HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/02/1976[* COMMISSIONERS
44 City of Newport Beach
Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Place: City Council Chambers
• $ Time: 7:00 P.M.
ti Date: Seotember 2. 1976
MOLL CALL
Present
Motion
All Aye:
0
Motion
All Aye
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS
R. V. Hogan, Commu
Hugh Coffin, Assis
Benjamin B. Nolan,
STAFF MEMBERS
James D. Hewicker,
Shirley Harbeck, S
X
Minutes of the Reg
were approved as w
Request to permit
"Snack Shop" resta
the expansion of I
sales area, and tc
teristics of the S
serving of beer ar
establish a parkir
tially zoned prop(
of the required pe
tion also include
ing agreement and
off -site parking i
to within five (5;
on Narcissus Avenl
indicates a minim)
Location: C -1
Applicant: Far
Owner: Jam
X
Planning Commissi
meeting of Septeml
nity Development Director
taut City Attorney
City Engineer
MINUTES
Assistant Director - Planning
ecretary
ular Meeting of August 19, 1976
ritten.
the remodeling of an existing
urant /bakery so as to permit
he dining, reception and bakery
change the operations charac-
ubject restaurant to include the
d wine. Further request to
g lot on the adjoining residen-
!rty so as to provide a portion
Irking off -site. Said applica-
a request for an off -site park-
a modification to permit the
rea and screen wall to encroach
feet of the front property line
ie where the Districting Map
Im 20 foot front yard setback.
and R -2
West Services, Inc., Irvine
as D. Ray, Corona del Mar
an continued this matter to the
per 16, 1976.
- 1 -
INOKX
Item #1
USE
PERMIT
1800
CONT. TO
SEPT. 16
COMMISSIONERS
BOLL CALL
E
Motion
All Ayes
City of Newport Beach
September 2, 1976
MINUTES
3 permit the extension of a previously
use permit that allows additional travel
in the Newport Dunes Trailer Park.
Portion of Blocks 54 and 94,
Irvine's Subdivision, located at
1131 Back Bay Drive, northerly of
East Coast Highway and westerly of
Jamboree Road in Newport Dunes.
Unclassified
Newport Dunes, Inc.; Newport Beach
Same as Applicant
er was opened for discussion and Mary
ood, Assistant Vice President and House
for Newport Dunes, 3000 Mission Boule-
Diego, appeared before.the Commission
questions. She advised that the stand -
were for irrigation of landscaping, that
e no plans for increasing the number of
nd that negotiations were under way for
ration of an Environmental Impact Report
ction with the redevelopment of the
any new uses would wait until after that
ng no further discussion, motion was made
ning Commission grant the extension of
t No. 1117 (Amended), subject to the
condition:
this approval shall be for a period of
ears, and any extension shall be subject
e approval of the Modifications Committee
or structural alterations and room and
ditions to two existing single - family
, in the C -1 District.
Lots 9 and 10, Block 21 of the
Newport Beach Tract located at 106
and 108 22nd Street in the McFadden
Square Specific Plan Area.
- 2 -
I IN O EX
Item #2
USE
PERMIT
1117
AMENDED
EXTENSION
GRAIfT_ED
Item #3
USE
PERMIT
1796
REMOVED
FR M
ULENDAR
Request t
approved
trailers
Location:
Zone:
Applicant
Owner:
This matt
Juanita W
Attorney
vard, San
to answer
up pipes
there wer
spaces, a
the prepa
in conjun
Dunes and
time.
X
There bei
that Plan
Use Permi
following
1. That
two y
to th
Request f
garage ad
dwellings
Location:
MINUTES
3 permit the extension of a previously
use permit that allows additional travel
in the Newport Dunes Trailer Park.
Portion of Blocks 54 and 94,
Irvine's Subdivision, located at
1131 Back Bay Drive, northerly of
East Coast Highway and westerly of
Jamboree Road in Newport Dunes.
