Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/04/1975COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Dm%y Vii£ Regular T T p q q Place: o�rei� p Z w Date: Planning Commission Meeting City Council Chambers 7:00 P.M. Sp OtPmhPr 4. 1975 MINUTES Present X X X X X X X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney Benjamin B..Nolan, City Engineer STAFF MEMBERS Tim Cowell, Advance Planning Administrator Shirley Harbeck, Secretary In connection with the Minutes of the meeting of August 7, 1975, Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised of the need for clarifi- cation of the height approved under Variance No. 1049 on Page 24 and recommended the addition of a condition which would state "that the height of the easterly tower shall not exceed that shown on the approved elevations (44 ft. ±)." He stated that the condition was necessary to clarify the • intent of the Commission and to allow the tower to exceed the 40 foot height limit, since a condi- tion of the use permit which was also approved at the August 7, 1975 meeting stated `.'that the ridge line of all of the roofs on the proposed structure shall not exceed a height of 40 feet above grade" and without the condition on the Variance, there was a possibility of misinterpretation as to the approved height. Motion X Motion was made to approve the Minutes of the Ayes X X X X X X Regular meeting of August 7, 1975 with the amend - Abstain X ment that the following condition be included as a part of the approval of Variance No. 1049 on Page 24: 1. That the height of the easterly tower shall not exceed that shown on the approved eleva- tions (44 feet ±). Commissioner Tiernan abstained in connection with the approval of these Minutes as Commissioner Hazewinkel was seated on the Commission at the August 7, 1975 meeting. Page 1. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Motion Ayes Abstain Motion Ayes Abstain 0 9 m y x < Z MINUTES Ccnfnmh., d I 07 X Minutes of the Special Meeting of August 13, 1975 X X X X were approved as written. Commissioners Beckley X X Y and Williams abstained as they were absent from the meeting and Commissioner Tiernan abstained as he was not on the Commission at that time. X Minutes of the Regular meeting of August 21, 1975 X X X X X Y were approved as written. Commissioner Seely X abstained as he was absent from the meeting. Item #1 Consideration of a possible amendment to the Cir- GENERAL culation Element as it pertains to the Fifth Ave. L1WN— "corridor" in Corona del Mar, which would indicate AMENDMENT that a "Coast Highway Bypass" in the Fifth Avenue corridor is an alternative traffic solution which should be further studied in the future. RECOM- MENDED Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach NEW STUDY Chairman Beckley commented on the reason for the PRIOR new public hearing and the basic procedures follow TUY ed in connection with amendments to the General CHNGYS Plan. Advance Planning Administrator Cowell reviewed the staff report and for background information, reviewed the Phase III City Wide Traffic Study conducted in October, 1973, as well as the actions of the Planning Commission and City Council in adopting the current General Plan proposals for Coast Highway through Corona del Mar. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Roy Giordano, 626 Seaward Road, Corona del Mar, appeared in opposition to the amendment and questioned what new facts and evidence were present to warrant reconsideration of the 5th Avenue corridor. Val Morton, 613 Narcissus, Corona del Mar, appeare in opposition and reminded the Commission of the thousands of signatures which have been secured in the past opposing any freeway or bypass through the 5th Avenue corridor. Page 2. COMMISSIONERS i 0 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES September 4. 1975 INDEX John Porter, 700 Larkspur, Corona del Mar, appeare in opposition as he felt there were other solution to the traffic problems on Coast Highway such as elimination of on- street parking during peak hours and providing off - street parking for the businesse . He did not feel there were any new facts present to warrant the proposed amendment. Commissioner Heather pointed out that when the Circulation Element was originally heard, the Planning Commission recommended eliminating on- street parking for two one -hour periods as a mitigation measure, but the City Council eliminate that option when the Circulation Element was finally adopted. Also, she agreed that off - street parking would help the businesses in Corona del Mar, but failed to see how this would help the flo of traffic. Robert McKay, 716 Narcissus, Corona del Mar, did not feel that the 5th Avenue bypass was a viable solution to the Coast Highway traffic problem. _He felt that the biggest traffic problem was the bottleneck on the bridge over the bay. Jeff Hurton, 714 Marigold, Corona del Mar, appeare in opposition to the 5th Avenue bypass which would cause a loss of open space and recreation area and would not eliminate the traffic problem on Coast Highway. Gerald White, 966 Sandcastle, Corona del Mar, commented that freeways should be planned in advance rather than disrupting existing communit- ies and felt that traffic should be routed through Bonita Canyon instead of 5th Avenue. Helen Kieron, 3201 4th Avenue, Corona del Mar, appeared in opposition. Norman Weinberger, 958 Sandcastle, Corona del Mar, did not feel the proposed amendment was a viable solution to the traffic problem on Coast Highway and that the lack of community support for a 5th Avenue bypass should be given consideration. He also commented on the lack of additional data to warrant further consideration of 5th Avenue. In response to the question of "new facts" Commis- sioner Parker commented on the TICMAP program with its various proposed roadway systems and developments which could generate an increase in Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH q�1 m T D m m Z m s p p 2 3 ad ceu September 4. 