HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/23/19791 COMMISSIONERS Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Place: City Counc.il Chambers
Time: 7:30 P.M.
Date: August 23, 1979
F City of Newport Beach
LL CALL
Present x x x Commissioners McLaughlin, Bal.alis and Haidinger
Absent were absent.
* * *
H;ugh.Coffin, Acting City Attorney
AFF MEMBERS
dames Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning
Oob Webb, Assistant City Attorney
Glenna Gipe, Secretary
* * *
inutes Written By: Glenna Gipe
MINUTES
• Request to consider a Traffic Study for a proposed"-Item #1
development and redevelopment of facilities at
Hoag Memorial Hospital - Presbyterian. TRAFFIC
Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission con- CONTIN-
Ayes x x.x tinue Agenda Item No. 1, Traffic Study for Haag UED TO
Absent * * Hospital, to the regular Planning Commission meet SEPTEMB
iing of September 20, 1979, as.per the applicant's 20, 97
request.
iequest.to amend a previously approved use permit Item #2
hat permitted the construction of Hoag Memorial
ospital- Presbyterian facilities on the site so USE PER
's to remodel and expand the existing hospita com MI7 NO.
lex, and the acceptance of an Environmental ocu -- 1421 -C
ent.
CONTIN-
LOCATION: Parcel 1, Record Survey 15/30, lo- Eta TO
cated at 301 Newport Boulevard; on SEPTEMB
the southwesterly corner, of Newport eeF, 7
Boulevard and Hospital Road.
ZONE: A -P -H
PPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Hospital- Presbyterian,
Newport Beach
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
August 23, 1979
C:ity of Newport Beach
OLL CALL INDEX
OWNER: Same as Applicant
Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission con -
Ayes x x x x tinue Agenda Item No. 2, Use Permit No. 1421 -C,
Absent to the regular Planning Commission meeting of
September 20, 1979, as per the applicant's request
Request to amend a previously approved use permit Item #3
that allowed the construction of a restaurant with .
0.n -sale alcoholic beverages so as to permit a-n ad- USE PER -
ditional freestanding identification sign on the MIT NO.
site. 11671
LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 60 -30 (Re- APPROVED
subdivision No. 425) located at CONDI-
3300 Wfst Coast Highway, on the TIONALLY
northerly side of West Coast High-
way, east of Newport Boulevard on
Mariner's Mile.
NE: Specific Plan Area No. 5.
PLICANT: Allyn Cano, dba. Cha Cha's Meki-
can Food, Newport Beach
NER: Byco, Inc., Newport Beach
he Public Hearing was opened .regarding this item
nd John Howenstein, representing the Applicant,.
rom the Graphics Co. that designed and manufac-
ures signs; appeared before the Planning Commis -
ion to state that the sign they had designed for
ha Cha's Restaurant would be aesthetically pleas -
ng and compatible with the building. He demon -
trated to the Planning Commission the proposed
ppearance of the ground sign and the pole.sign
lternative.
ames Hewicker, Assistant Director - .Planning, state
'hat the ground sign would be 9'6" in height and
'he logo would encompass approximately 45 sq. ft.
nd the pole sign involves 12' to the bottom, and
ould be approximately 40 sq. ft., and the letter-
-2- 1
1MISSIONERS MINUTES
August 23, 1979
a� D
y City of Newport Beach
ing used is.channel letters recessed into tile.
Mr. Howenstein expressed his feeling that the pol
sign would be more appropriate than the ground
sign to eliminate any last minute decisions as tc
where the restaurant is.
Commissioner Allen inquired whether the Citizen's
Savings parking lot and Cha Cha's parking lot are
continuous, to which Mr. Hewicker answered in the
affirmative.
Mr. Hewicker then explained that the reason the
applicant was presently before the Planning Com-
mission was due to the fact that he has a Use
Permit for the restaurant, and that they are ad-
dressing the sign with th.e restaurant use.
I;n response to a question posed.by Commissioner
Beek, Mr. Howenstein replied that the.lighting is
neon tubing contained within each individual let-
ter.