Unclassified
Newport Dunes, Inc.; Newport Beach
Same as Applicant
er was opened for discussion and Mary
ood, Assistant Vice President and House
for Newport Dunes, 3000 Mission Boule-
Diego, appeared before.the Commission
questions. She advised that the stand -
were for irrigation of landscaping, that
e no plans for increasing the number of
nd that negotiations were under way for
ration of an Environmental Impact Report
ction with the redevelopment of the
any new uses would wait until after that
ng no further discussion, motion was made
ning Commission grant the extension of
t No. 1117 (Amended), subject to the
condition:
this approval shall be for a period of
ears, and any extension shall be subject
e approval of the Modifications Committee
or structural alterations and room and
ditions to two existing single - family
, in the C -1 District.
Lots 9 and 10, Block 21 of the
Newport Beach Tract located at 106
and 108 22nd Street in the McFadden
Square Specific Plan Area.
- 2 -
I IN O EX
Item #2
USE
PERMIT
1117
AMENDED
EXTENSION
GRAIfT_ED
Item #3
USE
PERMIT
1796
REMOVED
FR M
ULENDAR
r COMMISSIONERS
0
ROLL CALL
Motion
All Ayes
0
0
City of Newport Beach
September 2, 1976
C -1
Dell M. Williams, Corona del Mar
Dr. C. W. Ackerman, Corona del Mar
MINUTES
est of the applicant, Planning Commis -
d this matter from the calendar.
permit the construction of first and
r room additions and a second floor
ingle family dwellin with the follow -
orming features: 1.3 A one car garage
Ordinance now requires two garage
The existing garage has a depth
4 inches t (where the Ordinance
depth of 20 feet, inside measurement);
yard setback of 2 feet ± (where the
iow requires a rear yard setback of 2
ies when abutting a 20 foot wide alley).
sd development also includes a second,
:overed, parking space with a width of
Iches ± (where the Ordinance requries a
feet). All new construction conforms
•ed yard setbacks, except that the
scond floor deck encroaches 6 inches t
squired 2 foot 6 inch rear yard setback.
Lot 25, Block D, Tract No. 518,
located at 2025 East Ocean Boule-
vard, on the southerly side of Ocear
Boulevard between L and M Streets or
Peninsula Point.
R -1
Mr. and Mrs. Ronald E. Dahl, Balboa
Same as Applicants
John W. and Dianne L. Castanha,
Balboa
ring was opened in connection with this
nha, appellant, 2019 E. Ocean Boulevard
peared before the Commission to.comment
- 3 -
INOEX
0
Item #4
MODIFI-
AT_ION
1051
APPEAL
DENIED
Zone:
Applicant:
Owner:
X
At the requ
Sion remove
Request to
second floc
deck on a E
ing nonconi
(where th.e
spaces); f
of 19 feet
requires a
3.) A rear
Ordinance r
feet 6 incf
The propose
partially c
8 feet 6 it
width of 9
With requii
proposed se
into the re
Location:
Zone:
Applicants
Owners:
Appellants
Public hea
matter.
John Casta
Balboa, ap
C -1
Dell M. Williams, Corona del Mar
Dr. C. W. Ackerman, Corona del Mar
MINUTES
est of the applicant, Planning Commis -
d this matter from the calendar.
permit the construction of first and
r room additions and a second floor
ingle family dwellin with the follow -
orming features: 1.3 A one car garage
Ordinance now requires two garage
The existing garage has a depth
4 inches t (where the Ordinance
depth of 20 feet, inside measurement);
yard setback of 2 feet ± (where the
iow requires a rear yard setback of 2
ies when abutting a 20 foot wide alley).
sd development also includes a second,
:overed, parking space with a width of
Iches ± (where the Ordinance requries a
feet). All new construction conforms
•ed yard setbacks, except that the
scond floor deck encroaches 6 inches t
squired 2 foot 6 inch rear yard setback.
Lot 25, Block D, Tract No. 518,
located at 2025 East Ocean Boule-
vard, on the southerly side of Ocear
Boulevard between L and M Streets or
Peninsula Point.
R -1
Mr. and Mrs. Ronald E. Dahl, Balboa
Same as Applicants
John W. and Dianne L. Castanha,
Balboa
ring was opened in connection with this
nha, appellant, 2019 E. Ocean Boulevard
peared before the Commission to.comment
- 3 -
INOEX
0
Item #4
MODIFI-
AT_ION
1051
APPEAL
DENIED
COMMISSIONERS
Cc
City of Newport Beach
September 2, 1976
MOLL CALL
on his appeal which was based on two points:
1. That the carport does not meet minimum requir
ments and does not, in his opinion, conform to
similar development in the area; and 2. That
although he does not wish to prevent improvement
by his neighbors on the subject property, the
proposed development would be a detriment to his
quality of living. He further commented on his
opposition to the proposed two -story addition on
the front portion of the property because it wou
block out light and air to his property.
