Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/08/1995*���9L�y�90 Pr Ex 14 Mo Ay Ab CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: June 8, 1995 MINUTES ROLL INDEX CALL esent * * * * Commissioner Ridgeway was excused. cused EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney William R Laycock, Current Planning Manager Patty Temple, Advance Planning Manager John Douglas, Principal Planner Don Webb, Public Works Director Dee Edwards, Secretary Remaining Portion of May 4 1995 Planning_ Commission Minutes Minutes and May 18 1995 Planning Commission Minutes of 5/4/9 (Portion Commissioner Adams requested that the last sentence of the first paragraph & on page 58 of the May 4, 1995, Planning Commission Minutes be 5/18/95 corrected to state the incompatibility of the 12 foot deep by 22 foot wide Approved by 15 foot high tune family mausolea. tion Motion was made and.voted on to approve the amended May es * 4 and May 18, 1995, Planning Commission Minutes. sent MOTION CARRIED. Public Comments: Public Comments Chairman Gifford commended William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager, for the 24 years that he worked in the Planning Department and COMMISSIONERS %RN\0110 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL INDEX CALL I was associated with the Planning Commission, and the 8 years that Commissioner Gary DiSano served on the Planning Commission. Posting of the Agenda: P Posting of the James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission A Agenda Agenda was posted on Friday, June 2, 1995, in front of City Hall. * *r Use Permit No. 3559 (Public Hearing) I Item No.. UP3559 Request to permit the establishment of a dry cleaning facility on property COMMISSIONERS MC Ay At 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8, 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX ,tion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3559, subject es * * * * to the findings and conditions in Exhibit 'W'. MOTION CARRIED. sent Findings: 1. That the proposed application is support service in nature and not an intensification of square footage of the existing structure, and as such, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed dry cleaning facility, with on -site cleaning equipment, does not pose any significant environmental impact. 3. That the approval of Use Pemvt No. 3559 will not under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan and elevation. 2. That any boilers shall be isolated in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 3. That the use of chemicals shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. 4. There shall be no outside storage of materials, supplies or other paraphernalia likely to be objectionable to the adjacent property owners. ' -3- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 F�99 ti� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8. 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL 5. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be screened from view and shall be sound attenuated to be no greater than existing sound levels at the property lines. 6. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from view of adjoining properties and the public streets 7. That the cleaning operation shall be installed and operated in conformance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 8. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the issuance of building permits for the dry cleaning facility. 9. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use pen-nit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. Use Permit No. 3560 (Public Hearing) Item No. Request to permit the continued operation of an existing car rental facility UP3560 on property located in the "Retail Service Commercial" area of the Approved Mariner's We Specific Plan Area. LOCATION: A portion of Lot F, Tract No. 919, located at 2906 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway, between Newport Boulevard and COMMISSIONERS 4 Mc Al At if CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES TnnnR 1QQ4 ROLL CALL INDEX Riverside Avenue, in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Enterprise Rent A Car, Huntington Beach OWNER: Robert Brandy, Irvine The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bob Willard, 2702 Vista Court, Orange, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Willard concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Willard requested that more than 9 rental vehicles be allowed on the premises when the business is closed inasmuch as 17 parking spaces are being created for the operation. Commissioner Pomeroy suggested that Condition No. 4, Exhibit "A', be ' amended to state that no more than 9 rental vehicles shall be stored on the automobile rental site during business hours There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. -tion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3560 subject es * * * * * to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", and to amend Condition No. sent * 4, Exhibit "A ", as previously modified. MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate parking will exist on -site to serve the automobile rental facility. ' -5- I 4 COMMISSIONERS 9L ��9a y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tune 8 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the establishment of the subject business will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3560 as submitted, will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That the development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan, except as noted below. ' 2. That employees shall park on -site at all times. 3. That 8 on -site parking spaces shall be maintained for customers and employees of the automobile rental facility at all times. 4. That no more than 9 rental vehicles shall be stored on the automobile rental site during business hours. 5. That no vehicles shall be displayed with open hoods, doors, trunks, or tailgates. 6. That no vehicles for rent shall be stored on West Coast Highway. 7. That no car washing or automobile repair shall be permitted on the site unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. However, misting of vehicles shall be permitted. 8. That no windshield signs shall be permitted, and that all signs shall meet the requirements of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tune R 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 9. That no banners, pennants, wind signs, moving signs, or flashing or animated electrical signs shall be displayed. 10. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the implementation of the proposed on -site vehicular storage. 11. That all mechanical equipment, trash areas and vehicle storage areas shall be screened from West Coast Highway and adjoining properties. 12. That no outdoor paging or sound system shall be utilized on -site. 13. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the on -site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self - parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each ' handicapped space. 14. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to finiher review by the City Traffic Engineer prior to implementation. 15. That all signs shall meet the requirements of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 16. That the entire site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 17. That all electrical wiring and fixtures shall be brought up to compliance with appropriate Building and Electrical Code requirements as required by the Fire Department and Building Department. 18. 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 ' -7 COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8. 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL 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 . 19. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. rxx Use Permit No 3328 (Amended) (Public Hearin el Item No. Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the UP3328A establishment of a full service restaurant with on -sale alcoholic beverages live entertainment and valet parking, on property located in the Approved "Recreational and Marine Commercial" area of the Mariner's Mile Specific ' Plan Area. The proposed amendment involves a request change the hours of operation of the restaurant so as to allow an 11:00 a.m. daily opening for lunch, whereas the existing restaurant is not permitted to open before 5:00 p.m. daily. The proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the additional required off-street parking. LOCATION: A portion of Lot H, Tract No. 919, located at 2751 West Coast Mrghway, on the southerly side of West Coast Highway, at the southerly terminus of Riverside Avenue, in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: B. & R Restaurants Inc. (Billy's at the Beach Restaurant), Newport Beach OWNER: Gordon Barienbrock, Newport Beach 8 COMMISSIONERS • 4F9 �y�F�90 4 A r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES rnnn R 1 QQi ROLL CALL I INDEX The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bill Craig, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by Chairman Gifford, Mr. Craig addressed the number of parking spaces that would be required for the daytime operation. James Hewicker, Planning Director, pointed out that Condition No. 6, Exhibit "A ", states that 31 independently accessible parking spaces shall be provided on the property. Condition No. 8, Exhibit "A", states that the Planning Commission may call up the use permit if it is determined that the operation is detrimental to the community. Mr. Craig concurred with the foregoing Condition No. 6. Mr. Gordon Barienbrock, property owner of the subject property and the adjacent property, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the subject request. Mr. Barienbrock did not anticipate a parking problem inasmuch as Mariner's Mile currently has a high vacancy rate, and the restaurants in the area would benefit the commercial area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. MINUTES •�F�9o9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH yl �O Tune R 1995 4 ROLL CALL INDEX 4. That the daytime parking demand for the office uses on the property has been demonstrated to be lower than the number of parking spaces required by the Zoning Code and therefore, there is adequate daytime parking within the shared parking area in order to allow the daytime operation of the subject restaurant. S. That the parking demand for the lunch -time operation of the restaurant will be reduced inasmuch as a portion of the lunch -time patrons of the restaurant will be walk -in customers from nearby office and commercial developments. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3328 (Amended) will not under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Conditions: 1. That the proposed project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan and floor plans, except as noted below. 