In response to a question posed by Commission r
Beek, Mr. Hewicker replied that the 'only sig
that could be erected on the Specific Area Plana
for Mariner's Mile without the Planning Commission
approval are those uses which are automatically
permitted under the Specific Area Plan, and any
use requiring Use Permit or Site Plan Review gives
the Planning Commission an opportunity to review
the signing with the other discretionary.action.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
rihomas, Mr. Hewicker replied that this particular
roposal does not conform with the sign ordinance
in that they are asking for two ground.signs or
a single highway frontage and are normally pe�-
itted to have one sign, but that Staff is of the
'pinion that they should have an equal signing
pportunity.
ommissioner Cokas stated that he would prefer the
onument sign, as he felt that it was most in keep
ng with the decor; however, that he preferred the
esign of the letters themselves in the pole sign.
mgm
Motion
Ayes
Noes
Absent
•
x
x
August 2.3, 1979
on
r
r a ,
MINUTES
commissioner Beek inquired how high off the ground
;he.pole sign would have to be to be considered
cut of the way of site distance for vehicles com-
ing out of the driveway, to which Don Webb, As-
istant City Engineer, replied that the minimum
iow would be 8'.
mmissioner Beek then stated his preference for
pole sign 5' high on the bottom side, 45 sq. ft.
d with more subdued lettering and decor than the
oposed sign:
tion was made that the'Planning Commission make
e following findings:
That the sign, as revised, is properly re=
lated to the site and is in keeping with the
character of the neighborhood and surrounding
sites and is not detrimental to.the.ord.erly
and harmonious development of their sur-
roundings and of the City.
That the sign as revised is in keeping with
the desired character of the Specific Area
Plan area as identified by the General Plan
and the Specific Area Plan.
That a sign which "attempts to direct the
movement of traffic" would be a violation of
the Sign Ordinance and could jeopardize the
health, safety, and general welfare of the
community due to the proposed sign's lo.ca-
tion with a major traffic intersection.
ynd approve the Monument Sign with the design.and
lecor of the Pole Sign, subject to the following
'onditions:
That the display surface area be limited to
a maximum of 45 sq. ft. per face.
That the overall height of the sign, includ-
ing any base, be limited to 9 feet.
That the location of the sign shall be sub -
ject to the approval of the Traffic Engineer.
That no flashing animation or movement, eithe
actual or suggested be permitted.
ME
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
August 23, 1979
City of Newport Beach
LL CALL INDEX
51. That all "temporary ".signs be removed from th
site prior to the issuance of a Sign Permit.
6. That any landscaping or irrigation facilities
removed by the construction location of this
sign be replaced.
7. That South Coast Regional Commission approval
be obtained for this sign prior to the is-
suance of a Sign Permit.
Request to adjust a common property line between Item #4
two lots.
RESUB-
OCATION: Lots A and B, Tract No. 6927, 10- DIVISION
cated at 1801 Bayside Drive, on NO. 638
the southwesterly side of Bayside
Drive, adjacent to the Balboa Yacht WITHDRAWN
Clubhouse facility..
• 'ONE: C -1 -H
PPI_ICANT: The Balboa Yacht Club, Newport.Beac
'WNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
NGINEER: Same as Owner
genda:Item Flo. 4, Resubdi-vision No. 638, was,
ithdrawn, as per the applicant's request.
equest to consider an amendment to Section 20.02.
50 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to
educe height limits and establish building height
n relation to curb height on the bluff side of
cean Boulevard between Carnation Avenue and Poppy
venue, in Corona.del Mar, and the acceptance of
n Environmental Document.
NITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach
• ames Hewicker, Assistant Director- Planning, state .
hat this item was initiated at the request of the
11ity Council and that it is a request to discuss
-5-
911L>C
0
0
MINUTES.