Commissioner Agee pointed out that there was no
legal authority to restrict development on the
subject property and commented on the fact that
zoning sets certain standards whereby a property
can be developed and if the property is not
developed to its capacity, adjacent properties
may enjoy greater benefits such as more light an
air for an interim period of time.
Commissioner Hummel questioned the appellant wit
.
respect to the carport and parking and Mr. Casta
advised that an automobile parked in the space
would not upset him since he would not be able t
see it, however, he did feel that property value
would be decreased by allowing additional livinc
space without requiring enclosed parking.
Commissioner Balalis pointed out the possibility
that the plans could be drawn whereby a modifice
tion would not be required and therefore Mr.
Castanha's objection to the two -story addition
was not a valid reason to deny the improvements.
Ann Dahl, 2025 East Ocean Boulevard, applicant
and owner of the property, appeared before the
Commission and concurred with the staff report
and the decision of the Modifications Committee
She commented on their right and desire to imprc
the property and advised they had 14 signatures
on a petition agreeing that the appeal should bl
denied since the proposed construction would up•
grade the neighborhood rather than downgrade.it
Mrs. Dahl presented pictures of the property in
question, a plot plan indicating the location o•
the neighbors signing the petition, a map showi
•
the location of other carports and open parking
spaces in the same block, and pictures of their
property as well as the Castanha property indi-
cating the light situation. She also commented
- 4 -
MINUTES
e-
ld
h
n
0
s
ng
INOUX
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
September 2. 1976
MOLL GALL
that the carport was more of an open parking spa
than a carport because of its design under a
cantilevered deck.
John Castanha, appellant, appeared in rebuttal a
questioned the number of carports in the area.
Community Development Director Hogan advised tha
the number was not germane to this request becau
carports are permitted by Code. The issue pendi
is the size of the carport and whether it would
satisfactorily provide for the parking of an
automobile.
John Castanha further requested that the Commis-
sion reveal which Commissioners had actually
reviewed the site. He was advised by the Commis
Sion that the question was inappropriate because
the Commission is not required to view sites,
however, each Commissioner does spend much time
individually reviewing the various si.tes and
preparing for the hearings and may respond to th
question during the course of discussion.
•
Commissioner Seely advised he had reviewed the s
and commented on a reverse of the present situat
as well as the balance between benefits and detr
ments between properties when redevelopment.or
imp.rovement occurs. He pointed out that the.
community itself had established the type of
development desired aswas evidenced by the devel
ment standards adopted for the area and emphasiz
the fact that the Dahls had the right to develop
and improve their property the same as other
properties in the community.
There being no others desiring to appear and be
heard, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
X
Motion was made that Planning Commission deny 0
appeal of Modification No. 1051 and uphold the
decision of the Modifications Committee, based c
the following findings:
1. The existing parking space is of adequate
depth for vehicular storage.
2. The second required parking space is partial
covered and is of adequate width for the par
ing of an automobile.
3. The existing nonconforming features on the
site are very minor in nature.
- 5 -
MINUTES
n
t
se
ng
e
it
io
i-
op
ed
Ily
•k-
INOE.X
COMMISSIONERS r Q {,
City OI f Newport ` Beach MINUTES
• �s°i September 2, 1976
ROLL CALL
4. The existing rear yard encroachment is simil
to other encroachments on adjoining residen-
tial properties, and does not impede vehicul
circulation on the 20 foot wide alley.
5. The approved plans provide that all new con -
struction shall conform to required yard set
backs.
and subject to the following conditions:
1. That development shall be in substantial con
formance with the approved plot plan and ele
tions, except as noted in condition.No. 2..
2. That the proposed second floor deck shall.nc
encroach into the required 2 foot 6 inch rea
yard setback.
3. That the two on -site parking spaces shall be
accessible and usable for vehicular storage
•
at all times.
