HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/06/1981REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Place: City Council Chambers
Time 7:30 p.m.
Date: August 6, 1981
0
All Present.
t Beach
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT:
James D. Hewicker, Planning Director
Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
William Ward, Senior Planner
Donald Webb, City Engineer
Pamela Woods., Secretary
MINUTFS
Request to permit the installation of outdoor
lighting on 24 foot high ± standards in conjunc-
tion with four tennis courts in San Joaquin
Hills Park.`
LOCATION: Record of Survey 88- 34,.located
at 2901 San Joaquin Hills Road on,
the southeasterly corner of San
Joaquin Hills Road and Crown Drive
• I�� I I I� I -1-
INDEX
PERMIll
Staff advised the Commission of the following
•
requested continuances: Item Nos. 3 and 4 -
Use Permit No. 2008 and Resubdivision No. 692
to be.continued to August 20, 1981; Item Nos. 5,.
6 & 7 - Traffic Study, Site Plan Review No. 27
and Resubdivision No. 688 to be continued to
August 20, 1981; Item No. 10 - Use Permit No.
2010 to be continued to August 20, 1981; Item
No. 13 - Use Permit No. 2014 to be continued
to September 10, 1981; and, Item No. 15 - Housing
Element to be continued to August 20, 1981.
Motion
X
Motion was made to continue the above listed
Ayes
X
X
X
X
items, which MOTION CARRIED.
Noes
X
Request to permit the installation of outdoor
lighting on 24 foot high ± standards in conjunc-
tion with four tennis courts in San Joaquin
Hills Park.`
LOCATION: Record of Survey 88- 34,.located
at 2901 San Joaquin Hills Road on,
the southeasterly corner of San
Joaquin Hills Road and Crown Drive
• I�� I I I� I -1-
INDEX
PERMIll
WjSSIONERS August 6, 1981
City of Newport Beach
MINUTES
INDEX
North, in the Jasmine Creek
Planned Community.
ZONE: P -C
APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
The public hearing opened in connection with
this item and Mr. Jeff Kolin, Recreation Super-
intendent for the Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department for the.City of Newport Beach, dis-
cussed background information on the requested_
use permit.
In response. to a question posed by Commissioner
Beek, Mr. Kolin stated that the additional noise
and light spillage will only be minimal.
• In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Winburn, Mr. Kolin explained the maintenance
cost summary for the tenni:s court lighting.
Commissioner Winburn asked if the lighted courts
will bring additional revenue to the City. Mr.
Kolin stated that the program :is designed to be
self- supporting. and therefore would not be an
additional expense to the City.
Commissioner Beek suggested that the lights be
turned off at 10:00 p.m. rather.than 11:00 p.m.
which may be more acceptable to the adjoining
residents. Mr. Kolin stated.that this .would
be acceptable.to the Recreation Depar,tment.as
most of the - instructional programs do not con-
tinue past 9:O0 p.m.
Mr. Robert DeRienzo., representing the Jasmine
Creek Community Association, appeared before the
Commission and stated that they are opposed to
the installation of the tennis court lighting.
August 6, 1981
of Newport Beach
MINUTES
INDEX
Mr. DeRienzo stated that the adjoining residents
will be detrimentally affected by the light and
noise pollution.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Beek, Mr.' DeRienzo stated that there are seven .
homes which will be immediately affected by
this proposal.
Commissioner Winburn stated that the .unlighted
tennis courts were in place before the Jasmine
Creek residences were built, but now the City
wants to install lighting fixtures, after the
residences are in place.. She asked Mr. Burnham
for a legal opinion. Mr. Burnham, Assistant
City Attorney, stated that the City has the
power to install the lighting fixtures. He
stated that the public hearing is being held to
receive public input and for the Commission to
decide on its appropriateness.
Commissioner Balali.s asked Mr. DeRienzo at what
time the Jasmine Creek tennis court lighting is
turned off. Mr. De Rienzo stated that the lights
are off by 10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Balalis stated that he can not
support the substitute motion because of the
double standard that the homeowners association
provides lighted tennis courts for its own
• I I I I I I I I -3-
h on
K
Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1989
subject to the findings and conditions of
Exhibit "A" with a revision that the lights be
turned off by 10 :00 p.m. daily.
