief that each resub- division request should be decided on an individual basis and opined that the area would be improved by the proposal in question. Barbara Whitford, President of the Cliff Haven Association,' appeared before the Planning.Commission and voiced concern with the setting of a precedent relating to lot splits. She stated that six of the seven board members are opposed to lot splits, and further stated that the majority of the Association members are opposed to lot splits. Ms. Whitford stated that Mr. Winfield received a clear mandate from the Cliff Haven Association and urged that the Plan- ning Commission.honor- that mandate. Commissioner Person questioned whether the .Association has met since the new application was announced. Ms. Whitford commented -that although the entire Association has not met, the Board had a meeting and is'concerned with the setting of.a.precedent of combining properties to make a lot split legally possible. Commissioner Person pointed out that the lot from which the 10' of property would be purchased would not be made sub - standard as a result of this action. Ms. Whitford com- mented that the Board is.aware of this fact. Mel Kiddie, 1100 Cliff Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission and stated that he is a member of the Cliff Haven Board of Directors. Mr. Kiddie stated that he believes the Applicant's project would be beneficial for Kings Road, but pointed out that Kings Road is part of Cliff Haven and the majority of the Cliff Haven residents are opposed to lot splits. He added that the residents purchased their homes in Cliff Haven because the lots are large. In addition, Mr. Kiddie pointed out that 10% of the R -1 lots in the area are large enough to be resubdividi into three .lots, if combined with an adjoining piece of property. -36- a 7c F C, s m c °Q a s 7c D m a • • June 7, 1994 MINUTES Commissioner Person advised that the proposal complies with the City's development standards and opined that the proposal would rectify an unsightly property situation. Mr. Kiddie voiced concern that the property was allowed to become run -down and suggested that perhaps the deterio tion was allowed so as to help the Applicant obtain a lot split for renovation purposes. In answer to a question posed by Mr. Kiddie, Mr. Jeannette commented on the four -foot height of the development as it relates to pedestrian view access. Bruce Trotter, Kings Road resident, appeared before the Planning Commission and commented that he is opposed to the project due to the resultant increase in density. George West, 412 snug Harbor Road, appeared before the Planning Commission and relayed his concern with any increase in the density of Cliff Haven. Brion Jeannette reappeared.before the Planning Commission and stated that.the subject property is not the only property with appearance problems on Kings Road and sug- gested that it is .unfair to single out the condition of the subject property as a reason for desiring the lot split. Mr. Jeannette stated that Kings Road is a special area due to the size of the lots. With.respect to the possibility of the subject proposal being precedent setting, Mr. Jean- nette pointed out that the last resubdivision in the area took place in 1973. Mr. Jeannette advised that he polled the Kings Road residents and learned that 75%t are in favor of the project. .Mr. Jeannette stated that the lot split is legal and meets, or exceeds, the City's minimum develop - ment standards. In.addition,.Mr. Jeannette commented that the Applicant is proposing a self- imposed height limit of 4', that will provide public view access to the bay. Commissioner Balalis explained that he opposed the previous application.for the subject project (Resubdivision No. 771) inasmuch as he felt it could be precedent setting. Even though the present application is in compliance with City standards, Commissioner Balalis stated that he is concerned with setting a precedent relative to the acquisition of additional square footage so as to comply with applicable City standards for a resubdivision. -37- �C . r g,9 ` � e° u n x u o _ June 7, 1984 M NUrES -38- Mr. Jeannette pointed out that a variance will not be required in this case and added that the proposal now exceeds City standards. He reiterated that a self - imposed height limit is being proposed that will protect public and.private views, and will create a public view to the bay that did not exist before. In response to additional comments by Commissioner Balalis relative to his concern with the setting of a precedent, Mr. Jeannette.stated that-there aren't many sites in the Cliff Haven area that have the potential for a similar lot split due to their.sizes. . Rob Craig, 418 Snug Harbor, reappeared before the Planning Commission and disagreed with Mr. Jeannette's comment that few sites in Cliff Haven have the potential for a similar lot split. George West, 412 Snug Harbor, reappeared before the Plannin • Commission and.questioned the validity of Mr. Jeannette's claim that 758 of the residents of Kings Road are in favor of the subject Resubdivision. Mr. West- opined that Mr. Jeannette's comment should be documented. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Goff relayed his belief -that =the Cliff Haven residents purchased their homes with the expectation that neighborhood character would be preserved and opined that the subject Resubdivision.would be precedent setting. Additionally, Commissioner Goff expressed his belief that the aesthetics of the property would not be improved by the proposed lot split. Motion x Motion was made for denial of "Resubdivision No. 782, sub- ject to the Findings contained in Exhibit "B" of the staff report. Commissioner Person commented that Kings Road is a unique portion of the Cliff Haven area and also commented that the application conforms with all City development stan- dards. Commissioner Person stated that he would be willing to support the application if the Planning Commission could • arrive at an appropriate additional finding to alleviate the concern of the Cliff Haven Association relative to the setting of a precedent. -38- 1yes Z ain lbsent lotion .mended otion yes ays bsent • 0 7c r ° f 9 o w 5;Ka 0 Ix Ix Ix June 7, 1984 MINUTES Commissioner Balalis discussed his concern relating to setting a precedent which would encourage individuals to acquire additional square footage so as to make a lot split possible. Therefore, Commissioner Balalis advised that he would abstain from voting on this item. Commissioner King voiced his concern with increasing the intensity of the Cliff Haven community. Commissioner King also commented that the Applicant has attempted to address the concerns previously expressed by the Planning Commission and has attempted to arrive at some compromise that would benefit the general public. Commissioner King voiced his opinion that all resubdivision requests should be decided individually, and added that although he would not support lot splits throughout the Cliff Haven community in toto, he would be willing to support the subject application. The motion on the floor was then voted on and FAILED. Motion was made to approve Resubdivision No. 782, subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A ". Discussion ensued relative to the Planning Commission's concern that the subject application not be precedent setting. It was noted that:the Project's proximity within the Cliff Haven area is unique, as is the nature of the subject application. Additionally, it was noted that each of the subject lots exceeds 10,000 sq. ft.:of land ar Commissioner King subsequently amended his motion to include an additional Finding as follows: That the approval of Resubdivision No. 782 will not be precedent setting due to the uniqueness of the application, and the fact that each of the subject lots exceeds 10,000 sq. ft. of land area. The motion on the floor was then voted on and CARRIED. Resubdivision No. 782 was thereby approved, subject to the following Findings and Conditions: -39- r June 7, 1984 MINUTES { r m m c m m c gas F l o o • O 2 0 ROLL CALL INDEX • 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. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. 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. 5. That the approval of Resubdivision'No. 782 will not be precedent setting due to the uniqueness of the application, and the fact that each of the subject lots exceeds 10,000 sq. ft. of land area. 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 Depart- 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. 5. That the existing dwelling unit that encroaches over the new property line between Parcels No. 2 and 3 shall be removed prior to recordation of the Parcel Map. ■m LV/V \lVUJJM1A�IClV �x � � m • c � o , 7C fl • June 7, 1984 • � 1 MINUTES 6. That the existing structure located on Parcel No. 1 shall be altered so as to comply with the 4 foot side yard setback requirement, measured.from the new proper line between Parcels Nos. 1 and 2 prior to recordation of the Parcel Map. 7. That any existing unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb and gutter if not needed for vehicular access and that all work within the public right -of -way be completed'under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 8. That no structural encroachments be allowed over the existing ten -foot wide sewer easement unless the developer relocates the existing sewer and provides an accompanying easement, and the old easement is abandoned. 9. That future residential development on Parcel No. 2 shall not exceed a maximum roof "height of 11' -0" above the top of curb measured on the southerly side of Kings Road in front of Parcel No. 2, except that a 2 -foot wide chimney shall be •permitted to exceed said height to the minimum extent required by the Uniform Building Code. The future residential devel- opment on Parcel,No. 3 shall not exceed a maximum roof height of 4' -0" above the top of curb, measured on the southerly side of Kings Road in front of Parcel No. 3, except that a 2 -foot wide chimney shall be permitted to exceed said height to the minimum extent required by the Uniform Building Code. The applicant shall provide verification during the course of con- struction that the proposed development fully complies with the provision above. Required verification shall be prepared and certified by a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer prior to final inspection of rough framing. 10. Development of the 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. -41r INDEX e x r a • c w it C 021 s n x O e ROLL CAU • June 7, 1984 MINUTES 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. 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 comprehen- sive 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. 15. That erosion control measures.shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading, or as approved by the Grading Engineer. . 