Commissioner Frederickson advised.that he had
reviewed the property and was well aware of the
local problems because he also resides on Penin-
sula Point. He commented that since property wi
at such a premium and there was so little of it,
the only way for expansion was "up," resulting
in two -story structures. Commissioner Freder.icl
son inquired as to what 'assurance the City had
that the two parking spaces would be maintained
as.required by condition No. 3, especially sincf
he noticed a beautiful garden and plant materia'
in the area designated for parking.
Community Development Director Hogan advised of
the City's Code Enforcement program which was a
part of the Community Development Department as
well as the City ordinance relative to obtainin,
a Residential Building Report each time a prope
is sold.
Commissioner Hummel advised he had also reviewe
the property and observed the planted area whic
Obviously must be removed to provide for the
required parking. He commented on development
•
in the area as well as the property in question
and felt there was no legal reason to deny the
proposed improvements. However, he voiced cone
that ultimate build -out of each property could
- 6 -
INDEX
ar
a
va•
t.
r
is
I
1
COMMISSIONERS
R ;
MOLL BALI.
0
All Ayes
0
City of Newport Beach
September 2, 1976
a City of two - story, wall -to -wall,
Ihich he felt was not very satisfactory
Ipeful that some way could be found
!velopment could be staggered to the
; amenities could be preserved and yet
old be allowed the right to use their
.o some reasonable extent.
:ion with the findings established,
City Attorney Coffin suggested that an
finding be made as follows:
MINUTES
;he modification will not under the
istances of the particular case, be
rental to the health,.safety, peace,
t and general welfare of persons
ing or working in the neighborhood or
:rimental or injurious to property and
re ments in the neighborhood or the
11 welfare of the City and the modifica-
is consistent with.the legislative
: of Title 20 of the Newport Beach
ipal Code.
.ommission concurred with the additional
discussion, motion was voted on and
create two parcels of land for
it.
Parcel 2 of Parcel Mpa 67 -21.
(Resubdivision No. 473) located at
1001 and 1101 Quail Street, on the
southwesterly side of Quail Street
between Spruce Avenue and Dove.
Street in "Newport Place."
P -C
Howard Richardson, Newport Beach
Hal Watkins and Margaret C. Richard
son, Newport Beach
Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Costa Mesa
- 7 -
inionx
Item #5
RESUB-
DIVISION
531
APPROVED
CONDI-
TIONALLY
result in
housing, 1
and was hi
whereby do
point tha
people woi
property
In connec
Assistant
additiona
6. That
circuo
detril
comfo
resid
be de
impro
gener,
tion
inten
Munic
Planning
finding.
Following
carried.
Request t
developme
Location:
Zone:
Applicant
Owners:
Engineer:
a City of two - story, wall -to -wall,
Ihich he felt was not very satisfactory
Ipeful that some way could be found
!velopment could be staggered to the
; amenities could be preserved and yet
old be allowed the right to use their
.o some reasonable extent.
:ion with the findings established,
City Attorney Coffin suggested that an
finding be made as follows:
MINUTES
;he modification will not under the
istances of the particular case, be
rental to the health,.safety, peace,
t and general welfare of persons
ing or working in the neighborhood or
:rimental or injurious to property and
re ments in the neighborhood or the
11 welfare of the City and the modifica-
is consistent with.the legislative
: of Title 20 of the Newport Beach
ipal Code.
.ommission concurred with the additional
discussion, motion was voted on and
create two parcels of land for
it.
Parcel 2 of Parcel Mpa 67 -21.
(Resubdivision No. 473) located at
1001 and 1101 Quail Street, on the
southwesterly side of Quail Street
between Spruce Avenue and Dove.
Street in "Newport Place."
P -C
Howard Richardson, Newport Beach
Hal Watkins and Margaret C. Richard
son, Newport Beach
Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Costa Mesa
- 7 -
inionx
Item #5
RESUB-
DIVISION
531
APPROVED
CONDI-
TIONALLY
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach MINUTES
September 2, 1976
ROLL CALL
City Engineer Nolan advised that the applicant
did not intend to immediately develop the proper
and had requested that physical construction of
the sidewalk.be deferred until such time as plan
were developed indicating location of -the.dri..ve-
"way approaches. Public Works Department had no-
objection to the deferment and felt that a
standard bond and agreement could be posted to
cover the situation without any modification of
the recommended conditions of approval.
