Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/23/1990COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES pod PLACE: City Council Chambers 7:30 P.M. August 23, 1990 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH *-CALL INDEX Present Absent * Commissioner Di Sano and Commissioner Merrill were absent. r * s 0 Motion Ayes Absent • EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT; Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney Patricia L. Temple, Advance Planning Manager W. William Ward, Senior Planner Sandra L. Genis, Senior Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary t i i Commissioner Pomeroy requested that page 32, paragraph 2 of the subject Planning Commission minutes be clarified to state "..zero clearance tbrough- the -wall fireplaces.. ". Motion was made and voted on to approve the amended August 9, * 1990, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Public Comments: No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non - agenda items. x x : Public of August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ft �W CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R L CALL . INDEX Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the Agenda Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, August 17, 1990, in front of City Hall. Request for Continuances: 1equest for ontinuances Ms. Temple stated that the applicant, Thomas L. Kistinger, has requested that Item No. 2, Resubdivision No. 936, property located iemoved to at 2612 and 2616 Ocean Boulevard, regarding a request to he end of he Agenda resubdivide three lots and a portion of a fourth lot into three parcels of land, be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of September 6, 1990. She further stated that the applicant, Birtcher /Campbell DDA, has requested that Item No. 1, Amendment No. 715, property located at 23 Corporate Plaza, be withdrawn, and Item No. 12, Amendment No. 708, regarding the • establishment of Retail and Service Commercial District, be withdrawn inasmuch as it was combined with Discussion Item No. 2, Amendment No. 716. The Planning Commission and Ms. Temple discussed the feasibility of continuing Item No. 2, to the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 1990, on the basis that one item (Amendment No. 714) was on the Pending Agenda. Ms. Temple stated that Mr. Kistinger, the applicant for Resubdivision No. 936, previously agreed to continue Item No. 2 to the September 20, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. She further suggested that the Planning Commission defer a motion to continue Item No. 2 to the end of the subject Planning Commission meeting. r -2- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS. MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL 1 1 I f i l l I I INDEX Amendment No. 715 (Public Hearing) 1Item No.1 Request to amend the Corporate Plaza Planned Community 715 Development Plan, Sight Plane Plan, and Grading Plan so as to change the property designated as Building No. 23 to Building No. itha 25. This revision will also change the address of the property from 23 Corporate Plaza to 25 Corporate Plaza. LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Lot Line Adjustment 90 -1, located at 23 Corporate Plaza, within the Corporate Plaza Planned Community ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Birtcher /Campbell DDA, Laguna Niguel OWNER: The Irvine Company • Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, stated that the applicant has requested that this item be withdrawn. Resubdivision No 936 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide three lots and a portion of a fourth lot into three parcels of land, each for two family residential purposes, on property located in the R -2 District. The proposal also includes an exception to the Subdivision Code so as to allow the creation of parcels which are less than 5,000 sq.ft. in area and less than 50 feet in width. LOCATION: Lots 3, 4, 5 and a portion of Lot 6, Block 132, Corona del Mar, located at 2612 - 2616 Ocean Boulevard, on the northeasterly side of Ocean Boulevard, between Dahlia Avenue and Fernleaf Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 • APPLICANT: Thomas L. Kistinger, Corona del Mar -3- 936 'd to August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES W A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL LI III I INDEX OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Duca McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, stated that the applicant has requested that this item be continued to allow for additional time to prepare the additional information required by staff. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue this item to the Ayes * * * * September 20, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION Absent * * CARRIED. s s s Resubdivision No. 937 (Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to resubdivide a single lot into a single parcel of land for Hsu' 937 two unit residential condominium purposes on property located in • the R -2 District. pproved LOCATION: Lot 20, Block 41, River Section, located at 117 41st Street, on the northerly side of 41st Street, between West Balboa Boulevard and Seashore Drive, in West Newport Beach ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Steven E. Strickler, Huntington Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Erich Ziebarth, Fountain Valley W. William Ward, Senior Planner, addressed Condition No. 1, Exhibit "A", and requested that the condition be revised to read: "llat a parcel map shall be recorded prior to occupancy.. ", instead of 'That a parcel map shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits.. ". Mr. Ward explained that the modification would allow the applicant to proceed with the construction while • the parcel map is in the process of being recorded. -4- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Todd Schooler, architect, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Schooler concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" with the exception of Condition No. 9 regarding a park dedication fee for one dwelling unit. Mr. Schooler and Mr. Ward discussed the application which states the subject property consists of a single family dwelling; however, Mr. Schooler stated that the property owner has indicated that the subject property is generating two rental units, and he would like to verify there are two legal rental units on the property. Following a discussion between Mr. Schooler and staff, it was suggested that the condition should be amended to state '"That a park dedication fee will be required in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code in the event an additional dwelling unit is created as a result of the application." There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. ion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Resubdivision No. 937, Ayes * * * subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", including the Absent * foregoing revised Conditions No. 1 and No. 9. MOTION CARRIED. 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 2. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 3. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 4. That public improvements may be required of a developer . per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. -5- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL 1NQEX CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded prior to occupancy. That the parcel map shall be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record the parcel map prior to the completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. • 5. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 6. That overhead utilities serving the site shall be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code. 7. That all vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 8. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 9. That a park dedication fee will be required in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code in the event an additional dwelling unit is created as a result of this application. 10. 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. -6- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R L CALL INDEX Resubdivisi No. 938 (Public Hearing) item Mo.4 Request to create one parcel of land for a 48 unit residential Resub 938 Approved condominium project, on property located in the MFR (48 Din District where a 48 unit community apartment project now exists. LOCATION: A portion of Block "C ", Corona del Mar, located at 2525 Ocean Boulevard, on the southwesterly side of Ocean Boulevard, between Carnation Avenue and Dahlia Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: MFR (48 DU) APPLICANT: Channel Reef Community Association, Corona del Mar • OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Toal Engineering, Inc., San Clemente W. William Ward, Senior Planner, requested that the first paragraph in the staff report be corrected to state "An accordance with Section 20.73.