16. That the applicant record .a covenant, the form and content of which shall be approved by the City Attorney and the..Planning Department, binding the applicant and his successors in interest in perpe- tuity to a height limit above top of curb along Kings Road as specified in Condition No. 9. -42- INDEX COMMLSSIONERS June 7, 1984 MINUTES p A i r V 06 ;3.=U5� of NeNWt Beach ROLL CALL 111 111 1 INDEX • Motion Ayes Abstain Absent • x, EL Use Permit No. 1965 (Amended) (Revocation) (Public Hearing) Request to consider the revocation of Use Permit No. U.P. #196` 1965 (Amended) that permitted the change of operational characteristics of the existing A.T. Leo's-Restaurant with Continued on -sale alcoholic beverages located in the C -1 District to 7/19/8 with existing related parking in the R -1 District so as to include live entertainment and dancing in conjunction with the restaurant use. This public hearing is to determine whether said use permit should be revoked for failure to comply with certain required conditions of approval. LOCATION :. Lots 58 -67, Tract No -. 673, located at 3901 East Coast Highway, on the southeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Hazel Drive in Corona del Mar. ZONES: C -1 and R -1 APPLICANT: A.T.Leo's Fine Foods and Spirits, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same'as applicant INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach Planning Commission continued this agenda item to its meeting of July 19, 1984. -43- n x r c °� sn�fls 0 • • June 7, 1984 71 A. • t �•1 MINUTES Request to approve an amendment to the Newport Place Traf- fic Phasing Plan so as to transfer development space from "General Commercial Site 4" to "Professional and Business Offices Site 511. AND B. Amendment No. 608•(Pu!l Hearing) Request to amend the Newport Place Planned Community Development Standards so as to transfer the remaining 4,130 sq. ft. of allowable building area from "General Commercial Site 4" to "Professional and Business Offices Site 5 ". The proposal also includes the acceptance of an environmental document. Item #7 Newport Place Traffic Phasing Plan Amendment No. 8 Approved Condi- tionally =0 Amendment ' No. 608 LOCATION: Parcel No. l of Parcel Map 57 -12 (Resub- proved division No. 386) and Parcel No 1 of Parcel Map 40 -31 (Resubdivision No. 319) located at the northwesterly corner of MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Place Drive in "Professional and Business Offices Site 5" of the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Bill Langston, Newport Beach OWNER. - McLachlan Investment Company, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Bill Langston, Applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission and requested clarification of Condition No. 1 and Condition No. 6 of the staff report, which pertain to the total development permitted on the subject building site, and the Fair -Share contribution for circulation system improvements and noise walls, respectively. r44- Motion Ayes Absent X n x r S 0 v m O - June 7, 1984 W MINUTES There being mothers desiring to appear and he heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made that the Planning Commission accept the Environmental Document and approve the Traffic Phasing Plan, subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED. Environmental Document: Findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declamation have been prepared in compliance with the California Envi- ronmental Quality Act and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 2. That based upon the information contained in the environmental document, the proposed project will not have a significant environmental impact. The project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures so that any presently anticipated negative environmental effects of.the project would be eliminated. Traffic Phasing Plan: Findings: 1. That environmental documentation on this proposed pro- ject has been prepared in compliance with the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K -3 and that its contents have been considered in decisions on this project. 2. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Develop- ment Plan for Newport Place. -45- �x r a $9e m • a X o 0 � a ° m S o ROLL CALL • L June 7, 1984 MINUTES 3. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting informa- tion submitted therewith, there is a reasonable cor- relation between projected traffic at time of comple- tion and the capacity of affected intersections. 4. That the establishment, maintenance of operation of the use of the property or building will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and gen welfare of persons residing or working in the-neigh- borhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neigh - borhood or the general,welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That the total development permitted on the subject building site shall not exceed 30,365 sq. ft. of net floor area (and 185,764 sq. ft. of net floor area for the entire area of "Professional and Business Offices Site 5 ") as defined in Section 20.87.184 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. That parking be provided at a ratio of at least one parking space for each 225 sq. ft. of net floor area. 3. That a maximum of 25 percent of the parking spaces be compact size spaces. 4. All mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from public streets, or adjoining properties. S. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the John Wayne Airport shall be included in all leases or sub- leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions which may be recorded against the site. era � x � r 9 m m 0 • r 1 f� June 7, 1984 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, herein, acknowledge that: a) The John Wayne Airport may not be able to pro- vide adequate air service for business estab- lishments which rely on such service; b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the John Wayne Airport; c) The City of Newport Beach will continue to oppose additional.commercial area service expansions at the John Wayne Airport; d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the John Wayne Airport. MINUTES 6. The project shall contribute to Fair -Share for circu- lation system.improvements and noise walls, to be established by ordinance adopted by the City Council. 7. Development of the site shall be subject.to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 8. The Fire Department shall review design plans to ensure adequate access and emergency exits. 9. The final design and composition of on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation Sys- tems shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 10. Handicap and compact parking spaces shall be desig- nated by a method.approved by the City Traffic Engi- neer and the Planning Department. The quantity and design of such spaces shall comply with all City Codes. 11. Parking arrangements during the construction period shall be approved by the City Planning Department and the Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of any grading and/or building permits. -47- • n x £ r O _ June 7, 1984 M 12. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. MINUTES 13. That each building be served with individual water services and sewer:laterals unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 14. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory com- pletion of the public improvements if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 15. That the intersection of the streets and drives be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 35 miles.per hour.. Slopes, landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight distance line shall.not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be appropriately modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval.of the Traffic Engineer. 16. That landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Parks, Reaches and Recreation Depart- ment and Public Works Department. 17. That the drive approaches be constructed or recon- structed to conform with City Std. DWG 166 -L and any unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Dove Street and Newport Place Drive frontages, and that all the work be com- pleted under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 18. That an access ramp be constructed per City Std. 181 -L at the intersection of Newport Place Drive and Dove Street under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 19. That prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and the Planning Department that adequate sewer facili- ties will be available for the project. Such demon- stration shall include verification from the Orange County Sanitation District and the City's Utilities Department. CM INDEX Motion Ayes Absent L 0 C x r6 v • a 030 03 7c a° c o 9 6 p m x June 7, 1984 M • MINUTES 20. That all on -site drainage be put directly into the public storm drain system.unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 21. That.the maximum slope of ramps.shall be fifteen percent and that ramps with direct access to parking stalls shall not exceed five percent slope. Motion was made for.approval of Amendment No. 608, subject to the Findings contained in Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the request to transfer 4,130 sq. ft. from "General Commercial Site 4" to the total permitted building area in "Professional and Business Offices Site.S" is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan. 2. That based upon the information contained in the Traffic study, the proposed transfer of building area will not result in an adverse impact to the existing circulation system in the vicinity of the subject property. 3. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. -49- rvuvvo�nn�w June 7, 1984 e x r c v m m G of New=t Beach Ity Final Map of Tract No. 10814 (Discussion) MINUTES Request to approve the Final Map of Tract No. 10814 subdividing 16.009 acres of land into 21 numbered lots for single family residential purposes, 1 numbered lot for private recreational purposes, 3 lettered lots for private open space purposes, 1 lettered lot for private street purposes, 1 lettered lot for private street and private open space purposes combined and 1 lettered lot for private driveway purposes. LOCATION: A portion of Blocks 55, 56, and 93 of Irvine's Subdivision, located on the northerly side of San Joaquin Hills Road between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, in Area 10 of the Big Canyon_Planned Community. ZONE: -P-C • APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as.applicant Current Planning Administrator Laycock stated that the Applicant has requested that the following street name changes be designated on the Final Map: Gleneagles Drive be changed to Canyon Fairway Drive; and Muirfield Drive be changed to Canyon'Court. Mr. Laycock expressed that the Fire Department has reviewed the new street names and has no objections. Motion x Motion was made for approval of Final Map of Tract 10814, Ayes x x x x x x with the incorporation of the revised street names, sub - Absent x ject to the Finding and Condition contained in Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED. 