The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/22/1985• Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent 0 EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Carol xorade, Assistant City Attorney a x STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of August 8, 1985: Minutes Motion was made for approval of the August 8, 1985, of Aug.8,1985 x x Planning Commission Minutes, which MOTION CARRIED. x x Request for Continuances: Staff recommended that Item No. 1, Use Permit No. 3162, be continued to September 19, 1985, and Item No. 3, Use Permit No. 3070, be continued to September 5, 1985. x Motion was made to continue Item No. 1 to September 19, x x x 1985, and Item No. 3 to September 5, 1985. Motion x voted on, MOTION CARRIED. • r ,t COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES „ x T PLACE: City Council Chambers C o = TIME: 7 :30 P.M. z c m z DATE: August 22, 1985 a = m a= O [ A= O O City of Newport Beach a ROLL CALL INDEX Present x x x x x Commissioner Goff arrived at 7 :35 p.m. Commissioner Absent x Eichenhofer was absent. • Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent 0 EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Carol xorade, Assistant City Attorney a x STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of August 8, 1985: Minutes Motion was made for approval of the August 8, 1985, of Aug.8,1985 x x Planning Commission Minutes, which MOTION CARRIED. x x Request for Continuances: Staff recommended that Item No. 1, Use Permit No. 3162, be continued to September 19, 1985, and Item No. 3, Use Permit No. 3070, be continued to September 5, 1985. x Motion was made to continue Item No. 1 to September 19, x x x 1985, and Item No. 3 to September 5, 1985. Motion x voted on, MOTION CARRIED. • r ,t COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES x x C O - 1 9 r 7 x T z c c=yp A Z a m Z z ;oo a= T z m City f Y Newport p Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 3162 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.l 0 Motion Ayes Absent Request to permit the expansion of the existing El UP3162 Torito Restaurant located in the Newport Place Planned Community so as to allow the use of an existing open Continue( courtyard for dining and drinking purposes. The to proposal also includes a request to allow the addi- Sept. 19, tional required off - street parking spaces to be provi- 1985 ded on an adjoining office building site under the same ownership as the restaurant site. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 45 -23 (Resub- division No. 347), located at 4221 Dolphin - Striker Way, westerly of Mac- Arthur Boulevard, between Martingale Way and Newport Place Drive in Newport Place. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Stuart Ketchum, Los Angeles OWNER: Same as applicant I xl I I 1 Motion was made to continue this item to September 19, x x x x 1985. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. x A. Use Permit No. 3053 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the establishment of an automobile sales and leasing facility on property located in the C -1 -H District. The proposed amendment includes a request to establish car washing facilities which will be operated in conjunction with the automobile sales and leasing operation. :.1811 B. Use Permits No. 3053 and I I I Request to consider the revocation of Use Permit No. 3053 and Use Permit No. 3053 (Amended) that permitted the establishment of an auto sales and leasing faci- lity. Said revocation will review the failure to comply with specific conditions of approval. -2- Item No.2 UP3053 (Amended) Approved UP3053 UP3053 (Amended) Not Revoked 16M • • August 22, 1985 Beach LOCATION: Lots 72, 73 and a portion of Lot B (private street), Tract No. 1011, located at 3939 West Coast Highway, on the southeasterly corner of West Coast Highway and the entrance to Balboa Coves, in West Newport. ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: Linda K. Verhulp, Newport Beach OWNERS: James H. Kindel and Balboa Coves Community Association, Newport Beach William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated that staff is recommending the addition of Condition No. 10 as follows: "that the car wash facility shall be used only to clean automobiles stored on -site in conjunction with the automobile rental operation ". Mr. Laycock explained that the car wash facility will not be open to the public but will be used solely to wash the rental automobiles before they leave the premises. Mr. Hewicker further stated that the automobiles will be washed manually as opposed to an automatic car wash. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Dennis Gorniak, 3939 West Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Gorniak stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the recommended Condition No. 10. Mr. Gorniak stated that his present title is General Manager, and he advised Commissioner Kurlander that the current applicant is aware that if the application is approved that she must comply with all of the conditions. In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Gorniak replied that the former owner, Mr. Silver, does not have any interest in the current operation, and that the present owner has a different business philosophy than Mr. Silver. Mr. Gorniak informed Commissioner Goff that he would not have any objections to Condition No. 5 being amended to read "that no trucks, vans, busses, campers, motor homes, or boats shall be stored, rented or sold from the subject property." -3- MINUTES x x c o � a x c m i z T C a m 0 0 0 9 O m s w O M (�T(' City za z aa ,i m l.fl August 22, 1985 Beach LOCATION: Lots 72, 73 and a portion of Lot B (private street), Tract No. 1011, located at 3939 West Coast Highway, on the southeasterly corner of West Coast Highway and the entrance to Balboa Coves, in West Newport. ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: Linda K. Verhulp, Newport Beach OWNERS: James H. Kindel and Balboa Coves Community Association, Newport Beach William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated that staff is recommending the addition of Condition No. 10 as follows: "that the car wash facility shall be used only to clean automobiles stored on -site in conjunction with the automobile rental operation ". Mr. Laycock explained that the car wash facility will not be open to the public but will be used solely to wash the rental automobiles before they leave the premises. Mr. Hewicker further stated that the automobiles will be washed manually as opposed to an automatic car wash. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Dennis Gorniak, 3939 West Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Gorniak stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the recommended Condition No. 10. Mr. Gorniak stated that his present title is General Manager, and he advised Commissioner Kurlander that the current applicant is aware that if the application is approved that she must comply with all of the conditions. In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Gorniak replied that the former owner, Mr. Silver, does not have any interest in the current operation, and that the present owner has a different business philosophy than Mr. Silver. Mr. Gorniak informed Commissioner Goff that he would not have any objections to Condition No. 5 being amended to read "that no trucks, vans, busses, campers, motor homes, or boats shall be stored, rented or sold from the subject property." -3- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES C O O - v 9 m C Z m 0 3 0 0 C Z Z City of Newport Beach a= m S ROLL CALL INDEX The public hearing was closed at this time, and Motion x Commissioner Goff made a motion to approve Use Permit No. 3053 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including modified Condition No. 5, and the addition of Condition No. 10, and the findings not to revoke Use Permit No. 3053 and the Amendment to Use Permit No. 3053 approved by the Planning Commission on December 6, 1984. Commissioner Person stated that he is satisfied with the staff's recommendations and that he will support the motion. Ayes x > N x x x Motion voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3053 Absent x (Amended), MOTION CARRIED. - USE PERMIT NO. 3053 (AMENDED) FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the • General Plan, and the adopted Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, and is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses. 2. The installation of a car wash facility will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The approval of Use Permit No. 3053 (Amended) will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to .property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of Use Permit No. 3053. 3. That all wash water shall drain into the sewer system. 4. 4. That the automobile .wash facility shall be de- signed in a manner that will prevent rain water from entering the sewer system. This will require -4- • COMMISSIONERS) August 22, 1985 the provision of a roofed washing area and curbing along the perimeter of the surface of the wash facility. The exact design shall be reviewed and approved by the Building, Public Works and Plan- ning Departments. 5. That no trucks, vans, busses, campers, motor homes, or boats shall be stored, rented or sold from the subject property. 6. That all employees shall park on -site. 7. That a minimum of 8 on -site parking spaces shall be provided for customers and employees. B. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of 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. This use .permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. That the car wash facility shall be used only to clean automobiles stored on -site in conjunction with the automobile rental operation. FINDINGS NOT TO REVOKE USE PERMIT NO. 3053 AND THE AMENDMENT TO USE PERMIT NO. 3053 APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 6, 1984 FINDINGS: 1. That the automobile rental operation substantially conforms to all conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3053, as approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting of August 4, 1983. 2. That the amendment to Use Permit No. 3053 that permitted the expansion of the site has not yet been exercised. -5- MINUTES INDEX xx c o 0 x c z m m N 0 O; O m> M� O City of Newport Beach z x z a z w m the provision of a roofed washing area and curbing along the perimeter of the surface of the wash facility. The exact design shall be reviewed and approved by the Building, Public Works and Plan- ning Departments. 5. That no trucks, vans, busses, campers, motor homes, or boats shall be stored, rented or sold from the subject property. 6. That all employees shall park on -site. 7. That a minimum of 8 on -site parking spaces shall be provided for customers and employees. B. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of 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. This use .permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. That the car wash facility shall be used only to clean automobiles stored on -site in conjunction with the automobile rental operation. FINDINGS NOT TO REVOKE USE PERMIT NO. 3053 AND THE AMENDMENT TO USE PERMIT NO. 3053 APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 6, 1984 FINDINGS: 1. That the automobile rental operation substantially conforms to all conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3053, as approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting of August 4, 1983. 