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, a community apartment project, as 'defined' in Section 11004 of the Business and Professions Code, containing two or more rights of exclusive occupancy, is by definition a "condominium ". The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Timothy Randall, attorney for the applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission, and concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Resubdivision No. 938 subject to the • findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". -7- COMMISSIONERS Off' W August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R73rL CALL INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to why the subject application is not considered a 'condominium conversion', Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, explained that a 'condominium' is a legal form of ownership and the Subdivision Act states that a community apartment project is a condominium. Ayes * * * * Motion was voted on to approve Reuubdivision No. 938 subject to Absent the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A'. MOTION CARRIED. 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 public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded and that said parcel map be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That an Encroachment Agreement covering non - structural improvements in the Ocean Boulevard right -of -way be executed prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 3. 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. -8- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES O� tP CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R L CALL Jill Ll INDEX A. Site Plan Review No. 55 (Revised)(Public Hearing) item No.5 Request to approve a site plan review so as to permit the SPR No.55 Resub 939 construction of a four unit residential condominium development on property located in the SP -6 MFR (1600) SPR District. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the building to encroach 5 feet into the required 10 foot rear Approved yard setback, and to allow one of the required guest parking spaces to have a depth of 16 feet where the Code requires parking spaces to maintain a depth of 19 feet. AND B. Resubdivision No. 939 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide two existing lots into a single parcel of land for four family residential condominium development on property located in the SP -6 MFR (1600) SPR District. • LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 219, Section A, Newport Beach, located at 1900 West Balboa Boulevard, on the northwesterly corner of 19th Street and West Balboa Boulevard, in the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan. ZONE: SP -6 MFR (1600) SPR APPLICANTS: Todd Schooler and Stephen McClure, Newport Beach OWNER: William Tepper, Newport Beach Commissioner Pers6n indicated that the attached Notice of Determination does not pertain to the subject application and was attached to the staff report in error. Commissioner Glover addressed the required widening of the 19th Street sidewalk, and she inquired if additional streets adjacent to • West Balboa Boulevard have had the same condition. Don Webb, City Engineer, replied that the required 1 foot widening of the -9- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL INDEX subject sidewalk was in response to a concern that was previously expressed by a City Councilman inasmuch as the subject location has a large number of pedestrians crossing from West Balboa Boulevard to the beach areas on 18th Street and 19th Street. Commissioner Glover suggested that the recommended request to widen the sidewalks should be made a policy so as to inform the developers of the forthcoming condition. Chairman Debay indicated that there are not sufficient facts available to the Planning Commission to make a determination on a single project, and the impact of the project needs to be proven necessary to widen a sidewalk. Commissioner PersSn stated that the Planning Commission does not set policy to widen sidewalks. Mr. Webb stated that the City Council's concern was on arterial streets and not on side streets. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Webb stated that it was the intent of the Public Works Department to recommend that the Planning Commission consider a review of the • widening of sidewalks with the review of the modifications to the Zoning Code, and he suggested that projects be reviewed individually until after said review. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Todd Schooler, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he agreed with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" with the exception of recommended Condition No. 8, Resubdivision No. 939, regarding the widening of the sidewalk adjacent to 19th Street to 6 feet inasmuch as he could not foresee future widening of the sidewalk by the property owners in the area, and he addressed the requested reconstruction of a twenty foot radius return with a curb access ramp. Mr. Schooler referred to the Planning Commission meeting of March 8, 1990, and the City Council's recommendation on April 23, 1990, that the applicants reduce the size of the development to four condominium units, and to reduce the square footage and Floor Area Ratio of the project. Mr. Patapoff, 209 - 19th Street, President of the Garden Peninsula Homeowner's Association, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he addressed the property owners' concerns • regarding the property line and the existing wall between the subject property and the property to the north. Commissioner -10- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL111 Jill I I INDEX Pers6n indicated that the foregoing concern needs to be resolved only between the applicants and the property owners. Discussion ensued between Mr. Patapoff and the Planning Commission regarding the location of the wall. W. William Ward, Senior Planner, explained that Condition No. 6, Site Plan Review No. 55, requires the removal of the existing wall which is currently located near the northeasterly property line. Mr. Ward indicated that if the action that is taken between the property owners determines that the wall cannot be removed, the applicant will be required to revise the proposed project and bring the application back to the Planning Commission.. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Ward replied that the wall encroaches 2 feet on the subject property. • Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, agreed with Commissioner Pers6n that the location of the wall and property line is a civil matter between the property owners. Commissioner Edwards addressed the proposed easement. Mr. Schooler explained that a Title Company on three separate occasions could not locate a recordation of an easement on the property. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Site Plan Review No. Ayes * 55 (Revised) and Resubdivision No. 939 subject to the findings and Absent conditions in Exhibit "A ", with the exception of a modification to Condition No. 8, Resubdivision No. 939, deleting "and that the sidewalk adjacent to 19th Street frontage shall be widened to 6 feet ". MOTION CARRIED. • -11- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 0'0 o� � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R L CALL INDEX A. SrM PLAN REVIEW NO. 55: Findinim 1. That the proposed development significantly conforms to the established development and density standards for the MFR District on the Balboa Peninsula. 2. That the site does not contain any unique landforms such as coastal bluffs. 3. That the development is compatible with the character of the neighborhood and will contribute to the orderly and harmonious development of surrounding properties and the City. 4. That there are no archeological or historical resources on- site. 5. That there are no environmentally sensitive areas on -site. 6. The property does not contain any areas of unique geologic hazards. 7. That the proposed project will meet City noise standards for residential development. 8. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas and pedestrian and vehicular access are functional in that there will be a minimum of commercial /residential conflicts. 