The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/10/1989COMMISSIONERS O� �'pd•dcr, REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Present A * All Commissioners were present. EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, City Attorney Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Patricia Temple, Principal Planner W. William Ward, Senior Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of July 20. 1989: linu tes of 7 -20 -89 Commissioner Debay referred to page four, fifth paragraph, and requested that owner /applicant be corrected to owner /occupant. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve the amended July Ayes * * * 20, 1989, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Abstain r r Public Comments: Public No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on Comments non - agenda items. s x s Posting of the A eg nda Posting of James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning the Agenda Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, August 4, 1989, 1989, in front of City Hall. COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Request for Continuances: .request fo ontinuances James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that staff has recommended the continuation of Item No. 4, Use Permit No. 3357, Jorge E. Oubina; applicant, property located at 4360 Campus Drive, to the August 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting, to allow the applicant additional time to submit information to staff; and Item No. 11, Use Permit No. 3321 (Revocation), Newport Sound Waves, property located at 2906 West Coast Highway, to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting, to allow staff additional time to discuss alternate solutions with the applicant. Mr. Hewicker stated that Item No. 12, Variance No. 1155, property located at 3619 Ocean Boulevard, has been withdrawn by the applicant, EPAC, Financial, Inc. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Items No. 4 to the All Ayes August 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting, and No. 11 to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION • CARRIED. x x x Resubdivision No. 899 (Public. Hearing) tem No. 1 Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land Resub.899 for two unit residential condominium development on property located in the R -2 District. Approved LOCATION: Lot 8, Block 529, Corona del Mar, located at 506 Acacia Avenue, on the southeasterly side of Acacia Avenue, between Second Avenue and Third Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Paul Ryan, Corona del Mar OWNER: 506 Acacia Partners, Corona del Mar -2 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Bye �o August 10, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX The public hearing was opened in.connection with this item, and Mr. Paul Ryan, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Ryan concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Resubdivision No. All Ayes 899, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. . 2. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied , with the plan of subdivision. 3. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 4. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to occupancy or final inspection of the structure and that the parcel map be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. • -3- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. 3. 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. 4. That all vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley. 5. That the garage setback and design of the driveway shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 6. That County Sanitation District fees be paid or proof of payment be provided to the Planning Department prior to occupancy of the structure. 7. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 8. That a park dedication fee for one dwelling unit shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 9. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. Exception Permit No. 33 (Public Hearing) item No.2 Request to permit the installation of an off -site service station EP No. 33 identification sign in the Newport North Shopping Center. The sign will be located on an existing ground sign adjacent to Approved MacArthur Boulevard. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit a 20± sq.ft. identification sign that exceeds the permitted 8 sq.ft. area, and various other signs and logos that are not specifically included in the Service Station Development Standards of the North Ford /San Diego Creek Planned Community. • -4- COMMISSIONERS gy d�+ cad MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX LOCATION: A portion of Lot 6, Tract No. 12309, located at 1200 -1280 Bison Avenue, on the northwesterly comer of MacArthur Boulevard and "Bison Avenue, in the North Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Mobil Oil Corporation, Burbank OWNER: SDC Developments, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened at this time, and Mr. Harry Erickson appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Erickson concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the . public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Exception Permit All Ayes No. 33 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed signs will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed signs will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the proposed signage and graphics are consistent with the character and design of the subject shopping center. 4. That the signs on the northern frontage of the building are oriented toward the interior of the shopping center. 5. That the granting of this exception permit will not be contrary to the purpose of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal • -5- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. Code, or the North Ford Planned Community Development Standards, and will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood, or detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, or to the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations. 2. That the applicant shall obtain a building permit for the proposed signs prior to installation. 3. That the location of the signs shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer for sight distance. s s s A. Use Permit No. 1677 (Amended)(Continued Public Hearing) item No.3 Request to review Use Permit No. 1677 (Amended) that UP1677A permitted an expanded Stuft. Noodle Restaurant with on -sale V1106 beer and wine and a limited lunch time operation. The review will permit the Planning Commission to consider adding or Appioved modifying conditions of approval to said application. AND E. Variance No. 1106 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to review Variance No. 1106 that permitted the waiver of a portion of the required off - street parldng spaces in conjunction with the Stuft Noodle Restaurant. The review will permit the Planning Commission to consider adding or modifying conditions of approval to said application. LOCATION: A portion of Lot D, Tract No. 919, located at 215 -217 Riverside Avenue, on the -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX northwesterly comer of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street, across Avon Street from the United States Post Office. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Stuft Noodle Restaurant, Newport Beach OWNER: Ms. Nelly Brandsma, Newport Beach Commissioner Edwards stated that he has read the July 20, 1989, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes and is prepared to vote. on the subject application. The continued public hearing was opened at this time, and Mr. Robert Douk, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he submitted letters to the Planning Commission from customers who patronize the restaurant at lunch time. Mr. Douk addressed the intensity of the business • community in the immediate area, and he commented that only a few restaurants are open for lunch in the area. He commented that the restaurant does not have high visibility, and serves 17 to 24 customers during the lunch hour. Mr. Douk and Commissioner Debay discussed the parking turnover in the immediate area since the post office moved from . the site that was adjacent to the restaurant across Avon Street. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Douk replied that the restaurant has two employees during the day, including himself. In response to a question posed by Commissioner PersGn, Mr. Douk replied that he personally waits on eight to ten tables during the lunch hour; however, he explained that the tables are not used simultaneously. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Douk replied that the employees park in the Municipal Parking Lot. -7- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Daily e y ot, appeared before a Planning ommission to state that the restaurant frequently serves three to four tables during the lunch hour. She explained that as are the circumstances with many restaurants in the area, it is not profitable for the restaurant to remain open during the lunch hour; however, she commented that Mr. Douk's reasons are to promote the restaurant for dinner and to foster good will in the community. Mrs. Gail Demmer, 2812 Cliff Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Newport Heights Community Association to state the concerns that the Association has with respect to the impact from parking and traffic in the residential area. Mrs. Demmer stated that the residents are concerned that employees in Mariner's Mile are parking along Riverside Avenue to Cliff Drive in Newport Heights. Mrs.. Demmer explained that when restaurant parking is waived that the residential area is affected. Mrs. Demmer addressed the number of available free and metered parking spaces in the • Mariner's Mile Municipal Parking Lot that are not being used by employees, and and she commented that conditions requiring employee parking are not being enforced. Mrs. Demmer and Commissioner Debay discussed the idea of a two hour parking zone and the affect the restriction would have on the Newport Heights residents. Mrs. Demmer commented that the Association will soon be conducting a survey addressing the parking problem. In response to questions posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mrs. Demmer replied that approximately nine automobiles park on Riverside Avenue instead of the Municipal Parking Lot, and she surmised that it may be more aesthetically pleasing to park on Riverside Avenue instead of the Municipal Parking Lot. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Mr. Hewicker stated that there are 15 parking spaces available on the subject site during the lunch hour inasmuch as the building's tenants are only on the site during the early morning and late afternoon. • -8- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX building's tenants are only on the site during the early morning and late afternoon. Motion * Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1677 (Amended) and Variance No. 1106 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B ", restricting lunchtime operation during the week. Commissioner Pers6n explained that the restaurant is a good member of the business community; however, he disagreed that the parking should be waived because of the high volume of traffic and intensity of use created by the post office, the video and photo stores, the bakery, and the Girl's Gym. Substitute Substitute motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1677 Motion (Amended) and Variance No. 1106 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Debay suggested that the use permit be reviewed by the Planning Commission after Avon Street has been completed, and she said that the applicant should be given the opportunity to continue to operate the restaurant during the lunch hour. Chairman Pomeroy supported the substitute motion based on Condition No. 15 that gives the Planning Commission the opportunity to review the use permit if it is determined that the traffic and parking are detrimental to the community. Commissioner Di Sano supported the substitute motion based on the foregoing Condition No. 15. He compared the proposed Specialty Food Ordinance with the opportunity to review use permits on an individual basis, and he addressed the timing of the environmentally sensitive ditch with the applicant's purchase of the restaurant. Commissioner Di Sano stated that parking is available in the Municipal Parking lot, and on the site. He addressed Commissioner Pers6n's concerns regarding the high volume of traffic in the area, and with the exception of the post office, he said that the peak time of said high intensity uses is not during the lunch hour. Commissioner Edwards supported the substitute motion. He concurred with Commissioner Pers6n's concerns; however, he said that to deny the applicant a lunchtime business would not mitigate the parking and traffic problems on Riverside Avenue. -9- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ��o \ August 10, 1989 0 � CITY OF NEWPORT. BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Glover supported the original motion on the basis that the patrons of daytime businesses should not be prohibited parking spaces by the patrons of the restaurant which is primarily a nighttime operation. Commissioner Merrill supported the original motion on the basis that the applicant should have been aware of the conditions that were imposed on the use permit when he purchased the restaurant operation. Commissioner Pers6n expressed his concerns with respect to how new business owners can be informed of the conditions that were imposed on use permits previous to their purchase of the business. Ayes * Substitute motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3677 Noes * k (Amended) and Variance No. 1106, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit 'W'. MOTION CARRIED. • FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That adequate parking is provided for the restaurant use at lunchtime during the week, since many of the restaurant patrons walk from adjoining residential and commercial areas. Furthermore, most of the public parking spaces located directly in front of the restaurant facility will be available at night and on weekends for restaurant patrons. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1677(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. -10- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT MINUTES . August 10, 1989 BEACH WL CALL j ;I j ) ) J ) 1 I INDEX I� 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, and floor plan, except as noted below. 2. That the previous Use Permit No. 1677 (Amended) and Variance No. 1106 shall expire with the approval of this application. 3. That the restaurant shall be allowed a limited lunch time operation during the week which will include the front entrance area and the front dining area (764± sq.ft. of "net public area ") only. 4. That the existing parking lot shall be maintained with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide, in accordance with the existing parking layout. All fifteen parking spaces on the site shall be accessible and usable for vehicular parking at all times. A directional sign shall be maintained designating that is parking is available to rear of the building. 5. That all asphaltic pavement surfaces of the existing parking areas shall be maintained. 6. That all of the required daytime restaurant parking spaces are waived and all of the existing on -site parking spaces (15 spaces) shall be available for the exclusive nighttime use of the Stuft Noodle Restaurant. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjoining streets. The existing trash area shall be relocated so that the trash doors and trash trucks will not interfere with pedestrians on the sidewalk on Riverside Avenue. 8. That approximately 5 feet of the existing block wall adjacent to the driveway on Riverside Avenue shall be lowered so as to provide better sight distance for motorists on the steep driveway. • 11111111 -11- COMMISSIONERS �. O�\ MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH L CALL INDEX 9. That no alterations to the existing parking design shall be permitted without the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 10. That the restaurant employees shall be required to park their automobiles in the "Mariner's Mile" municipal lot. 11. That all signs shall be in conformance with the provision of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 12. That the hours of operation for the restaurant use shall be limited from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday through. Thursday and to 11 :00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. 13. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application. 14. That the development standards pertaining to traffic circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination, underground utilities and a portion of the required parking spaces shall be waived. • 15. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. • -12- COMMISSIONERS O'✓ �'p�`'• did MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH L CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 3357 (Continued Public Hearing) item No.4 Request to permit the establishment of a retail sales operation Cont' a to involving the sale and installation of electronic sound equipment 8 -24 -89 and cellular phones for automobiles and boats on property located in the M -1 -A District. The proposal also includes a UP3357 modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit the installation of a related identification sign which will encroach 10 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback adjacent to Campus Drive. LOCATION: Lot 30, Tract No. 3201, located at 4360. Campus Drive, on the southeasterly side of Campus Drive between Dove Street and MacArthur Boulevard, across from the John Wayne Airport. ZONE: M -1 -A APPLICANT: Jorge R. Oubina, Newport Beach • OWNERS: Claudia and Pierre Sawaya and Partners, Irvine James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that staff recommends that this item be continued to the August 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting so as to allow the applicant additional time to submit information. requested by staff. motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Use Permit No. All Ayes 3357 to the August 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. . -13- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \\CITY August 10, 1989 OF NEWPORT BEACH L CALL J J J J J I J J INDEX Use Permit No. 3251 (Amended)(Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit that permitted the outdoor storage of recreational vehicles in conjunction with a self- storage facility on property located in the M -1 -A District. The proposed amended use permit consists of allowing the rental of moving trucks and related equipment on the property. LOCATION: Lots 7 and 8, Tract No. 3201, located at 3760 and 3800 Campus Drive, on the southeasterly side of Campus Drive, between Quail Street and Bristol Street North, across from the John Wayne Airport. ZONE: M -1 -A APPLICANT: Campus Drive Associates OWNER: Same as applicant . The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Mark Jones, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Jones concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3251 Ayes * * * * * (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the self- storage facility and related truck rental operation 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. • 11111111 -14- Item No.5 UP3251 Approved COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH L CALL INDEX 3. That the Police Department does not foresee any problems with the proposed project. 4. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 5. That adequate off - street parking spaces will be provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3251 (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. 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan except as noted below. • 2. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3251 shall be fulfilled. 3. That no more than ten rental trucks shall be stored or rented from the site unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 4. That the size of the rental trucks shall not exceed 20± feet in length. 