1875 MINUTES INDEX population of 50,000 in the next 20 to 25 years. He also commented on the SEOCCS program which proposes an east -west corridor through the City of Irvine. He stated that at this point in time, there is no information as to the ultimate route of the Corona del Mar freeway or when it will be constructed. He commented on the fear of merch- ants on Coast Highway in Corona del Mar that parking would be removed or that Coast Highway would be widened causing businesses to close. Recently there have been proposals for development within the 5th Avenue corridor and if implemented, they would reduce the number of options available to handle the east -west traffic through the City. Mr. Weinberger commented on the above and felt there was no firm data on which to vote in favor of the 5th Avenue option. Commissioner Seely commented on the issue under consideration which was to keep the 5th Avenue corridor open as an option and not to construct a freeway. He felt that the option should be left open because of the many changes which do take • place over a period of time and had the same concerns as he had when the matter was originally considered. Dick Spooner, 1327 Seacrest Drive, Corona del Mar, commented on Cal Trans funding and need for a concensus in the community before there is any undertaking to construct a roadway. He felt that if the 5th Avenue bypass option remained open, there would be less emphasis on the Bonita Canyon/ Coyote Canyon freeway and San Joaquin corridor which he felt was a much better solution. Rita K. White, 966 Sandcastle Drive, Corona del Mar, questioned why the option should be kept open when the option was not there to begin with. Also, she felt that the 5th Avenue corridor was not feasible and that through traffic should be routed around the City rather than through it. J. R. Blakemore, 2509 Harbor View Drive, Corona del Mar, commented on the re- opening of the 5th Avenue corridor issue and felt that some rules should be made to preclude the constant re- hearing of this or any other issue which has had recent • extensive hearings. He opposed the 5th Avenue corridor and favored routing traffic through Bonita Canyon. Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH N M61 Pall Sentamhar a_ 1Q79 MINUTES INDEX Christine Kent, 712 Poinsettia, Corona del Mar, advised of the unanimous decision of the Corona del Mar Civic Association not to support the 5th Avenue corridor. x Planning Commission recessed at 8:45 P.M. and reconvened at 9:00 P.M. Paul Martin, 6202 Marigold, Corona del Mar, felt that a park was needed along the 5th Avenue corridor and that a bypass would not accomplish a thing. He also felt that a bypass was needed around the City and that Bonita Canyon should be looked at first. Fred Granger, 554 Hazel Drive, Corona del Mar, felt that consideration of the 5th Avenue corridor would affect the Youth Center and that traffic should be routed around the City. Arnold Guess, 4500 Dorchester Road, Corona del Mar, felt that the ideal long term solution would be the Bonita Canyon /Coyote Canyon extension of the Corona del Mar Freeway and that a short term solution which has not been considered for east - west traffic would be San Joaquin Hills Road which could connect with the Coast Highway east and south of Corona del Mar. He stated that even though the Commission may feel they have new information, the feeling of the community had not changed. Richard A. Nelson, 2008 Altura Drive, Irvine Terrace, commented on the traffic along Coast Highway and the bottleneck at the bridge. He was not sure that 5th Avenue was the right solution but felt that Bonita Canyon was a good solution. He commented on the need to solve the traffic problems along Coast Highway and if the 5th Avenue corridor would help solve the problem, then the option should be left open. He also commented on the problem of getting in and out of Irvine Terrace and felt that a traffic signal was needed for this purpose. • Mrs. John Stanfill, 35 Bodega Bay, Corona del Mar, commented on the moral issue involved in trying to build a better community. Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH f+ q P m T om= T a 2 N &L CALL September 4, 1975 MINUTES - - -- INDEX Robert McKay again appeared before the Commission and suggested that a harder look be taken into the matter of signalization through Corona del Mar to increase the flow of traffic and to provide a better access to Coast Highway for the residents of Corona del Mar. Val Morton again questioned the reason for the public hearing and Chairman Beckley advised that it was to consider a potential revision to the General Plan involving the option to retain the 5th Avenue corridor as an alternative solution to the traffic problems along Coast Highway. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Agee commented on the General Plan amendment public hearing process, the procedures used to determine which proposals should be heard, and agreed that guidelines were needed for this purpose. He also commented on the amount of opposition registered against the 5th Avenue bypass as well as the recommendation to route • traffic through Bonita Canyon /Coyote Canyon and felt that no action should be taken to change the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Commissioner Parker commented on the Phase III Traffic Study and the recommended solutions to the traffic problems through Corona del Mar, one of which was the 5th Avenue bypass, but which was deleted because of the opposition within the community. He commented on the many future plans for the highway system by Can Trans, the County , of Orange and The Irvine Company which may or may not solve the problems of traffic through Corona del Mar. He felt that the City should attempt to solve its own problems of traffic and one of the solutions logically might be the use of the 5th Avenue corridor. Since the General Plan sets the tone for development, he suggested that the wordin in the Circulation Element which states that the "5th Avenue corridor was considered and rejected as an alternative because of lack of community support and other considerations" be deleted and that wording to the effect that "the 5th Avenue corridor bypass is an alternative solution to east -west traffic through Corona del Mar and shout • be given further study at such time as the City is in a position to begin implementation of a solu- tion" be substituted in order to retain the option He felt that the 5th Avenue corridor was a logical Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH yC ^ MINUTES e,•rei� N September 4, 1975 iwnFY and feasible solution and to remove the matter from City control would be illogical. Commissioner Heather felt that the option should be retained and that further study should be made and that although the alternative may not be politically feasible, it is technically feasible. She also commented on the intimidation resulting from the audience opposition to any one who may be in favor of the proposal and its effect on the democratic process. Commissioner Tiernan advised he had heard nothing throughout the proceedings which would indicate that the 5th Avenue corridor was of such vital importance as to override the wishes of the people who live in the area. Commissioner Seely commented on the request and felt that the 5th Avenue option should be kept open because there was no way to forsee what the future needs would be. Commissioner Williams commented on the various • points previously discussed and advised he would rather not retain 5th Avenue as an option but would like to see the community work together toward obtaining the Bonita Canyon extension of the Corona del Mar Freeway. Commissioner Beckley commented that if the input from the technicians was correct, there would be legitimate problems in the future and solutions must be sought. However, he felt that the factors have not been quanitified and to change the plan at this time was not warranted. In order to delete reference to the specific exclusion of 5th Avenue as an alternative and at the same time to place appropriate emphasis Motion X on other alternatives, motion was made that Item No. 8 on Page 9 of the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan read as follows: This segment of Coast Highway from MacArthur Boulevard through Corona del Mar includes pro- posals for additional street improvements, improved signalization, bypass routes or one -way routing through the community, and additional • off- street parking. It will be the policy of the City of Newport Beach to study and support the construction of major roadways surrounding the community to the north and east, particularly the Corona del Mar freeway, through Bonita Canyon, Page 7. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LTp P � N QAre11 Sentemhar 4. 1975 MINUTES San Joaquin Hills Road, and connecting north -south roads such as Canyon Crest Drive. Commissioner Agee felt that the matter under consideration was whether or not 5th Avenue should be considered as a bypass and that the Commission should vote on that issue rather than rewording of the General Plan. Ayes X X X The motion was then voted on and failed. Noes X X X Motion X Motion was then made that there be no recommenda- Ayes X X tion for an amendment to the Circulation Element Noes X X X X of the General Plan. Motion failed. Motion Motion was made recommending to the City Council that a new study of Coast Highway traffic problems be conducted in order to determine whether there have been any changes that would affect the traffic projections, and until such time as the study is completed, that the language of the General Plan be left as it is. Commissioner Williams stated that the