9. The development is consistent with surrounding land uses and with the goals and policies of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Area Plan. 10. Mechanical equipment and trash enclosures shall be concealed from view. • 11. The approval of the proposed project will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, -12- COMMISSIONERS CALL August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 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 and further that the proposed modification to allow a portion of the proposed building to encroach 5 feet into a newly established 10 foot rear yard setback is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. Conditions: That the proposed development shall be in substantial compliance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted below. 2. On -site parking and access for pedestrians and vehicles shall be subject to further review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. • 3. That all environmental mitigation measures, and conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 939 shall be fulfilled. 4. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from West Balboa Boulevard and 19th Street and adjoining properties. 5. That a Coastal Development Permit be issued prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. That the existing wall which is currently located near the northeasterly property line as shown on the tentative parcel map shall be removed from the site so as to provide the required parking access as shown on the approved site plan. 7. The applicants shall be required to construct a 6 foot high, solid wooden fence or a 6 foot high masonry wall along the full length of the northwesterly property line, up to the required five foot front yard setback adjacent to West Balboa Boulevard and along the full length of the northeasterly property line, up to the required five foot front 10 11111111 yard setback adjacent to 19th Street. -13- INDEX August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o� in CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 8. That the applicant shall prepare a landscape plan which shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, Public Works Department and the Parks Beaches and Recreation Department. Said plan shall, as a minimum, show the size, type and location of all plant material located between the building and the public sidewalk. 9. That this Site Plan Review shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 K of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. B. Resubdivision No. 939 Findines: 1. That the design of the subdivision improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed . subdivision. 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. 3. That the proposed project is consistent with surrounding land uses and with the goals and policies of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan. 4. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the design of the subdivision. 5. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 6. That the subject property is physically suitable for the type and density of development. • -14- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits unless otherwise permitted by the Building Department and the Planning Department. That the parcel map be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record the tract map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That the on -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation system be subject to further review by the Public Works Department and the City Traffic Engineer. 6. That the intersection of 19th Street and the driveway be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping and walls within the sight line shall not exceed twenty four inches in height above top of curb elevation. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non- critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. Any walls higher than 2 feet be set back from the West Balboa Boulevard right -of -way five (5) feet. 7. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner of 19th Street and West Balboa Boulevard be dedicated to the . public. -15- COMMISSIONERS o� August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 8. That curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements be constructed along the West Balboa Boulevard and the 19th Street frontages; that catch basins and storm drain lines be constructed if required to provide street drainage; that the curb return at the corner of 19th Street and West Balboa Boulevard be reconstructed using a twenty (20) foot radius return with a curb access ramp included in the design of the curb return; and that all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 9. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. The City may have preliminary improvement plans that may be used as a basis of design. 10. That all vehicular access to the property shall be from 19th Street. 11. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 12. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 13. That disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. A traffic control plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. No construction, storage or delivery of materials shall be permitted within the West Balboa Boulevard right -of -way. A minimum 7 foot wide walkway along West Balboa Boulevard shall be provided at all times. Prior to issuance -16- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX of any grading permits, a parking plan for workers must be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department. 14. That all mitigation measures, and conditions of approval for Site Plan Review No. 55 (Revised) shall be fulfilled. 15. That the park dedication fee for four dwelling units shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 1950 of the Municipal Code. 16. That this subdivision 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. Use Permit No. 2009 (Amended),(Public Hearing) Item No.6 Request to amend a previously approved use permit that permitted UP 2009A • the establishment of a commercial bakery which offers take -out food items and incidental wine on the premises and waived a Approved . portion of the required offstreet parking spaces. The proposed amendment involves a request to expand the hours of operation from the original hours of 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. to the revised hours of 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. daily. LOCATION: Lot 4, Block T, Tract No. 323, located at 3444 East Coast Highway, on the northeasterly side of East Coast Highway, between Marigold Avenue and Narcissus Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: C'est Si Bon Bakery, Corona del Mar OWNER: Sibling Associates - J. Ray, Irvine Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, distributed a letter • to the Planning Commission from Carmelo's Restaurant dated -17- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES. `4 \5\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX, August 22, 1990, regarding their opposition to the requested hours of operation and the impact of traffic on Narcissus Avenue. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Scott Russell, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. In reference to the foregoing letter, Mr. Russell responded that the restaurant's evening business would not generate the same amount of traffic that is generated by the take- out business during the day. Mr. Russell referred to the "Unsatisfied Conditions of Approval" as stated in the staff report wherein it is stated that the Public Works Department has indicated that a condition in the previously approved Use Permit No. 2009, dated August 6, 1981, has not been satisfied which pertains to the dedication of the applicants' interest in a 15 foot radius comer cutoff at the northwesterly corner of East Coast Highway and Narcissus Avenue. Mr. Russell explained that the Public Works Department informed him that the condition pertains to the property owner and not the applicant; however, he indicated that he would comply with the condition. Mr. Russell concurred • with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". He explained that the extended hours of operation would be financially beneficial to the restaurant. Mr. Bob Burns, 423 Narcissus Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he submitted a letter from residents on Narcissus Avenue concerning the impact of traffic and parking on Narcissus Avenue by the employees and customers of the restaurant and Coco's Restaurant. Chairman Debay and Commissioner Person pointed out that Condition No. 10, Exhibit "A ", states that the Planning Commission may recall the use permit if the operation is detrimental to the community. Ms. Donna Patch, 416 Narcissus Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein she stated her concerns regarding an increase in noise and parking on Narcissus Avenue because of the restaurant's change in the hours of operation. Ms. Judy Smith, 417 Narcissus Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein she opposed the restaurant's request • to open at 6:00 a.m. -18- August 23, .1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX, Mr. Russell reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein he responded to the foregoing statements. He indicated that he has no intention to open at 6:00 am. and he would be willing to change the opening hour to 7:00 a.m. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Russell replied that he was not aware the current posted opening time of 7:00 a.m. was inconsistent with the permitted opening time of 7:30 a.m. Mr. Russell projected the heaviest evening restaurant traffic would be between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Russell agreed to change the closing hours of operation to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 11:00 p.m Friday and Saturday. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 2009 (Amended) . subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", that Condition No. 5 be modified to state That the hours of operation shall be • limited between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday....." Commissioner Edwards supported the motion. Ayes Absent * Motion was voted on and MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the on -site parking is not being altered in conjunction with the increased hours of operation and will remain available on -site to accommodate the proposed facility. 4. That the waiver of the development standards as they • pertain to walls, utilities, parking lot illumination, -19- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX landscaping, and a portion of the required parking will not be detrimental to adjoining properties. 5. That the approval of Use Permit No. 2009 (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 to the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS• 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 2. That the development standards pertaining to traffic • circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination shall be waived. 3. That all previously applicable conditions of approval for Use Permit No. 2009 shall remain in effect. 4. That prior to implementation of this application to increase in the hours of operation, the applicant's leasehold interest in a 15 -foot radius comer cutoff at the comer of East Coast Highway and Narcissus Avenue shall be dedicated to the public. 5. That the hours of operation shall be limited between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and that any increase in hours shall be subject to the approval of an amendment to Use Permit No. 2009 (Amended). 6. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be located in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 7. That the sidewalk on East Coast Highway and Narcissus Avenue shall be kept clean and regularly maintained. Said -20- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES � �� �� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX sidewalk shall be swept, vacuumed, or washed in such a manner that any debris or waste -water does not enter the storm drain system or the Bay. 8. That no seating shall be provided in front of the facility or outside of the facility unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 9. That all employees shall park their vehicles on -site or in the off -site parking lot related to the subject property, at all times. 10. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the . community. 11. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as speed in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. A Use Permit No 3386 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.7 Request to permit the construction of a combined UP3386 commercial /residential development on property located in the C -1 District which is currently developed with an existing commercial UP1862A building. V1171 AND Approved B Use Permit No 1862 (Amended)(Continued Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the expansion of an existing coin - operated laundry facility and which included an off -site parking agreement which • required that a minimum of 4 parking spaces, portions of 5 other -21- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \O\ N131 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3W ROLL CALL 1111�1 INDEX parking spaces and related access be provided on a portion of the subject property which the applicant is now proposing to redevelop. The proposed amendment involves a request to delete 3 of the previously required off -site parking spaces and the related parking access which were previously required to be provided on the subject property. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a proposed parking space to encroach 10 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback adjacent to a 10 foot wide alley. AND C. Variance No. 1171 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to waive 3 of the previously required offstreet parking spaces for an existing commercial building on property located in the C -1 District. LOCATION: Lots 20 -22, Block 3, East Newport Tract, • located at 500 West Balboa Boulevard, on the northwesterly corner of Island Avenue and West Balboa Boulevard, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANTS: Martha and Robert Durkee, Newport Beach OWNERS: Same as applicants Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 14, of Use Permit No. 3386, and Condition No. 9, Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended), Exhibit "B", requesting an 8 foot wide sidewalk along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage of the property, wherein he explained that the recommended 8 foot wide sidewalk is 2 feet narrower than the existing 10 foot wide sidewalk that has been constructed in the adjacent area. Commissioner Glover and Mr. Webb discussed the parking stall that encroaches into the trash area. S -22- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Robert Durkee, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he referred to the letter that was distributed to the Planning Commission from the applicants dated August 23, 1990. Mr. Durkee indicated that he would agree to the existing laundromat lot and the parking lot be developed into one building site as long as the existing laundromat remains on the property. Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, indicated that Condition No. 4, Use Permit No. 1862, Exhibit "B ", states "That the property owners shall record a covenant to hold Lots 20 and 21, Block 3, East Newport Tract, as a single site for the commercial use and the related offstreet parking spaces on the property. ", and the recordation of the covenant will be eliminated when the existing structures are demolished. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to the existing onsite parking, Mr. Durkee and Mr. Del Williams, architect, explained that the existing parking plan depicts nine parking spaces; however, because of the trash enclosure and driveways off of Island Avenue, eight parking stalls exist on the two properties. Mr. Williams explained that 10 parking stalls are proposed on the two properties. Mr. Durkee explained that the customers of the businesses in the adjacent area will be allowed to use the project's parking stalls as long as parking spaces are available and there is not an impact on the subject project. Chairman Debay addressed the staff report's statements regarding the required 10 foot rear yard setback alley setback and 3 feet of dedication along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage as suggested in Exhibit "B ". Mr. Webb stated that Condition No. 11, Use Permit No. 3386, Exhibit "A ", and Condition No. 12, Use Permit No. 3386, Exhibit "B ", require a sight distance for vehicles leaving Island Avenue and that requirement. would necessitate an 8 foot wide area from curb face back to the property for clearance. Mr. Williams agreed to cooperate with the City's sidewalk and setback requirements. Mr. Williams concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibits "A" and "B ". Mr. Jim Crane, 323 Driftwood Road, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Crane submitted a petition stating the support • of the subject project from adjacent property owners. Mr. Crane -23- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES Ah CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Chairman Debay supported the motion. She suggested that if the applicants eliminated approximately 750 square feet, the parking requirement would be in compliance with the Zoning Code to allow the additional 3 parking spaces. Commissioner Pomeroy commented that unless the applicants reduced the facility's usage there would not be a change in the parking problem. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3386, Use Permit Ayes * * No. 1862 (Amended) and Variance No. 1171, subject to the Noes findings and conditions in Exhibit 'B ", including aforementioned Absent * * revised Condition No. 4, Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended). MOTION CARRIED. Use Permit No. 3386 Findings: 1. That the design of the development 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 development. 2. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 4. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3386 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. -25- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX, explained the results of a survey he conducted of the available parking spaces in the area, and in summary, he determined that there is ample parking. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Commissioner Edwards made a motion to approve Use Permit No. 3386, Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended) and Variance No. 1171 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B ". In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Ms. Temple replied that there would be a deficit of 4 parking spaces if Exhibit "B" would be approved. Mr. Ward explained that the parking space adjacent to the rear alley would have to be removed. Mr. Webb expressed a concern regarding the 5 foot encroachment in an alley that is 10 feet wide. Commissioner Pers6n did not support the motion on the basis that he could not grant a variance for parking. He stated that he also had a concern with respect to setting a precedent for other property owners in the area. Commissioner Edwards stated that the subject laundromat is a facility that is used by residents walking to the establishment. He commented that customers of adjacent businesses would be using the majority of the parking spaces. Ms. Temple suggested that Condition No. 4, Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended), Exhibit "B ", regarding the recordation of a covenant, be revised to state "That the property owners shall record a covenant to hold Lots 20 and 21, Block 3, East Newport Tract, as a single site for the 'duration'. of the existing commercial uses and the related offstreet parking spaces located on the subject property." Commissioner Glover did not support the motion on the basis that she had concerns regarding the small space to maneuver and park automobiles and trucks in the alley. i -24- COMMISSIONERS c� August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial compliance with the approved site plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That only one dwelling unit shall be permitted. 3. That the two garage parking spaces shall be for the exclusive use of the residential unit on the site. 4. That a sign which will be visible from the street shall be provided at the front of the building on Lot 22, indicating the location of the commercial parking at the rear of the property- 5. That the ground floor garage area shall be utilized for the parking of vehicles only and shall not be utilized for any • storage by either the commercial or the residential unit. 6. That the height of the building shall be redesigned so as to meet all provisions of the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District. 7. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 8. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 9. That three feet of right -of -way be dedicated to the public for pedestrian purposes along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage in order to provide an eight foot wide parkway: 10. That the commercial and residential unit be served with individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. -26- COMMISSIONERS ,o A August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 11. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 12. That the on -site improvements be redesigned to provide sight distance to Primary Highway standards as defined in City Std. 110 -L at the intersection of Island Avenue and West Balboa Boulevard. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 13. That a 10 foot -wide radius corner cutoff at the comer of West Balboa Boulevard and Island Avenue be dedicated to the public. 14. That the existing sidewalk be reconstructed to an 8 foot • width along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage; that all unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk along the West Balboa Boulevard and Island Avenue frontages; that the existing curb return at the intersection of West Balboa Boulevard and Island Avenue be reconstructed to a 20 foot radius including the construction of a curb access ramp; and that the tree well in the West Balboa Boulevard parkway be removed. That all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 15. That County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 16. That the Public Works Department plan check and inspection fee be paid. 17. That the disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state -27- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES A ,p CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX and local requirements. A traffic control plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. No construction storage or delivery of materials shall be stored within the West Balboa Boulevard right -of -way. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a parking plan for workers must be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department. 18. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code. 19. That the telephone and cable TV lines be undergrounded along the Island Avenue frontage and the telephone pole be removed unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 20. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the issuance of building permits. 21. 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. 22. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specked in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended) Findines: 1. That the proposed modification for a parking space to encroach 10 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback along the 10 foot wide alley would be detrimental to -28- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES d O,y KO`d - ACA �`Po� G y�� '�y.� I� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R L CALL INDEX persons, property and improvements in the neighborhood, and that the applicants' request would not be consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, inasmuch as the parking space may interfere with vehicular maneuverability in the alley. 2. That the development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Plan, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. That adequate parking spaces will be provided for the existing commercial building on the property. 4. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 5. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 6. That the approval of Use Permit No. 1862 (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 conformance with the attached parking layout. 2. That the Parking Space No. 5 on the parking layout shall be eliminated, inasmuch as it encroaches into the required 10 foot rear yard setback adjacent to the alley. 3. That 4 on -site parking spaces shall be maintained at all times for the commercial uses on the property. s -29- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ar I& O �� ��uO � O�� N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 1 11 Jill INDEX 4. That the property owners shall record a covenant to hold Lots 20 and 21, Block 3, East Newport Tract, as a single site for the duration of the existing commercial uses and the related offstreet parking spaces located on the subject property. 5. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 6. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 7. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation system be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer and that no parking stalls be allowed to encroach into the 10 foot alley setback area. That the driveway be designed as a one way . driveway in from West Balboa Boulevard. 8. That 3 feet of right -of -way be dedicated to the public for pedestrian purposes along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage in order to provide an eight foot wide parkway. 