Public hearing wa.s opened in connection with thi
matter.
J. A. Faerigan with Stevens Engineering, 1828 .
Fullerton Avenue, Costa Mesa, appeared before tl
Commission on behalf of the applicant and answer
questions pertaining to the request.
There being no others desiring to appear and be
heard, the public hearing was closed.
Sion
X
Motion was made that Planning. Commission make ti
AT1 Ayes
following findings:
1. That the proposed map is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
2. That the design or improvement of the propo!
subdivision is consistent with applicable
general and specific plans.
3. That the site is physically suitable for thi
type of development proposed.
4. That the site is physically suitable for th
proposed density of development.
5. That the design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements will not cause substai
tial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or th
habitat.
6. That the design of the subdivision or the p
posed improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
•
7. That the design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements will not conflict wit
any easements, acquired by the public at
_ 8 _
INDEX
ty
3
e
ed
e
e
�i
•o
I
COMMISSIONERS
9��! City of Newport Beach
M y�
S
0\0
t September 2, 1976
MOLL GALL
large, for access through or use of, propert
within the proposed subdivision.
8. That the discharge of waste from the propose
subdivision will not result in or add to any
violation of existing requirements prescribe
by a California Regional Water Quality Contr
Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing wit
Section 1300) of the Water Code.
and approve Resubdivision No. 531, subject to th
following conditions:
1. That a parcel map be filed.
2. That all public improvements be constructed
as required by ordinance and the Public Wor4
Department.
3. That a 6 -foot wide P.C.C. sidewalk be con-
structed immediately behind the curb along
•
the Quail Street frontage.
Request to permit the installation of an identi
fication.ground sign and automobile display are+
adjacent to Jamboree Road in conjunction with tl
"Beach Imports" and "Newport Datsun" automobile
sales and service facilities in "Newport Place.
The proposed development also includes the con-
struction of a new service building on the site
Location: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 64 -26
( Resubdivision No. 462) located a
848 -888 Dove Street, southeasterl
of Dove Street and northwesterly
of Jamboree Road in "Newport Plac
Zone: P -C
Applicant: James H. Parkinson, Newport Beach
Owner: Same as Applicant
•
Commissioner Seely questioned orientation of th
display area towards Jamboree Road, as it was h
understanding that because of the arterial natu
of the highway, no development such as this wou
occur.
i
- 9 -
MINUTES
INDEX
Y
d
d
of
h
e
s
Item #6
USE
s PERMIT
ie 1803
DENIED
t
e
iS
re
Id
11
COMMISSIONERS
90 � a � s�
City of Newport Beach
Seotember 2. 1976
. FROLL CALL
Assistant Community Development Director Hewicke
commented on the inadvertent issuance of permits
for the new construction and advised that staff
subsequently contacted the applicant in order to
clarify any misunderstanding as to what had been
approved in the past and advised of their need t
apply for a new use permit if the construction
were to continue as planned.
Public hearing was opened in connection with thi
matter.
James Harris, Architect, appeared before the
Commission on behalf of the applicant and concur
with the staff report and recommendations. He
answered questions of the Commission relative to
landscaping, maintenance, and the desire to re-
landscape to the satisfaction of Emkay Developme
Community Development Director Hogan commented c
the external illumination of the display area ar
the.City's requirement for installation and
shielding of lights so that glare did not become
•
a hazard to motorists on Jamboree Road.
Commissioner Frederickson commented on the lack
of maintenance on the cars and the grounds and
felt that something should be done to establish
daily maintenance.
Larry Sommers with Emkay Development, appeared
before the Commission and advised of their orig-
inal objections to any signs along Jamboree Roac
because they did not want the area to become
another Harbor Boulevard. However, now that the
Rolls -Royce agency has been established further
south on Jamboree Road, and in reviewing their
signs, felt that similar identification signs
would be appropriate for the subject site. Mr.
Sommers also advised they had no objection to ti
display area, but were very concerned with the
landscaping and would require that it be replan
with turf and permanently maintained to their
satisfaction.