August 23, 1979
of Newport Beach
he question of building heights on.the bluff side
f Ocean Boulevard between Poppy.Avenue and Carna-
ion Avenue in Corona del Mar and as set forth in
he Staff Report, heights of buildings on the bluf
ide of Ocean Boulevard are primarily regulated
ither by City Council action in reviewing indi=
idual curb -cut applications o.r by the Planning
ommission in reviewing individual applications
or either Use Permit or Variance to exceed the
eight limit. He informed the Planning Commission
hat the City Attorney has indicated that there
s a question regarding the ability of the City
ouncil to regulate the height of structures,throu
he curb -cut procedure and the City has initiated
n amendment which would pla`ce.this type of regu-
ation in the Zoning Ordinance. In conclusion;
e stated that Amendment No. 537 would allow ad-
itional residential uses on the bluff side of
cean. Boulevard to continue -in their existing stat
r would allow them to be remodeled as long as
ny remodeling did not exceed the height of the
xisting curb , and that room additions or new
onstruction on vacant parcels would require that
he new roof heights would not exceed the top of
he curb. He stated that there are several va-
ant pieces of property on Ocean Boulevard, and
hree vacant parcels adjacent to Inspiration
oint which would not be regulated by this Amend -
ent, and that at the West end of Ocean Boulevard
oward China Cove there is a vacant parcel which i
through lot between lower Ocean Boulevard and.
ay Lane that is currently owned by.Don Callendar,
lso to which this.Amendment would not apply, and
hat additionally there is one remaining undevelop
d parcel on the main portion of Ocean Boulevard
o which this application would apply, at the ex-
ension of Ocean Boulevard and Heliotrope extended
r property owned by Mr. Darwin Britvich, and that
e has a request currently before the City Council
or a.curb -cut for that particular site.
ugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney, stated that
he ordinance may codify the existing half dozen
eight restrictions that are set by a curb -cut
hich they have consistently stated is of doubtful
egal validity.
9M
INDEX
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
1111 City of _Newport Beach
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
Beek, Mr. Hewicker demonstrated the .locations
;to which the ordinance would apply.
:Commissioner Beek inquired whether this was
'a problem which could be solved by giving names
'to the right -of -ways for Ocean Boulevard.
'The Public Hearing was opened regarding this item
land Darwin Britvich, 300 Kings Place,. appeared
!before the Planning Commission to submit a letter
!to the Planning Commission for the record,.wh,ich
!included the following general comments: 1). that
'he has a building height set and curb -cut which
'is his at the present time 2) that the ordinance
'does not specifically refer to his property 3)
'that he regarded,the passing of this ordinance as
unconstitutional, since it is directed at the
Iregulation of building by a specific individual
i4) that the ordinance,might be unconstitutional
(regarding the restriction on homeowners' rights
• -to use their property without due .process of law
5) that an.EIR would.be inappropriate and irrele-
vant to any decisions as to whether to allow con -
struction. He further expressed his feeling that
they are talking about height problems that were
not properly spelled out to the notice to the
.,homeowners in that area.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
'Thomas, Mr. Coffin explained that this Negative
'Declaration relating to this Amendment is just
dealing with the Ordinance Amendment itself.
Mr. Hewicker indicated the letters from Ann and
Lee Spencer and Mr. W.R. Tighe, as distributed to
the Planning Commission.
Motion x'Motion was made that the Planning Commission ap-
prove Amendment No. 537, and recommend that the
!City Council adopt same.
'Commissioner Beek stated his support of the motio
!due to the reasons that this limits the height of
!the buildings to the.height of the curb and that
!there would be no restriction placed on Mr. Brit-
r1
-7-
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
I I 1 City of Newport Beach
vich beyond what he is.claiming as his maximum
height at the present time.
Mr. Hewicker explained that this amendment states
that regardless.of the height of the building:,
the top of the curb cannot be exceeded, but it
does not say that the, height limits do not have to
be met as specified under the Zoning Ordinance.
In response to a comment from Mr. Br.itvich, Com-
Missioner Beek restated his feeling that the
Amendment does not take from him anything which
he now has.
In response to a question asking what harm this
Amendment would bring him, Mr. Britvich responded
that there is a possibility that at certain points
on his building there would, be a maximum height
of 29' which might be taken from the uppermost
point on his property which would in effect exceed
• curb height, but that in granting the permit to
Vim for encroachment, in effect providing the -curb
cut for-him, that he accepted curb heights and
that City Council cannot place restrictions upon
a curb -cut or encroachment permit arbitrarily.
Commissioner Beek suggested an additional finding,
?That the proposed project will have a beneficial
¢ffect on the environment by preserving public
views from the. adjoining public street and view.
park.
Mr. Coffin suggested that the finding already in.
the Negative Declaration must be made to be consis
tent with the California Environmental Quality
:ontrol Act, but that an additional finding could
to added.