Substitute
Substitute motion was made for denial of Use
Motion
Permit No. 1989 with the findings and conditions
of Exhibit "B ", in that the installation of the
lights will be detrimental to the neighborhood.
Commissioner Winburn stated that she would be
supporting. the substitute motion because parti-
cipation in the City's tennis lesson program has
dropped,30 to 35.percent in the past three years.
Commissioner Balali.s asked Mr. DeRienzo at what
time the Jasmine Creek tennis court lighting is
turned off. Mr. De Rienzo stated that the lights
are off by 10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Balalis stated that he can not
support the substitute motion because of the
double standard that the homeowners association
provides lighted tennis courts for its own
• I I I I I I I I -3-
August 6, 1981
M
MINUTES
members, but refuses to allow the City to provide
lighted tennis courts for its own residents.
Chairman McLaughlin concurred and stated that
it is difficult for the general public to find
a lighted tennis court in the City.
Commissioner Thomas stated that the rights of the
residents should come first, instead of approving
lights for the tennis courts which will retro.
actively impact the residents. He stated that
the City should be acquiring land in non - impacted
areas for these types of facilities.
Ayes X X 1XI Substitute Motion for denial of Use Permit No.
Noes X 1989 was now voted on as follows, which SUBSTITUT
MOTION CARRIED:
r1
U
FINDINGS:
That when the tennis court lights are on,
the light and glare and related noise o'f
the users of the courts will have an ad-
verse impact on the adjoining residential
development in Jasmine Creek. .
That approval of Use Permit No. 1989 will
under the circumstances of this case be
detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort and general welfare of
persons residing and working i:n the neigh -
borhood and will be detrimental or injur-
ious to property or improvements in the
neighborhood and the general welfare of
the City.
Commissioner Allen asked if
automatically be appealed_ t
Mr. Burnham stated -that this
automatically appealed, but
it were to be'appealed, prop
would be sent.
• 11111111 -4-
this use permit will
o the City Council.
item would not be
in the event that
er notifications
INDEX
August 6, 1981
M
ME
MINUTFS
INDEX
Request to change the operational c.haracte:ristics
of an existing restaurant in the C -1 -H District
so as to allow the sale of beer and wine in con-
junction with the restaurant operation. The
proposed development also includes tandem parking
spaces and valet parking for the restaurant use.
LOCATION: Lots 74 and.75, Tract No. 1011,
located at 4001.West Coast Highway,
on the southerly side of West
Coast Highway between Newport
Boulevard and Balboa Boulevard,
adjacent to Balboa Coves.
ZONE: C -1 -H
APPLICANT: Royal Thai Cuisine Inc., Newport
Beach
OWNER: Mary Howard, Newport Beach
• P1anning Director Hewicker discussed the re-
designation of the floor plan. He stated that
a letter has been received from Mr. William.
Taylor which indicates his concerns for odors
and trash this proposal may generate. Planning
Director Hewicker recommended the following
additional conditions:
1). That the kitchen exhaust fans shall be
designed to control odors and smoke in
.accordance with Rule 401 of the Rules and
Regulations of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
2) That the service of alcoholic beverages be
served in such a manner so.that there would
be no bottles or other containers removed
from the building.
3) The Commission may want to place a time
limit on the approval, at which time the
use permit would be reviewed by the
Modifications Committee.
• I I I I I I I -5-
COMAAISSK)NERSI August 6, 1981 MINUTES
i1m I CIO e
Of
Beach
INDEX
4) The Commission may want to place a closing
hou.r on the use permit,.such as 12:00
midnight.
The public hearing opened in. connection with
this item and Mr. Sumets, the applicant, stated
that he was in concurrence with the staff
recommendations.
Mr. Wilford, representing the Balboa Coves
Community Association stated that the bar area
has not be redesigned, but only redesignated,
and.therefore, may present.an enforcement
problem. He then suggested the following
additional conditions:
1) That. the use permit be for a period of
two years.
2) That no customer bar, nor bar type lounge
• shall be installed.
3) That no beer or wine may be served to
patrons except solely a_s an incidental
food supplement.
4)_ Closing time shall be 12:00 midnight.
Planning Director Hewicker referred to Mr.
Wilford's Condition. No. 3-and stated that this
would be difficult for the City to enforce.
Commissioner Balalis stated that this project
is no longer providing a ba.r and that the ser=
vice of beer and wine will be incidental to
the food service.