2. That the amendment to Use Permit No. 3053 that permitted the expansion of the site has not yet been exercised. -5- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 x� INDEX x f ; T Use Permit No. 3070 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.3 = a r a a ° City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLLCALLi INDEX Use Permit No. 3070 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to amend a previously approved use permit that UP3070 permitted the establishment of a take -out ice cream (Amended) shop and the waiver of all of the required off - street parking on property located in the C -1 District. The Continued proposed amendment includes a request to expand the to hours of operation so as to allow the facility to open at 7:00 a.m. to sell coffee and croissants (where the Sept. 5, 1985 original use permit restricted the opening of the facility to 11:00 a.m. ) and a request to permit a 7 foot long bench in front of the ice cream shop, adja- cent to East Coast Highway (where the original use permit provided that there shall be no seating on the premises). LOCATION: Lot 5, Block M, Tract No. 323, located at 2756 East Coast Highway, on the northeasterly side of East Coast High- way, between Fernleaf Avenue and Golden- rod Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Robert W. Forstrom, La Canada ] , OWNER: Alex Pourgal, Huntington Beach Motion x Motion was made to continue this item to September 5, Ayes x x x x 1985. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Absent x 0 Use Permit No. 3110 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted on -sale beer and wine and tandem parking spaces in conjunction with an existing take -out restau- rant in the C -1 District. The proposed amendment involves a request to expand the gross floor area of the take -out restaurant so as to enclose the existing landscape planter in the front of the restaurant with a. "greenhouse" type glass storefront and to construct a new second floor office and storage area. The proposal also includes a request to waive any additional re- quired off - street parking spaces. IM UP3110 COMMISSIONERS ;R c o x - -, a M z z c m Z z m z z z r o x M a= M� a w m z AL August 22, 1985 MINUTES City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX LOCATION: Lot 2, Block 431, Lancaster's Addition, located at 3112 Newport Boulevard, on the easterly side of Newport Boulevard, between 31st Street and 32nd Street, in Cannery Village. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Robert Mah, Huntington Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jack Weston, Architect, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Weston stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". The public hearing was closed at this time, and Motion x a motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3110, A es x x x subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". t x Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. 0 FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environ- mental impact. 3. That the continued waiver of the development standards as they pertain to a portion of the required parking, parking lot illumination, circulation, walls, landscaping and utilities, 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. 4. That the proposed additions of a second floor office /storage area and the "greenhouse" type glass storefront to the take -out restaurant will not result in an increased parking demand for the • I I I I 1 area. 5. That there is adequate on -site parking for the restaurant employees. bG NIMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 x R e H S 7 m zc m �„i z A m o z 2, m City of Newport Beach MM z x z w m 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3110 (Amended) will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, sections, and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of ap- proval for Use Permit No. 3110 shall be fulfilled. 3. That the proposed parking,plan shall be revised so as to reverse the position of Parking Spaces No. 1, 2 and 3 with Parking Spaces 4 and 5. 4. That no additional dining area shall be permitted in conjunction with the approval of this appli- cation. 5. That all trash receptacles shall be screened from the alley and from adjoining properties. 6. That all new construction shall maintain a minimum setback of 5 feet from the Newport Boulevard right of way, unless the property owner enters into an agreement with the City which guarantees removal of any construction within this setback area, at no cost to the City, at such time as Newport Boulevard is widened. This agreement shall be exercised prior to the issuance of any building permits for any construction in the 5 foot area adjacent to Newport Boulevard. 7. 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, • I i I I ! I I i safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. -8- MINUTES • August 22, 1985 Beach 8. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. A. General Plan Amendment 85 -1 (c) (Public Hearing) Consideration of an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignate a portion of the subject property from "Low Density Residential" to a combined designation of "Administra- tive, Professional and Financial Commercial" and "Retail and Service Commercial ", and the acceptance of an environmental document. Will B. Amendment No. 7 to the Local Coastal Program (Public Hearing) Consideration of an amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, so as to redesignate a portion of the property from "Low Density Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial ". =5 C. Amendment No. 620 (Public Hearing) Request to amend a portion of District Map No. 18 so as to reclassify certain property from the R -1 District to the C -1 District. - 0 D. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to consider a traffic study so as to permit the construction of an 80 unit senior congregate living facility in the R -1 (proposed to be rezoned to C -1) and the C -1 Districts. AND MINUTES INDEX Item No.5 GPA 85 -1(C) Amend.No.7 Amend.No. 620 Traffic Study UP3155 Continued to Oct.lo, 1985 � sc c o n y = y D ; m z c m y m z 0 ]o = x= w r 0 o; o o 0 }` l 9m O ms m �� `Y of Z a z a z, m August 22, 1985 Beach 8. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. A. General Plan Amendment 85 -1 (c) (Public Hearing) Consideration of an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan so as to redesignate a portion of the subject property from "Low Density Residential" to a combined designation of "Administra- tive, Professional and Financial Commercial" and "Retail and Service Commercial ", and the acceptance of an environmental document. Will B. Amendment No. 7 to the Local Coastal Program (Public Hearing) Consideration of an amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, so as to redesignate a portion of the property from "Low Density Residential" to "Retail and Service Commercial ". =5 C. Amendment No. 620 (Public Hearing) Request to amend a portion of District Map No. 18 so as to reclassify certain property from the R -1 District to the C -1 District. - 0 D. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to consider a traffic study so as to permit the construction of an 80 unit senior congregate living facility in the R -1 (proposed to be rezoned to C -1) and the C -1 Districts. AND MINUTES INDEX Item No.5 GPA 85 -1(C) Amend.No.7 Amend.No. 620 Traffic Study UP3155 Continued to Oct.lo, 1985 VV\AWIUNtK�> August 22, 1985 x x C o 9 m a c m o m z 1 a a a r P x m o m> M M City of Newport Beach a s z a z m m E. Use Permit No. 3155 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of an 80 unit senior congregate living facility on property located in the R -1 (proposed to be rezoned to C -1) and the C -1 Dist- ricts. The proposal also includes: a request to allow a portion of the structure to exceed the basic height limit in the 32/50 Foot Height Limitation District; a request to establish an off - street parking requirement based on a demonstrated formula; and a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem parking spaces in conjunction with a full -time valet parking service. LOCATION: Lots 58 -67 and a portion of Lot 68, Block A, Tract No. 673, located at 3901 East Coast Highway, on the southeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Hazel Drive, in Corona del Mar. ZONES: R -1 and C -1 APPLICANT: S.J.S. Development Corporation, Beverly Hills OWNER: A.T. Leo's, Ltd., Irvine James Hewicker, Planning Director commented that copies of correspondence in support of the Crown House were submitted to the staff on Tuesday afternoon, August 20, 1985. He referred to the addendum to the staff report recommending revisions to Condition No. 22 and Condition No. 57 as requested by the applicant, and Condition No. 67 and Condition No. 68 as recommended by staff. Mr. Hewicker stated that to limit the use of the site to a senior living facility as is being discussed, staff has concerns relative to uniformity of permitted uses in C -1 Districts throughout the City. Mr. Hewicker expressed concerns that staff has relative to the proposed Land Use Element of the General Plan Amendment specifically referring to the view preservation and aesthetics of the proposal. 111 11111 In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding the proposed Condition No. 67 stating "that the facility shall be limited to persons • age 55 or older," Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator, replied that age 55 or older was suggested by staff for consistency with previous senior housing approvals granted by the City. -10- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS xx � c O = Z H 9 D; m Z c m Z z m D x z r a x w ° ; ° ° vm o a T z s z� ry z T m 9 August 22, 1985 MINUTES . City of Newport Beach R LL CALL INDEX Commissioner Koppelman asked what residential projects have been approved that would be in comparison to the 53.3 density unit buildable per acre of this project. Mr. Hewicker replied that he does not consider this a residential project, instead as a residential care facility. He pointed out that the Lutheran Church Senior Citizen housing facility, Oakwood Apartments and the Villa Balboa- Versailles residential projects would all be 40.0 units per buildable acre or higher. He further commented that the proposed project could be compared to a hotel but the rooms are larger. Chairman Person opined that the proposed project may have the ancillary facilities of a hotel but that the occupants would not be moving in and out on a daily basis. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mrs. Jodie Sherman, 602 North Maple Drive, Beverly Hills, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mrs. Sherman presented an over -view of the Crown House proposal and introduced Ron Yeo, Architect. She said that occupancy of the facility will be on a rental basis, and three meals .a day will be provided in addition to many personal and recreational services. Mrs. Sherman described the project's design, and the advantages that the location has for senior citizen housing. Mrs. Sherman stated that the applicants and Mr. Yeo have met with many of the homeowners on Hazel Drive and Evening Canyon Drive at which time they presented the proposed project and model. She said that the applicants have met with the Corona Highlands Homeowners Association, Shorecliffs Homeowners Association, Corona del Mar Civic Association, Corona . del Mar Chamber of Commerce, and OASIS. Mrs. Sherman commented that Mrs. Phipps on Hazel Drive, Shorecliffs Homeowners Association, Mr. John Killifer, and OASIS have written letters in favor of the project. On behalf of the applicants, Mr. Ron Yeo stated that the applicants concur with the findings and conditions of approval in Exhibit "B ", including the two modified conditions and the two added conditions. He further stated that the applicants would also agree to raise the age limit to 62 years or older. - In response to a question posed by Commissioner Turner, • Mrs. Sherman replied that the beauty shop would not be open to the public but only to residents and guests of the facility, and that the beauty shop would be open only a few days during the week. -11- MIMISSIUNEKS August 22, 1985 �x c o x C r ; MMISSIONERS August 22, 1965 x� �o y m 0 0 3 o o a = m = , m City of Newport Beach In response to inquiries from Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Zigler replied that he would be looking directly over 5 Crowns Restaurant into the proposed Crown House facility. He said that he does not object to the bulk of the building but he does object to the number of units and residents proposed for the facility, and the recommended parking. Commissioner Turner asked Mr. Zigler how the proposed facility could be compared to the Mesa Verde senior facility. Mr. Zigler replied that Mesa Verde has a convalescent area and an apartment building on a two acre site, and that he believes that the two facilities would be comparable. Dr. Paul Johnson, 1425 santanella Terrace, appeared before the Planning Commission. Dr. Johnson stated his concerns and recommendations for the proposed facility suggesting that considering the residents average age would be between 70 years to 75 years, that the ingress - egress of East Coast Highway could be extremely • dangerous and that he would recommend a change in the traffic pattern; he asked if the applicants have owned or managed a similar facility, and if so, could the facility be visited; he asked if a feasibility study had been done and if so, could it be made available to the Planning Commission and to the public; he opined that the projected rental rate in excess of $2,000.00 is double that of the average rental rate for a congregate care facility. He compared this rental rate with Regent's Point, Irvine, by stating that Regent's Point is a life care facility, and that The Irvine Company is considering a similar facility to the proposed facility adjacent to Regent's Point, Irvine. Dr. Johnson pointed out that the proposed project is a single use facility, that as the facility is proposed, and if it is not successful, that it could be a white elephant in Corona del Mar because there would not be another use for the building. Dr. Johnson asked that the public hearing be continued for further study and review. Chairman Person asked Dr. Johnson how this facility compares with the facility that Dr. Johnson has developed in Fountain valley. Dr. Johnson replied that the main difference would be in the projected rental rates, that the level of services are about the same and that he recommends a feasibility study to justify the projected rental rate. He also stated that the parking ratio is similar to the Fountain Valley -13- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES c O � x z c m � � z c z p M, ; r T m City of Newport Beach p 0 0 �a s R LL CALL INDEX facility, however he recommended that a. professional Traffic Engineering study be done comparing the proposed facility with similar facilities in Southern California. Commissioner Turner and Dr. Johnson discussed the merits of a feasibility study. Commissioner Turner opined that the City does not have the right to demand a feasibility' study, whereas Dr. Johnson opined that the City has the obligation to protect the residents in the event the single use facility does not succeed and becomes an eye -sore. In response to Commissioner Winburn's inquiry regarding the proposed congregate care facility in Irvine, Dr. Johnson replied that the facility will be similar to Villa Valencia in Laguna Hills and the start of construction will be in approximately 3 to 6 months. Ms. Deedee Masters, 140 Fernleaf, appeared before the Planning Commission, supporting the proposed project. • Ms. Masters commented that she does not believe that the project is too huge, that the $2,000.00 monthly rental fee is not too high, that there is a need for the proposed concept, that the development would eliminate previous problems that the City has had regarding useage of the property, and that anywhere in Corona del Mar the ingress- egress is bad. Mr. Ray Sanford, 703 Narcissus, appeared before the Planning Commission, in support of the proposed project. Mr. Sanford commented that his business research has shown that because the population of the elderly is increasing that affordable senior housing is a high priority and there is a need for the proposed concept. Mr. Larry Chang, 3901 East Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission to address Ming Dynasty restaurant's on -site parking problems. Chairman Person advised Mr. Chang to contact the Planning Department staff regarding the restaurant's operation. Mr. Ming Ching Chow, 3901 East Coast Highway, appeared before the Planning Commission stating that he favors the subject site for a restaurant facility. I I I I I I I The public hearing was closed at this time. -14- • is COMMISSIONERS august 22, 1985 xx n m Z c m a m a A x r m x Z Z= M Z T m M a City of Newport Beach Commissioner Koppelman commented that she believes the project is appropriate to this particular site, and that this type of project should be encouraged. She discussed several of her concerns regarding the proposed development stating that the project's intensity is not consistent with the neighboring businesses in Corona del Mar; that the project's four floors adjacent to East Coast Highway gives the impression of a solid wall and that visually the building is more appropriate for a larger site; that the proposed building obscures the view through Buck Gully, and that natural view corridors should be encouraged; that she was concerned as to whether the parking requirement of, one parking space per unit is sufficient; that the building's intensity be reduced to 1.25 buildable acre to conform with the surrounding area and to increase the parking so that staff concerns are taken into consideration as well as the requirements for the residential apartment renters; and to maximize the setbacks to open up the view corridors. Commissioner Koppelman suggested that the public hearing be continued so that the applicant could have ample time to resubmit plans that would meet the guidelines the Planning Commission recommend to the applicant. Discussion followed between Mr. Hewicker and Commissioner Koppelman. Mr. Hewicker requested verification of the lot size against which the 1.25 floor area ratio would be calculated. Commissioner Koppelman replied 1 times total lot size, 1.25 as it relates to the buildable area. In reference to the staff's Traffic Study, Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineer, advised Commissioner Goff that the project's 320 traffic total is trip ends and not round trips. Mr. Hewicker stated that staff is concerned with the zoning change Amendment to C -1 Zone, and the future use of the property if the proposed project is not built. Another project could then be proposed that may not need discretionary approval. If the project is built and could not continue, the C -1 District may allow uses which may not be acceptable on this site. He said that one possibility would be to reclassify the site to a Planned Community Zone. in accordance with the zoning standards, the property is too small to be zoned to a Planned Community District but there are provisions in -15- MINUTES INDEX M/V\I551UNEK5 August 22, 1985 xx c o � x a 9 _ v m Z Z Z Z _ ° City of Newport Beach the Code allowing the City to, make a waiver in respect to the size of the parcel. If the parcel is zoned to a Planned Community District, then the use permit could become the development plan for this particular Planned Community and no other use of the property could be achieved without amending the Planned Community Development plan. He said that one reason the zoning change to commercial would be desireable for the applicant is because the applicant could get a 32/50 foot height limit, but he further stated that under the Planned Community zone the applicant could also get a 32/50 foot height limit. Mr. Hewicker commented that typically businesses are not permitted in a residential district, however the Park Newport development was developed under an unclassified zone and the developers came to the City with a use permit wherein the residential project was built and commercial uses were established in the complex. I I I I I I I I The public hearing was reopened, and Chairman Person asked Mr. Yeo to reappear before the Planning Commission. Chairman Person and Mr. Yeo discussed the applicant's willingness to continue the public hearing and the time frame necessary to resubmit new plans. Mr. Yeo stated that the applicant would agree to the Planning Commission's decision. Commissioner Kurlander advised the applicant of his concern regarding parking, specifically that if the parking is based on 16 employees in addition to occupants of the 80 units, that one parking space per unit may not be adequate and asked the applicant to submit an alternate parking plan. Mr. Yeo replied that the applicant would supply whatever parking the City requires, but that based on the results of research by a professional Traffic Engineer that 0.65 parking space per unit is ample and that similar facilities have shown this figure to be correct. He said that the Traffic Engineer and the applicant agreed that one parking space per unit would be reasonable. Mr.. Yeo asked staff on what basis the one parking space per unit was based. Ms. Temple responded that the one to one parking ratio includes employee parking assuming that not all of the residents have automobiles. Commissioner Kurlander stated that his other concerns include ingress- egress on East Coast Highway, and the • 11111111 massive structure. -16- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 �a a v - v m z c m Z z Z 1Z W 0 m o i 0 City of Newport Beach Commissioner Winburn stated her concern regarding the project ingress- egress on East Coast Highway, that the density of the proposed development is out of character with the Corona del Mar neighborhood, and that she is requesting additional information regarding the neighborhood structures height. Commissioner Winburn requested that the applicant make the decision regarding where the cuts should be in the proposed development. She opined that there is a need for this type of facility and that the location would be a desireable location. In response to a question posed by Mr. Yeo, Commissioner Winburn stated that she is requesting a cut in the mass of the structure and not the number of units. Commissioner Goff stated that