Ayes x x x K Motion -was then voted on that the Planning Commis -
Absent * * Sion make the following findings as contained with
in the Negative Declaration:
1. Pursuant to the provisions of City Council
Policy K -3 pertaining to procedures and guide
lines to implement the California Envionmen-
tal Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs
• Committee has evaluated the proposed project
and determined that the proposed project will
not have a significant effect on the environ-
ment.
N
August 23, 1979
M
MINUTES
2. That the proposed project will have a bene-
ficial effect on the environment by preserv-
ing public views from the adjoining public
street and view park.
and approve Amendment
that the ,City Council
CARRIED.
*
No. 537, and recommend
adopt same, which MOTION
* *
Motion x Motion was then made that the Planning Commission
Ayes x x x recommend to the City Council that they adopt
Absent k k names for the two lower portions of the right -of-
ays of Ocean Boulevard adjacent to Inspiration
hint and China Cove.
* * *
Request to remodel and enlarge an existing take-
out restaurant facility (Sugar -n- Spice) in the C -1
mistrict, and to waive the required offstreet park
• ing spaces.
LOCATION: Lot 6, Block 14, Balboa Island, lo-
INDEX
Item #6
cated at 310 Marine Avenue, on the DENIED
easterly side of Marine Avenue be-
tween East Bay Front and Balboa
Avenue on Balboa Island. (Sugar -
n- Spice)
ZONE: C -1
APPLICANT: Bettie Banto, Balboa Island
OWNER: Same as.Applicant
The Public Hearing was opened regarding this item
and Kathleen Felling, 309 Grand.Canal, appeared
before the Planning Commission and stated her op-
position to approval of this Use Permit, as she
felt that it would be detrimental to the safety,
Fomfort and general welfare of the 26 private en-
trances on the Grand Canal whose only access to
their homes is the alley on which is this business
and that this business would add traffic that
IMI
0
MINUTES
Augusl 23, 1979
LoJ.1
would be detrimental to the safe and continuous
flow of traffic in the alley.
Mark Benabou then appeared before the Planning
Commission and stated his opposition to the Use
Permit, expressing his feeling that if the City
Were going to make certain restrictions for him,
the same should hold true for everyone.
Jerry Jones, representing the Owner., appeared be-
fore the Planning Commission and expressed his
feeling that the owner of the property is not re-
sponsible for the carelessness of the buyer,.and
that this type of restaurant facility is needed
in this area. He informed the Planning Commission
that the Health Department is now requiring of
them some minor modifications and a 10' X 10' dry
storage area regardless of whether or not there is
any change in type of food service He also sta-
ted that 95% of the Sugar -n -Spice business is
valk -by and express.ed his feeling that this would
not add to traffic congestion.
James Hew_icker, Assistant Director- Planning, ex
plai.ned that these Health Department reauirements
are like other codes which address the issue of
non= conforming buildings which require that when
one remodels or does maintenance repair up to a
certain percentage of the value of the property,
that beyond a certain point the structure must be
brought up to the code standards.
gob Millar, 116 Crystal Avenue., appeared before
the.Planning Commission to express his feeling
that it is.time for the Planning Commission to
begin limiting the amount of activity on a lot
as small as 35' X 85', to require additional .park-
ing and to limit business on Marine Avenue.
athleen Felling again appeared before the Plan-
ing Commission to express,her feeling that consi-
eration needs to be given to the business deli -
ery that each of these businesses requires and
he traffic congestion 'to which this contributes.
-10-
TV11:33KANEK,3 '
August 23, 1979
City of Newport Beach
MINUTES,
Jerry Jones again.ap.peared before. the Planning
Commission and stated that behind the businesses
on Marine Avenue there is an 8'.right -of -way off
the alley which is specifically for delivery.for
the businesses and that there is a loading zone
each end of Marine Avenue.
Bob Millar again appeared before the Planning
Commission to refute the previous statement, sta-
ting that the buildings are built out to the 10'
alley.
Kathleen Felling again appeared before the Plan -
Oing Commissiron to express her observation that
the applicant's parking place is always occupied
by the person operating the business and is not
Available for business deliveries.