Motion X Motion was made for approval. of Use Permit No..
All Ayes X X X.XX X 2005 with the findings and conditions of Exhibit
"A" and the additional staff recommendations,
including that the use permit be approved for
_6_
•
August 6, 1981
loll
M,
MINUTES
INDEX
a period of two years and that no customer bar
or bar type lounge shall be installed, which
MOTION CARRIED as follows:
FINDINGS:
The proposed restaurant is consistent with
the zoning map and the draft Local Plan
and is compatible with surrounding land
uses.
6. The approval of Use Permit No. 2005 will not,
under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimen.tal to the health,. safety, peace,
morals, comfort and general welfare of
persons residing and working in the neigh-
borhood or be detrimental or injurious to
property and improvements in the neighborhood
. or the general welfare of the City..
-7-
2. The.Police Department has indicated that
they do not contemplate any problems.
3. The project will not have any significant..
environmental impact.
4: The subject property is inadequate for the
use of tandem parking spaces and valet ser-
vice due to its limited size and singular
access.to West Coast Highway.
•
5. That the establishment, maintenance or
operation of the use of the property or
building will not, under the circumstances
of the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety, peace, comfort and
general welfare of persons .residing or
working in the neighborhood of.such proposed
use or be detrimental or injurious to pro-
perty and improvements in the neighborhood
of the general welfare of the City. And
further that the granting of the proposed
modification for the tandem parking spaces
with valet service is not consistent with
the legislative intent of Title 20 of the
Municipal Code.
6. The approval of Use Permit No. 2005 will not,
under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimen.tal to the health,. safety, peace,
morals, comfort and general welfare of
persons residing and working in the neigh-
borhood or be detrimental or injurious to
property and improvements in the neighborhood
. or the general welfare of the City..
-7-
August 6, 1981
.'•n
Beach
MINUTES
INDEX
CONDITIONS:'
1.. That development shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved pl.ans, except
as noted below.
2. That all mechanical equipment and trash
areas sha l be screened from West Coast
Highway and adjoining properties.
3. That any parking lot lighting shall be de-
signed so as to eliminate any light or
glare upon surrounding properties and West
Coast Highway.
4. That the existing park.ing areas shall be
restriped utilizing the existing parking ,
design. All parking spac.es.shall be in-
dependently accessible a.nd no valet service
shall be provided in conjunction with the
restaurant facility.
• 5. That the kitchen exhaust fans shall be
designed to control odors and smoke in
accordance with Rule 401 of the Rules and
Regulations of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
6. That.alcoholic beverages be served in such
a- manner that no bottles or.o.ther containers
.will.be removed from the building.
7. That this approval shall be for a period of
two years, and any extensions shall be sub-
ject to the approval of the Modifications
Committee.
8. That the closing time for the restaurant
shall b.e 12 :00 midnight.
9. That no customer bar, nor bar type lounge
shall be installed.
CALL
Motion
Ayes
Noes
•
x
P4
August 6, 1981
M
MINUTES
i� � wl
]r
INDEX
Staff advised that Item Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7
Use Permit No. 2008, Resubdivision No. 692,
Traffic Study, Site Plan Review No. 27 and
Resubdivision No. 688, be continued to the
Planning Commission Meeting of August 20, 1981.
Motion was made to continue the above listed
items, which MOTION CARRIED.
Req.uest,to establish a restaurant facility with
on -sale alcoholic beverages.and live entertain= I
ment in a portion of the Pacifica Marina .Building
on Mari.ner's Mile, and the acceptance of an off -
site parking agreement fora portion of the-re-
quired parking spaces. Valet parking is also U:
proposed in conjunction-with the proposed devel- NI
opment.
LOCATION: A portion of Lot H, Tract No. 919,
located at 2751 West Coast Highway,
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
APPL.ICANTi William.J. Clark, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as applicant
The public hearing.opened in connection with this
item and Mr. Bill Clark, the applicant, discussed
the background information on this item and re-
viewed for the Commission the off -site parking
agreement.
In response to a question posed by.Commissiover
Allen, Mr. Clark stated that he was aware of the
• 11111111 -9-
August 6, 1981
M
Beach
MINUTFS
INDEX
off -site parking agreement entered into with
Mr. Barienbrock when he purchased the property.