effect of the motion would turn the matter over to the City Council in order to secure more information and data as the people have been saying that there is no new data. Also, there have been changes in the use of mass transit and in the use of human power rather than horse power since the last study was made and perhaps a Phase IV Traffic Study would cover these issues. Commissioner Agee asked,for clarification, if this motion was to recommend a new study and to recom- mend no changes to the Circulation Element. Commissioner Williams indicated that was the intent of the motion. Ayes X X X X X Following discussion of the motion for purposes of clarification, the vote was taken and the motion carried. Items No. 2 and No. 3 were heard concurrently • because of their relationship. Page 8. E 0 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T r• -` j0 G MINUTES Spntpmhpr a. 7Q7F Item. #2 Request to permit the construction of illuminated USE tennis courts in the Unclassified District in PERMIT conjunction with the Marriott Hotel facilities. 1763 Location: Parcel Nos. 1 and 2 of Parcel Map CONT..TO 37 -49 (Resubdivision No. 305) and SEPT. 18 a portion of Block 55 of Irvi.ne's Subdivision, located at 900 Newport Center Drive West, on the south- westerly corner of Newport Center Drive West and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center. Zones: Unclassified, C -O -H Applicant: Marriott Properties, In.c., Washington, D. C. Owner: The Irvine Co., Newport Beach Item #3 Request to establish one building site where two RESUB- parcels and a portion of the Irvine Coast Country DIVISION Club property now exist so as to permit the con- NO. 497 struction of tennis courts on the expanded Marriott Hotel site. CONT. TO SEPT. 18 Location: Parcel Nos. 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 37 -49 (Resubdivision No. 305) and a portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, located at 900 Newport Center Drive West, on the south- westerly corner of Newport Center Drive West and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center. Zones: Unclassified, C -O -H Applicant: Marriott Properties, Inc., Washington, D. C. Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Engineer: Williamson and Schmid, Irvine Planning Commission discussed the 11:00 P.M. time period for lights out as permitted under Condition No. 7 of the use permit, since other requests for Page 9. COMMISSIONERS RArsi Motion All Ayes r1 U CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Seotember 4. 1975 lunry lighted tennis courts have been limited to 10:00 P.M. and in fairness to the other requests as well as the residents in the area it was felt that the lights should be out by 10:00 P.M. There was a question by the Commission in connec- tion with the water catching device and its effect on the adjacent golf course and staff requested that the question be directed to the applicant. Public hearings were opened in connection with Use Permit No. 1763 and Resubdivision No. 497. Neither the applicant nor a representative was present in connection with this request. Other questions by the Planning Commission included potential tournaments and use of the. facility as a membership club separate from the hotel operation. Richard Stevens of the Balboa Bay Club appeared before the Commission and commented that 10 tennis courts were a lot of courts for a 300 -room hotel. Due to the number of questions by the Commission, including tournaments, hours of court use, drainage, method of control as to use of the courts, and long range use of the proposed courts, as well as the absence of the applicant or a X representative, motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 1763 and Resubdivision No. 497 to the meeting of September 18, 1975. Item #4 Request to permit the establishment of a restau- USE rant facility with on -sale alcoholic beverages, PERMIT live entertainment and dancing on the former 1764 Kismet Restaurant site. The proposed development also includes a modification from the required parking standards so as to allow tandem parking spaces and a request for an off -site parking APPROVED CC NEDI TIO�N L-LY agreement for a portion of the required parking spaces. Location: A portion of Lot 35 and Lots 36, 37, and 38, Tract 1210, located at 1100 West Coast Highway, on the Page 10. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Q- rAlI September 4. 1975 MINUTES .n VGA northerly side of West Coast Highway, opposite the Balboa Bay Club. Zone: C -1 -H Applicant:. ONLY, Inc. and Larry R. Smith, Westminster Owner: Tract 1210 Ltd., Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker commented that the site plan had not been accurate- ly drawn and the location of some of the parking spaces thereon was not accurately depicted. He also advised that after further study of the site, only 4 additional spaces could be placed on the site as opposed to the 5 spaces indicated in the staff report. Mr. Hewicker reviewed the plot plan with the Commission and pointed out the changes suggested as well as the availability of parking on the adjacent property and ingress and egress to the subject restaurant. Planning Commission discussed the parking and its relationship to the square