Mr. Hewicker explained that there is a 10' setback
between the:back of the building and the alley
right -of -way line and an additional 5' between the
• property line and the center line:of the.alley.
Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission make
the following findings for denial:.
1: That the proposed development will be detri-
mental to the safe and continuous flow of ve-
hicular traffic on Marine Avenue. Added con-
gestion will also be encountered with the ex-
panded take- out restaurant facility due to
increased demand for parking in an area with
already limited. parking capacities.
2. The approval of Use Permit No. 1912 will
under the circumstances of.this case, be de-
trimental to the health, safety, peace, mor-
als, comfort, and general welfare of persons
residing or working in the neighborhood or
be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood or the gen-
eral welfare of the City.
and DENY Use Permit No. 1912.
Commissioner Allen stated her support of the Moti
• suggesting that they go one step further and,con-
-11-
Ayes
Absent
0
0
X
August 23, 1979
M
Beach
MINUTES
cider referring this general problem to the City
Litter Committee to consider alleviating some of
the problems .these take -out windows are creating.
Commissioner Thomas also stated his support of.
the Motion, adding that there is a personal res-
ponsibility regarding litter on the part of each
business owner.
Motion was then voted. on, which MOTION CARRIED.
The Planning Commission recessed at 9:20 P.M. and
reconvened at 9:30 P.M.,
Request to remodel and expand an existing res'tau-
rant facility with on -sale alcoholic beverages
(Franciscan Restaurant) in the C -N —H District.
The proposed development includes the conversion
of a portion of the existing restaurant,complex
into a private club with alcoholic beverages and
dancing to recorded-music. The proposal also in-
cludes a modification from the required parking
standards so as to allow valet parking and tandem
parking spaces.
LOCATION: A portion of Lots 7 and 8,.Tra:ct
No. 4225, located at 1617 Westcliff
j Drive, on the southwesterly side of
Westcliff Drive, between Irvine
Avenue and Dover Drive, in the West
cliff area (Franciscan Restaurant).
ZONE: C -N -H
kPPLICANT: Circa Designs /James Skaug, Newport
Beach
WNER: The Irvine Company; Newport Beach
AND
equest to establish one building site and elimi-
ate an interior lot line where portions of two
-12-
Item #7
USE PER -
IT N0.
1915
APPROVED
CONDI-
TIONALLY
Cl
MINUTES
ItAugust 23, 1979
12 1 1,11C,itv of Newport Beach
lots now exist so as to permit the remodeling and
expansion of the existing commercial building on
the property.
I
LOCATION:. A portion of Lots 7 and 8, Tract
No. 4225, located at 1617 Westclif
Drive, on the southwesterly side
of Westcliff Drive, between Irvine
Avenue and Dover Drive, in the
Westcliff area (Francisca.n Resta-
urant).
ZONE: C -N -H
APPLICANT: Circa Designs /James Skaug, Newport
Beach
OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
ENGINEER: Van Dell and.Associates Inc., Ir-
vine
(Agenda Item Nos. 7 and 8 were heard concurrently,
due to their relationship.)
The,Public Hearing was opened regarding these,. item
And James Skaug, repr.esenting.the Applicant, ap-
peared before the Planning Commission to state his
Concurrence with the conditions, with one excep-
tion: Condition No. 2 relative to the parkinlg
requirement, as they are 8.parking.spaces short
and by restriping the lot, 3 spaces will be re=
captured, and that additionally there are app "roxi -
matel.y 350 sq. ft.. of hallway which is now being
construed as occupied area and requires the 8 ad -.
ditional.parking spaces; however, this, hallway
area will'not be occupied, but rather a thoroiugh
fare and should not be included in the square foot
age figures that require parking spaces. In.con-
clusion, he informed the Planning.Commission that
pn the process of securing this Use Permit, they
have been required to bring up the standards of
the entire building, not just for the 20% space,
which they had done.
-13-
ESUBDI-
PPROVED
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
w I City of Newport Beach
Imple
Commissioner Allen inquired whether the parking
requirement makes allowance for the fact that
the club is open only in the evening, to which
Mr.. Skaug replied that nighttime use requires ad-
ditional parking; however, at night they take ad-
Vantage of all the additional parking in the area
that is utilized during the day by the office use
Games Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning, in-
formed the Planning Commission that the entryway
O ll be.occupied by people and should be included
in determining the square footage for parking.,
and would not include in the calculations areas
occupied by a service bar or waiter station or
areas of that nature.