Mrs. Sheri Herman, resident of 207 Tustin Avenue,
stated that there is no room for additional cars
to park in this area.
Commissioner Balalis asked if the off -site
parking location will be designated for the use
of this restaurant only. Planning Director
Hewicker stated that t-he off =s.ite parking agree-
ment provides for 50 off -site parking spaces at
the northwest corner of the parking lot, but the
parking.spaces are not designated on the lot.
Commissioner Beek questioned the enforceability
of the valet service...Mr. Burnham, Assistant
City Attorney, stated that the valet service can
be made a condition of the use permit. He
stated that a condition.of designating spaces
• can be a further condition that the`'Commission
may want to impose. Mr. Burnham then explained
the procedure for obtaining an off -site parking
agreement.
In response. to a question posed by Commissioner
Beek, Mr.. Clark stated that they will be policing
the off -site parking lot on anon -going basis
for any violations.
Motion X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 2003,
subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit
"B ", with the condition that the applicant pro -
vide an off -site parking agreement for the
necessary 44 parking spaces, which includes the
spaces required for the staff employees. The
employees must park in the designated spaces.
The parking agreement shall be for the period
of the use permit and that it specify the exact
spaces for its primary use. In addition, if
any violations of parking occur, the use permit
shall be revoked. The valet service must park
in the designated lot.
• 11111111 -10-
Substitute
Motion
Ayes
Noes
•
E
X
x
m
FIA
X
August 6, 1981
R1
MINUTES
Commissioner Thomas asked when the business uses
close in the evening, that utilize the parking
spaces during th.e day. Planning Director
Hewicker stated that most of the business uses
in this area close between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m
Chairman McLaughlin stated that the uses are open
much later than 5:00 p.m: and in some cases are
open until 10:00 p.m.
Substitute Motion was made for denial for Use
Permit No. 2003, with the findings of Exhibit. "A"
in that an off -site parking, agreement.is a
special request of.-the-City, and the lot in
this particular case, has chose to give up its
own on -site parking. Substitute Motion for
denial was now voted on as follows, which
SUBSTITUTE MOTION CARRIED:
FINDINGS:.
1. That the proposed restaurant use on a por-
tion of the subject property represents a
land use of greater intensity than that
which pr.esently.exists on the property.
2. That said restaurant will require a greater
amount of parking and generate more traffic
than the existing use.
3. The proposed.off -site parking lot is not
located as to be useful in connection with
the proposed use or uses on the building
site or sites inasmuch as the off. -site
location is approximately 500 feet from
the subject property.
4.. Parking on such lot will create undue
traffic hazards in the surrounding area
with valet parking attendants walking and
driving vehicles back and forth from the
subject property and the off -site location.
- 11 -
August 6, 1981
0
MINUTES
5. That the establishment, maintenance or
operation of the use or building applied
for will, under the circumstances of the
particular case, be detrimental to the
health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of such pro-
posed use, and be detrimental or injurious
to property and improvements in the neigh
borhood, and the general welfare of the City.
INDEX
OWNER: James.Ray; Costa Mesa
The public hearing opened in connection with this
item and Mr. Paul Kohne, representing the appli-
cant, requested approval of this use permit.
Mr. Michael Ray, representing the owner, re-
ferred to Condition of approval No. 6 and stated
that they can not dedicate the land at the
corner of Narcissus Avenue and.East Coast High-
way, because they do not own it.
• � i I( 1 I I� -12 -.
Request to permit the establishment of retail
Item #9
_
commercial bakery in the C -1 District which
offers take-out-food items and inci'dential
wine for consumption on the premises, and to
waive a portion of the required .off- street
USE PERMIT
NO. 2009
parking spaces.
•
LOCATIO.N: Lot 5 of Block 440, Corona .del
Mar Tract, located at 344.6 East
APPROVED
TON DI-
TIONALLY
Coast Highway, on the northwesterl
c.orner of East Coast Highway and
Narcissus Avenue,. in Corona_ del
Mara
ZONE: C -1
APPLICANT: C'Est Si Bon Bakery, Newport Beach
OWNER: James.Ray; Costa Mesa
The public hearing opened in connection with this
item and Mr. Paul Kohne, representing the appli-
cant, requested approval of this use permit.