Commissioner Seely commented on his original
concern that signing be directed towards the
interior of the Emkay Development and not towar
•
Jamboree Road; that while the Rolls -Royce sign
may not be offensive, he had not heard of any
enthusiasm towards it; that the people in the
area felt that Jamboree Road was an entrance to
- 10 -
MINUTES
r \ INCEX
0
s
re
n
,n
d
le
:e
is
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach MINUTES
• y September 2. 1976
MOLL CALL
Newport Beach and its residential areas; voiced
concern that the development in question had bee
poorly maintained in the past and did not feel
that the additional display area would improve
the situation; and felt that from a safety stand
point, the proposed location was not a desirable
place to construct a raised display area because
of the distraction to high speed traffic along
Jamboree Road and.the close proximity to the
intersection of Jamboree Road with Bristol Stree
and future freeways.
Public hearing was closed in connection with thi
matter.
Commissioner Agee commented on his understanding
of the original concept that development would b
directed towards the interior of the planned
community and felt that the original concept
should be followed.
Commissioner Hummel concurred with Commissioners
Seely and Agee and felt that all merchandising
and displays should be directed towards the
interior streets and should not be visable from
Jamboree Road, and that minimal signing be pro -
vided as there are other ways in which to advise
the public of their presence.
Commissioner Balalis felt that Jamboree Road
should not have any kind of display area or sigr
that would create any further hazards than alree
exist.
Notion
X
Notion was made that Planning Commission deny.
Use Permit No. 1803, based on the following
findings:
1. That the proposed display areas and signing
were not compatible with the surrounding lal
uses.
2. That the establishment of the proposed sign•
ing and display areas with their proximity I
a major thoroughfare at its point of inter-
section with other highly traveled roadways
would be detrimental to traffic and create
•
potential traffic hazards in that particular
area.
3. That the proposed development would be detr
mental to the general welfare of the neigh-
borhood.
INORX
n
t
s`
e
S
ll
III
COMMISSIONERS
9Q V� T S S S
A.
aoy
BOLL
6`•
Noe!
City of Newport Beach
September 2, 1976
CALL
Commission
the motion
Commission
establishi
and felt c
an area ha
part of th
merchandis
would pres
site and Y
industrial
Commissior
a motion 1
the displz
a motorist
Commissior
there wer(
effective
traffic it
X
X
X
X
X
Following
X
X
carried.
Request ti
tennis coi
Crest Est+
Location:
Zone:
Applicant
Owner:
Community
one of th
be out by
want to g
the Commi
the light
adjacent
MINUTES
er Heather advised of her opposition to
inasmuch as she was a part of the
which approved the planned community
ng the area for automobile dealerships
lisappointed that the potential of such
.d not been realized. She felt that
ie problem was due to the lack of
ing and marketing and this use permit
.ent the opportunity to upgrade the
ielp to strengthen the commercial and
complex.
ter Frederickson advised he could support
;o permit a sign, but did not feel that
ty areas had any value and could attract
;'s attention at the wrong time.
er Seely commented on signs and felt
alternatives that would be just as
and with less potential impact on the
t the area.
discussion, motion was voted on and
INOEX
Item #7
permit the illumination of an existing JUSE
art (under construction) in the Canyon PERMIT
rtes residential development. 1 1802
Lot 1, Tract 8406, located at 2700
Pacific View Drive, northeasterly
of Pacific View Drive and southerly
on San Miguel Drive.
R -3 -B
Canyon Crest Estates, Newport Beach
Same as Applicant
Development Director Hogan advised that
e conditions recommended that the lights
11:00 P.M., however, the Commission may
ive this further consideration. Also,
ssion may want to establish a height for
s because of their relationship to
residential buildings.
- 12 -
PROVEDI
COMMISSIONERS
Clty of Newport Beach MINUTES
• ��°t September 2, 1976
ROLL CALL
Planning Commission questioned and discussed the
lighting as it pertained to intensity and height
and hours of operation approved for other tennis
courts in the City.
Public hearing was opened in connection with thi
matter.