Mr.. Skaug circulated a petition representing the
number of merchants and tenants in the immediate
area walking to said restaurant for ;lunch as op-
posed to taking their automobile.
• In response to a question posed by.Commissioner
Qokas, Mr. Hewicker explained that they were shor
8 parking spaces, but by restriping.the lot ac-
cording to the original plan, they gained back 3
spaces, and would, therefore`, be short 5 parking
spaces on a'1/40 sq. ft. basis.
Commissioner Allen inquired whether this waiver
would be a precedent- setting situation, to which
Mr. Hewicker replied in the negative.
Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission make
the following findings:'
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the
Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is
compatible with surrounding land uses.
2. The project will not have any significant
environmental impact, providing that adequate
offstreet parking spaces are provided.
3. The Police Department has indicated that they
do not contemplate any problems.
i
-14-
1MISSIONERS MINUTES
August 23, 1979.
1.9 l a ,
t I e City of Newport Beach
INDEX
4. That the proposed tandem parking spaces, wil
not, under the circumstances of the particu-
lar case,, be detrimental to the health, safe
ty, peace, comfort, and general welfare of
persons residing or working in the neighbor-
hood of such proposed use or.be,detrimental
or injurious to property and improvements
in the neighborhood or the general welfare
of the City, and further that the proposed
modifications are consistent with the legis-
lative intent of Title 20 of this Code.
5. The approval of Use.Permit No..1915 will not,
under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort, and general welfare of per-
sons residing and working in the neighbor-
hood or be detrimental.or injurious to pro-
perty and improvements in the neighborhood
or the general welfare of the City.
• and approve Use Permit No. 1915,.subject to the
following conditions:
1. That development shall be in substantial con
formance.with the approved plot plan, floor
plans and elevations, except as noted below.
2. That a minimum of one parking space /42 sq.
ft. of "net public area" shall be provided
for the restaurant facility.
-15-
3: That a parking attendant .(or attendants),.
shall be provided on -site at all times during
regular business hours of the restaurant and
private club uses.
That all mechanical equipment and .trash areas
shall be screened from adjoining properties
and from adjoining streets.
6. That the proposed recorded music shall be
confined to the interior of the building.
6. That there shall be no sound amplification
used outside of the structure.
•
7. That the hours of operation of the club shall be bet -
ween the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., except on
Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays.
-15-
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
City of Newport Beach
8. That all exterior lighting and signs shall b
approved by the Department of Community De-
velopment. Only one pole sign shall be per-
mitted by the restaurant facility and the pr
v.ate club for identification purposes..
-16-
9. That a washout area for trash containers shall
be provided in.such a way as to allow direct
drainage into the sewer system and not into
the storm drains.
p. That all provisions of the Uniform Building
Code shall be required in conjunction with
the expanded restaurant use'.
1, That all conditions of.approval of Resubdi-
visi.on No. 639 shall be fulfilled.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner
§eek, Mr. Hewicker replied that an 82' stall would
',require a 26' aisle, and they have a 28' aisle,
•
making parking easily assessible.
Commissioner Beek expressed his feeling that he
does not.find the tandem parking spaces satisfac-
tory; that he does not want to approve valet park -
1ng, to which Mr. Skaug replied that they have
�bundant parking which is not valet.
Motion
x
Amendment to the Motion was made that a minimum
Ayes
x
of one parking space /50 sq. ft. of "net publiic.
Noes
x
x
area" shall be provided for the restaurant faci-
Absent
*
*
lity.
Ayes
x
X.
K
Original Motion was then voted on, which MOTION
Noes
x
CARRIED.
Absent
Motion
Motion was then made that the Planning Commission
Ayes
x
x
x
K
make the following findings:
Absent
1. That the map meets the requirements of Title
19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all
ordinances of the City, all applicable gen-
eral or specific plans and the PlanningCom-
mission is satisfied with the plan of sub-
division.