he is not as concerned with the visual mass of the building, but that he is concerned with what the density may imply, an example being the ingress- egress on East Coast Highway. In reference to Condition No. 23 which states that "valet parking service be provided at all times during the • proposed development's hours of operation ", Commissioner Goff recommended that the condition state "that valet parking service be provided at all times ". He commented that if figuring the development's 320 trips in per day is based on a 16 hour period, that there would be a trip in every 3 minutes, and he summarized these facts by stating that he was not comfortable with the valet service coupled with a trip in every 3 minutes. Commissioner Goff opined that the solution may be to cut back on the number of units. Commissioner Turner stated that in regard to the ingress- egress, that .there is a center divider in the middle of East Coast Highway, that Hazel Street is a narrow one -way street, and that in summary there is no other way to drive on and off the site. He concurred that there is a hazard on East Coast Highway and suggested that maybe a signal could be installed to alert the ingress- egress traffic. In reference to view corridors, Commissioner Turner opined that the majority of people are possibly talking about the view through Buck Gully, and recommended that the setback be moved back on the left side of the project. He recommended that the 5 foot setback be moved back on East Coast Highway to open up a view corridor and stated that the • 11111111 building could be broken up with landscaping or architectural features. Commissioner Turner suggested -17- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS xx C O n - C O 1 9 MZ z c m Z z M = m y * M as a August 22, 1985 MINUTES City of Newport Beach R LL CALL Use Permit No. 3163 (Public Hearing) Request to establish a photography studio which in- Item No.6 UP3163 INDEX cludes classroom instruction in photography and related that as a single purpose building that the proposed subjects on property located in the M -1 -A District. development not be confused with a hotel or an apartment but that the project remain as senior citizen housing only. Motion 39 Chairman Person made a motion to continue the public hearing to October 10, 1985. Substitute ZONE: M -1 -A .Motion x Commissioner Winburn made a substitute motion to Ayes x x x continue the public hearing to September 19, 1985. .Noes 2 X x Motion voted on, MOTION FAILED. Absent x Motion voted on to continue the public hearing to Ayes x x x x October 10, 1985, MOTION CARRIED. Absent x The Planning Commission recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. I� Use Permit No. 3163 (Public Hearing) Request to establish a photography studio which in- Item No.6 UP3163 cludes classroom instruction in photography and related subjects on property located in the M -1 -A District. Approved LOCATION: Lots 11, 12, 50 and 51, Tract No. 3201, located at 2032 Quail Street between Campus Drive and Birch Street, across from the John Wayne Airport. ZONE: M -1 -A APPLICANT: Maurice Sherman, Newport Beach OWNER: Wesley Nutten III, Trustee c/o Seeley Co., Los Angeles James Hewicker, Planning Director, commented that the application is the relocation of an existing photography school. I i l l l l l l The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Maurice Sherman, 1940 Port Provence, I I I ( I I I appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Sherman stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". -18- motion Ayes Absent Ix I I I xI xl xI x • • Of August 22, 1955 Beach The public hearing closed at this time. A motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3163, subject to the findings and conditions for approval in Exhibit "A ". FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surroun- ding land uses. 2. That an adequate. number of off - street parking spaces will be provided in conjunction with the photography school,. provided classes are offered only on weekends and weekday evenings. 3. The the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use of the property or building 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. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That classes shall be offered only after 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Classes may be offered during the daytime and evening hours on Saturdays and Sundays. 3. That attendance at all classes shall be restricted to 12 students. 4. That a minimum of 5 parking spaces shall be provided for students and staff of the photography school. 5. That all employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 6. That the applicant shall attempt to schedule evening and weekend classes on dates when E.S.T. -19- MINUTES INDEX xOt c 0 x - H p ; m z c m z 0 z m z a z r =0 o ; 0 0 a m O m s Z S Z y= p m motion Ayes Absent Ix I I I xI xl xI x • • Of August 22, 1955 Beach The public hearing closed at this time. A motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3163, subject to the findings and conditions for approval in Exhibit "A ". FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surroun- ding land uses. 2. That an adequate. number of off - street parking spaces will be provided in conjunction with the photography school,. provided classes are offered only on weekends and weekday evenings. 3. The the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use of the property or building 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. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That classes shall be offered only after 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Classes may be offered during the daytime and evening hours on Saturdays and Sundays. 3. That attendance at all classes shall be restricted to 12 students. 4. That a minimum of 5 parking spaces shall be provided for students and staff of the photography school. 5. That all employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 6. That the applicant shall attempt to schedule evening and weekend classes on dates when E.S.T. -19- MINUTES INDEX ,NMISSIONERS � se c O � x . Y c T> q S m 9 S Y r 0 x cY m 03 O O City of August 22, 1985 Beach is not offering seminars on the site so as to maximize the number of on -site parking spaces available for each business. 7. 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. 8. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • A. Use Permit No. 3164 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of a restaurant with on -sale alcoholic beverages, live entertainment and outdoor patio dining on property located in the C -1 District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunction with a full time valet parking service. :.n. B. Resubdivision No. 815 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide five .existing lots and eliminate interior property lines so as to create a single building site in conjunction with the conversion of the previous Balboa Bank of America building to a rest- aurant use. I I I I I I I LOCATION: Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block $, Balboa Tract, located at 611 East Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner • I I I I I I I of East Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street, on the Balboa Peninsula. —20— MINUTES Item No.7 UP3164 R815 Approved ZONE: APPLICANT: OWNER: ENGINEER: August 22, 1985 Beach C -1 Griswold's Development, Newport Beach Griswold's Development, Costa Mesa George F. Jenkins, Diamond Bar Chairman Person stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, commented that the applicant has advised staff that outdoor dining is no longer being proposed in conjunction with the project. The public hearing opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jerry King, No. 1 Civic Plaza, Suite 250, Newport Beach, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. King reviewed the applicant's proposal, and he further commented that the applicant was attempting to design a restaurant that would utilize the existing • space in the previous Balboa Bank of America building so as not to require off -site parking or in -lieu parking. Mr. King added that with the revisal of handicapped spaces and other constraints, the applicant was required to redesign the original proposal. He said that the applicant is requesting a parking ratio of one parking space for each 50 square feet of "net public area ". Mr. King stated that the applicant did not originally intend to alter the parking lot, and they intended to utilize the existing 25 foot wide driveway instead of a 26 foot wide driveway. The original structure will remain with the main entrance in the front of the building and an emergency opening on the side of the structure. Mr. King stated that staff requested that the driveway be widened in order to accommodate the original 8 foot 6 inch wide parking spaces. However, the parking spaces have been widened to 9 feet, except for three compact parking spaces. He explained that staff requested one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area" because of the site's increase in activity. He said that the area is the destination point and that the restaurant would serve the public that would already be in the area, and local residents. Mr. King commented that there may be a slight difference of opinion between the applicant and the City regarding the actual "net public area" of the building, and the applicant is willing to comply with the reduction in space after the applicant is certain what the actual square footage is. -21- MINUTES R R C O = 9 r m z c C m m z C 'al w o C O O + A o ms *r City Of z X z a a '" m ZONE: APPLICANT: OWNER: ENGINEER: August 22, 1985 Beach C -1 Griswold's Development, Newport Beach Griswold's Development, Costa Mesa George F. Jenkins, Diamond Bar Chairman Person stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, commented that the applicant has advised staff that outdoor dining is no longer being proposed in conjunction with the project. The public hearing opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jerry King, No. 1 Civic Plaza, Suite 250, Newport Beach, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. King reviewed the applicant's proposal, and he further commented that the applicant was attempting to design a restaurant that would utilize the existing • space in the previous Balboa Bank of America building so as not to require off -site parking or in -lieu parking. Mr. King added that with the revisal of handicapped spaces and other constraints, the applicant was required to redesign the original proposal. He said that the applicant is requesting a parking ratio of one parking space for each 50 square feet of "net public area ". Mr. King stated that the applicant did not originally intend to alter the parking lot, and they intended to utilize the existing 25 foot wide driveway instead of a 26 foot wide driveway. The original structure will remain with the main entrance in the front of the building and an emergency opening on the side of the structure. Mr. King stated that staff requested that the driveway be widened in order to accommodate the original 8 foot 6 inch wide parking spaces. However, the parking spaces have been widened to 9 feet, except for three compact parking spaces. He explained that staff requested one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area" because of the site's increase in activity. He said that the area is the destination point and that the restaurant would serve the public that would already be in the area, and local residents. Mr. King commented that there may be a slight difference of opinion between the applicant and the City regarding the actual "net public area" of the building, and the applicant is willing to comply with the reduction in space after the applicant is certain what the actual square footage is. -21- MINUTES MMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 x x c o � a 7 x I a w o; o 0 a = a a , m City of Newport Beach Mr. King advised that there will be no patio dining, that there will be no dancing on the premises, that the resubdivision is not a guise for an office building or parking structure, that the applicant agrees with the conditions which include a 6 -1/2 foot wall adjacent to the alley to mitigate noise or the glare of automobile lights. He said that the applicant requests that the condition be amended to have only a general reference to the entertainment and not the specific number of persons that would be a part of the entertainment. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Koppelman asking if the restaurant could encourage patrons to wait inside the entry of the restaurant instead of outside wherein the noise could affect the neighbors, Mr. King replied that this is possible, however the main entrance is on East Balboa Boulevard and there is a sizeable patio outside of the restaurant. He said that while the patron is paying the restaurant bill the valet could be retrieving the automobile and the automobile could be waiting outside • the restaurant. Mr. King commented that the all of the guests will be advised of the operational characteristics of the restaurant to protect the residents. Mr.. King advised that the restaurant vault at the back of the building will be used for refrigeration and storage which will also be a sound barrier. He said that the best operating function for the restaurant valets will consist of one valet handling the automobiles in front of the lot and one valet retrieving the automobiles. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Kurlander regarding Condition No. 10 stating that all doors and windows be closed during live entertainment, Mr. King replied that the applicant would agree if the condition were amended to state "that the doors and windows shall be closed at all times ". In response to inquiries posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. King replied that the valet service could accommodate 1008 of the patron parking, and that even during peak periods, all of the automobiles would be able to move forward onto East Balboa Boulevard without disruption. Mr. King said that the applicant also intends to provide entertainment during brunch hours of I I ( I I I I ( 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on weekends. -22- MINUTES " N\b UNtKS August 22, 1995 E a: - v z a 2 m p; O O z a = a = , m City of Newport Beach Vice - Chairman Turner asked staff if the conditions would be adequately covered if the applicant's square footage would differ from the City's records. Mr. Hewicker replied that the applicant will have to reduce the square footage on the plan to comply with the requirement of one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area ", and if the 36 on -site parking spaces are allowed, then the restaurant will be permitted to contain 1,440 square feet of "net public area ". Commissioner Turner confirmed that the parking area will limit the "net public area" and not the square footage of the building. Mr. King cited that before the applicant eliminates 270 square feet of "net public area" from the .proposed resturant in order to maintain on -site parking, the applicant wants to make sure that the figure is accurate. Vice - Chairman Turner said that he was satisfied that the conditions were covered. I I I I I I I Mr. Hewicker advised that Condition No. 8 refers to the hours that live entertainment shall be permitted but • does not limit the number of entertainers, and that the staff report's reference to a three piece instrumental combination originated from the applicant's request. Mr. Jack Prebicim, 600 East Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission, stating that a business in the Bank of America building will be an asset; however, he expressed concerns that the sale of alcoholic beverages in the restaurant could add more alcohol - related problems to the area, and that the noise eminating on the back side and on the side of the restaurant facility could be a disturbance to the residents of the Rendevzous Condominiums. Mr. Prebicim recommended that the applicant be required to permanently close the windows, that shrubbery be planted adjacent to the 6, foot wall separating the condominiums from the proposed restaurant to eliminate the noise and the glare of the lights, and that a wall be constructed on the side of the proposed restaurant so that the entire parking area will be enclosed. I I I I I I Mr. A. L. Fishman, 600 East Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission, stating that he supports a business on the site; however, he expressed 11111111 his concern regarding the proposed restaurant noise and 0 activities. Mr. Fishman recommended a retail business for the site. -23- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 0 x m z F,110,5�zc; x City of Newport Beach Mr. Dale Post, a resident of Tustin and an owner of a Rendezvous Condominium, appeared before the Planning Commission recommending denial of the application. Mr. Post stated that he objects to the restaurant's sale of alcoholic beverages, live entertainment and that the establishment will be open until 2:00 a.m. Mr. Post stated that these concerns have been voiced by all of the residents of the Rendezvous Condominiums. Mr. Post said that because the applicant had not submitted a model or plans, the residents did not know what the proposed restaurant would look like. Mr. Ed Lynch, 600 East Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission expressing his concern regarding the number of "bars" that the Balboa area currently has, and the proposed "bar- restaurant ". He commented that according to the restaurant's proposed plans, the "bar" will be larger than the restaurant's vault which will be used for refrigeration and storage. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Lynch replied that the Bank of America parking lot was • open on week -ends. Mr. Jerry King, reappeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. King replied to the residents' concerns that the restaurant's windows will be permanently closed as stated in Condition No. 10, that the exterior of the proposed restaurant will not change in order to maintain the character of the bank and that the applicant has applied for a "historical designation" of the Bank of America building. Mr. King stated that the vault containing the refrigeration and storage is considered a service portion of the restaurant. Vice - Chairman Turner asked Mr. King if the applicant would consider landscaping along the wall. Mr. King replied that there would not be room for landscaping adjacent to the alley, and that vegetation is no longer considered a noise barrier. Commissioner Goff asked Mr. King if Condition No. 9 stating "that the operation of the restuarant will not increase the ambient noise levels beyond the.boundaries of the subject property" could be adhered to, and will the management of the restaurant control the valet • noise, and asked Mr. King if the applicant could give the residents assurances? Mr. King replied that the proposed restaurant has two entrances the main entrance and an emergency door only on the side of the -24- MINUTES VIMONUNtK�O August 22, 1985 . X x C o e x H r 7 - L M c 2 w p r o O Z Z Z A= M m City of Newport Beach building, that the parking lot will be small and that the valets will be supervised by on -site restaurant management. In reply to Commissioner Winburn, Mr. King replied that the applicant is proposing a "theme" restaurant, that the decorating will be in keeping with the structure of the building, and that there will be "period" music. Mr. Prebicin, reappeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Prebicin confirmed that the alley is very narrow, and that some of the condominium's bedrooms are on the edge of the alley. He stated that more traffic will be generated at the intersection of Washington Street and East Balboa Boulevard because of the restaurant's parking lot and that the impact on East Balboa Boulevard will be greater. The public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Koppelman asked staff if the emergency side door could stay locked. Mr. Hewicker replied that he did not know what the Building Code would require, and that Condition No. 10 only requires that doors and windows be closed during the live entertainment. Mr. Hewicker cited that the Rendezvous Condominiums are in a commercial zone and not a residential zone. Commissioner Koppelman cited that Condition No. 19 provides that if the restaurant would not be compatible with the community, that the use permit could come back to the Planning Commission for review. Commissioner Motion x Koppelman made a motion to approve Use Permit No. 3164, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", amending Condition No. 4 to state that the applicant shall locate the valet parking station so as to eliminate the necessity for patrons to enter the parking lot. She explained that if the valet station is kept toward the East Balboa Boulevard exit and away from the Rendezvous Condominiums, and the patrons who are picking up their cars are in the front of the building, that there would be less noise than if patrons would be standing and talking in the parking lot. Mr. Hewicker stated that if the valet station would be positioned near East Balboa Boulevard, traffic • I I I I I ( I could be blocked on the street, but if the valet I Ilt station would be moved towards the alley, there may be conversation near the condominiums. Mr. Hewicker recommended that the automobiles could be moved towards -25- MINUTES INDEX COMMISSIONERS x x L c O Z M a m z c m Z z M= N o ;oo M m o m f; r Z a z x a� m x August 22, 1985 MINUTES City of Newport Beach Y P L CALL INDEX the alley as they enter the parking lot, and as the MEMENMEMMW automobiles exit, they could be moved towards East Balboa Boulevard. Mr. Rich Edmonston, Traffic Engineer, recommended that the valet could be notified as the patrons are paying their bills and the automobiles would be delivered to the front of the lot. Vice - Chairman Turner recommended that Condition No. 4 be amended to state "subject to the approval of a valet parking arrangement satisfactory to the City Traffic Engineer" whereby Commissioner Koppelman concurred. She continued her motion by recommending that Condition No. 10 be amended to read "that all doors and windows shall be closed at all times ", and to delete "during the live entertainment "; add Condition No. 21 "that the applicant shall construct a 6 foot high masonry wall in the parking lot along the rear.property line, adjacent to the alley "; and add Condition No. 22 "that the project shall be so designed to eliminate light and glare spillage on adjacent uses in