9. That the existing sidewalk be reconstructed to an 8 foot width along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage. 10. That all applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 1862 shall be maintained. 11. 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. 12. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -30- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CALL 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Variance No. 1171 Findines: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building, and use proposed in this application, which circumstances and conditions do not apply to land, building, and /or uses on the other lots in the area which justify the approval of a waiver of 4 parking spaces, inasmuch as the subject property will maintain more on -site parking spaces than other commercial lots in the area. 2. That the granting of a variance to allow the waiver of a portion of the required parking is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicants, inasmuch as the limited size of the lot precludes additional parking spaces on the property. 3. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use, property, and building as proposed will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use and detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Condition: 1. That all conditions of Use Permit No. 1862 (Amended) shall be maintained. The Planning Commission recessed at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 P.M. -31- INDEX August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLCALI-111 Jill I I INDEX Use Permit No. 2018 (Amended)(Continued Public Hearing) I Item No.8 Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit which UP2018A permitted the installation of three off -site directional signs on three sites, all of which are located on property in the Unclassified con - 9 a to District. The proposed amendment involves a request to permit z -7 -91 revised copy on the existing signs located at the southwesterly comer of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard (3666 Jamboree Road); the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, between San Joaquin Hills Road and Ford Road (1851 Jamboree Road); and on the northerly side of East Coast Highway, westerly of Jamboree Road (980 East Coast Highway). The proposal also includes a request to permit a larger and taller sign than permitted at the southwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, and a request to extend the period of approval for Use Permit No. 2018. • LOCATION: Properties located at the southwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard; the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, approximately 1,500 feet southwesterly of Ford Road; and the northwesterly corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant m Use Permit No 3176 (Amendment)(Continued Public Hearing) Item No.9 Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit which UP3176A permitted the installation of an off -site, directional sign on property located in the Unclassified District. The proposed amendment con - 9 a to 2 -7 -91 involves a request to install revised copy on the existing off -site, directional sign located at the southeasterly comer of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street. The proposal also includes a request to -32- COMMISSIONERS `goy `"o in August 23, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX permit a larger and taller sign than permitted,.and a request to extend the period of approval for Use Permit No. 3176. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 146, Block 51, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 3501 Jamboree Road, on the southeasterly comer of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street, northerly of the North Ford /San Diego Creek Planned Community. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant AND Exception Permit No 9 (Amended )(Continued Discussion) Item No.10 Request to amend a previously approved Exception Permit which EP No. 9A permitted the installation of a temporary, off -site directional sign and a modification of an existing off -site, temporary directional sign on property located in the P -C District. The proposed amendment Cont ' d to 2 -7 -91 involves a request to install revised copy on the existing off -site, directional sign located at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard. The approved sign located at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road has been deleted. The proposal also includes a request to extend the period of approval of Exception Permit No. 9. LOCATION: Property located at 2500 East Coast Highway, on the northeasterly comer of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach • OWNER: Same as applicant -33- • August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALL INDEX Chairman Debay suggested that the Planning Commission address Items No. 8, 9, and 10 concurrently inasmuch as the three items concern off -site directional signs at various locations. Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the City Attorney's Office is currently writing a Sign Ordinance with the intention of addressing temporary and permanent directional and informational signs, and the proposed Ordinance would be introduced to the Planning Commission in approximately two months. Ms. Flory suggested that the Planning Commission continue the foregoing items for 90 days on the basis that the Commission would avoid taking action on signs that could potentially be nonconforming signs, and she also commented that the proposed Sign Ordinance could assist the Commission in making a final decision. I I I I( I I I Commissioner PersBn emphasized his concerns regarding the inconclusive staff reports that were submitted to the Planning Commission inasmuch as the Commission had requested that The • I I I I ( I I I Irvine Company meet with the staff to discuss the Planning Commission's recommendations as a result of the April 19, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Pomeroy pointed out that he had requested at the April 19, 1990, Planning Commission meeting, that it would be to the public's benefit if the City had a sign program that would address major points -of- interest. He explained that as the City has become a more tourist - oriented area, a sign program would improve traffic flow in the City. Chairman Debay concurred with the foregoing statement. The public hearing was opened in connection with these items, and Mr. David Dmohowski appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. He explained that The Irvine Company met with staff on two separate occasions prior to the subject public hearing. Mr. Dmohowski stated that there is a need and a desire for temporary directional signage to identify rental projects that are currently being leased, and he requested that the Planning Commission also consider on a limited basis, a permanent directional signage in a median near Newport Center. -34- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 CALL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the applications be continued to February 7, 1991. Ms. Temple stated that the subject use permits will expire prior to February 7, 1991; however, the applications will be continued from the subject public hearing and the use permits will be considered 'pending'. In response to a question posed by Mr. Dmohowski with respect to the direction that the City Attorney's Office will be taking regarding the proposed Sign Ordinance, Ms. Flory suggested that The Irvine Company submit a letter to the City Attorney's Office with suggestions. Motion * Motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 2018 (Amended), Use Permit No. 3176 (Amended) and Exception Permit No. 9 (Amended) to the February 7, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Glover stated her support for directional signs to Fashion Island and Newport Center inasmuch as there is a need to guide the public to the businesses at said locations. Ayes * * * Absent The foregoing motion was voted on, and MOTION CARRIED. 