footage of the restau- rant.. They also discussed the criteria which would allow a reduction in the number of required parking as provided by the restaurant parking ordinance recently adopted. Public hearing was opened in connection with this request. Richard Stevens, 1210 W. Coast Highway, represent- ing the property owner, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter and related their attempts to up -grade the property and re -open the subject restaurant. Larry Smith, Applicant, appeared before the Commission to answer questions and advised of the use of valet parking during all hours of operation plans to resurface and restripe the parking lot; and clarified ingress and egress to the restaurant in order to preclude the stacking of cars in the street. • There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the hearing public was closed. Planning Commission again discussed the parking in order to establish the total number of spaces Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH � m T 1p y A r T < R CALL September 4, 1975 MINUTES I E% ND which would be required as well as the period of time for which approval should be granted. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made that Plan -. All Ayes ning Commission make the following findings: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Adequate provisions for traffic circulation are being made. 3. Portions of the offstreet parking spaces for the restaurant facility on separate lots are. justifiable for the following reasons: a.) The applicant has a 24 year lease on Lots 36, 37 and 38 Tract 1210 (i.e., the restaurant building and the related park- ing lot to the west of the structure). b.) A long term lease has been granted the . applicant for 9 parking spaces and related access to West Coast Highway on Lot 35, Tract 1210, to the east of the restaurant facility. c.) Parking on the offsite lots will not create undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. 4. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems with the pro- posed development. 5. The proposed live entertainment will not be detrimental to any surrounding land uses so long as the music is confined to the interior of the restaurant. 6. Approval of Use Permit No.1764 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. 7. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. Page 12. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES 00rAlI Santamhar Q_ 1Q75 8. Sufficient justification exists to require one parking space for each 50 sq. ft. of net public area based upon the criteria specified under Section 20.38.030(d) of the Municipal Code and the fact that no changes are proposed in the operation of the restaurant from those that were originally considered prior to the adoption of the current restaurant parking standards. and approve Use Permit No. 1764, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan, except as noted in Condition Nos. 2 and 3. 2. That a revised site plan reflecting the sug- gested changes in the parking layout shall be submitted for approval to the Department of Community Development and the Traffic Engineer The parking lot shall be restriped in accord- • ance with the amended parking layout. 3. That off - street parking shall be provided at a ratio of one space for each 50 square feet of net public area. In the event said parking cannot be accommodated on site, sufficient additional.parking shall be provided in an off -site location meeting the approval of the Planning Commission or the net public area of the restaurant shall be reduced accordingly. 4. That a resubdivision shall be processed to combine Lots 36, 37 and 38 or the applicant shall secure an off -site parking agreement for the parking spaces located on Lots 37 and 38. 5. That an ingress, egress and parking agreement shall be recorded between the tenants and owners of the restaurant site and the adjoin- ing business to the east providing for the use and access thereto of the parking spaces located on the east side of the restaurant. 6. Parking attendants shall be provided during the operations of the restaurant. • 7. That the live entertainment shall be confined to the interior of the facility. 8. That there shall be no sound amplification use outside of the structure. Page 13. COMMISSIONERS . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH YC T D m m T a F r p N 0 40reia SPntPmhPr 4_ 1Q75 MINUTES !!q Ds x 9. Air conditioning shall be installed and operable before the live entertainment com- mences, and doors and windows shall be kept closed during business hours. 10. All roof top mechanical equipment except vents required by the Building Code, shall be screened from view of homes fronting on Kings Road. Such screening to be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. 11. A landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. Said plan shall indicate landscaping throughout the site and include minimum 5 foot wide landscape planters along West Coast Highway, except at. approved drive- ways. Said planters shall consist of trees, shrubs and groundcovers to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recrea- tion, be irrigated with automatic watering devices, and be permanently maintained. • 12. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 50 of the Air Pollution Control District. In addition, the kitchen hood system shall have an automatic fire protection system installed. 13. That a washout area for trash containers shall be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or the storm drains. 14. That all signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. Convenienc signs such as "entrance" or "exit" shall have a maximum area of six square feet. Said convenience signs shall not include the name or logo of the restaurant use. 15. All existing or proposed exterior lighting shall be approved by the Department of Community Development and shall be designed and /or shielded so as to confine any glare to the site. 16. All storage of cartons, containers and trash shall be shielded from view within a building or within an area enclosed by a wall or fence not less than six feet in height. Page 14. COMMISSIONERS Tmymm� A T N R CALL 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES INDEX 17. That unused drive approaches be reconstructed with standard curb and sidewalk. 18. That an encroachment permit be obtained.from the State Division of Highways for work within the Coast Highway right -of -way. 19. That this approval shall be for a period of one year from the date of final determination of the application, and any request for exten sion shall be acted upon by the Modifications Committee. 20. The existing metal rolling door that covers the main entrance shall be completely removed from the structure. 21. That the parking lot shall be resurfaced and restriped in order to provide for.the safety of patrons. Item #5 USE Request to permit the construction of a restau- rant with a cocktail lounge, live entertainment, PERMIT and dancing in "Newport Place." The proposed T765 development includes a 22 foot wide landscape planter along Birch Street (where the Planned APPROVED Community Development Standards require a minimum 30 foot CONDI- wide landscape strip). TIONALLY Location: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 45 -25, located at 4250 Birch Street, on the southeasterly corner of Corinthian Way and Birch Street in "Newport Place." Zone: P -C Applicant: Richard Hofman, c/o Hendrick & Mock, Architects, San Diego Owner: Emkay Development Co., Newport Beach Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Richard Hofman, Colorado Springs, Colorado, Applicant and President of Restaurant Services Corporation, appeared before the Commission in Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH C m m➢ m m f m � = m < Z RAM relI September 4. 1875 MINUTES INDEX connection with this request. He reviewed the Plans and the operation of the restaurant, advising that the restaurant portion of the operation would close at 9:30 P.M. and would not be available to the public after that time and that dancing would not begin until 9:30 P.M. He concurred with the staff report except for the recommendation on parking and requested that the parking requirement be reduced to 112 spaces which could be provided on the site and which he felt was adequate in view of the proposed opera- tion. Planning Commission indicated some skepticism as to the workability of the proposal to close the restaurant at 9:30 P.M. because of previous experience with restaurants in the area as well. as the potential popularity of the restaurant due to dancing and live entertainment. Planning Commission asked Mr. Hofman if he would agree to conditions being placed on the use permit which would restrict the hours of the various • operations within the restaurant and he advised that he had no objections to such conditions. Planning Commission further discussed the pro- posed restaurant operations as outlined by the applicant, criteria to justify any reduction in the required parking, size of the dance floor and procedures for obtaining a dance permit. Staff advised that hours of operation was one of the criteria which could be used in connection with reduced parking and also pointed out that the area of the dance floor had been enlarged to 240 square feet. John Mock, Architect, San Diego, appeared before the Commission and commented on the parking. He reviewed a revised site plan which indicated 112 parking spaces at a ratio of 1 space /38 sq. ft. of net public area within the restaurant and pointed out that the plan as revised would provide parking without changes to the landscaped area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. . Planning Commission discussed the proximity of other restaurants which presently exist or are proposed for the immediate area; ability to control the hours of operation within the Page 16. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m n oiAreii N September 4, 1975 MINUTES restaurant; and the parking ratio to be used. Commissioner Seely commented on the potential success of the restaurant with or without a dance floor and voiced a reluctance to impose restric- tions on the internal operation of the restaurant. Motion X He then made the motion to approve Use Permit No. Ayes X X X 1765 using the parking requirement of 1 space /35 Noes X X X X sq. ft. of "net floor area" as recommended in the staff report and eliminating any reference to the dance floor as stated in Condition No. 2 and with no reference to hours of operation. Motion failed. Commissioner Agee commented that the proposed method of operation justified a reduction in Motion X parking and, therefore, made a new motion that Ayes X X X X X X Planning Commission make the following findings: Noes X I. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Adequate offstreet parking spaces are being • provided for the proposed development. 3. Adequate provisions for traffic circulation are being made in the parking lot. 4. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems with the proposed development. 5. The proposed live entertainment will not be detrimental to any surrounding land uses so long as the music is confined to the interior of the restaurant facility. 6. That the modification in the required width of the landscape strip along Birch Street 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 or be detrimental or injur- ious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modifica- tion is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. • 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 1765 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, Page 17. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH en RIO CAL N September 4, 1975 MINUTES INDEY 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. 8. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. and approve Use Permit No. 1765, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, elevations and floor plans, except as noted in Condition No. 2. 2. That a minimum of one parking space /38 sq. ft. of "net floor area" shall be provided on -site or on an approved off -site location if the proposed development includes a dance floor. 3. That the live entertainment shall be confined • to the interior of the facility. 4. That there shall be no sound amplification used outside of the structure. 5. Air conditioning shall be installed and operable before the live entertainment com- mences, and doors and windows shall be kept closed during business hours. 6. All roof top mechanical equipment except vents required by the Building Code, shall be screened from view. Such screening to be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. 7. That a landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. Said landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plan and the landscaping shall be permanently maintained. 8. That all signs shall be approved by the Direc- tor of Community Development. Convenience signs such as "entrance" or "exit" shall have • a maximum area of six square feet. Said convenience signs shall not include the name or logo of the restaurant use. Page 18. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Sentemher 4. 1975 iunry 9. All exterior lighting shall be approved by the Department of Community Development. 10. All storage of cartons, containers and trash shall be shielded from view within a building or within an area enclosed by a wall or fence not less than six feet in height. 11. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 50 of the Air Pollution Control .District In addition, the kitchen hood system shall have an automatic fire protection system installed. 12. That six -foot wide P.C.C. sidewalk be con- structed along the Birch Street, Corinthian Way, and Scott Drive frontages. 13. That the sidewalk and driveway approach construction as well as the water and sewer service connections be in accordance with an approved encroachment permit issued by the . Public Works Department. 14. That the dining room shall be closed at 9:30 P.M. and that dancing shall not begin prior to 9:30 P.M. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Motion X Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 931, All Ayes setting a public hearing for October 2, 1975, to consider the recodification of Title 20, Zoning Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code. Motion X Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 932 Ayes X X X X X N entitled "A Resolution of the Planning Commission Abstain X of the City of Newport Beach making its report as required by Government Code Section 65402 in regards to the Environmental Management Agency of Orange County proposal for the acquisition of right -of -way and construction of portions of a bicycle trail within the City of Newport Beach." • The resolution provides for approval of the final design by the City of Newport Beach. Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 'C M T$ m T L Can +amhar d 1Q7G MINUTES u�nev Motion X Planning Commission recommended to the City Counci All Ayes that no action be taken on the recommendation of the Intergovernmental Coordinating Council regard - ing standard zoning designations as they felt that further confusion would result since development standards would be different from one place to another even though the designations may be the same. Commissioner Heather requested and received permission to be excused from the meeting of September 18, 1975. Motion X There being no further business, motion was made All Ayes to adjourn. Time: 11:55 P.M. JAMES PARKER, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Page 20.