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. '50- Item #8 Final Map of Tract No. 10814 Approved Condi- tionally C0MM 1 June 7, 1984 UIX11 ITCC n x r e W e o � 7t p G Of NeM"t Beach ROLL CALL - INDEX Condition: 1. That all remaining conditions of the Tentative Map of Tract No. 10814 as approved by the City Council on December 12, 1983 be fulfilled. * * k Planning Commission Review No. 5 (Discussion) Item #9 Request to permit alterations and additions to an existing Planning single - family dwelling in the R -1 -B District that includes Commissior a solar chimney that exceeds the basic height limit in Review No. the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. 5 LOCATION: -Lot 8, Tract No. 1116 located at 239 Morning Approved • Canyon Road, on the westerly side of Morning Condi- Canyon Road, between Shorecliff Road and Drift- tionally wood Road in Shorecliffs. ZONE: - R -1 -B - APPLICANT: Bert.Tarayao, Corona del Max - OWNERS: Dick and Jan Duncan, Corona del Mar Bert Tarayao, Applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Tarayao referred to the first page of the staff report wherein it states that the majority of the flat - roofed structure will be 24 feet above grade. Mr. Tarayao commented that only 288 of the total roof area is in fact at 241, with the balance of roof having a height of 20' or lower. Mr. Tarayao then referred to Page 2 of the staff report wherein it states that "...since the constraints of the thereto- siphoning system were known when the solar water system was designed, staff feels that allowances in the building design should have been made to accommodate the placement of the storage tanks above the solar panels and the need to expel accumulated heat from the upper portion of the structure within the permitted • height limit." Mr. Tarayao commented that when the project r51- • �x r s 9 m C u °saAp m June 7, 1984 TI was designed in 1980, he met with Carol Kruse, staff planner, who is no longer employed by the City. Mr. Tarayao stated that he received a verbal approval at that time that.the project would be in compliance with City regulations. Mr. Tarayao explained that a period of time elapsed before the owners decided, this past year, to proceed with the project, Mr. Tarayao then referred to Page Two of the staff report wherein it states that ". staff does not believe that denial of this application would preclude the property owner from enjoying the bene- fits of the proposed passive solar features." Mr. Tarayao stated that if the application is denied, the'. design of the house would be changed from a passive house to an active house, inasmuch as the use of mechanical means would be necessitated for the purposes of ventila- tion and water circulation. Mr. Tarayao explained that the use of energy would be consequently increased and the original intent of the design defeated. Mr. Tarayao went on to explain that the chimney height is the only issue in question, He then explained that in order to make a thereto- siphoning system work, the tanks must be a minimum 2' above the collectors. MINUTES In answer to -a question posed by the Planning Commission as to whether the Applicant would need Planning.Comnission approval for the 29' chimney.if the roof of the structure were sloped, Current Planning Administrator Laycock com- mented that Planning Commission approval would still be necessary since the chimney would be flat on the top and would be measured from the top of the flat portion since it's not a chimney required by the Uniform Building Code. Current Planning Administrator Laycock further explained that in the 24/28 Foot.Height Limitation District, the Applicant would be able to reach a maximum height of 29' at the top of a pitched roof, with an average roof height of 24'. If the average roof height were over 24', Mr. Laycock explained that it would be necessary to obtain Planning Commission approval. Current Planning Administrator Laycock questioned why the chimney couldn't be situated on one of the lower roofs. Mr. Tarayao responded that the chimney needs to be situated at the proposed location since that location provides the best orientation for the collectors. -52- INDEX x r � m � m June 7, 1984 M �11 MINUTES •• E 1 1., 1, till!J_� Motion Ayes Absent 0 x x x Planning Director Hewicker expressed his opinion that it was incorrect for the Applicant to proceed with a design of a project based upon four- year -old staff information. Commissioner Goff noted that the project has varying heights of the roof elements with the highest one, exclusive of the height of the chimney, being 241. Motion was made for approval of Planning Commission Review No. 5, subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit "B ", which MOTION CARRIED. Findings 1. The proposed development will be aesthetically com- patible with the structure and the surrounding area. 2. The proposed solar equipment will not intrude on views or light and air, from adjoining residential property. Conditions- 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, roof plan, and elevations 2. That the proposed solar equipment shall comply with the City's Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes. : * x There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 10:45 p.m. James Person, Secretary Newport Beach City Planning Commission -53- Adjourn- ment