5. That no truck repair or servicing shall be permitted on site. 6. That all parking spaces on the property shall be used for either parking or the storage of moving trucks or recreational vehicles. 7. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. • 11111111 -15- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RML CALL JJJJJJ11 1INDEX 1♦ 0 0 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. Modification No. 3565 (,Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of two pilasters 10 feet t high and wrought iron gates 11 feet t high which are to be located less than 15 feet but more than 10 feet from the front property line where the Big Canyon Planned Community Development Standards limits such construction in said area to 8 foot maximum height. Also included in this application is the construction of two additional pilasters with light fixtures with an overall height of 5 feet t within the 10 foot front yard setback where the fences and walls and any such appurtenances are limited to 3 foot maximum height. LOCATION: Lot 3, Tract No. 7223, located at 22 Cypress Point Lane, on the southeasterly corner of Cypress Point Lane and Royal Saint George Road, in the Big Canyon Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Michael J. Rogerson, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant APPELLANT: Canyon Hills Community Association -16- Item No.6 Mod. 3565 Denied' COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT MINUTES August 10, 1989 BEACH RWL CALL J 1 1 1 1 1 1 I INDEX 10 In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, James Hewicker, Planning Director, agreed that the project's construction commenced prior to obtaining a building permit or approval by the Modifications Committee. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Michael Rogerson, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pers6n and Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Rogerson explained that the dwelling is currently undergoing an extensive remodel. He explained that the contractor obtained a Building Permit for the dwelling unit; however, he was not aware that the landscaping contractor had not obtained a Building Permit for the pilasters inasmuch as the exterior has been developed in stages. Mr. Rogerson further replied that the Canyon Hills Community Association's Architecture Committee has not approved the pilasters. I I I I I Discussion ensued between Mr. Rogerson and Commissioner Edwards with respect to the construction of the pilasters. • Mr. Bill Hickey, attorney for the Canyon Hills Community Association, appellant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hickey referred to the law firm's letter to the Planning Commission dated August 3, 1989, and the attached photographs which explain why the Association opposed the Modifications Committee's findings to approve the subject modification. Mr. Hickey compared photographs of the pilasters currently under construction with the architect's exhibit that was submitted to the Association's Architecture Committee. He commented that it is an "overwhelming" project and out of character for the neighborhood. Mr. Hickey stated that the Architecture Committee informed Mr. Rogerson that 8 foot pilasters would be acceptable and reasonable with the Canyon Hills Community Association. Discussion ensued between Mr. Hickey, Commissioner Edwards, and Mr. Hewicker with respect to the maximum height that would be allowed for pilasters with light fixtures that would be acceptable and permitted by the Association and that would IIIIII11 -17 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX conform with the Big Canyon Planned Community Development Standards which limits pilasters to eight feet including light fixtures. Mr. Dan DeMille appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the Architecture Committee of the Canyon Hills Community Association. Mr. DeMille stated that the Association does not object to the light fixtures installed on three foot pilasters; however, the Association does object to the massive pilasters. Mr. DeMille explained that the applicant withdrew a previous request to construct pilasters across the garage area after the neighbors objected. He compared the proposed modification with a similar application that was approved by the Architecture Committee and the Modifications Committee. Mr. DeMille explained that the property located at 81 Royal St. George is at the end of a cul -de -sac and does not interfere with adjacent property and had the support of the residents. Mr. DeMille stated that the proposed setback does not conform with the adjacent setbacks on Cypress Point Lane. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. DeMille explained that the 150 residents in the Association include residents on Cypress Point Lane. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Robert Burnham, City Attorney, stated that provisions of the Association's CC &R's are irrelevant to the Planning Commission's determination, and the City's rules are without reference to the CC&R's. Mr. John Byerlein, 82 Royal St. George, appeared before the Planning Commission to oppose the subject modification on the basis that the proposed project would interfere with the traffic circulation in the vicinity of Cypress Point Lane and Royal St. George, and would not be aesthetically pleasing in the area. Mr. Roger Hughes, Hermitage Lane, appeared before the Planning Commission to oppose the proposed modification and he referred to the petition opposing the modification that was signed by the local residents. • -18- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \\ � �. August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Hewicker explained that the Building Department was advised that the pilasters were being constructed over the height limit and without a Building Permit. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made to deny Modification No. 3565, subject to the findings in Exhibit "B ". Commissioner Edwards supported the motion based on Finding No. 1 stating the project is not consistent with the Big Canyon Planned Community Development Standards. Mr. Hewicker explained that the Planned Community Standards were adopted by the City, and the CC &R's were adopted by the residents and the Association. Motion was voted on to deny Modification No. 3565, MOTION to Ayes CARRIED. Findings:. 1. That the Planning Commission determined that in this case, the proposed location of the pilasters and the wrought iron gates would be detrimental to persons, property and improvements in the neighborhood, and that the applicant's request would not be consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or the Big Canyon Planned Community Development Standards. 2. That the approval of the pilasters and related wrought iron gates could set a precedent for the approval of other similar requests which could be detrimental to the neighborhood. 3. That the height of the proposed pilasters and wrought iron entry gates is higher than any previously approved structure within the front yard setback and out of character of the neighborhood. -19- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX The Planning Commission recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. Amendment No. 679 (Public Hearing) Item No.7 Request to consider an amendment to Title 20 of the Newport A679 Beach Municipal Code so as to define and regulate "Specialty Food" uses in the City; and the acceptance of an environmental Cont' d to document. 10 -5 -89 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach In response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay with respect to the staff report which states "in order to relieve the smaller facilities of the 'burden' of obtaining use permits,.." James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained the process that is required after a use permit has been approved by the Planning • Commission, including the possibility that a Coastal Permit may be required. Mr. Hewicker stated that small take -out establishments, i.e., donut shops, cookie shops, bakeries, and ice cream stores are currently under the same category as large take -out restaurants, i.e., McDonald's restaurant, and he commented that the take -out establishments are different types of uses. Mr. Hewicker stated that use permit requirements for take -out restaurants could be 'burdensome" to small establishments. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Hewicker defined "take -out" restaurant. He referred to the staff report depicting a summary of use permit approvals from February 6, 1986, through April 14, 1989. Mr. Hewicker compared the parking and traffic characteristics of a retail or office use in a non - conforming area to a specialty food establishment, and he explained that because a specialty food operation does not generate more parking or traffic than a retail or office use, the Planning Commission often waives the parking. Mr. Hewicker addressed Restaurant Ordinance, Section 20.72.020 C, stating that if a specialty food use does not meet the criteria as stated in the proposed Section 20.72.015, of the draft • -20- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Ordinance, then a use permit would be required. He explained the relationship between the Floor Area Ratio Ordinance and the proposed Specialty Food Ordinance relative to floor area limitations applicable to retail and office uses as compared to restaurant uses. Commissioner Pers6n referred to the foregoing charts listed in the staff report, and he commented that there are small food establishments that are required to provide an abundant number of parking spaces, and he concurred that it is not a good idea for the Planning Commission to waive parking. Commissioner Pers6n and Mr. Hewicker discussed what the affect would be if a provision would be added to the nine standards stating that a parking requirement could not be satisfied by the use of non- conforming parking rights, and that the parking demand of a specialty food operation shall be similar to retail uses that could be established in the same building space. Mr. Hewicker commented that the area that the provision would have the greatest affect would be in the older sections of the City where • there is legal non - conforming parking. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Hewicker explained that to comply with the proposed Floor Area Ratio Amendment, a specialty food use cannot be established in a building that exceeds the floor area ratio of .3 FAR. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill with respect to the proposed Ordinance, Mr. Hewicker replied that the menu of a specialty food operation can be expanded as long as the square footage is not added, the hours of operation are not modified, and the seating is not increased. Mr. Hewicker further replied that additional seating in the common area of a shopping center would be considered in the floor area ratio of the specialty food operation. Commissioner Debay asked what control does the Planning Commission have if the success of a specialty food establishment increases the parking and traffic demand. Discussion ensued and Robert Burnham, City Attorney, explained that a provision could be written into the Ordinance in the event the operation is detrimental to the community. -21- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o 'gyp ��0 August 10, 1989 0 \. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Association, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mrs. Pettit distributed a copy of a letter dated August 9, 1989, to the Planning Commission from the Association stating their opposition to the proposed Ordinance on the basis that the Ordinance is too liberal for the older sections of the City because of the parking impact, and the public needs to be fully informed of changes in specific uses. Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 - 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. Dr. VanderSloot addressed the traffic that C'Est Si Bon Bakery generates in the Newport Heights area at Riverside Avenue and West Coast Highway. Commissioner Person explained that said bakery opens at 7:00 a.m., and because the operation is a bakery and does not fall under the Restaurant Ordinance, a use permit is not required. In response to questions posed by Dr. VanderSloot, Mr. Hewicker explained that there are bakeries that have seating that require use permits. . There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the hearing was closed at this time. public Motion * Motion was made to continue Amendment No. 679 to September 21, 1989, so as to allow the City Attorney time to research a provision that would restrict the use of non - conforming parking under the proposed Amendment. Commissioner Debay stated that she has a concern with respect to the need for parking spaces inasmuch as there are specialty food establishments that do not generate traffic. Mr. Burnham asked if the Planning Commission would agree to a concept of eliminating use permits for certain businesses that operate food establishments and do not serve as a destination point and do not generate more traffic than a retail use? Chairman Pomeroy explained that the Planning Commission has a desire to streamline the approval process with the ability to require a use permit if the operation creates a problem. Substitute Substitute motion was made to deny Amendment No. 679. Motion k Commissioner Di Sano explained that his concerns are with respect to "policing" the Ordinance inasmuch as it is difficult to -22- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX respect to 'policing" the Ordinance inasmuch as it is difficult to "police" establishments that have use permits; that it would be difficult to bring an individual into Court if there are no conditions with the City; that staff come back with an Ordinance that contains "teeth'; that he has no problems giving consideration for specific sections of the City but not in the older intense areas of the City; and in conclusion Commissioner Di Sano stated that restaurants are a problem in the City and need to be looked at on a case by case basis, including parking. Commissioner Pers6n advised that he requested language to the proposed Ordinance that would not allow non - conforming parking rights, that if an establishment does not have adequate parking then a use permit would be required in every case, and he addressed the older sections of the City that would be mostly affected. Commissioner Di Sano stated that he also has concerns with the sections of the City that have strip commercial development such as in Corona del Mar where there could be a row of specialty food restaurants if the restaurants met all of the provisions of the Ordinance. Commissioner Edwards supported the motion to continue Amendment No. 679 based on the need to address the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Glover supported the substitute motion to deny . Amendment No. 679 inasmuch as she. did not support the concept. Commissioner Glover explained that whether a restaurant generated more traffic than a retail establishment is not necessarily what should be looked at, that there is a different type of dynamics where food is served, that food establishments have different problems than retail, and that there is a need to monitor the operation. Ayes * Substitute motion was voted on to deny Amendment No. 679. Noes * * * MOTION FAILED. Commissioner Pers6n indicated his concern that there are a number of small food establishments that have no seats, however, there are high parking requirements. 23 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Di Sano requested to amend the motion to continue Amendment No. 679 to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. The maker of the motion concurred with the request. Commissioner Merrill indicated his concern that a specialty food restaurant could expand the menu and change the operational characteristics of the establishment. Mr. Burnham stated that staff would consider adding provisions that would limit the number of types of food items sold, and that would serve local residents in the area. Chairman Pomeroy stated that unless the Specialty Food Amendment had "teeth" in it he would not support the Ordinance. He indicated his concern is to give the Planning Commission the authority to govern the specialty food operation by authorizing a use permit in the event the operational characteristics are converted to resemble a restaurant. • Commissioner Debay indicated her concern with respect to a potential trash problem at the specialty food restaurant. Motion was voted on to continue Amendment No. 679 to the All Ayes October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3356 (Continued Public Hearing) item Ro.8 Request to permit the establishment of a take -out restaurant UP3356 with on -sale beer and wine and incidental seating specializing in pizza on property located in the C -1 District. The proposal also Denied includes a request to waive the required off - street parking spaces. LOCATION: Lots 15 and 16, Block 6, Balboa Tract, located at 107 Palm Street, on the northwesterly comer of Palm Street and East Ocean Front, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 -24- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES � NP `�o� � August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX APPLICANT: Lourdes Gulmatico, Huntington Beach OWNER: James G. West, Costa Mesa In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Hewicker explained that the adopted General Plan requires a .3 floor area ratio for a restaurant and the subject building exceeds the permitted floor area ratio. Mr. Carlo Mioni, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that he has been paying rent at the subject site since May, 1989, and he expressed his desire to expedite the project. Mr. Mioni requested that the hours of operation be addressed to allow the restaurant to remain open until 12 midnight. Discussion ensued between Mr. Mioni, Chairman Pomeroy, and Mr. Burnham with respect to the take- out restaurant category as opposed to the specialty food category. In response to questions posed by Mr. Mioni and the Planning Commission, Mr. Hewicker explained the proposed Floor Area Ratio Amendment that is currently being considered by the City Council. He discussed the goals of the adopted General Plan and how the intensities of the land use and floor area ratio were accomplished. Mr. Hewicker explained that the average floor area ratio permitted within the City is .5 times buildable area, the high traffic generators were assigned with .25 or .3 floor area ratio and the low traffic generators were assigned a 1.0 floor area ratio. Mr. Hewicker concluded that it would be difficult for the applicant to establish a high traffic generator on the existing building which has a .3 floor area ratio. Discussion ensued regarding the floor area ratio of the pizza restaurant as opposed to the building's floor area ratio, and to determine the similarity of a muffin shop or bakery to a take- out pizza restaurant. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Hewicker explained that the application was submitted to the Planning Commission with the idea that the take -out restaurant could be considered in the special food category with a finding • -25- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX that the use would more clearly resemble retail use instead of a restaurant use. Discussion ensued between Chairman Pomeroy and Mr. Burnham with respect to the difference between a bakery and a pizza restaurant, and what constitutes a destination restaurant as opposed to taking food out and consuming said food at a later time. Mr. Mioni commented that the proposed pizza restaurant would not be operated in the same manner as the restaurant he operated on Balboa Island. Discussion ensued with respect to the food service of the proposed restaurant. Mr. Burnham stated that a take -out restaurant is defined as a place of business that sells food products or beverages, which delivers those foods outside of the building or within the building where the majority of the patrons consume the products outside of the building. Mr. Hewicker commented that under the Zoning Code a bakery is specifically identified as a use that does not require a use permit. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Burnham, and Mr. Hewicker with respect to whether the operation could be considered a take -out restaurant if the applicant removed the tables and chairs, and sold the pizza over a counter or delivered the pizza to customers. Mr. Burnham explained that the take -out restaurant delivers food on -site, and to deliver food in a van or truck could be considered catering. Mr. Douglas Boyd, Balboa Peninsula Point Association, appeared before the Planning Commission to express their concerns with respect to parking congestion in front of the proposed pizza restaurant. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made to deny Use Permit No. 3356 subject to the findings in Exhibit "B ". Commissioner Merrill maintained that the Planning Commission attempted to adopt .a General Plan that would control traffic. He explained that the subject application • -26- COMMISSIONERS � d,d MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX exceeds the allowable floor area ratio and should not be permitted at the subject location. Commissioner Edwards reluctantly supported the motion based on the floor area ratio that was adopted by the General Plan. Commissioner Debay supported the motion based on Finding for Denial No. 1 that provides an explanation regarding the floor area ratio. Motion to deny Use Permit No. 3356 was voted on, MOTION All Ayes CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed restaurant is a renovation of an existing commercial structure at more than the 0.3 F.A.R. allowed for a "restaurant ", in an area designated by the Land Use Plan of the General Plan for a maximum 0.511.0 F.A.R. (with 1.25 allowed for inclusion of mixed residential). The proposed application is an intensification of use and therefore not consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 2. That approval of the request to waive all the required parking in conjunction with proposed take -out restaurant facility as set forth in the Municipal Code would be detrimental to adjacent properties or improvements. 3. That the proposed take -out restaurant represents an intensification of use which will result in an increased parking demand for the area. 4. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3356 will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. -27- COMMISSIONERS .o .d � d, d O� c� q� \ August 10, 1989 • �� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES LOLL CALL INDEX The Planning Commission recessed at 10:10 p.m. and reconvened at 10:20 p.m. i Y Y Amendment No. 683 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No. 9 Request to amend Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal A683 Code so as to establish a "Site Plan Review ", Special Zoning District. Approved INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach " " The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 - 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the subject Amendment. Dr. VanderSloot addressed the proposed Amendments reference to 'Environmentally sensitive areas shall be preserved and protected. ", and he commented that this would be appropriate on specific sites that will be proposed to the Planning Commission • in the future. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to recommend to the City All Ayes Council the adoption of Amendment No. 683 (Resolution No. 1194) so as to establish a Site Plan Review Overlay District. MOTION CARRIED. General Plan Amendment No. 89 -1(C) (Continued Public Item No. 10 Hearing) GPA89 -1C Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan (R -1195) so as to redesignate the subject property from "Retail and Service Commercial" to "Multi - Family Residential" with a density LCPA of one dwelling unit for each 1,698 sq. ft. of buildable lot area; (R.119966 ) and the acceptance of an environmental document. 682 INITIATED. BY: The City of Newport Beach SPR 50 RDP 16 . _28_ TTN14028 A roved COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT MINUTES August 10, 1989 BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX AND B. Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 17 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to amend the Land Use Plan of the . Local Coastal Program so as to redesignate the subject property from 'Retail and Service Commercial" to "Multi - Family Residential" with a density of one dwelling unit for each 1,698 sq. ft. of buildable lot area. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND C. Amendment No. 682 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 20 so as to reclassify the subject property from R -3 -B to R -3 (1698) SPR and to establish a 15 foot front yard setback along the East • Coast Highway and Seaward Road frontage of the subject property. AND D. Site Plan Review No. 50 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a twenty unit residential condominium development and related subterranean parking area on the subject property. The proposal also includes a modification to the Sign Code so as to permit the installation of a 12 square foot identification sign at the entrance of the development whereas the Zoning Code limits the size of an identification sign in the R -3 District to 6 square feet and the construction of an exterior stairway with handrails which exceed three feet in height and which encroach into the required front yard setback. AND • -29- COMMISSIONERS lul • MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX E. Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 16 (Discussion) Request to approve a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance for a 20 unit residential condominium development pursuant to the Administrative Guidelines for the implementation of the State Law relative to Low- and - Moderate - Income Housing within the Coastal Zone. AND F. Tentative Map of Tract No. 14028 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to subdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land in conjunction with the development of a twenty unit residential condominium project on the subject property. LOCATION: Lot 1, Tract No. 1237, located at 4030 East Coast Highway, on the northwesterly corner of East Coast Highway and Seaward Road • in Corona Highlands. ZONE: R -3 -11 APPLICANT: Buck Gully Associates, Ltd., Corona del Mar OWNER: Ed Friedl, Corona del Mar ENGINEER: Stevenson; Porto and .Pierce, Inc., Irvine Patricia Temple, Principal Planner, addressed the revised plans that were submitted to the Planning Commission by the applicants. She explained that the project was reduced from 20 units to 18 units to comply with the Public Works Department's requirement that structures not be built over an existing storm drain easement and the General Plan's requirement that requires a 25 foot setback area at the Buck Gully property line. Ms. Temple stated that two units were deleted so as to accommodate the foregoing requirements. She explained that after the applicants met with the neighbors with respect to their concerns to preserve the views from the surrounding areas, the building height was reduced from 28 feet, that is consistent with R -3 • -30- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Standards, to a maximum building height of 24 feet to 25 1/2 feet. She stated that there is minimal difference between the project's height and the patio of the lowest unit in the immediate vicinity. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Kent Hawkins, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hawkins concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". He indicated the meetings that the applicants had with the neighbors so as to produce a development that would be desirable to the residents, and he advised that the project is the result of those meetings. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pers6n confirmed the cooperative efforts that were Motion * made by the applicants and the residents. Motion was made to approve the Actions, Findings and Conditions for Approval in Exhibit "A" of the Environmental Document, General Plan • Amendment 89 -1 (C) (Resolution No. 1195), Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 17 (Resolution No. 1196), Amendment No. 682, Site Plan Review No. 50, Coastal Residential Development No. 16, and Tentative Map of Tract No. 14028. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Hewicker explained that in the event the project would not be developed, the property would be designated as "Multi - Family Residential." All Ayes The foregoing motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Findings: 1. That an Initial Study has been prepared for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and City policy. • -31- COMMISSIONERS � o CITY OF NEWPORT MINUTES August 10, 1989 BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 2. That based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the environment. A Negative Declaration has, therefore, been prepared. 3. That the information contained in the environmental document has been considered in the decision on the project. Mitigation Measures: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a. grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize impacts from silt, debris and other water pollutants. • 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering and sweeping program designed to.minimize the impact of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. The grading, excavation and recompaction of the site shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on the recommendations of a soil engineer or an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. • -32- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ��' 0 q� � August 10, 1989 9 � t � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. 6. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of the landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan. 7. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and the approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments. 