Mr. Michael Ray, representing the owner, re-
ferred to Condition of approval No. 6 and stated
that they can not dedicate the land at the
corner of Narcissus Avenue and.East Coast High-
way, because they do not own it.
• � i I( 1 I I� -12 -.
COM/WSSKXfRS August 6, 1981 MINUTFS
City of Newport Beach
LL CALL I I I I I I INDEX
Mr. Don Webb, City.Engineer, stated that the
ow.ner could.dedicate any interest or any future
interest he may have in the corner cutoff. Mr.
Ray stated that this would be acceptable.
Motion X Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No.
All Ayes X X X X YX 2009 subject to the findings and conditions of
Exhibit "A" with the revision to Condition No.
6 that the owner dedicate.any interest.or future
interest he may obtain in the corner cutoff,
which MOTION CARRIED as follows:
FINDINGS:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with
the Land Use Element of the General Plan
and is compatible with surrounding land
uses .
2. The project will not have any significant
• environmental impact.
3. The Police Department has indicated that
they do not contemplate any problems.
4. That the waiver of the development stand-
ards as they pertain to circulation, walls,
landscaping, utilities, and a portion of
the parking requirements will be of no
further detriment to adjacent properties .
inasmuch as the site has been developed
and the structure has been in existence
for many years.
The approval of Use Permit No. 2009 will
not, under the circumstances of the case
be detrimental to the health, safety, peace,_
morals, comfort and general welfare of per-
sons residing and working in the neighbor-
hood or be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the neighbor-
hood or the general welfare of the City.
CONDITIONS:
.1. That development shall be in substantial
• conformance with the approved plot plan,
floor plan and elevation.
-13-
f11011
August 6, 1981
m
t Beach
2. That all new exterior lighting and.signs
shall conform to Chapters 20.06 and 20.72
of the Newport.Beach Municipal Code.
MINUTES
3. That all mechanical equipment and trash
areas shall be screened from public streets,
alleys, or adjoining properties.
4. That a minimum of eight(.8) parking spaces
shall be provided for the proposed bakery.
INDEX
5.. That all improvements be constructed as
required by ordinance.and the Public Works
Department.
6. That prior to issuance of any building,
electrical. and mechanical permits, the
applicants interest in a 15 -foot radius
corner cutoff on the corner of East Coast
Highway..and Narcissus Avenue -be dedicated
•
to the public.
ITEM #10
Item No. 10, Use Permit No. 2010, was continued
to the Meeting of August 20, 1981.
Continued
To August
20, 1981
Request to amend an approved use permit that
permitted the.construction of a combined com.=
Item #11
mercial- residential structure in the-C-1
District and that permitted a modification to
USE PERMIT
the Zoning Code for tandem parking spaces and
N0. 1981
encroachment of parking,spaces into the re-
quired 10 foot rear yard. The purpose of this
(Amended)
application is to permit the approved develop-
ment to be a condominium project.
AND
AND
Item #12
RESUB-
Request to establish one parcel of land and
eliminate an interior lot line where two logs
now exist so as to permit the construction of
DIVISION
•
N0. 693
-14-
•
Motion
Ayes
Noes
X
X
August 6, 1981
ref■
t Beach
a combined commercial- residential condominium
project in the C -1 District.
MINUTES
INDEX
LOCATION: Lots 3.and 4, Block 9, Balboa BOTH
Island, located at 504 South Bay APPROV
Front, on the.northeasterly side CONDI --
of South Bay Front between Opal TIOUL
Avenue and Agate Avenue on Balboa
Island.
ZONE: C -1
APPLICANT: Fleetwood B. Joiner, Huntington
Beach
OWNER: Ed Ziemer and Bruce Chandler,
Balboa
Agenda Item Nos. 11 and 12 were heard concur-
rently, due to their relationship.
The public hearing opened in connection with
these items and Mr. Fleetwood Joiner, architect
representing the owner, requested approval of
these items.
Planning Director Hewicker suggested an added
condition to the resubdivision request, that
the City review the Covenants., Conditions and
Restrictions for this project.
Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1981,
(Amended) subject to the findings and conditions
of Exhibit "A" as follows, which MOTION CARRIED:
USE PERMIT NO.. 1981 ( Amended).
FINDINGS:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the
Land Use Element of the General Plan, the
Local Coastal Plan, and is compatible with
surrounding land uses.