0 Modification No. 3688 (Apoeal)(Public Hearing) Request to permit the retention of portions of an as-built 5 foot 6 inch high wrought iron fence and related 6 foot high stone pilasters topped with 2 foot high light fixtures, which encroach 15 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback adjacent to Cameo Shores Road and which also encroach 15 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback adjacent to Hampden Road. The proposed development also includes the construction of a new 5 foot 6 inch high wrought iron fence that encroaches 15 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback adjacent to Hampden Road. The front yard setbacks are established by Districting Map No. 31. -35- MINUTES INDEX Item No.11 Mod No.3688 (Appeal) Approved COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX LOCATION: Lot 1, Tract No. 3357, located at 345 Cameo Shores Road, on the southwesterly comer of Cameo Shores Road and Hampden Road, in Cameo Shores. ZONE: R -1 -13 APPLICANTS: Mr. & Mrs. Yasui, Corona del Mar OWNERS: Same as applicants APPELLANTS: Same as applicants The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Mitch Michino, Attorney, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants. Mr. Michino made a brief presentation regarding the activities that have surrounded the construction of the fence. • Mr. Dave Stephens, contractor, appeared before the Planning Commission. He explained that the fence has been removed from the comer of Cameo Shores Road and Hampden Road, and has been replaced with a 30 inch high hedge. Mr. Stephens further explained that the fence that runs parallel with Cameo Shores Road has been replaced with a 36 inch high hedge. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to staffs suggested added Condition No. 8, stating "That any landscaping shall not exceed 30 inches in height above existing natural grade..", Mr. Michino replied that the applicant would agree with the condition. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Stephens described the areas where the hedges have replaced the fences from the plans on display. He explained that the fences that would remain are in areas surrounding the gates. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay with respect to suggested Condition No. 8 and the existing junipers, Don Webb, • City Engineer, explained there is a 25 foot triangle area that staff -36- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES .o ,p O� 0 A � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL III Jill INDEX would like to have replaced with low ground cover. Mr. Stephens replied that nothing within the triangle area exceeds 30 inches. Mr. Michino explained that the junipers have existed on the site for at least 26 years. Mr. Charles Cannon, 4633 Tremont Lane, appeared before the Planning Commission to state his opposition to the modification. He stated that the revised plan does not comply with the current regulations, that the fence will be an 'eyesore', and the subject modification would set a precedent in the community. Mr. Cannon and Chairman Debay addressed the communication between the homeowners and the Cameo Community Association inasmuch as the Cameo Community Association approved the modification and many of the residents have opposed the application. Mr. Frank Clendenen, 4739 Tremont Lane, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Clendenen explained that the plan that was presented to the Cameo Community Association did not accurately describe the height of the proposed fence, and the Association assumed that only the City would have the jurisdiction to control the height of the fence. Mr. Clendenen objected to the six foot high pilasters and gates that will remain on the site. Mr. Michino reappeared before the Planning Commission in rebuttal to the foregoing statements. He commented that several of the residents in the area have stated their support of the fence, that it would be an economic waste to remove the fence, that the Cameo Community Association currently has several pending lawsuits, and he stated that if the subject application is denied that the applicants would consider litigation. In response to statements expressed by Commissioner Edwards and Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Ward commented that the City Council has not reviewed the revised plans subsequent to when the City Council considered the application on July 9, 1990. Mr. Clendenen reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein he stated that during the foregoing City Council meeting, a statement was made by a Councilman that the Planning Commission was to review the -37- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES ,o 0� ,s o, 0 CITY OF NEWPORT 6EACH ROLL CALL INDEX requested revised plan to be assured that the modification met the City's regulations. Mr. Michino reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein he indicated that there are many properties in Cameo Shores that have violations and the subject application would not be setting a precedent in the area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Modification No. 3688 (Appeal) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including Condition No. 8. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the applicants have revised the plan beyond the suggestions initially requested by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Pomeroy did not support the motion on the basis that the gates do not serve a function, and the applicant has reluctantly taken the suggestions of the Planning Commission based on the number of revisions that have been presented to the City. Commissioner Edwards addressed Finding No: 4 stating "That the Cameo Shores Community Association does not object to the original subject fence. ", and he commented that he had not visibly read the support of the Association subsequent to when the Association reviewed the original plans. Commissioner Glover, Commissioner Pers6n, and Chairman Debay discussed the position that the Cameo Community Association took when the Association considered the modification. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Ms. Flory concurred that the foregoing finding could be eliminated inasmuch as the subject plans have been revised subsequent to the Association's approval of the modification. Commissioner Glover did not support the motion on the basis that the applicants did not comply with the fence height requirement. She further referred to the previous Planning Commission meeting wherein she indicated that it was stated that only the Architectural Committee of the Cameo Shores Community Association makes • decisions on projects. -38- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES ,o ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Chairman Debay stated that when gates are closed across a driveway there is an element of security. She indicated that several individuals have suggested that the white fence be repainted to a color that is not quite so stark. Commissioner Edwards supported the motion on the basis the applicants have submitted revised plans that have met the Planning Commission's previous concerns. Ayes *_ * Motion was voted on to approve Modification No. 3688 subject to Noes * the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", including the deletion of Absent * Finding No. 4 and added Condition No. 8. MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposal will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or increase any detrimental effect of the existing use and is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the • Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. That the existing driveway gates, entry gates and related pilasters are not detrimental to the surrounding area or increase any detrimental effect of the existing use. 3. That the original as -built construction is supported by several of the neighboring property owners. 4. Deleted. 5. That the revised design of the as-built construction does not adversely obstruct views from adjoining residential properties. 6. That the wrought iron fencing is of open construction and not as obtrusive as a solid wall or fence. 7. That the elimination of that portion of the existing wrought iron fencing, located nearest the corner of Cameo Shores Road and Hampden Road, will improve sight distance from • the existing condition with the higher fencing. -39- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved revised plot plan and partial elevation, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. That any light fixtures affixed to the existing pilasters shall be limited to a maximum height of 2 feet as indicated on the approved plan. 3. That the construction, other than the pilasters, shall be of open construction. 4. That any landscape hedges or row plantings shall be limited to a maximum height of 3 feet within the 15 foot front yard setbacks adjacent to both Cameo Shores Road and Hampden Road, except as noted in the following conditions. Also that a landscape plan of the planting types, in • particular to be located within the corner of the property shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 5. That a building permit shall be issued for the as-built construction and prior to the reconstruction of the approved changes. 