accordance with plans to be approved by the Planning Department ". Commissioner Koppelman suggested that Finding No. 4 be amended to include the 6 foot high masonry wall, as approved by the Planning Department. The motion further states the approval of Resubdivision No. 815 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Goff commented that he would support the motion on the basis that the approval of this use permit includes Finding No. 6 which states "that the approval of this use permit will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood ", and he further commented on the importance of this finding to the citizens. He said . that Griswold's reputation for responsible business practices will support that finding. Commissioner Goff pointed out that Condition No. 9 and Condition No. 10 will protect the citizens from the restaurant noise and he added that the 6 foot high wall will protect the residents from the noise and lights in their bedrooms. He commented that Condition No. 19 states that if Finding No. 6 is not followed, then the Planning Commission can call the item back up for review or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit. Commissioner Winburn recommended that Condition No. 2 • requiring "that a minimum of one parking space shall be provided on -site for each 40 square feet of "net public area" within the restaurant" be left as is. -26- COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES � c O = y z c V m� r 7 T m z W= M 0 z o ;oo A z M m City f Y Newport Beach P *7707 a INDEX Ayes x x X x x The motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3164, MEMENMEEMMM Absent K x subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including modified Finding No. 4, Condition No. 4, Condition No. 10, additional Conditions No. 21 and 22, and to approve Resubdivision No. 815, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3164 FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed restaurant facility is consis- tent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the number of compact parking spaces consti- tutes only 25% of the total number of parking spaces provided on site, and that valet parking attendants will be present to ensure that smaller cars are parked in the appropriate spaces. 4. That the use of tandem parking spaces in conjunc- tion with a valet parking service and the related six foot high masonry wall adjacent to the alley, 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. Further, the proposed modifications are consistent with the legislative intent of the Municipal Code. 5. That due to the limited number of parking spaces available in the Balboa Municipal parking lot during the daytime hours, all required parking spaces should be provided on -site. 6. That as conditioned, the approval of Use Permit No. 3164 will not, under the circumstances of this . case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons -27- COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES c 0 n C 9 r 7 A a= a z City of Newport Beach c=0vzoo a L CALL INDEX residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan and floor plans, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. That a minimum of one parking space shall be provided on -site for each 40 sq.ft. of "net public area" within the restaurant. 3. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 4. That valet parking service shall be provided at all times during the restaurant's hours of 1111111 operation, subject to the approval of a valet 0 1 parking arrangement satisfactory to the City Traffic Engineer. 5. That no more than 258 of the on -site parking spaces may be compact spaces. 6. That all employees shall park on -site. 7. That the operation of the restaurant shall be restricted to the hours between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. daily. B. That live entertainment shall be permitted between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight daily, and from 11 :00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on weekends. 9. That a licensed acoustical engineer shall certify to the Planning Department that the operation of the restaurant will not increase the ambient noise levels beyond the boundaries of the subject property, especially during the hours when live entertainment is featured. 10. That all doors and windows shall be closed at all times. -28- v \IV \I»iviv[Ra August 22, 1985 R R c o n X z c m T s m z 9 a r 'M City of Newport Beach 11. That a washout area for the restaurant's trash containers shall be provided in such a way as to insure direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or the storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 12. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 13. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 14. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from East Balboa Boulevard, Washington Street, the alley and adjacent prop- erties. 0 1 11111111 15. That a trash compactor shall be installed in the restaurant. 16. That any landscaping to be installed adjacent to the public right of way shall be approved by the Public Works and Parks, Beaches and Recreation Departments. 17. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 18. That outdoor dining shall not be permitted unless an amendment to this use permit is approved. 19. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval of 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. 20. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -29- MINUTES INDEX VV\AbNUNtK5 August 22, 1985 ;ts C 0 f = ; C T M C 2 0 a; O O M = A = T m City of Newport Beach 21. That the applicant shall construct a six foot high masonry wall in the parking lot along the rear property line, adjacent to the alley. 22. That the 'project shall be so designed to eliminate light and glare spillage on adjacent uses in accordance with plans to be approved by the Planning Department. Resubdivision No. 815 FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. • 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded. 2. That all improvements shall be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Depart- ment. 3. That a subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record the parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That a ten foot wide radius corner cutoff at the corner of East Balboa Boulevard and Washington Street be dedicated to the public. 5. That the deteriorated curb and sidewalk be recon- structed along the Washington Street frontage, that deteriorated portions of curb and sidewalk be COO MINUTES 129 19) August 22, 1985 Beach reconstructed along the East Balboa Boulevard frontage in front of the existing building and that the curb return at the corner of Washington Street and East .Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed on a 15 foot radius with a curb access ramp incorporated within the curb return. All work shall be performed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. 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. A. Use Permit No. 3165 (Public Hearin I I Request to permit the construction of a two unit residential condominium development and related garages on property located in the R -2 District, a.portion of which exceeds the basic height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed garages and second floor decks to encroach 1 foot, 2 inches into the required 4 foot side yard setbacks; and to allow the construction of 7 foot high slumpstone walls on the side property lines where the Zoning Code allows only 6 foot high walls. 0 B. Resubdivision No. 816 (Public Hearing) Request resubdivide one lot and a portion of two other lots and eliminate interior property lines so as to create a single parcel of land for residential condominium purposes. LOCATION: A portion of Lots 13 and 17 and Lot 15, Block 529, Corona del Mar, located at 515 Begonia Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Begonia Avenue between Second I j V I I I Avenue and Third Avenue, in Corona del M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ZONE: R -2 -31- MINUTES x x c O f y > m z c m z z m a C 2 a N z r a p; O z O City am o ms M a ; p= M r m , August 22, 1985 Beach reconstructed along the East Balboa Boulevard frontage in front of the existing building and that the curb return at the corner of Washington Street and East .Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed on a 15 foot radius with a curb access ramp incorporated within the curb return. All work shall be performed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. 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. A. Use Permit No. 3165 (Public Hearin I I Request to permit the construction of a two unit residential condominium development and related garages on property located in the R -2 District, a.portion of which exceeds the basic height limit in the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the proposed garages and second floor decks to encroach 1 foot, 2 inches into the required 4 foot side yard setbacks; and to allow the construction of 7 foot high slumpstone walls on the side property lines where the Zoning Code allows only 6 foot high walls. 0 B. Resubdivision No. 816 (Public Hearing) Request resubdivide one lot and a portion of two other lots and eliminate interior property lines so as to create a single parcel of land for residential condominium purposes. LOCATION: A portion of Lots 13 and 17 and Lot 15, Block 529, Corona del Mar, located at 515 Begonia Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Begonia Avenue between Second I j V I I I Avenue and Third Avenue, in Corona del M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ZONE: R -2 -31- MINUTES August 22, 1985 MINUTES Mr. William Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated that staff is recommending that the following Condition No. 8 be added to Resubdivision No. 816 in accordance with the Public Works Department: "that the tree damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk be constructed along the Begonia Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. That the parkway trees be root pruned or replaced as recommended by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department." C O z z The public hearing was opened in connection with this T r ; m M = 9 = r ° City of Newport Beach item, and Mr. Gary Dougherty, Architect, 1180 North A x x R LL CALL x x x Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, appeared before the Absent INDEX x Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants. Mr. APPLICANTS: Glen and Steven Nelson, Orange the additional Condition No. 8. Motion voted on, OWNERS: Dr. and Mrs. Berry L. McCord, Sierra MOTION CARRIED. Madre -32- ENGINEER: William S. McGee, Santa Ana Mr. William Laycock, Current Planning Administrator, stated that staff is recommending that the following Condition No. 8 be added to Resubdivision No. 816 in accordance with the Public Works Department: "that the tree damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk be constructed along the Begonia Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. That the parkway trees be root pruned or replaced as recommended by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department." • j { I I I I I Dougherty stated that the applicants concur with the 11f lI findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the