2. That all previously applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3328 shall be fulfilled unless otherwise provided in this approval. 3. That the hours of operation of the restaurant shall be limited between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. daily. 4. That this approval for the daytime operation of the subject restaurant is contingent upon the subject property and the adjacent property to the west remaining in the same ownership. Should one or both of the properties be sold so as not to be in the same ownership, this use permit shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission to insure that adequate parking arrangements are maintained for the restaurant. -10- COMMISSIONERS •9°c �'prc�T F9 �F90 4 i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tune 8. 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 5. That a valet parking service shall be provided during the daytime operation of the subject restaurant, and shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 6. That the potted plants located within the area shown as Parking Space No. 3 on the site plan shall be removed so as to provide 31 independently accessible parking spaces on the property. 7. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the opening of the restaurant at 11:00 a.m. daily. 8. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 9. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. s *e Variance No. 1206 (Public Heari ng) Item No. Request to permit alterations and additions to an existing single family v1206 dwelling on property located in the R -1 District, which will exceed the allowable 1.5 times the buildable area of the site. The proposal also Approved includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed additions to encroach one foot 3 inches into the required 20 foot front yard setback and 6 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback. The existing building encroaches 5 feet into the required 20 foot front yard setback, and 6 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard. -11- 4 A Aj A] 4 MINUTES %in, 0 99 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH `o June 8. 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX LOCATION: Portions of Lots 7 and 8, Block 138, Corona del Mar, located at 210 Larkspur Avenue, on the southeasterly side of Larkspur Avenue, between Seaview Avenue and Ocean Boulevard, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANT: W. F. A. Architecture, Newport Beach OWNERS: Tim Clinnick and Carole Records, Corona del Mar The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Ms. Kim Pederson, 3 Civic Plaza, architect for the applicants, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Pederson presented background information concerning the subject site. She explained that because of the ' configuration of the subject property there is a need to ease the restrictions for the buildable and setback areas. Chairman Gifford concurred with Ms. Pederson's statement that Condition No. 3, Exhibit "A ", requires two independently accessible covered parking spaces in a garage. Ms. Virginia Figge, 214 Larkspur Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by Ms. Figge, William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, explained that the existing first floor will maintain a front yard setback of 15 feet, and the second floor setback is proposed to be 18 feet 9 inches from the front property line on Larkspur Avenue. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that problem lots were created many years ago, and the subject property meets the criteria for a variance. Motion was ?pion * made and voted on to approve Variance No. 1206 subject to the findings ?proVed * * * * and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. 3sent * -12- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June S_ 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land and building referred to in this application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings and/or uses in the same District, inasmuch as the subject property is wider than the typical lot in Corona del Mar, and is subject to greater than normal setback area requirements which restrict the amount of buildable area of the site. 2. That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as the proposed project is generally comparable to the size, bulk and height to other buildings in the surrounding neighborhood and strict application of setback requirements results in a lot with reduced buildable area, which would limit ' development. 3. That the granting of the variance will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be materially detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the subject property and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property improvements in the neighborhood. 4. That the granting of the modifications to the Zoning Code to encroach one foot 3 inches into the required 20 foot front yard setback and 6 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback, will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the subject property and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property improvements in the neighborhood, and further that such modifications are consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. ' -13- COMMISSIONERS •9��9 <� <�Fa o 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tnne R 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 5. 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. 6. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.82.050 of the Municipal Code. Conditions: 1. That the development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plans, floor plans and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That the gross structural area of the subject project shall not exceed 3,254± square feet. ' 3. That two independently accessible parking spaces shall be provided on -site for the parking of vehicles only, and shall be available to serve the residential unit at all times. 4. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 5. That a covenant to hold the property as a single building site shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits and recorded prior to final of building permits. 6. That this variance shall expire unless exercised within 24 months of the date of approval as specified in Section 20.82.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. sss ' -14- COMMISSIONERS •9¢F� 9��0 9 r 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8. 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL Variance No. 1202 (Continued) Public Hearinal Item No Request to permit the construction of a single family dwelling on V1202 property located in the MFR (2178) District which exceeds the allowable 1.5 times the buildable area of the site. The proposed Cont 'd development provides the required amount of open space, but the to 6/22/95 location of the open space does not meet Ordinance requirements. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed structure to encroach 10 feet into the required 10 foot front yard setback adjacent to the abandoned Carnation Avenue right - or -way as established by Districting Map No. 17, and to encroach 6 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setbacks. Said development also proposes to extend up to 12 feet with portions of the revised construction beyond the original lot line adjacent to the vacated portion of Carnation Avenue, and an additional 16± inches with a roof overhang; and three retaining walls which encroach 3 to 12 feet into 1 said abandoned right -of -way. The application also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit an entry stairway which will also extend 10 feet beyond the original lot line adjacent to the vacated portion of Carnation Avenue and will measure 4 feet above natural grade where the Zoning Code limits such construction to a maximum height of 3 feet. LOCATION: A portion of Block "D ", Corona del Mar, and a portion of Carnation Avenue (vacated), located at 319 Carnation Avenue, southerly of Bayside Drive and westerly of the midline of the vacated extension of Carnation Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: MFR(2178) APPLICANT: Robert Losey, Irvine OWNER: Same as applicant -15- .5 COMMISSIONERS MC Ap Ab w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES rnne R 1995 ROLL INDEX CALL Chairman Gifford requested that the applicant appear before the Planning Commission. Inasmuch as Mr. Robert Losey, applicant, was not in pion * attendance, a motion was made to continue Variance No. 1202, to the June proved 22, 1995, Planning Commission meeting. Motion was voted on, MOTION sent CARRIED. * *3 A. General Plan Amendment No. 93 -2(A) (Public Hearin gl item No. Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan so as to GPA 93 -2: reclassify Area 4 of the Ford Aeronutronic Planned Community from A800 "General Industrial" to "Single Family Attached" and "Single Family Detached" and to establish an additional residential development TTM 1492 allocation of 500 dwelling units at an average density of 5.1 dwelling ' units per acre; and the acceptance of an environmental document. DA No.b Approved INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND B. Amendment No 800 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Planned Community Development Regulations of the Ford Aeronutronic Planned Community so as to redesignate Area 4 from "Research and Development" to "AttachedMetached Residential Area 4A" and "Detached Residential Areas 4B, 4C, 4D & 40. The proposed amendment also includes the adoption of residential development standards for Areas 4A -4E. AND C. Tentative Map of Tract No. 14925 I[Public Hearing) Request to subdivide 98.1 acres of land into 25 lots for a combination of attached and detached residential development, 9 lettered lots for ' -16- COMMISSIONERS 0 '- 4 r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX private street purposes and 5 lettered lots for private landscaping purposes. AND D. Development Agreement No. 8 (Public Hearinel Request to approve a development agreement for the proposed construction of 500 dwelling units in Area 4 of the Ford Aeronutronic Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 140/1 -6 (Resubdivision No. 629), located at 1000 Ford Road, on the northerly side of Ford Road between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, in the Ford ' Aeronutronic Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Ford Motor Land Development Corporation, Milpitas OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Brown stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Tim Ridner, Western Region Development and Operations Manager for Ford Motor Land Development Corporation, 1 Park Lane Boulevard, Dearborn, Michigan, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Ridner gave a slide presentation to the Planning Commission describing the history of the subject site during the past 38 years, and the adjacent residential communities that were developed since 1959. Prior to 1983 approximately 100 acres of the land were sold and the Belcourt and Bay Ridge communities were developed. Subsequent to 1990 when ' -17- COMMISSIONERS W\1 ��pscT 4 0 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8. 