• 11111111 -15
40 [CID c
August 6, 1981 .
M1
MINUTES
INDEX
2. That the project will not have any signifi-
cant environmental impact.
3. The project will comply with all applicable
City ,and-State Building Codes and Zoning
requirements for new.buildingsapplicable
to the district in which the proposed pro-
ject is located.
4. The project lot size conforms to the Zoning
Code area requirements.
5.- That each of the proposed units has been de-
signed as a condominium with separate and
individual utility connections.
6. The approval of Use Permit No. 1981(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 neigh -
borhood or be detrimental or injurious to
property and improvements in the neighborhood
or the general welfare of the City.
CONDITIONS:
1. That the approval of Use Permit No. 1981
iAmended) shall be subject to all applicable
conditions of Use Permit No. 1981.
2. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivi-
sion No. 693 be fulfilled.
RESUBDIVLSION NO. 693
Motion X Motion was made to approve Resubdivision No.
Ayes X YX X X 693 subject to the findings and conditions of
Noes X Exhibit "A with the added condition,.that
prior to recordation, the City. shall review
and approve the Covenants, Conditions and Re-
strictions for this project, which MOTION CARRIED
as follows:
I I I( I I I I -16
COMMISS01,11ERS August 6, 1981 MINUTES
City,of Newport Beach
L1 CALL I I I I I I I INDEX
FINDINGS:
1. That the maps meet the requirements of Title
19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all
ordinances of.the City, all applicable
General or Specific Plans, and the Planning
Commission is satisfied with the plan of
subdivision.
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map. Item #14
No. 50 from the R -A District to the R -1 -B
District. Amendment
NO. 563
LOCATION: A portion of Block 93 of the
Irvine's Subdivision located
southerly of San Joaquin Hills APPROVED
0 11111111
2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no
problems from a planning standpoint.
CONDITIONS:
1. That a parcel map be filed.
2. That all improvements be constructed as re-
quired by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
•
3. That each unit have.individual sewer later-
als and water services unless otherwise
approved by the Public Works Department.
4. Prior to recordation of the parcel map, the
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for
this project shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Attorney's Office and the Planning
Department.
Item #13
Item No. 13, Use Permit No. 2014, was continued
to the Meeting.of September 10 ,1981.
Continued
to Septem-
* * *
ber 10,
198
Request to amend a portion of Districting Map. Item #14
No. 50 from the R -A District to the R -1 -B
District. Amendment
NO. 563
LOCATION: A portion of Block 93 of the
Irvine's Subdivision located
southerly of San Joaquin Hills APPROVED
0 11111111
i i mac
ZONE
August 6, 1981
R1
MINUTES
Road between MacArthur Boulevard
and San Miguel Drive. ..
R -A
INITIATED
BY: City of Newport Beach
Staff presented background information on this
request.
Motion X Motion was made for approval of Amendment No.
All Ayes X X X X X 563 which will amend a portion of Districting.
Map No.. 50 from the R -A District to the R 71 -B
District, which MOTION CARRIED.
• The Housing Element,was.continued to the.Meeting
of August 20, 1981.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Excused Absences.
Motion X Motion was made for excused absences for Commis -
All Ayes, X X XX X X X sioner Allen and Commissioner Winburn from the
Planning Commission.Meeting of August 20, 1981,
which MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman McLaughlin requested a study session
on September 10, 1981, to begin at 4:30 p.m.
She recommended that the following items be
discussed: mobile home park zoning for De Anza
Bayside Village and in -lieu parking for West
B-
INDEX
Item #15
Continued
to August
20, 1981
ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS j
August 6, 1981
701
MINUTES
INDEX
Newport. Commissioner Thomas suggested that a
future study session discuss the use of in -lieu
fees for park lands.
Commissioner Ba.lalis suggested that a joint
meeting be scheduled between the Planning Com-
missions and Department staffs for the Cities
of Costa Mesa and Newport-Beach. He stated
that the Beeco, Ltd. project could be discussed,
along with General Plan Amendment 80 -3, 17th
Street and any possible annexations. The Com-
mission members expressed their interest in
such a meeting. Chairman.McLaughlin stated
that she would be discussing this with the .Int,er-
City Relations Committee.
There being no further business, the Planning
Commission adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Joan Winburn, Secretary
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
0 11111111 -19