6. That the wrought iron fencing, other than the existing entry and driveway gates and related pilasters, shall be limited to a maximum height of 5 feet measured above existing natural grade. 7. That the height of the existing wrought iron entry gate and motorized driveway entry gate shall not exceed a height of 5 feet 6 inches measured above existing natural grade and the pilasters a maximum height of 6 feet. 8. That any landscaping shall not exceed 30 inches in height above existing natural grade within a triangle bounded by the right -of -way lines and a connecting line drawn between points twenty-five (25) feet distant from the intersection of • the right -of -way lines prolonged. -40- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS 0\ � N"'\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Amendment No. 708 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No. 12 Request to amend Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code A708 so as to establish the Retail and Service Commercial (RSC) District. Withdrawn INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, requested that Amendment No. 708 be withdrawn and that the Retail and Service Commercial District be combined in one chapter with other new commercial districts as proposed under Amendment No. 716. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Discussion Items Commissioner Pers6n suggested that Discussion Item No. 2 be taken out of order based on the proposed length of discussion pertaining to Discussion Item No. 1. Amendment No. 716 Item No. 2 A request to consider amending Title 20 of the Municipal Code so A716 as to establish the Retail and Service Commercial (RSC), Recreational and Marine Commercial (RMC), and Administrative, Public Professional, and Financial Commercial (APF) Districts. Hearing set for 9/20/90 INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 2, Ayes * Resubdivision No. 936, and reschedule Amendment No. 714 to the Absent * * Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 1990, and to set Amendment No. 716 for public hearing on September 20, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. -41- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 3346 (Review) Item No.l Request to review a previously approved use permit which UP3346 permitted the establishment of a restaurant with on -sale beer and (Review) wine and live entertainment on property located in the C -1 District. The requested review involves an interpretation of the parking requirement and location of parking for the approved project. LOCATION: Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 9, Tract No. 27, and an abandoned portion of Newport Boulevard, located at 485 North Newport Boulevard, between Orange Avenue and Bolsa Avenue, adjacent to Newport Heights. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Sid Soffer, Costa Mesa OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner PersGn addressed the policy concerning public notices if the Planning Commission made a decision to modify the number of required on -site parking spaces. William Ward, Senior Planner, stated that a public notice would be necessary if the number of parking spaces would be revised inasmuch as Condition No. 16, Use Permit No. 3346 approved on March 23, 1989, requires a minimum of 10 on -site parking spaces. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Soffer stated that he concurred with staffs original advise that 520 square feet of "net public area" would be required for the number of parking spaces that are available on the property. He addressed the concerns that were expressed by the residents regarding the proximity of the restaurant to the former Plymouth Congregational Church at the October 22, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Soffer indicated that the primary concern was what type of restaurant was proposed and what impact the restaurant would have on the residential community 300 feet away. Mr. Soffer stated that after the Planning • Commission approved the application, he appealed the use permit -42- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES ,o 0 �p q� A 'P CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R CALL INDEX to the City Council on January 11, 1988, on the basis that he objected to the hours of operation that the Planning Commission had approved, wherein the Council subsequently denied the use permit. Mr. Soffer explained that at the March 23, 1989, Planning Commission meeting, he submitted a plan that provided 10 parking spaces. Mr. Suffer addressed the alternative parking plan that was referred to in Condition No. 15, Use Permit No. 3346, that was prepared by the Planning Department staff and was based on discussions with the City Traffic Engineer relative to various design deficiencies associated with the parking plan submitted by the applicant. Mr. Suffer indicated that he would not have applied for a Building Permit with the original plot plan if there had been an alternative plot plan. Mr. Soffer addressed his discussion regarding the foregoing original plan and the alternative plot plan with the City Traffic Engineer, Rich Edmonton, wherein Mr. Soffer stated Mr. Edmonton indicated that the alternative plot plan was approved by the Planning Commission and not the original plot plan. Mr. Soffer stated that he could not remember seeing the alternative plot plan as referred to in Condition No. 15. Mr. Edmonston advised Mr. Soffer that the original plot plan was rejected because three vehicles would have to back out approximately 75 feet to 80 feet to North Newport Boulevard. Mr. Soffer referred to the parking plan at the nearby Whiskey Bill's establishment, and his discussion with a representative from the Department of Motor Vehicles. Mr. Soffer addressed the fact that he had not received credit of three parking spaces for the storage building that is located on the property. He stated that the City Attorney, Mr. Burnham, erroneously indicated that the five parking spaces on the northerly side was on a different site wherein he responded that the property line goes through the middle of the building. Mr. Soffer concluded that the project has become a financial burden. Chairman Debay stated that Mr. Suffer had previously indicated that he would be willing to remove the storage unit if there would be a problem concerning the parking spaces. Mr. Soffer replied that he could remove the storage unit, and he could cut down on • the occupancy. He said that on the basis that he owns ample space -43- August 23, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES PO \CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX for restaurant customers to park for the size of the restaurant, that he would doubt a restaurant patron would park an automobile in the residential district. Mr. Soffer concluded that he would guarantee that if there would be one parking complaint, he would do whatever is necessary to solve the parking problem as long as it is a legitimate complaint. Commissioner Pers6n addressed the original parking plan that was submitted by Mr. Soffer, and he concluded that to back automobiles out from three parking spaces is minimal, and be said that if there is a problem, there is a condition that allows the Planning Commission to review the use permit. Commissioner Pers6n determined that the parking requirement should be interpreted as the parking plan submitted by Mr. Soffer as satisfying the parking requirement. Commissioner Edwards concurred with the foregoing statement that the Planning Commission shall implement the parking plan submitted by the applicant. Motion was made to make an on interpretation that Use Permit No. 3346 was intended that the parking plan submitted by the applicant be implemented rather than the alternative parking plan prepared by staff. Patricia Temple, Advance Planning Manager, determined that the Clarified motion indicates that the parking plan submitted for Building Motion Permit purposes by the applicant is substantially in conformance with the approval of the Planning Commission. The maker of the Ayes motion concurred with the modified motion. Motion was voted on, Absent MOTION CARRIED. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Addll Business The Planning Commission canceled the September 6, 1990, Planning Commission meeting because there were no applications. PCM of 9/6/90 * Motion was made and voted on to excuse Chairman Debay from Canceled Motion Ayes the September 20, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION Absent * * CARRIED. Debay Excused • s s -44- COMMISSIONERS August 23, 1990 MINUTES o� dew o� 0 F \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX ADJOURNMENT: 10:00 p.m. Ad'ournment THOMAS EDWARDS, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION • -45-