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Ford Aerospace was sold to Loral further alternative development options were considered by the company. Mr. Ridner stated that when Ford contemplated converting an industrial facility into a residential community, the company considered the environmental conditions that exist at the site. It was concluded that Ford was in a position to effectively address the environmental conditions prior to the construction of residential housing. In conjunction with the staff and the local and regional agencies that have oversight authority for the environmental issues, the company feels comfortable that solutions were made to satisfy the city and to protect the interests of future homeowners. Mr. Hal Lynch, 20 Corporate Plaza, Development Planning Consultant, appeared before the Planning Commission. He said that one of the first aspects of the development plan was to create a community that fit ' within the existing community. One task was to create densities that were comparable and/or compatible with the existing neighborhood. Mr. Lynch described the access points into the 98 acre site, and the location of the adjacent residential developments. The proposed project has many similarities to the Belcourt residential area, i.e. access into the community via Ford Road and at Bison Street. An extensive landscaped area is proposed adjacent to Jamboree Road, and because there would be no access from Jamboree Road the traffic signal would be eliminated. Mr. Lynch compared the density of the adjacent Belcourt development to the proposed 500 single family attached or detached dwelling units at an average density of 5.1 units per acre. Mr. Lynch addressed the street and landscape design that is planned for each of the communities within the development, and the architectural design for the structures. Mr. Ridner reappeared before the Planning Commission to explain the Fiscal Impact Analysis that was performed at the request of the City. He said that the total one -time fees that will be generated as a result of the project would be over $8 million. The on -going financial benefit to the City as a result of the community would generate approximately ' -18- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tune S_ 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX $570,000 of net fiscal revenue on an annual basis. Mr. Ridner concurred with findings and conditions for approval in Exhibit "A "; however, he requested that a minor clarification be made to Condition No. 23, Exhibit "A". John Douglas, Principal Planner, stated that the project is the reuse of an existing facility. Therefore, in evaluating the concerns and impacts of the project, staff looked at a project not compared to a vacant site but a project compared to another type of project, i.e. an aerospace facility. The comparison of the traffic study was between the previous use and the proposed use. One major issue concerning the project through the public review and public comment process is the potential traffic impacts on the Eastbluff neighborhood. The traffic was evaluated in the EIR and it was concluded that this is the type of situation where a traditional traffic analysis does not work well. It is a fine grained, detailed type of analysis, and based on the traditional type of analysis the Ford project would not have what is considered a significant impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood. There are residents in Eastbluff that perceive an existing problem today without the Ford project and the residents believe that an addition of 500 homes would exacerbate the existing problem. As a result, staff met with representatives of Eastbluff, Councilman Edwards, and representatives of Ford to discuss possible solutions to the problem which is at the intersection of Bison Street and Jamboree Road. Subsequent to the meeting, the City Traffic Engineer sent a letter to the Eastbluff representatives that were in attendance at the meeting indicating that geometric changes could be implemented to address the traffic from outside the Eastbluff neighborhood coming in at the Bison Street entrance. A second issue is the existing soil and ground water contamination on the property. The aerospace research and development industrial facility was in operation for over thirty years, and over the course of time there have been various leaks from underground storage tanks and industrial procedures. Because the reuse is for residential, staff was very sensitive to the proper handling and cleanup of the contamination before the development of the site, not only for the future residents of ' -19- COMMISSIONERS -4 r 9, A c� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES 995 ROLL CALL INDEX the site but also for the surrounding residential areas. As a result of the high level of sensitivity, the City hired an independent expert in the area of hazardous materials to advise in the preparation of the EIR and to advise the Planning Commission and City Council. It is important that the redevelopment not exacerbate any of the problems concerning soil or ground water contamination. An independent consultant was hired in hydro - geology and contaminated ground water to develop a comfort level that there would be no additional impacts as a result of the residential reuse of the project. It was also important to adopt a mitigation strategy for the investigation and cleanup of the site that would assure that the required cleanup of the property would be completed before any grading and construction. The EIR addresses a series of mitigation measures that present a step -by -step approach to the mitigation cleanup of the site in conjunction with the development. Mr. Douglas referred to a list of suggested changes to conditions and mitigation measures that would provide an additional level of assurance ' to the City that the cleanup would be done properly. Mitigation Measure No. 21 - Pre - Development Health Risk Assessments. Add the language Concurrent with submittal to OCHCA, the applicant shall provide all data and reports in support of the Health Risk Assessment to the City for its independent review and analysis. The County Health Care Agency has primary jurisdiction over the approval and cleanup of the site. The additional language allows the City to participate in the review of the technical studies and data so the City can be assured that the County Health Care Agency is doing a proper job. Mitigation Measure No. 23 - City Monitoring of Closure, Demolition and Remediation Activities. The requirement is that the City will hire an independent consultant to advise that all of the requirements and conditions and mitigation measures regarding the cleanup of the site have been carried out properly. The consultant would ensure there is an objective analysis as opposed to a consultant being hired by an applicant or developer. When the mitigation measure was drafted it was established that there would be a dollar amount cap on the consultant ' -20- COMMISSIONERS •9�A�cT. �F�iy�9 �F�90 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T..-- Q i ooc ROLL CALL INDEX who advised the City in the monitoring program. There are concerns that the dollar cap could obstruct the City or the consultant in doing a complete and adequate job in monitoring the progress towards the cleanup of the site. Staff has proposed to eliminate the dollar cap from the mitigation measure, and language would be inserted that the consultant would be selected and the consultant's scope of work would be negotiated jointly by Ford and by the City. The mitigation measure would read Prior to issuance of any demolition or grading permit the City shall select and retain a qualified hazardous materials consultant to monitor and verb compliance with all adopted mitigation measures related to site closure, demolition, remediation and health risk assessment activities, with the cost of this consultant to be paid by the applicant. Both the consultant and the consultant's scope of work shall be acceptable to both the City and Ford. Recommended Condition No. 28 to the Tentative Map of Tract No. 14925, states that Prior to recordation of any final map the subdivider shall submit a street naming program for approval by the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Douglas replied that there is no connection between the cleanup of the site and the approval of the project. Ford initiated the cleanup of the site independent of the project. In response to questions posed by Chairman Gifford regarding Mitigation Measure No. 23, Mr. Douglas explained that there was a concern that by having a dollar cap on the consultant work that it is possible that the City could be limited in its review and monitoring of the progress. During negotiations between the City and the applicant it was decided to remove the dollar cap so as not to present a constraint to the City's ability to adequately review and monitor the work. The applicant needs assurance that this is not just a blank check that could get completely out -of -hand. It would be appropriate to have consultant selection and scope of work approved jointly by the City and Ford which would keep the dollar limit within reason. Mr. Douglas further -21- MINUTES 0 °�F� �*001no CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 June 8. 1995 4 ROLL CALL INDEX explained that the scope would not change but the level of detail of the work involved could become greater. Commissioner Di Sano supported the additional language to allow the City and Ford to become partners based on his professional experience with the State, the EPA, and the Regional Water Quality Board. Commissioner Pomeroy also expressed his support of the additional language. Mr. Douglas explained why it is in the best interest of Ford and the City that the site be cleaned up properly. Commissioner Adams expressed his concerns regarding the Traffic Impact Analysis that was conducted for the EIK, and the response to comments with respect to the potential for neighborhood intrusion in the Eastbluff area. He suggested a study indicating how much of the Belcourt development traffic enters into the Eastbluff neighborhood. In reference to the EK Commissioner Adams stated that he had a concern that the demolition and grading on the site development would ' take 31 months and he questioned how it would affect the residents. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams regarding the EIR Mr. Douglas replied that for purposes of noise restrictions nighttime hours are generally considered to be between 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. In response to Commissioner Adams' question as to whether Ford would be required to fully construct the backbone street system as part of this subdivision, Mr. Douglas further replied that a condition of this map requires that the street be constructed and paved to sufficiently protect the water and sewer lines that are beneath the street, but full improvements such as curbs and gutters may be done with subsequent residential development. Commissioner Kranzley referred to the aforementioned modified Mitigation Measure No. 23. He stated that part of the concept to hire a consultant to oversee the proposed project was to provide an independent source that would not be connected with the applicant. To potentially restrict the scope of the work might not allow the consultant to do the job that the consultant was asked to do. Mr. Douglas stated that the intent is to draw up the scope of work before the consultant is retained. The City and Ford would agree on the scope at the outset, ' -22- COMMISSIONERS W\4v %5� r 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tnne R 1995 ROLL CALL - _ - INDEX and the City would be assured that the scope is adequate and proper to do a thorough job. It is in Ford's interest to cooperate because the action is to be done prior to the issuance of any demolition or grading permit. Chairman Gifford referred to the aforementioned Mitigation Measure No. 21 indicating that the City would be provided with all of the data and reports in support of the Health Risk Assessment for its independent review and analysis, and she suggested that the following be added to Mitigation Measure No. 23, stating ...health risk assessment activities and to review and analysis the data and reports referred to in Mitigation Measure No. 21.... Commissioner Pomeroy and Commissioner Adams discussed the trip generation rates, and the distribution and assignment of trips in the Belcourt development during the peak hours at the two Belcourt entrances. rMr. Tim Paone, 19100 Von Karman, Irvine, Attorney for the applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. In reference to Mitigation Measure No. 23, Mr. Paone stated that Ford's concern is of not having the open checkbook, and of not having a potential scope of work which is unknown to anyone. Ford is concerned that while there are certain defined jobs that the consultant would do, they are concerned that reasonable people could have some serious disagreements of what that would entail. Ford's view is that the conditions should give the City a reasonable comfort level that everything is being done correctly, and that environmental matters are being taken seriously. He said that Ford does not want it to be a political type of an issue where someone takes the ball and keeps it rolling, and that is why Ford has asked for some constraint. The condition as it was originally discussed with staff had a $25,000 cap, and that was on the high end of what the City's current consultant believes would be an appropriate number. Ford subsequently agreed based on additional concerns that had been expressed to raise that to allow for an analysis of the data that would go into the application that went to other regulatory agencies. The number that Ford considered was roughly double what the consultant thought was appropriate. Subsequently, the discussions led to -23- COMMISSIONERS a 9� ��vcT F9'I,- r 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES u 1 ooc ROLL CALL INDEX dropping the cap altogether which is something that Ford is extremely uncomfortable with. It is necessary that the consultant that is chosen and the scope of work are acceptable and deemed reasonable by both the City and Ford. In response to Chairman Gifford's request that Mitigation Measure No. 21 be included in Mitigation Measure No. 23, Mr. Paone responded that Ford does not have a problem with the amended condition. Commissioner Kranzley stated that it was his opinion that in no way would corners be cut in Mitigation Measure No. 23, and that different opinions should be welcome and they should be encouraged. Mr. Paone commented that there will be an inherent conflict of interest and all of the parties involved do need to be partners, and they need to indicate to the consultant what the appropriate scope of work is. ' In response to comments expressed by Commissioner Adams concerning the Eastbluff traffic, Mr. Webb stated that in evaluating distributions of traffic the traffic study is very close in distributing trips to all of the intersections within the area; however, it would be difficult to predict how much traffic is going to go through the Bison Street area through Eastbluff. The traffic on Bison Street and Eastbluff, Bamboo Street and Bixia Street has been a topic of discussion in the Eastbluff neighborhood since about 1972 -73, and in 1974 -75 the Board of Directors spent a considerable amount of time debating the issue. In 1976, the City, at the request of the Board, installed a diverter at Bison Street and Jamboree Road that only allowed people to make right turns in and out of the tract. The City did it as inexpensively as possible because the City felt that the community did not support it, and it lasted roughly one month inasmuch as two- thirds of the polled residents requested that it be removed. In 1993, the City prepared a study that addressed the amount of pass - through traffic on Bison Avenue. In the area between Alta Vista there is approximately 3,300 trips per day that use that segment. It was estimated at that time that approximately 520 of the trips would pass through the tract, probably on Bison Street and Bamboo Street and out the other side. The Bison/Bamboo connection -24- 4 f COMMISSIONERS `` i' §*10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX is approximately 1,200 trips. In consideration of the quasi - collector residential streets throughout the community there are approximately 1,200 to 2,000 trips per day. He explained how it would be difficult to evaluate the traffic distribution from the Belcourt development and the proposed development based on the location of the entrances at Bison Street and Ford Road, and the locations of the shopping centers. Mr. Webb stated that when the Traffic Engineer met with the Eastbluff residents he was asked to put together proposals on how the exterior traffic could be controlled at the Bison Street and Jamboree Road intersection. A number of proposals were put forth which would restrict various turning movements. Any restrictions that are installed at the intersection would impact the residents in the Eastbluff development as much as they would the people coming from the opposite direction. There are some relatively inexpensive trials that could be used at the intersection if the problem occurs, i.e. at the Bison Street intersection, which faces the tract, it is possible to restrict the through traffic so that no one could go across into Eastbluff. If major restrictions would be made in the Eastbluff tract there could potentially be problems at Eastbluff, Ford Road, and Jamboree Road, and at Eastbluff, University Avenue, and Jamboree Road. He stated that a larger traffic study adequately predicts the traffic distribution through the various different intersections in the surrounding areas. Mr. Steve Osterman, 4425 West Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that he was a real estate agent with three listings on Bamboo Street, and that he was representing those homeowners in addition to other residents in the area. W. Osterman explained the traffic problems that currently exist or could occur in the Eastbluff residential neighborhood. He requested an effective change at the intersection of Bison Street and Jamboree Road. Mr. Patrick Sanders, 2301 Arbutus Street, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of 160 homeowners who signed a petition. He is also the President of the Eastbluff Community Homeowners Association. Mr. Sanders addressed the meetings that he had with Councilman Edwards and representatives of the Ford -25- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8. 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Company wherein he indicated that the preliminary traffic solutions offered by the City are under consideration by the homeowners; however, the community at large is mobilizing and they are going to demand that further solutions be considered by all of the parties involved. Chairman Gifford and Mr. Sanders discussed the preliminary meeting that the homeowners had with Councilman Edwards and the Ford representatives concerning the traffic study. Discussion incurred between Commissioner Pomeroy and Commissioner Adams regarding the mitigation measures and the traffic study. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kranzley, Mr. Sanders stated that the petition would not be left with the Planning Commission during the public hearing inasmuch as the residents are still securing signatures. The homeowners want to be a good neighbor with Ford Motor Land, and he said that the residents will work expeditiously to solve the problem to their satisfaction working with the parties involved. Mr. Douglas stated that there is a difference between existing traffic conditions and the impacts of the Ford project. In order to impose a mitigation measure or a condition of approval on the Ford project there has to be a link between significant impact and the project. Mr. Wayne Jones, 29 Northampton Court, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the homeowners in the Belcourt Hill Association. He said that the residents are concerned with contaminants in the soil and dust, and he questioned how the flow of water will affect the homeowners. He said that several of the residents in the Belcourt Hill area have a problem with dampness and a potential for mildew in the downstairs portion of their homes, and they are not certain where the water is coming from. Mr. Jones requested that the property be cleaned up before the project begins. 