8. All rooftop and other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 dBA at the property line, and that all mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. • 9. All units shall be sound attenuated to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL for interior living areas and 65 dBA CNEL for exterior living areas associated with individual units, as measured from the area expected to experience the highest sound levels. Measurement and certification of compliance with this condition shall be completed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy by a registered engineer practicing in acoustics. 10. All units shall be air conditioned. 11. The design and layout of the parking structure and ramp shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. Ramp design and landscaping on Seaward Avenue shall be designed to provide adequate sight distance from behind the sidewalk for automobiles exiting the structure. • -33- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES � o August 10, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. 12. Construction shall . conform to the hours of operation set forth in the Newport Beach Municipal Code. B. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -1(Q) Adopt Resolution No. 1195, recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 89 -1(C) to the City Council. C. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO, 17, Adopt Resolution No. 1196, recommending approval of Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 17 to the City Council. D. AMENDMENT NO, 682. Recommend approval of Amendment No. 682 to the City Council, an amendment to Districting Map No. 20 rezoning the site from R -3 -B to R -3 (1900) - SPR and to establish a 15 foot front yard setback on East Coast Highway and Seaward Road, with the following findings: • 1. That the amendment is necessary to implement the provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan. 2. That the proposed project cannot be implemented without the proposed amendment. E SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 50. Findings: 1. That the project is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. 2. Adequate off - street parking is being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 3. The project will comply with all applicable City and State Building Codes and Zoning requirements for new building applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located, except those items • -34- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES � o.o August 10, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX requested in conjunction with the proposed modifications. 4. The proposed development is a high -quality proposal and will not adversely affect the benefits of occupancy and use of existing properties within the area. 5. The proposed development promotes the maintenance of superior site location characteristics adjoining major thoroughfares of City-wide importance. 6. 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. 7. The proposed use of tandem spaces will not, under the circumstances of this 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 property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification for the project identification sign is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as may be noted below. 2. That a minimum of two parking spaces for each dwelling unit plus one -half guest parking space for each dwelling unit be provided on -site. • -35- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That tandem parking spaces be assigned to specific dwelling units. 4. That guest parking spaces be independently accessible and be identified as guest parking. 5. That all parking areas shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 6. Parking areas shall have a maximum 5% slope. 7. That the final design of on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 8. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjoining properties. • 9. That the applicant shall prepare a landscape plan which identifies the size, type and location of all plant material and the design and location of a permanent irrigation system. Said landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, Public Works Department and the Planning Department. 10. That the site plan is subject. to the further review and approval of the Newport Beach Fire Department in order to assure provision of adequate fire flow and emergency access. Automatic sprinklers and hose cabinets are recommended and may be required. 11. That all conditions of Tentative Map of Tract No. 14028 shall be fulfilled. 12. That a siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall be submitted and be subject to approval by the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control • -36- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Board, Santa Ana Region. This shall be a complete plan for temporary and permanent facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 13. That the siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 14. This site plan review shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 J of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 15. That a Coastal Development Permit be issued prior to the issuance of a building permit. 16. That no fences, retaining walls, pools of any size or • depth, or tennis other activity areas be constructed in the 25 foot Buck Gully property line setback. F.COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT N0.16 Finding: 1. That the proposed development has met the requirements of City Council Policy P -1. Conditions: 1. That prior to the recordation of the Final Tract Map, the applicant shall enter into an affordable housing agreement, the form and content of which is acceptable to the City Attorney and the Planning Director, which guarantees the provision of two affordable dwelling units on site. The affordable housing agreement shall be recorded as deed restriction against the property. 2. The affordable units provided shall be affordable to moderate income families if the units are for sale • -37- COMMISSIONERS 0 • �i MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX or to low income families at fair market rent if the units are rented by the applicant or successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of the Newport Beach Housing Element. 3. The term of affordability shall be twenty years. G. TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO, 14028 Findings: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the design of the subdivision. 2. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 4. That public improvements may be required of the developed per Section 19.08.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. 5. That sidewalk constructed along the Seaward Road frontage and construction of ramps for the handicapped will improve pedestrian safety. Conditions: 1. That a final map be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. That the final map be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. -38- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 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. 5. That the intersection od Seaward Road and the driveway be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour in conformance with City Std. 110-L. Slopes, landscape walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height 6. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits. 7. That all vehicular rights to East Coast Highway be released and relinquished to the City of Newport Beach. 8. That sidewalk be constructed along the Seaward Road frontage; that a curb access ramp be constructed at the corner of East Coast Highway and Seaward Road; That unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Seaward Road frontage and the deteriorated sidewalk be reconstructed along the East Coast Highway frontage. All work within East Coast Highway shall be completed under an encroachment permit. issued by the California Department of Transportation. • -39- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 9. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 10. 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 storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording 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. 11. That the proposed structure not be built over the existing storm drain line located on the westerly portion of the property. The storm drain line must either be relocated in order to provide future maintenance of the storm drain or the proposed structure must be placed on piles a minimum of 10 feet clear of the storm drain line to provide for future maintenance of the storm drain without endangering the proposed structure. If the storm drain is relocated the old easement must be abandoned and a new one dedicated as required. Caltrans approval is required for any encroachments into the storm drain easement. 12. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 13. That the Edison transformer serving the site be located outside the sight distance planes as described in City Std. 110 -L. 14. 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. A traffic control plan shall be • -40- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. No construction storage or delivery of materials shall occur within the State right -of -way. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a parking plan for workers must be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department. Use Permit No. 3321 (Revocation )(Public Hearing) Item Noll Request to consider recommending the revocation of Use Permit UP3321 No. 3321, Newport Sound Waves, that specializes in the sale and installation of automobile accessories, for failure to comply with Cont' d to specific conditions of approval or to consider adding or 10 -5 -89 modifying conditions of approval to said use permit. LOCATION: A portion of Lot F, Tract No. 919, located at 2906 West Coast Highway, on the • northerly side of West Coast Highway, between North Newport Boulevard and Riverside Avenue, in Mariner's Mile. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANTS: Nancy and Robert Clark OWNER: Robert Brandy, Pauma Valley James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that staff recommends that this item be continued to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting to allow additional time to discuss alternate solutions with the applicant regarding previously established conditions of approval. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Use Permit No. All Ayes 3321 (Revocation) to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED, • -41- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES O`d �'dd•d�t August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Variance No. 1155 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.12 Request to permit the construction of a single family dwelling V1155 which exceeds the maximum allowable height in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District on property located in the R -1 Withdrawn District. The height of the proposed dwelling will not exceed the height of the top of curb on Ocean Boulevard. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed dwelling to encroach 10 feet into the required 10 foot front yard setback adjacent to Ocean Boulevard. LOCATION: Lot 15, Tract No. 1257, located at 3619. Ocean Boulevard, on the southerly side of Ocean Boulevard between Orchid Avenue and Poinsettia Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANT: EPAC Financial, Inc., Costa Mesa OWNER: Thomas Linden, Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the applicant has requested to withdraw the subject application. A. Amendment No. 685 (Public Hearing) Item No.13 Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 17 so as to A685 establish a 10 foot front yard setback along the Carnation Avenue (private) frontage of the subject property and the Waiver of acceptance of an environmental document. Combining Requirement AND CRDP 14 Cont`d to B. Waiver of Combining Requirement (Discussion) Request to waive the combining of lots requirement in 9 -21 -89 conjunction with the proposed project; and the approval of a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow an open stairway to encroach 7 feet into a required 10 foot rear yard setback and • -42- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \\J\� � August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX to allow a portion of the structure to encroach 2 feet into the required 6 foot reverse comer setback adjacent to Seaview Avenue, at the rear of the property. AND C. Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 14 (Discussion) Request to approve a Coastal Residential Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance for a 6 unit residential condominium development pursuant to the Administrative Guidelines for the implementation of the State Law relative to Low -and- Moderate - Income Housing within the Coastal Zone. LOCATION: Portions of Lots 2, 4, 6 and 8, Block 231, Corona del Mar and a portion of an abandoned street (Carnation Avenue), located at 2500 Seaview Avenue, on the northeasterly comer of Seaview Avenue and Carnation Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -3 APPLICANT: Carnation Cove, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Debay addressed the Coastal Residential Development Permit as referred to in the staff report that states "it will not be feasible for a low or moderate income unit either on -site or off-site .... in accordance with Council Policy P -L. ", and based on said statement she requested that a fifth scenario be provided in which an affordable unit be required in the form of a contribution to a fund. Commissioner Debay referred to the survey of two bedroom condominium units that was taken by the consultants, and she noted that the survey was in the Corona del Mar neighborhood where residential sales prices are higher than elsewhere in the City, and she suggested that the survey should have been taken in areas of the City where condominium units are sold for less than they are in Corona del Mar. • -43- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o`O �do•o� August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Debay concluded that the applicants should be required to participate in the City's affordable housing policy. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, explained that the replacement housing has to be only within the Coastal Zone. In reference to establishing a fund, Mr. Burnham explained that there are cities in the State that have housing programs which contemplate the construction of units and require a payment of fee into a fund from property owners, and that money is used to construct the units. He explained that the units to be constructed are requested for in the Housing Element of that jurisdiction in accordance with the requirements of AB 1600 which states that if a condition is imposed it has to be reasonably related to the demands that are being created by a particular project. Mr. Burnham stated that in the absence of a housing authority it is difficult to satisfy the requirements of AB 1600. Chairman Pomeroy and Mr. Burnham discussed the provisions to grant a density bonus, and affordable housing that is included • in the General Plan. Commissioner Persdn commented that the policy has not been applied to a project consisting of 10 units or less. Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager, addressed the Housing Element that was recently revised by the City and the State Department of Housing and Community Development. He explained that the Housing Element now exempts projects of 10 or less units, and that in the future the City shall amend Council Policy P -1 to be consistent with the new General Plan policy so the projects of the subject size will not be coming to the Planning Commission under P -1. He said that the Coastal Residential Development Permit will be essentially administered without a public hearing or any requirement for affordable housing. Mr. Lenard alluded to the City's successful affordable housing program that has been looked upon favorably by other jurisdictions. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the 10 or less exemption would not apply if the applicant requested Density Bonus. Mr. Lenard concurred. -44- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 10, 1989 ROLL CALL INDEX Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 16, Waiver of Combining Requirement, and requested that the condition be modified to state '"That a minimum 6 in. rise be provided.." instead of "That a minimum 6 ft rise be provided.. ". The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. David Diem, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Diem concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A'. Mr. Diem stated that the proposed project was planned within the guidelines of the General Plan and in consideration of the adjacent neighbors. Mr. Diem commented that each of the 6 units has been designed with either a three or four car garage, and eight driveways have been added to accommodate eight guest automobiles. Mr. Diem explained that three units will have access off of Carnation Avenue and three units will have access off of the alley. He explained that to have access off of Seaview Avenue would have required a curb cut. He stated that a turn - around area has been created in the alley to enhance the traffic flow. Mr. Diem stated that the requested 10 foot front yard setback off of the old Carnation Avenue right -of -way equates to a 20 foot front yard setback off of the curb. He explained that the front yard setback corresponds with the new developments on Carnation Avenue. Mr. Diem moved to the exhibit area and described the requested modifications. He explained that the requested rear yard encroachment is required by the Fire Department to allow access around the property. Mr. Diem stated that the City considers the front yard of the project to be on Carnation Avenue and the side yard to be on Seaview Avenue which would be adjacent to the Seaview Avenue neighbor's front yard. He explained that the development is required to conform with the setback of the building that is adjacent to the site on Seaview Avenue. Mr. Diem explained that 20 feet of the property is required to conform with the setback that is adjacent to the subject site. He described what the project's impact would be if the sideyard setback modification were not requested. Mr. Diem described the second and third floor open deck encroachments. -45- COMMISSIONERS \e\ • �� MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Diem explained that 12 garage spaces and 8 guest spaces will be accessed from Carnation Avenue and 8 automobiles to accommodate three condominium units will enter from the alley. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to the applicants staking the subject property, Mr. Diem explained that the applicants revised the plans after they observed the project from the adjacent property decks, and the applicants also staked the site with 28 foot poles to comply with a request by the neighbors and staff. Mr. Diem stated that the applicants delivered a revised set of plans to staff that do not include the reverse corner setback modification. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to the fire lane, Mr. Diem replied that he is in support of a fire lane; however, it is not a criteria for the project inasmuch as the Fire Department has indicated that adequate fire protection may be provided without the subject fire lane. • In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill regarding the automobile access to the alley, Mr. Diem explained that the existing structure provides access for one automobile and the proposed project will provide access for eight automobiles to accommodate three condominium units. Mr. Diem stated that the driveway will not be available to guest parking, and said parking restriction will be included in the CC&R's. Mr. Diem and Commissioner Merrill discussed the traffic flow and available parking in the alley.. Commissioner Merrill emphasized his concern that it would be difficult to enforce the parking problem and congestion in the alley. Don Webb, City Engineer, explained that if a fire lane would be established that there would be adequate room to turn automobiles around. Mrs. Doris Boisseranc, property owner at 2520 -2522 Seaview Avenue, adjacent to the subject property, appeared before the Planning Commission to state concerns with respect to the subject project on the basis that the project would have an impact on their property. Mrs. Boisseranc explained that at the Boisserancs' request, the applicants ineffectively staked the subject project for the neighbors, and the result was that the project would impair their view at the corner inasmuch as the • -46- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX project's decks would extend into their view. Mrs. Boisseranc requested a clarification of garages on Seaview Avenue. Mrs. Boisseranc and Commissioner Pers6n discussed her concerns with respect to the project and the impact the project would have on their view. Mrs. Boisseranc referred to her letter dated August 1, 1989, objecting to the rear yard setback that adjoins their property, and the impact in the alley. She commented that they do not object to the number of units or the development. Mr. Burnham explained the City's position with respect to protecting private views. He stated that in consideration of the. subject project, there is a waiver of a combining requirement provision that has been created in the Zoning Code. He stated that in considering the merits of the proposed waiver the Planning Commission may impose conditions that they consider appropriate; however, he questioned if the conditions could appropriately include restrictions on the building as it relates to Carnation Avenue and Seaview Avenue. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Bill Ward, Senior Planner, explained that the normal sideyard setback would be 4 feet and would apply to the entire Seaview Avenue frontage of the building except for the last 20 feet of the property which is adjacent with the front yard area of the adjoining lot. He said that the Zoning Code requires that the last 20 feet must maintain the same setback as exists on the adjoining property, and the existing setback on the adjoining property is 6 feet from the property line to the second floor deck; therefore, the applicant must provide a six foot street side setback on the last 20 feet of the property. Mr. Ward further replied that the applicant is proposing to have the ground floor portion of the building encroach two feet into the required six foot reverse corner setback. He said that the second and third floor of Unit "F' will maintain A 7 foot building setback and a 4 foot deck setback. Chairman Pomeroy and Mr. Ward discussed the view that would be impacted by the project if the applicant withdrew the modification requesting the reverse corner setback. • -47- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Chairman Pomeroy maintained that the proposed modification would preserve the existing views better than if the applicant withdrew the modification. He said that the applicant has agreed to cut back the second and third floors closest to the Boisseranc's property to improve the view from that area. Mr. Jay Cohen, 2520 Seaview Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Cohen commented that if the 2 foot encroachment is granted to the applicant, 70% to 100% of his view would be blocked of Newport Harbor and that would affect the value of the property. Mr. Cohen indicated that there is a parking problem and 8 additional automobiles would impact the. alley. He agreed that a fire lane would be beneficial to the area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Ward described the alternate plan that the applicant submitted which fully conforms to the required side and rear yard setbacks. He explained that the stairway at the rear portion of the property has been moved into the interior portion of the building. He explained that the 7 foot rear yard encroachment would increase to 6 feet and would remain at 6 feet to the end of the building, and on all three levels of the project. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Ward described how the Boisseranc's view would be impacted if the applicant fully complied with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Mike Mack, 2524 Seaview Avenue,. appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Mack referred to his letter dated August 3, 1989, expressing concerns with respect to the size of the project and the sideyard setback. He said that the view is only one concern. Mr. Mack requested that the applicants' stake the project so the neighbors will have a clear understanding of the size of the development. Mr. Steven W. Johnson, 331 Dahlia Place, appeared before the Planning Commission. He referred to his letters dated August 9, 1989, addressed to Mr. Ward with respect to the proposed project and to Fire Chief Reed with respect to establishing a fire lane. He supported the neighbors. foregoing concerns, and he stated that he has concerns that the proposed setback could set • -48 COMMISSIONERS o "0 MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX a precedent on Seaview Avenue. Mr. Johnson emphasized the importance of a fire lane and the potential traffic in the alley. Mr. Johnson referred to the Environmental Report's checkoff list and he questioned staff's response to the questions pertaining to transportation and circulation, and he rebutted that an additional 8 automobiles would create congestion in the area. He requested that the CC &R's require property owners participate in the maintenance of the private right -of -way. Mr. John Boisseranc appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Boisseranc expressed his concern that the setback measurement was to his property's deck area and not to the. structure. In summary, he stated that the Boisseranc's support the alignment of the adjoining buildings and the adjoining decks. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Debay commented that the applicant is not • constructing a project that is more than the lot requires; however, she said that by combining lots that there is a sacrifice of open space that would ordinarily be between each of the lots. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Ward replied that the setback was measured from the adjacent deck and not the structure. Commissioner Merrill and Mr. Hewicker discussed the alignment of the adjacent deck area on Seaview Avenue and the structure on Carnation Avenue. Mr. Hewicker suggested that the applicant could submit plans that would exhibit setbacks that would match structure with adjacent structure and deck with adjacent deck. Commissioner Edwards and Mr. Hewicker discussed the proposal requesting exhibits to display the alignment of the adjoining decks and structures. Motion * Motion was made to continue Amendment No. 685, Waiver of Combining Requirement, and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 14 to the September 21, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Pers6n requested that the applicant prepare exhibits that would show the alignments of the decks • -49- COMMISSIONERS � o 03 o�.r �� MINUTES August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX and structures as suggested, and that the applicant also stake the property for the neighbors. Commissioner Merrill requested an amendment to the motion that the applicant submit plans showing a fire lane and a parking layout in the alley. The maker of the motion agreed to amend the motion. Mr. Diem reappeared before the Planning Commission to state that he would like to proceed with the project and he reviewed the proposed project and the revisions to the proposed plan. Chairman Pomeroy suggested that the applicant consider the neighbors' requests and come back to the Planning Commission with plans that address their concerns. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mn Ward stated that the required setback for the adjoining property is actually 20 feet. He stated that there was a variance granted on that property to allow a 10 foot setback, and the deck on • the second and third floors of the adjoining property encroach approximately 5 feet into that 10 foot setback. Mr. Ward stated that the reverse comer setback requirement is the equal to the existing setback, not the required setback, of the adjoining property. Motion was voted on to continue this item to the September 21, All Ayes 1989, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. s s : DISCUSSION ITEMS: Discussion Items Discussion of Enclosed Commercial Parking Spaces D -1 Commissioner PersGn stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. Parking Parking James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that what has been Spaces adopted by the City Council for commercial parking spaces does not allow the installation of garage doors. He said that because of the concerns that have been expressed: with respect to the mixed use developments that the Planning Commission has • -so- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o�� d�Y• d�� August 10, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX requested staff to prepare an amendment that would allow the closure of the garages during non - business hours; however, the doors could be secured and would remain open during business hours and available. Commissioner Debay responded favorably to the Motion * recommendation. Motion was made to request staff to prepare an Amendment regarding enclosed commercial parking spaces. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the secured doors be constructed of a see- through material that would assist code enforcement. * * * * Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Ayes Absent s s s Amendment No. 687. etc. (Discussion) � D -2 Request to initiate Amendment No. 687, etc. to Title 20 of the A687,etc. Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to implement the • provisions of the. General Plan as adopted by the City Council Initiated on October 24, 1988. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to direct staff to amend various Ayes * * iA A * sections of Title 20 of the Municipal Code so as to implement Absent * the provisions of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. MOTION CARRIED. Proposed Multi - Family Residential (MFR) District (Discussion) MFR The Planning Commission discussed the proposed Amendment Pa set for that will be coming back to the Planning Commission on August 8 -24 -89 24, 1989. ADJOURNMENT: 12:00 midnight s s s Ad'ournment JAN DEBAY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT • -51-