added Condition No. 8. Mr. Mark Sorenson, 513 Begonia Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission, opposing the application because the four condominium units would add to the traffic and parking problems, and that several of the trees would have to be removed. Mr. Sorenson stated his concern that the project could set a precedent in the area. Chairman Person advised Mr. Sorenson that the project is a two unit residential condominium development, and that the applicant is providing four garage spaces. Mr. Sorenson voiced his concern that the development will not conform with the neighboring structures. Chairman Person pointed out that under the current Zoning Code, the applicant is providing approximately 6,600 cubic feet of additional open space than is required. Commissioner Goff commented that the applicant could construct two rental units on the site without any Planning Commission discretionary approval. The public hearing was opened in connection with this x item, and Mr. Gary Dougherty, Architect, 1180 North A x x x x x x Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, appeared before the Absent x Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants. Mr. • j { I I I I I Dougherty stated that the applicants concur with the 11f lI findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the added Condition No. 8. Mr. Mark Sorenson, 513 Begonia Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission, opposing the application because the four condominium units would add to the traffic and parking problems, and that several of the trees would have to be removed. Mr. Sorenson stated his concern that the project could set a precedent in the area. Chairman Person advised Mr. Sorenson that the project is a two unit residential condominium development, and that the applicant is providing four garage spaces. Mr. Sorenson voiced his concern that the development will not conform with the neighboring structures. Chairman Person pointed out that under the current Zoning Code, the applicant is providing approximately 6,600 cubic feet of additional open space than is required. Commissioner Goff commented that the applicant could construct two rental units on the site without any Planning Commission discretionary approval. The public hearing was closed at this time. x Commissioner Kurlander made a motion to approve Use A x x x x x x Permit No. 3165 and Resubdivision No. 816, subject to Absent x the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the additional Condition No. 8. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. -32- V1 1V\DNkJINtK3 August 22, 1985 xx c o � x - I I A a _ I ° City of Newport Beach USE PERMIT NO. 3165 FINDINGS: 1. That each of the proposed units has been designed as a condominium with separate and individual utility connections. 2. The project lot size conforms to the Zoning Code area requirements in effect at the time of ap- proval. 3. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan. 4. That an adequate number of on -site parking spaces will be provided in conjunction with the proposed residential condominium development. 5. The project complies with all applicable • standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of approval, .except for the proposed encroachments into the required side yard setbacks and the proposed building height. 6. The increased building height will result in more public visual open space and views than is required by the basic height limit, inasmuch as the roof contains less bulk and provides more visual open space than would a roof design which conformed to the height limitations. 7. The increased building height will result in a more desirable architectural treatment of the building and a stronger and more appealing visual character of the area than is required by the basic height limit. S. The increased building height will not result in undesirable or abrupt scale relationships being created between the structure and existing devel- opments. • I I ( ( ( 9. The structure will have no more floor area than could have been achieved without the use permit for the building height. -33- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 xx c o � x H r ' - 9 m Z c m m z c z w o 9 o 0 W m z X z City of Newport Beach a s a p= r m 10. That the provision of two conforming two car garages providing four independently accessible parking spaces is not possible unless the garage walls are permitted to encroach 1 foot, 2 inches into both of the required side yard setback areas. 11. That construction of 7 foot high walls along the side property lines would restrict the flow of air and light to the adjoining residential properties. 12. The approval of Use Permit No. 3165 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detri- mental 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 1 1 1 1 'I i I CONDITIONS: • I I I I I I 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. That the gross floor area of the structure shall not exceed 4,845 sq.ft. (1.5 times the buildable area of the site). 3. That the height of any walls constructed ,within the required side yard setback areas shall not exceed 6 feet. 4. That the inside dimensions of each garage shall conform to the provisions of Section 20.87.260 of the Municipal Code (17ft. -6in. wide by 19ft. -Oin. deep). 5. That the proposed third floor decks shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code. 6. That two garage spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit. 0 7. That all Conditions of Resubdivision No. 816 shall 11111111 be fulfilled. -34- MINUTES COMMISSIONERS c o x M a = M = * ° August 22, 1985 MINUTES City of Newport Beach R CALL INDEX 8. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. RESUBDIVISION NO. 816 FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded. 2. That all improvements shall be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Depart- ment. 3. That arrangements be made with the Public works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral con- nection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley. 6. That County Sanitation District Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 7. 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. -35- August 22, 1985 Beach 8. That the tree damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk be constructued along the Begonia Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. That the parkway trees be root pruned or replaced as recommended by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department. * * i Amendment No. 621 (Public Hearing) MINUTES INDEX Request to amend the Corona del Mar Homes Planned Amend. Community Development Standards so as to eliminate.the No. 62 third off- street parking space requirement for two lots within the development (Lots 1 and 2 of Block 531, Appro Corona del Mar). I I I I I I LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 531, Corona del Mar, located at 500 Carnation Avenue and 501 Dahlia Avenue, on the northeasterly side of Second Avenue between Carnation Avenue and Dahlia Avenue, in. Corona del Mar. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: - Gfeller Development Company, Tustin OWNER: Summer Wind, a California Limited Partnership, Tustin The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Philip Bettencourt, 37 Hartford Drive, Newport Beach, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Bettencourt stated that the applicant concurs with the findings in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Bettencourt stated that there is more than adequate public parking in the area and that the guest parking needs will be well mantained. James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that the applicant could have provided three parking spaces on each lot by narrowing down the size of the garages to a minimum as required by the Municipal Code, but the applicant chose to construct over -sized garages. He said that if the applicant had provided parking spaces • in the side yards in order to preserve the sight distance at the intersection of Second Avenue and the alley, the Public Works Department would have asked the applicant to relocate the exterior parking spaces into an area which the applicant was planning as a patio area. -36- X A C o n i = y 9 7 m i c m > ," z w a M m a = r C x + o m i +�i w City Z a = a= m m 7 August 22, 1985 Beach 8. That the tree damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk be constructued along the Begonia Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. That the parkway trees be root pruned or replaced as recommended by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department. * * i Amendment No. 621 (Public Hearing) MINUTES INDEX Request to amend the Corona del Mar Homes Planned Amend. Community Development Standards so as to eliminate.the No. 62 third off- street parking space requirement for two lots within the development (Lots 1 and 2 of Block 531, Appro Corona del Mar). I I I I I I LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 531, Corona del Mar, located at 500 Carnation Avenue and 501 Dahlia Avenue, on the northeasterly side of Second Avenue between Carnation Avenue and Dahlia Avenue, in. Corona del Mar. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: - Gfeller Development Company, Tustin OWNER: Summer Wind, a California Limited Partnership, Tustin The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Philip Bettencourt, 37 Hartford Drive, Newport Beach, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Bettencourt stated that the applicant concurs with the findings in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Bettencourt stated that there is more than adequate public parking in the area and that the guest parking needs will be well mantained. James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that the applicant could have provided three parking spaces on each lot by narrowing down the size of the garages to a minimum as required by the Municipal Code, but the applicant chose to construct over -sized garages. He said that if the applicant had provided parking spaces • in the side yards in order to preserve the sight distance at the intersection of Second Avenue and the alley, the Public Works Department would have asked the applicant to relocate the exterior parking spaces into an area which the applicant was planning as a patio area. -36- FINDINGS: 1. That the deletion of the third parking space requirement for two of the lots within the Planned Community will not significantly alter the design character of the development 2. That adequate off - street parking is being provided within the Planned Community in excess of that which is required by the Zoning Code for single family residential development. 3. That the proposed amendment is minor in nature and will result in a loss of only two off - street parking spaces for the entire development. Amendment No. 622 (Public Hearing) Item No.10 Request to amend Chapter 20.02 of the Newport Beach Amend. Municipal Code by adding Section 20.02.090 to the No. 622 City's Height Limitation Ordinance specifying Airport Land Use Commission review of all projects which would Approved require Federal Aviation Administration notification. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that a letter . has been received by The Irvine Company, dated August 21, 1985, recommending modifications to the zoning code, and that staff concurs with the subject changes. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Dave Dmohowski, representing The Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission, recommending that prior to the City Council's approval of the Amendment, that the Airport Land Use Commission receive a copy of subject Amendment to ascertain if the Amendment meets their requirement. The public. hearing was closed at this time, and a x x x x motion was made to approve Amendment No. 622, as t x amended by The Irvine Company. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. * x x -37- COMMISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES x R 10 x . m = 9 m w o o z o X 0 City of Newport Beach = a = y = r m a R L CALL INDEX Motion The public hearing was closed at this time, A motion Ayes x I I x x llll x was made to approve Amendment No. 622, subject to the Absent x findings in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the deletion of the third parking space requirement for two of the lots within the Planned Community will not significantly alter the design character of the development 2. That adequate off - street parking is being provided within the Planned Community in excess of that which is required by the Zoning Code for single family residential development. 3. That the proposed amendment is minor in nature and will result in a loss of only two off - street parking spaces for the entire development. Amendment No. 622 (Public Hearing) Item No.10 Request to amend Chapter 20.02 of the Newport Beach Amend. Municipal Code by adding Section 20.02.090 to the No. 622 City's Height Limitation Ordinance specifying Airport Land Use Commission review of all projects which would Approved require Federal Aviation Administration notification. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that a letter . has been received by The Irvine Company, dated August 21, 1985, recommending modifications to the zoning code, and that staff concurs with the subject changes. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Dave Dmohowski, representing The Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission, recommending that prior to the City Council's approval of the Amendment, that the Airport Land Use Commission receive a copy of subject Amendment to ascertain if the Amendment meets their requirement. The public. hearing was closed at this time, and a x x x x motion was made to approve Amendment No. 622, as t x amended by The Irvine Company. Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. * x x -37- Motion Ayes Absent C August 22, 1985 Beach General Plan Amendment No. 85- 2(a)(Public Hearing) Request to amend the General Plan Policies Report of the Newport Beach General Plan, repealing obsolete policies concerning housing, land use, future residen- tial growth, and community design, and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach The public hearing was opened at this time, and because there was no testimony, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Resolution No. 1130, General x x x x Plan Amendment No. 85 -2(A). Motion voted on, MOTION x CARRIED. A. Development Agreement No. 3 (Public Hearing) MINUTES INDEX 0� Item Noll GPA 85 -2(a) Resolution No. 1130 Approved Item No.12 Consideration of an agreement between the City of IDevelop- Newport Beach and the J. M. Peters 7 A ment subject agreement will establish specific development C O O rights and related obligations pursuant to the annexa- 2 tion to - - S r 7 T z C m > z B. General Cz N o;OO �[ city i z i s a* m VI August 22, 1985 Beach General Plan Amendment No. 85- 2(a)(Public Hearing) Request to amend the General Plan Policies Report of the Newport Beach General Plan, repealing obsolete policies concerning housing, land use, future residen- tial growth, and community design, and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach The public hearing was opened at this time, and because there was no testimony, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made to approve Resolution No. 1130, General x x x x Plan Amendment No. 85 -2(A). Motion voted on, MOTION x CARRIED. A. Development Agreement No. 3 (Public Hearing) MINUTES INDEX 0� Item Noll GPA 85 -2(a) Resolution No. 1130 Approved Item No.12 Consideration of an agreement between the City of IDevelop- Newport Beach and the J. M. Peters Company. The ment subject agreement will establish specific development Agreement rights and related obligations pursuant to the annexa- No. 3 tion to the City of Newport Beach of the Bayview Site. AND B. General Plan Amendment 85- 2(b)(Public Hearing) GPA 85-2(b) Consideration of an amendment to the Land Use and Recreation and Open Space Elements of the Newport Beach Amend. General Plan so as to change the land use designation No. 623 from "Recreational and Environmental Open Space with an alternate of Low Density Residential" to "Multi - Family Approved Residential" and a mixture of "Administrative, Profes- sional and Financial Commercial" and "Retail and Service Commercial ". AND C. Amendment No. 623: Pre - Annexation Zoning(Public • Consideration to reclassify the subject property to the P -C (Planned Community) District and adopt the Bayview Planned Community Development Plan and Development Standards. -38- August 22, 1985 Beach INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach LOCATION: A portion of Block 51 of Irvine's Subdivision, located on the south- westerly corner of Bristol Street and Jamboree Road in Unincorporated County territory. ZONES: PA /95 PD, CC /90, CC /35, R -1 -2975 PD, R- 2,400, B -1 (All County Zoning designations) APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Chairman Person made an announcement that this application does not pertain to the annexation of Santa Ana Heights but only to the annexation of the Bayview site. • James Hewicker, Planning Director, cited that the City Council has directed the Planning Department to prepare a plan that would incorporate the balance of the Santa Ana Heights area, and that plan will be presented to the Planning Commission when available. He commented that the plan is along the same general lines that has already been approved by the County. In response to inquiries made by Chairman Person, Mr. Hewicker replied that the proposed site is undeveloped except for a school, and he said that discretionary approvals to build on this site have been obtained within the County jurisdiction. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bob Trapp, J. M. Peters Company, appeared before the Planning Commission and indicated he was available to answer questions regarding the project. Mr. Al Aebischer, 23092 Bayview Avenue, Santa Ana Heights, appeared before the Planning Commission expressing his opposition to the proposed development. Chairman Person informed Mr. Aebischer that the County has approved the project, and that Newport Beach is only considering the annexation of the property. Mr. l I I I I I I i Aebischer suggested that the development be annexed at 0 the time that the entire Santa Ana Heights annexation is considered, and not "piece meal ". Commissioner -39- MINUTES INDEX �x c o n f = C M r v z c m z m a `= a N z r G °; ° 2 ° M m o m s * w City of 2 a 2 a i m August 22, 1985 Beach INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach LOCATION: A portion of Block 51 of Irvine's Subdivision, located on the south- westerly corner of Bristol Street and Jamboree Road in Unincorporated County territory. ZONES: PA /95 PD, CC /90, CC /35, R -1 -2975 PD, R- 2,400, B -1 (All County Zoning designations) APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Chairman Person made an announcement that this application does not pertain to the annexation of Santa Ana Heights but only to the annexation of the Bayview site. • James Hewicker, Planning Director, cited that the City Council has directed the Planning Department to prepare a plan that would incorporate the balance of the Santa Ana Heights area, and that plan will be presented to the Planning Commission when available. He commented that the plan is along the same general lines that has already been approved by the County. In response to inquiries made by Chairman Person, Mr. Hewicker replied that the proposed site is undeveloped except for a school, and he said that discretionary approvals to build on this site have been obtained within the County jurisdiction. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bob Trapp, J. M. Peters Company, appeared before the Planning Commission and indicated he was available to answer questions regarding the project. Mr. Al Aebischer, 23092 Bayview Avenue, Santa Ana Heights, appeared before the Planning Commission expressing his opposition to the proposed development. Chairman Person informed Mr. Aebischer that the County has approved the project, and that Newport Beach is only considering the annexation of the property. Mr. l I I I I I I i Aebischer suggested that the development be annexed at 0 the time that the entire Santa Ana Heights annexation is considered, and not "piece meal ". Commissioner -39- MINUTES INDEX "/V\ISSIONERS August 22, 1985 MINUTES xPt c o A D D I T I O N A LB U S I N E S S: z Business T X _ X a � ° City of Newport Beach Kurlander and Mr. Aebischer debated the proposed development and the annexation of the Santa Ana Heights area. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Commissioner Turner made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 1131, recommending to City Council approval of Development Agreement No. 3, General Plan Amendment 85 -2(B) and Amendment No. 623. Chairman Person commented that he would support the motion to annex the Bayview property, but he further commented that if the development came to the Planning Commission as a new project he was uncertain if he would support the development on its merits. Chairman Person explained that the advantage that Newport Beach has by annexing the development is that the City will benefit in terms of revenue, the required roadway improvements on .jamboree Boulevard. Commissioner Goff commented that he would support the • motion because of the revenue benefits and the planning advantages. Motion voted on to approve Resolution No. 1131, and to Ayes ... x x x recommend Development Agreement No. 3, General Plan Absent x Amendment 85 -2(B) and Amendment No. 623. MOTION CARRIED. * • r -40- A D D I T I O N A LB U S I N E S S: Additional Business ' Planning Director Hewicker discussed the Planning Commission agenda of September 5, 1985 with the Planning Commission. Chairman Person also suggested 9 -5 -85 that staff provide a list of the major items that the PCM Agenda Planning Commission will be reviewing within the next year for said meeting. • * x The Planning Commission discussed the proposed annexation of the Santa Ana Heights area to the City. Santa Ana.. Heights Mr. Hewicker stated that the proposed Santa Ana Heights annexation may come before the Planning Commission Annexation between the next three to six months. -40- �J 1 COMMISSIONERS c o I z c m Z T z m a a I r P I A M O m i M +� 2 D = 9 z T itv of August 22, 1985 Beach Commissioner Turner was excused from the September 5, 1985, Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 P.M. x * + PAT EICHENHOFER, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -41- MINUTES INDEX