10 -26- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES 11nP.R 19()s ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Dan McNerney, 2443 Bamboo, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the parents of children residing on Bamboo Street, and he addressed their concerns regarding the traffic in the area. Mr. Jason Liu, 2615 Blackthorn Street, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of many of his neighbors. Mr. Liu suggested that Ford fund a portion of a gated community in Eastbluff to eliminate additional traffic or crime. Commissioner Pomeroy and Mr. Liu discussed Mr. Liu's suggestion. Mr. Bob Duke, 85 Hillsdale Drive, Belcourt Terrace, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the four homeowners adjacent to his property, and he is also on the Board of Director of the Belcourt Terrace Homeowners Association. He said that the homeowners are concerned that there is a negative financial impact on their properties because of the contamination under their properties. He said that the ' neighbors are also concerned with the noise, vibration, and dust during the construction period. The homeowners request mutual screening along the masonry wall separating Belcourt Terrace and the project. Mr. Duke expressed his support of the proposed project. The Planning Commission recessed at 10:05 p.m. and reconvened at 10:25 p.m. Ms. Donna Prokop, 2369 Blackthorn Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to express her concerns regarding the traffic passing through Bison Street in the mornings and late afternoons, and she expressed a concern that the proposed project will cause additional traffic through the neighborhood. Any mitigation efforts that could be imposed by the Planning Commission to impede the traffic would be warranted and passed under any Constitutional challenge, and she suggested speed bumps, blocking off Bison Street, or gate the community. In response to a question posed by Chairman Gifford, Mr. Webb stated that the Eastbluff streets are public. Bison Street cannot be selectively gated off and restricted to a portion of the public. If gates are to be installed on Bison Street then the street would have to ' -27- f 4 COMMISSIONERS y` F90 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T.— e 1004 ROLL CALL INDEX be declared private, and City Council would have to make a finding that there is no present or future public need for the street. He said that the only way that the community could be gated would be if all of the streets in Eastbluff were made private. There currently are not any public parks or other public destination points within Eastbluff. If 100 percent of the residents in Eastbluff were to agree that they wanted private streets, and petitioned the City Council to do so, then the streets could be vacated and gates could be put on the entry streets. Mr. Chuck Rubin, 2220 Alta Vista Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. He responded to Mr. Douglas' previous comments concerning the traffic impact of the proposed project on the existing traffic conditions in the area, and he addressed Letter 19 in response to comments concerning the migration of water across the Bluffs community. Mr. Bernard Pegg, 2633 Bamboo Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to discuss the traffic that comes into Eastbluff from the Bison Street entrance, and the proposed generated trips as stated in the traffic study. Mr. Michael Bigi, 2639 Blackthorn Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. He requested equity and quality of life for the Eastbluff residents similar to the lifestyles that are proposed for the new development, and he discussed his concern regarding the traffic through the Eastbluff residential area. W. Peter Laird, 2218 Aralia Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to express his concerns regarding the EIR and the traffic study. Mr. Lee Berman, 2655 Basswood, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that the proposed project would have a traffic impact on the Eastbluff neighborhood, and he suggested that the applicant meet with the residents to come to a satisfactory compromise. -28- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 11AREiR8*0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T..--Q 100C ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Jim Petrolli, 2501 Bamboo Street, appeared before the Planning Comrission. He said that the EIR only indicates the traffic that goes to the Eastbluff shopping center. He said that there are numerous facilities in the area for public use, i.e. the high school, the preschool, the community college, the swim stadium, and Eastbluff Park. He said in consideration of the foregoing uses that the trip generation would be more than the EIR indicates in the Eastbluff area. He suggested that Ford meet with the residents to come to a traffic solution inasmuch as the proposed project would contribute to the traffic in the area. Ms. Sherri Abbott, 2115 Arbutus Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. She requested a continuation of the EIR to allow the residents additional time to meet with Ford and City staff. The solutions that were proposed by the City Traffic Engineer would further inconvenience the Eastbluff residents inasmuch as the residents are currently being inconvenienced by the adjacent communities. She asked if the proposed project includes a park, because the park that exists in Eastbluff is a privately funded, and it is currently being used by residents in the adjoining neighborhoods. Ms. Abbott requested that if there would be a meeting with the applicant concerning the traffic that there are numerous streets in Eastbluff that should be considered and not just Bison Street. Mr. Warren Sturtevant, 2028 Vista Cajon, appeared before the Planning Commission to address his concerns regarding ground water. In response to the EIR, he said that the residents believe that the Montgomery Report that was prepared in 1978 is significant. Mr. Sturtevant opined that the residents did not have water problems running through their property this past year because Ford had stopped irrigating their property last Fall. Mr. Charles Begg, 11 Northampten Court, appeared before the Planning Commission to express the Belcourt Dill residents concerns regarding contamination on the subject site, and that the value of their property could depreciate because of the possible contamination in the area. ' -29- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tnne R 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Paone reappeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. He said that Ford is sensitive to the Eastbluff residents primary concerns regarding the existing traffic in the area and the proposed project adds to their concerns. Mr. Paone stated that the City's traffic model does work; however, no traffic model is perfect in every situation. A new traffic study addressing the proposed project's impact would not help because of the existing problem that needs a solution, and if a new traffic study showed different results it would be questionable how much the proposed project's pro -rata share would be. Four traffic solutions were submitted by the City Traffic Engineer to Mr. Patrick Sanders; however, there was no agreement on a solution. W. Paone suggested that the Planning Commission offer to the City Council that in the Development Agreement for the project that there ' be a provision that requires two things of Ford. Ford will contribute up to 100 percent of the cost of any one of the four solutions or an equivalent. The solutions do not include a gated community because Ford is not responsible for the traffic problem in the area. Ford will fund the cost of a traffic study to address the best traffic management solution for Eastbluff. Commissioner Pomeroy suggested that because the proposed project would have an impact on the traffic in Eastbluff that one solution would be a right turn in and a right turn out of Bison Street, and shut Bison Street off at Jamboree Road. Mr. Paone stated that Ford would pay for the cost of the foregoing improvement. Commissioner Adams stated that the traffic impacts need to be quantified and either identified significant or insignificant. If a focused addendum study to the traffic impact to the EIR would be done that focused on attempting to quantify the amount of traffic from the Bison Street Belcourt entrance that is traveling to and from the Eastbluff community and if the traffic would be applied on a pro -rata basis based on the number of dwelling units in the project then the record would have quantified the impact of the Ford development. A significant impact is an arbitrary decision. He said that if a traffic study would be ' -30- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T.— Q i oac ROLL CALL INDEX done and the traffic engineer put together some mitigation measures, that would help in the process of identifying the solution. He expressed his approval of the applicant funding the entire cost of the mitigation. Chairman Gifford, Commissioner Adams, and Mr. Paone discussed W. Paone's previous comments concerning what Ford would do for the residents of Eastbluff. Commissioner Adams asked if Ford would agree to bond for a certain dollar amount for improvements, and W. Paone stated that the applicant would provide for any security that is appropriate for the obligation. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Adams, Mr. Webb explained that the cost of implementing mitigation at the intersection would primarily be signing and striping in the street and probably would not cost much more than $10,000 to $15,000. Mr. Webb explained that the City Traffic Engineer submitted the ' following alternatives at the Bison Street and Jamboree Road intersection. Bison Street on the Eastbluff side is the westerly side of the intersection and Bison Street on the Ford side is the easterly side of the intersection. Option A: leave Bison Street going in and out of the Eastbluff tract on the westerly side as is, no changes. On the Ford side restrict through movements coming from Bison into the Eastbluff tract, i.e. a left turn and right turn only. That could be done with a traffic island and a couple of signs at virtually no expense. Option B: Restrict the through movements coming out of Eastbluff across Jamboree Road, and just have a right and left turn move coming out of Eastbluff. Option C: A right turn into Eastbluff and out of Eastbluff off of Jamboree Road, there would be no through movements and there would be no left turns from Jamboree into Eastbluff. Option D: A solid barrier across the Eastbluff side of Bison Street that would totally block all traffic from going in and out of Eastbluff. Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Webb, and Commissioner Adams discussed the traffic study. Mr. Webb explained that the traffic study was directed towards arterial traffic in Eastbluff and Commissioner Adams expressed his concerns that the streets in Eastbluff are at ' -31- COMMISSIONERS •9,n FgqG3 "G'�9 '9 �� 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES TiinpR 1001; ROLL CALL INDEX environmental capacity. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that his desire would be to solve the traffic problem for the residents, and the applicant has offered a very appropriate solution. He stated that based on the facts that nobody opposed the proposed project, and there was no objection of what the project would do financially for the City, that he would support including the applicant's terms concerning what they would do for the Eastbluff residents in the Development Agreement. Ms. Clauson stated that what the applicant has .offered as part of the solution would be considered a public benefit item under the Development Agreement, and not a mitigation measure under the EIR. The Development Agreement would include the solution proposed in the form of a 100 percent payment of one of the four solutions, or another solution up to the equal cost of whatever the most expensive solution would be if that would be appropriate. Chairman Gifford stated that the reference would be for the funding of a more comprehensive traffic study for Eastbluff. Commissioner Di Sano and Commissioner Adams expressed their support of Commissioner Pomeroy's aforementioned recommendation that a solution be included in the Development Agreement. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams, Ms. Clauson explained that the Planning Commission makes a determination of whether the EIR provides the adequate information. The proponent indicated that the information, and studies are adequate. Ms. Clauson further explained that the public benefit offer to the Development Agreement is a proposed solution to the problem that was expressed during the public testimony. Mr. Paone stated that through the Development Agreement the applicant would incorporate within the project design a study to determine the best approach to the solution, and the applicant will fund up to the cost of the solutions which would clearly be in excess of the pro -rata share. -32- COMMISSIONERS •9��9����90 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES t..-- 4 I OOC ROLL CALL INDEX There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Chairman Gifford stated that funding the traffic study addresses the problems in the community and would be of much greater value to the Eastbluff residents than the narrow type of study that would measure only the additional impacts. She stated that she was comfortable with the fact that the applicant accepted a slight modification to the language in Mitigation Measure No. 23. She suggested that language be included to recommend to the City Council that the parties conclude a Development Agreement that would incorporate and reflect all of the aspects of the EIR and mitigation measures. Chairman Gifford requested that the City Council consider additional indemnity in the Development Agreement for the portion of the project that relates to the mitigation concerning hazardous substances. ' The public hearing was reopened in connection with this item, and Mr. Chris Telles, 2607 Bamboo Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. He requested that the Planning Commission put a time frame on the addition of the improvements at Bison Street and Jamboree Road. Chairman Gifford responded that the changes would be implemented when there would be an agreement between the City and the residents as to the appropriate choice. Mr. Paone appeared before the Planning Commission. He said that the improvements would be made by the applicant after the Development Agreement was signed and after the City gave its approval of the changes. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams, Mr. Pat Brown, Consultant for the applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that the 31 month time frame would include demolition, backbone infrastructure, neighborhood infrastructure, models, and production. Commissioner Adams stated that he had a concern regarding the time frame of the ground water remediation. -33- COMMISSIONERS 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tnne R 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Ken Habeek, President of the Belcourt Hills Homeowners Association, appeared before the Planning Commission to express his concerns regarding hazardous materials. Mr. Bigi reappeared before the Planning Commission, and in response to his question, Mr. Douglas explained that the Planning Commission is making recommendations to the City Council, and it is the City Council's authority to approve and certify the EIR. Ms. Terry Beber, 22107 Aralia, appeared before the Planning Commission. She said that it is possible that there are other streets that would be affected if the traffic is redirected off of Bison Street in Eastbluff. Chairman Gifford explained that the proposal was not limited to the aforementioned four potential solutions. Mr. Webb explained that each option can be implemented on a trial or temporary basis with an evaluation of the various impacts or benefits. No implementation would be done without a general consensus from the Eastbluff Association as to what the residents desire. The public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Kranzley expressed his concerns regarding the language that was added to Mitigation Measure No. 23. He suggested a continuance so as to provide additional information concerning the costs of the consultant. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that it is for the City to make sure that there is not a financial cap on enforcement, and for Ford Motor Land to make certain that they will not give a consultant the opportunity to pay himself excessively by creating work. Commissioner Di Sano stated that the additional sentence is better than a dollar amount inasmuch as the City would have to satisfy itself, and the City would not allow the applicant to go forward by giving permits unless the City is satisfied with Ford that adequate coverage is being provided. Commissioner. Kranzley stated that his concern was against the dollar amount. -34- COMMISSIONERS •94�9f��c�90 Mot 4 Aye Ab: 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Tune R 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Chairman Gifford stated that she felt that it was important that first, the City have the ability to have independent review throughout the whole process beginning at the stage of raw data and going all the way to completion. Second, that a comprehensive framework for the scope of independent review be provided for in the document, and third, that the scope of independent review not be established by an arbitrary dollar cap. She was satisfied that the language of mitigation measures 21 and 23 as adjusted would provide for that, and at the same time would not leave the potential cost to the applicant totally opened ended. She supported the language that was revised. .ion * Motion was made to recommend to City Council General Plan Amendment No. 93 -2(A) [Resolution No. 1393]; Amendment No. 800 [Resolution No. 1394]; Tentative Map of Tract No. 14925; Res.i? Development Agreement [Resolution No. 1395]; and Certification of EIR No. 153 with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" as aes.i'_ ' modified in Mitigation Measures No. 21, No. 23, and added Tentative Res. g- Map of Tract No. 14925 Condition No. 28. The public benefit item would be added to the Development Agreement, with an additional finding that the traffic study would be included as part of the project. Chairman Gifford suggested that the Development Agreement reflect all of the mitigations and obligations that are contained in the mitigation of the EK and she proposed an indemnification of any liability to the City from the contamination on the site. Ms. Clauson stated that the City Attorney's Office does not have a concern with respect to the liability to the City for the contamination on the site because the City is not a responsible party and there would be no public facilities. The only area of concern would be if there would be a lawsuit some time in ,s * * * * the future. The Planning Commission could make a recommendation sent * * but it is more in the purview of the City Council. Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. -35- 193 194 t95 COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T,maQ loot ROLL CALL INDEX A. Environmental Impact Report No. 153 Findings: 1. That an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project in compliance with the California. Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and City Policy, 2. That the proposed Final EIR, which includes the Draft EIR, Comments and Responses, revisions to the Draft EIR, and all related documents in the record is complete and adequate to satisfy all the requirements of CEQA for the proposed project. 3. That the analysis and conclusions contained in the proposed Final EIR reflect the independent judgement of the Planning Commission. 4. That the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the proposed Final EIR prior to making its recommendations to the City Council. Mitigation Measures: Short-Term Impacts from Demolition and Construction - related Activities. (See Sub - section 3.3.3.1.1 in Impact Analysis) 1. Soil disturbance shall be halted when winds in excess of 25 mph make dust control impractical. 2. To minimize emissions by reducing interference of construction traffic with regional non - project traffic movement, the following measures shall be implemented where possible: Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non -peak travel periods. -36- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T.- 4 1004 ROLL CALL INDEX Routing construction traffic through areas of least impact sensitivity. Providing ride -share incentives for contractors and subcontractor personnel. 3. To avoid spill-over impacts on neighboring roadways, construction vehicles shall be hosed down before entering public roadways from any dirt road project areas, or shall be limited to exiting the site from only paved roads. 4. The project access to public roadways shall be washed/swept at regular intervals to minimize dirt impacts on neighboring roadways. 5. Emissions from on -site construction equipment shall be controlled ' through a routine mandatory maintenance program. Demolition and Construction- related Noise (see Sub - section 3.4.3.1.1 in Impact Analysis) A note stating these requirements shall be placed on all demolition, grading and construction plans: 6. No stationary constriction equipment shall be permitted to operate in a manner that results in either: a. An exterior noise level greater than 55 dBA Leq (daytime) or 50 dBA (nighttime) at the property line of any occupied residence; or b. An interior noise level greater than 45 dBA Leq in any occupied residence. 7. Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading or building permits the project applicant shall demonstrate that all construction staging ' -37- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX shall be performed on -site as far as feasible from occupied dwelling. Remediation Equipment Noise (see Sub - section 3.4.3.1.2 in Impact Analysis) 8. Prior to issuance of any building permit for remediation equipment, the applicant shall submit to the Building Department a report prepared by a licensed acoustical engineer certifying that operation of the equipment will not cause an increase in ambient noise of greater than 1 dBA nor exceed an exterior noise level of 55 dBA Leq (daytime) or 50 dBA Leq (night time), or an interior level of 45 dBA Leq, or as set forth in the City's Noise Ordinance. 