Joe Gioscia, 1743 New Hampshire, Costa Mesa, wit
the Troy Investment Fund, 4321 Birch Street,
partner of Canyon Crest Estates, appeared before
the Commission and advised that the height of
18 feet for the lights, as shown on the plan,.wa
a maximum dimension and that a reduction to 15
feet above the playing surface would be agreeabl
He concurred with the staff report and the recon
mended conditions, including those pertaining tc
height and hours of operation, as they do not
want unhappy residents in the development.
There.being no others desiring to appear and be
•
heard, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
X
Motion was made that Planning Commission make tl
All Ayes
following findings:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with th
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 adequa
provisions are made to screen the tennis
court lighting from motorists on San Miguel
Drive.
3. The Police Department has indicated that th
do not contemplate any problems.
4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1802 will no
under the circumstances of this case be det
mental to the health, safety, peace, morals
comfort and general welfare of persons resi
ing and working in the neighborhood or be
detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood or the
general welfare of the City.
.
and approve Use Permit No. 1802, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That development shall be in substantial
- 13 -
e.
I-
ie
to
ey
t,
ri
d-
INOEX
COMMISSIONERS
9plp 9(
City of Newport Beach
September 2. 1976
BOLL CALL
conformance with the approved plot plan and
section.
2. That the lighting system shall be designed
with a maximum height of 15 feet above the
tennis court surface and maintained in such
a matter as to conceal the light source and
to eliminate light and glare from creating
a hazard to motorists on San Miguel Drive.
The plans shall be prepared and signed by a
Licensed Electrical Engineer; with a letter
from the Engineer stating that, in his opini
this requirement has been meta
3. That if the lighting system design proves to
be ineffective in eliminating light and glar
to motorists on San Miguel Drive, the systen
shall be redesigned and /or modified.to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community
Development and the Public Works Department.
.
4. Trees or shrubs of sufficient variety, numbe
be between the tennis
and size shall planted
court facility and San Miguel Drive so as tc
screen the court lights from the arterial
street. A landscape plan shall be submittec
to and approved by the Director of Parks',
Beaches and Recreation incorporating the abc
mentioned landscape requirements. Said Ian(
scaping shall be implemented in accordance
with the approved plan, and the landscaping
shall be permanently maintained.
5. That the windscreen shall be installed as
proposed by the applicant.
6. All tennis court lights shall be out by
10:00 P.M. daily.
7. The tennis court facility shall only be uti'
ized by residents and guests of Canyon Cres-
Estates. No tournament games open to the
public shall be permitted.
- 14 -
MINUTES
e
)ve
I -
INDEX
COMMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
• y September 2, 1976
POLL CALL
Request to consider an amendment to Title 19 anc
Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code
clarifying the responsibility for providing the
names of owners and addresses for required notil
cation.
Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach
Public hearing was opened in connection with th
matter and there being no one desiring to appeal
and be heard, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
X
Motion was made that Planning Commission recomm
All Ayes
to the City Council that Amendment No. 471 be
adopted.
Request to consider an amendment to Chapter 20.
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it perta
to height limits for chimneys and vents, archit
tural.features, flag poles and parapet walls,
elevator and mechanical penthouses and mechanic
equipment.
Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach
Public hearing was opened in connection with th
matter and there being no one desiring to appea
and be heard, the public hearing was closed.
Motion
X
Following discussion, motion was made that Plan
All Ayes
ning Commission recommend to the City Council t
Amendment No. 472 be adopted.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
Motion
X
Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 960,
All Ayes
setting a public hearing for October 7, 1976, t
consider an amendment to Section 20.80.090 of
•
the Newport Beach Municipal Code eliminating th
provision for the extension of previously apprc
ed permits when said permits have not been
exercised within the time specified.
- 15 -
MINUTES
'i -
is
>nc
)2
ins
ec-
al
is
r
hal
7
e
v -
INOEX
Item k8
AMEND-
MENT
471
APPROVED
Item #9
AMEND-
MENT
472
APPROVED
MMISSIONERS
City of Newport Beach
•
September 2, 1976
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
Motion X Commissioner Heather requested and received
All Ayes permission to be absent from the Planning Commis-
sion meeting of September 16, 1976.
Motion
All Ayes
•
•
There being no further business, motion was made
to adjourn the meeting. Time: 8.:55 P.M.
moo.®
WILLIAM AGEE, Secretary
Planning Commission
City of Newport Beach
- 16 -
INOex