•
-16-
COMMISSIONERS I I MINUTES
August 23, 1979
(Lit Y of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL INDEX
Z. That the proposed resubdivision presents no
problems from a planning standpoint.
aind approve Resubdivision No. 639, subject to.the
following conditions:
1. That a parcel map be filed.
21. That a firewall, shall be constructed along
the northwesterly side property line that
meets the requirements of the Uniform.Build-
ing Code.
0
Motion
Ayes x
Absent
0
Request to permit a Traffic Study to permit.the Item' #9
construction of a maximum of 140 apartment units
on 10.6 gross acres. TRAFFIC
STUDY
VOCATION: Parcel No. 1, Parcel Map 45 -10
(Resubdivision No. 311), and a CONTINUE
portion of Blocks 92 and 93, Ir- TO SEPT-
vine's Subdivision, located at EMBER 20
1601 San Miguel Drive, on.the 1979
northeasterly side of San Joaquin
Hills Road, between MacArthur
Boulevard and San Miguel Drive in
Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apart-
ments).
i
ZONE: P -C
I
4PLICANT: The Irvine Company., Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as Applicant
Motion was made that the Planning.Commission con-
tinue this item to the regular Planning Commis-
sion meeting of September 20, 1979, as per the
applicant's request.
Request to amend the Planned Community Develop- Item #10
ment Plan for Harbor View Hills so as to permit
the expansion Area No. 8 (Baywood Apartments) AMENDMENT
of the Planned Community for additional multi- NO. 536
family residential units, and the acceptance of
-17-
Moon
ti
Absent
COMMISSIONERS
Fq
9T
f��WE
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
M
Beach
do Environmental Document.
OCATION: Parcel No. 1, Parcel Map 45 -101
(Resubdivision No. 311), and a
portion of Blocks 92 and 93, Ir-
vine's Subdivision, located at
1601 San Miguel Drive, on the
northeasterly side of San Joaquin
Hills Road, between MacArthur
Boulevard and San Miguel Drive in
Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apart-
ments).
ZONE: P -C
i
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as Applicant
Motion was made that the Planning Commi.sston con-
tinue this item to the regular Planning Commissioi
meeting of September 20, 1979, as per the appli-
cant's request.
,Request to combine one parcel and a portion of
Blocks 92 and 93 of Irvine's Subdivision into one
Iuilding site so as to permit the expansion of
the Baywood Apartment complex on the property.
LOCATION: Parcel No. 1, Parcel Map 45 -10'
(Resubdivision No. 311), and a
portion of Blocks 92 and 93, Ir-
vine's Subdivision, located at
1601 San Miguel Drive, between
MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel
Drive in Harbor View Hills (Bay-
wood Apartments).
,ONE: P -C
APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach
OWNER: Same as Applicant
ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost & As-
sociates, Newport Beach
-18-
INDEX
CONTINUED
TO SEPT-
EMBER 20,
1979
COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES
August 23, 1979
ity of Newport Beach
ROLL CALL INDEX
Motion Notion was made that the Planning Commission con -
Ayes x x tinue this item to the regular Planning Commissio il
Absent * * meeting of September 20, 1979, as per the appli-
cant's request.
Motion
Ayes
Absent 11x Absent *
Motion
Ayes
Absent
Motion
Ayes
Absent
•
x1*
* * *
Request to consider an amendment to Section Item #
20.87.140 of the .Newport Beach Municipal Codel as
it pertains to the definition of the term "Dwell AMENDM
ing Unit", and the acceptance of an Environme!ntal 1N0. 53
Document.
INITIATED BY: The City
Motion was .made that th
tinue this item to the
sion meeting of October
Planning Commission may
of Newport Beach
e Planning Commission con -
regular Planning Commis -
4, 1979, so that the
appoint a sub - committee.
* * *
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Motion was made that the Planning Commission dis-
puss at the September 6, 1979 Study Session and
* place on a subsequent evening agenda a proposed
amendment.to the Commission's Rules of Procedure
pertaining to substitute and amended motions.
* * *
Motion was made that the subject of "prohibiting
Hissing within the land adjacent to the Water
* thed °.be forwarded to the City Council for their
consideration on August 27, 1979.
* * *
There being no further business, the Planning
Commission adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
�t.
Debra Allen, Secretary
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
..
-19-
CONTINUED
TO CTOBER
,l
DDITION-