9. Soil Remediation (see Sub - section 3.6.3.2.1 for Impact Analysis) ' Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall submit evidence acceptable to the Building Department that the additional investigations and/or remedial activities at APECs identified in Tables 2 through 8 contained in Appendix I (referred to in section 3.103 /.Pubfic Health and Safety) have been performed and all shallow soil contamination within the planning area for that project phase has been remedaated to acceptable levels as defined by the Health Risk Assessment(s) and approved by the OCHCA. 10. Demolition Sampling Plan (see Sub - section 3.6.3.2.1 for Impact Analysis) Prior to the issuance of general grading permits, the project proponent shall submit a Post Demolition Investigation Work Plan to the City. The plan shall be based on the potential presence of contaminated soils, and include procedures to be followed to identify contaminated soil during the subject facility demolition process. This plan shall include a stipulation that areas of contaminated soil will not be left uncovered during the rainy season. -38 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES hme R 1995 ROLL CALL I INDEX 11. Remedial Action Plan (see Sub - section 3.6.3.2.2 for Impact Analysis) Prior to approval of any Final Subdivision Map that would create a legal building site for residential development, the project proponent shall provide the Newport Beach Planning Department a Groundwater Remedial Action Plan approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Light and Glare (see Sub - section 3.8.3.3 of Impact Analysis) 12. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for any community recreation facility or common area that includes exterior lighting the applicant shall demonstrate to the Building Department that the COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Iune R_ 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Fire Protection (see Sub - section 3.9.3.1 in Impact Analysis) 14. Prior to approval of tract maps or site plans, the project proponent shall make appropriate provisions to permit access by the Fire Department at all entry gates. Police (see Sub - section 3.9.3.2 in Impact Analysis) 15. Before approval of any residential building permit, the project proponent shall consult with the Police Department regarding appropriate crime prevention features in site and building design and construction. 16. Prior to approval of tract maps or site plans, the project proponent shall make appropriate provisions to permit access by police at all ' entry gates. 17. Project Demolition Prior to issuance of any demolition or grading permit a Project Demolition Manual shall be submitted by the applicant and approved by the Building and Fire Departments. All demolition plans and permits shall contain a note stating that all work shall be done according to the requirements and specifications contained in the manual. A copy of the approved manual shall be kept on site at all times and shall be made available to City inspectors, contractors and employees upon request. The manual shall include the following components: a. Removal of Hazardous Substances The manual shall describe the hazardous substances to be removed prior to demolition of structures, the cleanup standards to be met, and the procedures to be followed by the contractor. -40- 4 r L COMMISSIONERS A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX b. Health and Safety Plan The Health and Safety Plan shall be based on the potential presence of hazardous substances in buildings, equipment and in subsurface soils, and shall outline proper procedures and safe work practices to ensure the safety and protection of all workers involved in the demolition, environmental clean-up and general site activities, as well as residents of the surrounding area and the general public. The plan shall meet all applicable federal, state and local requirements. c. Demolition Sampling Plan The Demolition Sampling Plan shall be based on the potential presence of contaminated soils, and include procedures to be followed to identify contaminated soil during the site ' demolition process. d. Air Monitoring and Response Plan The manual shall include a plan for on -site and perimeter air monitoring to be conducted during demolition and grading, and a response plan describing remedial actions to be taken in the event that unacceptable levels of air emissions are detected. 18. Pre - Demolition Building Certification Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for each building, the project proponent shall demonstrate to the Building Department that all pre - demolition clean -up has been completed in compliance with the Project Demolition Manual. This certification shall include the following: -41- MINUTES •9 \91i F9F90 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH �' Tnne R 1995 4 4 ROLL CALL INDEX a. Removal of Hazardous Substances The applicant shall demonstrate that hazardous substance removal has been completed in accordance with the Project Demolition Manual. 19, Soil Remediation Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall submit evidence acceptable to the Building Department (in coordination with the Planning Department) that the additional investigations and/or remedial activities at APECs identified in Tables 2 through 8 contained in Appendix I have been performed and all shallow soil contamination within the planning area for that project phase has been remediated to acceptable levels as defined by the Health Risk Assessment(s) and approved by the OCHCA. ' 20. Remedial Action Plan Prior to approval of any Final Subdivision Map that would create a legal building site for residential development, the project proponent shall provide to the Newport Beach Planning Department a Groundwater Remedial Action Plan approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 21. Pre - Development Health Risk Assessments Prior to approval of any Final Subdivision Map that would create a legal building site for residential development, the project proponent shall submit to the Planning Department an OCHCA - approved Health Risk Assessment(s) and Health -Based Cleanup Levels (HBCLs) demonstrating that all potential health risks associated with soil and groundwater contamination will be eliminated prior to residential construction. Health Risk Assessment(s) shall include both construction worker and residential scenarios. Concurrent with submittal to OCHCA, the applicant shall provide all data and reports in support of the Health Risk Assessment to the City for its independent review and analysis. ' -42 •9 A 4- c,, ��9 �y�F�o�o 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June S_ 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX Prior to issuance of any residential building permit the applicant shall demonstrate that either: 1) all appropriate remedial actions have been completed to the satisfaction of OCHCA and RWQCB; or 2) any remedial actions that continue after commencement of residential construction have been determined by OCHCA to have no health risk to occupants. 22. Post - Development Health Risk Assessments Prior to issuance of a building permit for any remedial action that would remain in operation after commencement of residential development and may involve air emissions, the proponent shall provide the Building Department with a copy of the air permit issued by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD). SCAQMD uses risk assessment data to establish allowable air emissions which are stipulated in ' the permit conditions. 23. City Monitoring of Closure, Demolition and Remediation Activities Prior to issuance of any demolition or grading permit the City shall select and retain a qualified hazardous materials consultant to monitor and verify compliance with all adopted mitigation measures related to site closure, demolition, remediation and health risk assessment activities, with the cost of this consultant to be paid by the applicant.. Both the consultant and the consultant's scope of work shall be acceptable to both the City and Ford. The applicant shall provide to the City or its designee in a timely fashion copies of all written correspondence with the OCHCA, RWQCB, and any other agency involved in review and approval of soil and groundwater remediation of the site. ' -43- COMMISSIONERS •9�F99�" �9�� 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES o innc ROLL CALL INDEX B. General Plan Amendment 93 -2fAl Adopt Resolution No. 1393 recommending City Council approval of GPA 93 -2(A). C. Amendment No. 800 Adopt Resolution No. 1394 recommending City Council approval of Amendment No. 800. D. Development Agreement No. 8 Adopt Resolution No. 1395 recommending City Council approval of Development Agreement No. 8. In addition, the Planning Commission recommends that the following provisions be incorporated into the Developoment Agreement: 1. That as a public benefit, Ford Motor Land shall pay the cost of a traffic study evaluating potential solutions to the problem of through traffic from the Bison Avenue entrance in the Eastbluff neighborhood, and shall also pay the cost of implementing a solution agreed upon by the City and the Eastbluff community with the stipulation that if a solution other than the four possibilities outlined by the City Traffic Engineer is adopted, Ford's financial obligation shall not exceed the cost of the most expensive of those four solutions; and 2. That the Development Agreement reflect all of the conditions and mitigation measures contained in the EIR; and 3. That the City Council consider including in the Development Agreement a provision for indemnifying the City from liability related to contamination of the site. ' -44- COMMISSIONERS •9� ��vcT i9 W *90 4 r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES TI-4 10" ROLL CALL INDEX E. Tentative Map of Tract No. 14925: Findings: 1. That the subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and its objectives, policies, general land uses and programs, and the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community Development Plan and District Regulations. 2. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the density of development ' proposed. 4. That the design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 5. That the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 6. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 7. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. -45- COMMISSIONERS .69�9Fo 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T""P R tQQ4 ROLL CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That a final map be recorded. That the final map be prepared so that the Bearings relate to the State Plane Coordinate System. The final map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD83) and that prior to recordation of the final map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall submit to the County Surveyor a digital- graphic file of said map in a manner described in Section 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. That prior to recordation of the final map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments ' (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the Public improvements if it is desired to record a tract map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 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 and the Building Department. -46- COMMISSIONERS •9\ ��cT a 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June 8 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 5. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 6. That the design of the private streets and drives conform with the City's Private Street Policy (L -4), except as approved by the Public Works Department. The basic roadway width shall be a minimum of 36 feet with parking on both sides. That the collector ring road shall have a minimum width of 40' curb to curb. That the cul -de -sacs shall be designed to conform to minimum City standards as shown in City Std. 103 -L with planters or other designs as approved by the Public Works Department and Fire Department. That all bends in roadway shall be designed using the City standard knuckle Standard No. 104 -L or other designs as approved by the Public Works Department to provide an adequate turning radius for moving ' vans and fire trucks. That all street curb returns shall have a minimum radius of 25'. That the location of all underground utilities in the private streets shall conform to City Std. 101 -L. That a minimum centerline radius for private streets shall be 150', unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. The location, width, configuration, and concept of the private street and drive systems shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 7. That an Encroachment Agreement be executed for all non- standard paving improvements proposed in private streets and utility easements. 8. That the intersection of the private streets and drives be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non- , -47- 4 4 COMMISSIONERS \-4:04- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June S_ 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer, and trees with canopies above 8 feet will be considered. 9. That easements for ingress and egress be provided for all lots that do not have frontage along the private street system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 10. That the California Vehicle Code be enforced on the private streets and drives, and that the delineation acceptable to the Police Department and Public Works Department be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and drives. 11. That if it is desired to have a control gate at the entrance, a turnaround shall be provided prior to the gate. The gated entry shall have a minimum of two lanes in (one for visitors and one for owners). The guard gate shall be positioned so that a ' minimum of 80' is provided for automobile stacking. The design of the controlled entrance shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Fire Department. 12. That easements for public emergency and security ingress, egress and public utility purposes on all private streets be dedicated to the City and that all easements be shown on the tract map. 13. That asphalt or concrete access roads shall be provided to all public utilities, vaults, manholes, and junction structure locations, with width to be approved by the Public Works Department. 14. That all vehicular access rights to Jamboree Road be released and relinquished to the City of Newport Beach. 15. That the following improvements be completed: -48 COMMISSIONERS 4 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX a. On Jamboree Road: That the left turn lane and traffic signal be removed at the Ford -Loral entrance. This will require the construction of a median island and landscaping, removal of the north bound deceleration lane into Ford -Loral which will require the construction of new curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements along a portion of the Jamboree Road frontage and possible installation of additional street lighting where the traffic signal was removed as approved by the Public Works Department. b. On Ford Road: That the unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk, and that the unused left turn lane be removed and replace with a median island and landscaping as ' approved by the Public Works Department. C. That deteriorated or displaced sections of sidewalk be reconstructed along the Jamboree Road and Ford Road frontages. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 16. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown of standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 17. That a hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and stone drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the tract map. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer. ' -49- COMMISSIONERS 4 4 T CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES June, 8 1995 ROLL CALL INDEX 18. That the drainage from the slopes adjacent to Jamboree Road and Ford Road be picked up in concrete drainage swales and conveyed to the storm drain unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 19. That the drainage along the northerly tract boundary adjacent to Hartford Drive and Hillsdale Drive be directed away from tract boundaries and conveyed to the storm drain system. 20. That the Water Capital Improvement fee be paid, unless otherwise modified or waived by the City Council. 21. 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 facilities will be available for the project. Such demonstration shall include verification from the Orange County Sanitation District and the City's Utilities Department. 22. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 23. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 24. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. There shall be no construction storage or delivery of materials within the Jamboree Road, Bison Avenue or Ford Road rights - of -way. 25. That a fire protection system acceptable to the Fire Department be installed by the developer and tested by the Fire Department -50- COMMISSIONERS •9°c ��cT T 4 Mo Ay Ab 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES TiinpR 100; ROLL INDEX CALL prior to storage of any combustible materials or start of any structural framing. 26. That this map is for financing and conveyance purposes only, and no legal residential building sites shall be created until subsequent subdivision maps are approved and recorded. Building permits for non - residential structures (e.g., recreation facilities and guard gate entrances) may be issued upon recordation of this map and satisfaction of all applicable requirements, however. 27. That all lettered lots shall be privately owned, landscaped and maintained. 28. Prior to recordation of any final map the subdivider shall submit a street naming program for approval by the Planning Commission. *►s Amendment No. 824 (Public Hearing) Item No Request to amend Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as A824 to add or expand outdoor dining areas to restaurant uses upon application to the Planning Director; and to amend the offstreet parking coast d standards for restaurants, bars, and theater /nightclubs. to 6/22/95 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach tion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Amendment No. 824 to the es June 22, 1995, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. sent r•s Discussion Items: -51- .7 •COMMISSIONERS 0\� MC Ap Ak 4 MC Al Al 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES T,..,e 4 1000 ROLL CALL INDEX General Plan Amendment No. 95 -2 (Discussion) Disc. Request to initiate amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan as Item No. follows: Cont ' d A. 507 Jasmine Avenue to 5/22/95 Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Element to redesignate property located at 507 Jasmine Avenue in Corona del Mar from Two- Family Residential to Retail And Service Commercial. ,tion Motion was made and voted on to continue the item to the June 22, ,es * * * * * 1995, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. )sent * AND ' B. Newport Center Drive Request to amend the General Plan Circulation Element to change the arterial roadway classification for the ring section of Newport Center Drive from a Major Road (Six -lane, Divided) to a Primary Road (Four - lane, Divided). This amendment will allow for the establishment of parallel parking on Newport Center Drive around Fashion Island. AND )tion Motion was made and voted on to continue this item to the Planning res * * * * Commission meeting of June 22, 1995. MOTION CARRIED. )sent C. Newport Village Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Element to redesignate the 10 acre site located at the comer of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard from Governmental, Education and Institutional Facilities to Retail and Service Commercial, in order to allow the -52- - COMMISSIONERS •9� �'�vcT F i �F09a Mo Ay Ab 4 Ay Ab 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES u 1ooc ROLL CALL INDEX construction of a retail shopping center. The square footage of development allocated to the site will remain the same at 100,000 sq.ft. tion Motion was made and voted on to continue this item to the Planning es * Commission meeting of June 22, 1995. MOTION CARRIED. sent AND D. Newport Harbor Art Museum Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Element to re- establish the land use designation of Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities for the former Newport Center Branch Library site, and to establish an overall museum development allocation of 70,000 sq.ft., which will accommodate both the short-term and long- term development program of the Newport Harbor Art Museum. * Motion was made and voted on to continue this item to the Planning es * * * * * Commission meeting of June 22, 1995. MOTION CARRIED. sent r ** ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Add' l Busine a.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - None b.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee - None c.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting. - None d.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a . future agenda for action and staff report.- None -53- S 4 COMMISSIONERS I 9 qj F`O CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL INDEX e.) Requests for excused absences - Motion was made and voted on to excuse Chairman Gifford from the Planning Commission meeting G Gifford of June 22, 1995. MOTION CARRIED. e excused sss ADJOURNMENT: 12:00 midnight A Adjourn GAROLD ADAMS, SECRETARY NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION