Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/1989COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 P.M. c>, DATE: September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Present * * * * * A11 Commissioners were present. (Commissioner Edwards arrived at 7:40 p.m.) s a a EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: Robert Burnham, City Attorney Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney x x x William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager Sandra L. Genis, Senior Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary • x x x Minutes of August 24. 1989: minutes Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve the August 24, of 8 -24 -89 Ayes * * * * 1989; Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. Abstain Absent Public Comments: Public Comments No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non- agenda items. x x x Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, stated that the Agenda Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, September 1, 1989, in front of City Hall. • a x a COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o ado. o� September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Request William Laycock, stated that staff has requested that Item No. 3, Modification No. 3576, Executive Pools, property located at 2001 for Continuance Kings Road, be continued to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting to allow staff time to meet with the applicant. Mr. Laycock requested that Item No. 4, Use Permit No. 3009 (Amended), Ardeshir Bahar, applicant, property located at 2931 East Coast Highway, and Item No. 7, Residential Density Bonus, Site Plan Review No. 51, and Tentative Map of Tract No. 14113, W. F. Webster Enterprises, applicant, property located at 777' Domingo Drive, be removed from calendar as requested by the applicants. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 3, Ayes * * * Modification No. 3576, to the October 5, 1989, Planning Absent * Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Site Plan Review No. 29 (Amended)(Discussion) item No.1 Request to amend a previously approved site plan review which sPR 29(A) (Approved) permitted the expansion of the Newport Marriott Hotel and established an off - street parking requirement for the hotel based on a demonstrated formula. The proposed amendment involves a request to convert 14 guest. rooms on the third floor of the north tower into six hospitality suites, a restroom facility and a business center. The proposal also includes a request to create a new roof top patio on the north side of the building and a new service corridor to the new patio; and a request to approve a new parking study in conjunction with the establishment of the hotel's parking requirement by demonstrated formula. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 75 -33 (Resubdivision No. 497) located at 900 Newport Center Drive, on the southwesterly corner of Newport Center Drive West and Santa Barbara Drive, in Newport Center. • ZONE: C -O -H -2- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX A?PMC�t!Tv NEWPOIL Beat!] MalltULL HOLM and TOMS Club, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Mr. Jerry King, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant whereby he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. King reviewed the application, and he explained that the market demands more flexibility to provide hospitality suites and business services for hotel guests. Mr. King addressed the revised design that will be submitted by the applicant as requested by staff and Commissioner Merrill regarding the relocation of the stairwell for" the proposed patio on the roof. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding who would be using the proposed service rooms, Mr. King explained that there is a demand for services by hotel guests inasmuch as a survey was taken showing that when the hotel's occupancy increased the use of the meeting rooms • increased. Commissioner Pers6n stated, and William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, agreed, that the 1,600 square foot hospitality room would accommodate approximately 110 persons. Motion * Motion was made to approve Site Plan Review No. 29 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Laycock explained that the traffic study's survey was taken on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, July 11, 1989 through July 13, 1989. All Ayes Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Findines: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan and is compatible with.surrounding land uses. 2. That the proposed conversion of guest rooms will not • significantly impact the parking based on the parking study provided. -3- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o° • d�� September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX observed by the parking study, there appears to be adequate parking on -site to accommodate the proposed conversion of guest rooms to hospitality suites. 4. The proposed development is a high - quality proposal and will not adversely affect the benefits of occupancy and use of existing properties within the area. S. The proposed development does not adversely affect the public benefits derived from the expenditures of public funds for improvement and beautification of street and public facilities within the area. 6. The proposed development will not preclude the attainment of the specific area plan objectives stated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 7. The proposed development is consistent with the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission and City Council in conjunction with the approval of Site Plan Review No. 29. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plans. 2. That all applicable conditions of approval of Site Plan Review No. 29 shall remain in effect. 3. That the number of hospitality suites shall not exceed 6 on the third floor of the North Tower of the hotel facility and that any subsequent changes to other floors of the hotel facility will also require approval of an amendment to the site plan review. 4. That this Site Plan Review shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 J of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • • s x -4- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Item No.2. UP3359 Request to permit the establishment of a personal fitness training facility offering: one on one personal fitness training, aerobics, member use gym, tanning ,and retail shop for exercise and active Approved. wear apparel on property located in the C -O -H District. The proposal also includes an Exception to the Sign Code so as to allow the installation of two identification wall signs where the Zoning Code allows only one wall sign for each business in a multi- tenant building. LOCATION: Lot 7, Tract 4824, located at 1080 Irvine Avenue, on the northeasterly corner of Irvine Avenue and Westcliff Drive, in the Westcliff Shopping Center. ZONE: C -O -H APPLICANT: Magic Movement Inc., Costa Mesa OWNER: Irvine Retail Properties Company, Newport . Beach Commissioner Edwards indicated his interest in comparing Costa Mesa's parking requirements with the City's requirements in the Westcliff Plaza area. Commissioner Di Sano and William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, discussed the action that is taken when public notices are removed from the premises to notify the public of public hearings. Mr. Laycock directed the Planning Commission to the aerial photograph depicting the main entrance to the subject facility. He explained that the front door of the facility is approximately 145 feet from the residential, property on Rutland Road and approximately 200 feet from the adjacent apartments, northerly of the property. Don Webb, City Engineer, recommended that the following Condition No. 11 be added to Exhibit "A' inasmuch as the sight distance of automobiles leaving the premises is blocked by the landscaping and walls: "That the walls and landscaping on both . sides of the northerly driveway to Rutland Road be lowered to provide sight distance in accordance with City Standard 110 -L." In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. -5- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 1 0 \"\ �d��. September 7, 1989 �T CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. classes prior to 8:00 a.m., is the noise emanating from the parking lot: Commissioner Pers6n commented that it has been his experience that persons attending physical fitness facilities do not disturb the neighborhood. Commissioner Debay pointed out that a class of 40 students could create a disturbance in the area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Laycock explained that the definition of a personal fitness center would come under the athletic club category. i The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Robert Burns, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Burns concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", with the exception of Condition No. 4 which states "That the hours of operation for the facility shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily provided that aerobics classes shall not begin prior to 8:00 a.m." Mr. Bums explained that the Costa Mesa use permit requires the facility to operate between 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and 4 :00 p.m. . to 10:00 p.m. and the operators have never received a noise complaint from the adjoining neighbors. In response to a question posed by Mr. Burns for clarification of the facility closing at 9:00 p.m., Mr. Laycock explained that the request means that the doors would be closed to incoming members at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Burns stated that he would contact The Irvine Company with respect to who would be responsible to pay for the foregoing sight distance condition as suggested by Mr. Webb. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pers6n; Mr. Burns explained that the only entrance to the facility will be adjoining the rear parking lot. Mr. Burns stated that the applicants are restricted by the lease to allow any member traffic to enter the facility from the main parking lot. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover with respect to restricting the size of the aerobic classes, Mr. Laycock explained that to control the size of the classes would be an enforcement problem. Mr. Burns and Chairman Pomeroy discussed the demand for aerobic classes between 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. Mr. Burns stated • that more male than female members participate at 6:00 a.m. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover with ! respect to the one -on -one training program and a 40 member I -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH j ROLL CALL INDEX. aeroMc Mass, Mr. Burns expia!ned that a class of 40 memMers would be the absolute maximum, and the typical class is between 20 to 25 members. He explained that the facility employes six trainers who work with individuals on a personal basis. Mr. Burns explained the daily schedules used by the members. In .response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay and Commissioner Pers6n with respect to the entrance adjoining the main parking lot, Mr. Burns explained that to comply with The Irvine Company lease, the entrance from the front must enter into a retail store only and not into the. athletic club facility. Mr. Bums stated that it would be more convenient and would create less confusion for the members to park in the rear parking lot where there would be available parking, and noise emanating from the parking lot should not be an issue.. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Di Sano with respect to the facility's current location, Mr. Burns explained that the fitness center occupies a building in addition to a hair salon and an empty office, that 30 parking spaces are available to the building's tenants, and there are 450 members in the fitness center. Mr. Bums commented that the applicants.intend to build the membership up to 750 members at the proposed location. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards with respect to the increased square footage at the proposed facility, Mr. Bums explained that aerobic and fitness training will be increased as well as adding showers and locker facilities. Mr. Bums further replied that 18 parking spaces are currently available to the fitness center after 8:00 a.m., and the proposed parking will be increased to 70 parking spaces. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Di Sano addressed his concerns with respect to the Westcliff Shopping Center becoming a high intensity area. He maintained that the operational characteristics in the shopping center is changing from a retail area to a service area. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3359 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit 'W, including the foregoing Condition No. 11, and to amend Condition No. 4 to state that the aerobic classes may be started at 6:00 a.m. -7- i COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. motion on the basis that 40 members in a class would not be appropriate at 6:00 a.m. In response to a question. posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Laycock replied that the only complaints received have been with respect to the noisly air conditioning system at Hughes Market. Commissioner Merrill recommended that the applicants be given an opportunity to operate the fitness center and if there are complaints with respect to noise that Condition No. 9 provides the Planning Commission an opportunity to call the use permit back for review. Commissioner Edwards stated that he would not support the motion on the basis that the fitness center will increase to 750 members; that there is inadequate parking; that the parking lot's traffic circulation is bad; and the increase in traffic on Rutland Road would be inappropriate because of the close proximity to the elementary school. . Chairman Pomeroy stated that if the aerobic classes could not begin prior to 8:00 a.m. then it would remove the. purpose of an athletic club inasmuch as the working force needs to use the facility prior to the workday beginning at 8:00 a.m. Chairman Pomeroy commented that the facility would be appropriate for the site inasmuch as the parking demand would be during the non -peak hours of the shopping center. He stated that if there are any complaints with respect to the operation the Planning Commission has the right to bring back the use permit. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3359, subject Ayes k k * * to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the Noes * * * foregoing modified Condition No. 4 and added Condition No. 11. MOTION CARRIED. Findings: 1. That the proposed application is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. i 2. That adequate parking exists on -site for the proposed • development. -8- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX significant environmental impact. 4. That the proposed signs are necessary due to the location of the proposed facility. 5.. That the granting of this exception will not be contrary to the purpose of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code, and will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, j comfort or general welfare of persons residing in the neighborhood, or detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. 6. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3359 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 the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 2. That should the parking lot require restriping, the striping shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 3. That the noise from the music associated with proposed aerobics classes shall be confined to the interior portions of the building and the doors to the rear of the property shall remain closed at all times. 4. That the hours of operation for the facility shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily. 5. That the proposed signs for the facility shall be of similar design as those approved for the Westcliff Plaza Shopping Center sign program. The identification sign adjacent to the rear parking area shall not be illuminated. 6. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from Rutland Road and adjoining properties. -9- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 LAMBE& CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MUM 8. That all employees shall park on -site to the rear of the facility at all times. 9. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 10. 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. 11. That the walls and landscaping on both sides of the northerly driveway to Rutland Road be lowered to provide sight distance in accordance with City Standard 110 -L. I1 R ■ Modification No. 3576 (Public Hearing) Request to consider an appeal of the Modifications Committee's denial of Modification No. 3576 which involved a request to permit the retention of an as- built deck which encroaches 10 feet into the required 10 foot rear yard setback and which is up to 15 feet 4 inches in height above existing natural grade where the Zoning Code limits such construction to a 6 foot maximum height. The deck also encroaches 4 feet into the required 4 foot side yard setbacks and which maintains a height of 15 feet 4 inches where the Zoning Code limits such construction to a 6 foot maximum height. LOCATION: Lot 2, Tract No. 1221, located at 2001 Kings Road, on the northwesterly side of Kings Road between Cliff Drive and St. Andrews Road. • I( I I( I( I ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: Executive Pools, Anaheim Hills -10- INDEX. Item No.3 MOD. 3576 Cont'd to: 10 -5 -89 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I INDEX William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, stated that staff has requested that this item be continued to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting so as to allow staff time to meet with the applicant to resolve issues which have arisen in conjunction with the proposed application. Motion J * Motion was made and voted on to continue Modification No. Ayes * * * * * 3576 to the October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. Absent * MOTION CARRIED. ss: Request to amend a previously approved use permit that UP3009A permitted the service of beer and wine in conjunction with an existing restaurant in the C -O-Z District. The proposed Removed amendment involves a request to expand the "net public area" of from the restaurant by enclosing an existing covered patio entry. The Calendar proposal also includes a request to waive a portion of the required off- street parking spaces. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 6939 -90, 91 (Resubdivision No. 179) located at 2931 East Coast Highway, on the southwesterly side of East Coast Highway between Iris avenue and Heliotrope Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -O-Z APPLICANT: Ardeshir Bahar, Architect, Laguna Hills OWNER: J. Ray Property Management, Irvine William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, stated that the applicant has requested that this time be removed from calendar. x x x A. Traffic Study No. 58 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.5 Request to accept a traffic study so as to permit the conversion Ts No. 58 of an approved employees' cafeteria in the Newport Imports Automobile dealership to a restaurant facility. -11- COMMISSIONERS 0 ROLL CALL 0 • MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the construction of an automobile dealership which exceeded the 26 foot basic height limit in the 26/35 Height Limitation District, on property located in the "Retail and Service Commercial" area of the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan. The proposed amendment includes a request to convert an approved employees' cafeteria into a restaurant facility with on- sale beer and wine which will operate in conjunction with the auto dealership. The proposal also includes: a request to permit a portion of the required restaurant parking on an adjoining parcel which is in the same ownership as the subject property; and a request to delete or modify Condition of Approval No. 13 of Use Permit No. 3229, so as to allow all night security lighting at the rear of the building, adjacent to Avon Street, whereas said lighting is currently required to be turned off at 10:00 p.m. LOCATION: Restaurant Site: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 87 -106 (Resubdivision No. 840), located at 3000 West Coast Highway; Off -Site Parldng Site: a portion of Lot F, Tract No. 919, located at 2922 - 2940 West Coast Highway; both sites being on the northerly side of West Coast Highway between North Newport Boulevard and Riverside Avenue, in Mariner's Mile. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Lee West, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Debay requested a clarification of the results of the I.C.U. traffic analysis at the intersection of Riverside Avenue and West Coast Highway. Don Webb, City Engineer, stated that the analysis at that intersection is 0.904 which is slightly greater than 0.90; however, staff, in accordance with Traffic Phasing Ordinance guidelines, rounded the figure off to two decimal points to 0.90. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay with respect to the traffic count, Mr. Webb explained that the traffic fluctuates from year to year and during the past -12- INDEX UP3229A Approved COMMISSIONERS � 1 u MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J J J J J 1 J J I INDEX II Highway. He stated that several previo were used as committed traffic in the studies have sunsetted and were not projected number of trips were les explained that in the project's previous of floor area was counted twice, once ; as a portion of the car dealership. as project approvals that area in previous traffic included; therefore, the �. Mr. Webb further study, 3,300 square feet is a restaurant and once Commissioner Merrill suggested that the traffic counts may have been reduced because of the construction activity on West Coast Highway. Mr. Webb stated that the traffic counts were monitored in May, 1989. Commissioner Pers6n asked why the project's traffic study was not done at the intersection of Superior Avenue and West Coast Highway. Mr. Webb explained that the restaurant did not provide 1% or greater traffic at said intersection. • In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Webb explained that staff analyzes the square footage of a restaurant and does not consider the success of a restaurant. Commissioner Pers6n asked if the traffic analysis considered the Planning Commission removing the use permit and rights granted for the original China Palace as well as the project proposed at 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway. Mr. Webb stated that the I.C.U. would be reduced from 0.904 to 0.903, if they were removed. Commissioner Debay asked if the Planning Commission should be concerned that the applicant is currently operating the requested restaurant without a use permit? Robert Burnham, City Attorney, replied "no ". He explained that the only important factor relates to the likelihood that the applicant will comply with the conditions of approval of the items before the Planning Commission. He stated that it would be difficult for the Planning Commission to take action on the assumption that the applicant may not comply in the future with the approval because the City has the ability to enforce the conditions through revocation or court action. . . The public hearing was opened in connection with this item. Mr. Richard Dear, attorney for the applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Dear stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Mr. Dear -13- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES IN September 7, 1989 • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J I J J I I J J I INDEX customers, 93 percent were Newport Import employees, and 7 percent were customers who were in the establishment having their automobiles repaired or the general public. Mr. Dear maintained that the applicant has complied with Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) that has been granted. He explained that the applicants have not advertised that the restaurant is open to the general public. Mrs. Janine Gault, 406 San Bernadino Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission as a representative of the Newport Heights Community Association. She stated that the Board of Directors do not object to a small restaurant in the area; however, the Board does object to a restaurant that has the potential to force traffic in the residential neighborhood and to necessitate a traffic signal at the intersection of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street or the continuation of Avon Street to Santa Ana Avenue. Mrs. Gault explained that after the Board of Directors studied the traffic study regarding the intersection of Riverside Avenue and West Coast Highway, it was concluded that there has to be a reason why the I.C.U. was reduced temporarily. Mrs. Gault questioned the traffic study's statement with respect to a 20 percent reduction in vehicle trips due to pedestrian traffic, and she said that the 20 percent assumption could have a bearing on the TPO. Mr. Webb explained that the 20 percent reduction was based on the number of walk -in persons in the area, and the percentage is not unusual for a restaurant. Mrs. Gault stated that the Newport Heights Community Association is consistent with its concerns regarding Avon Street, inadequate parking in Mariner's Mile, and increased traffic in the area. She asked what project is proposed for the property at 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway? In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mrs. Gault replied that the Newport Heights Community Association is not requesting denial; however, they are concerned with the proposal. Lee West, applicant, and Mr. Dear appeared before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Pers6n asked if Mr. Dear and Mr. West had the opportunity to review the findings and conditions in Exhibit 'W, in the staff report and the addendum to the staff report? Mr. Dear stated that they had met and conferred. Mr. West stated that he would abide by the conditions of approval. Commissioner Pers6n referred to the condition with respect to nullifying the previous development rights of the proposed office -14- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I I I I I J J J I INDEX Mr. West if that would be an acceptable condition. Mr. West replied that it is an acceptable condition because he will not be developing that project; however, he said that he has plans to develop a project on the property in the future. Mr. West stated that it was his understanding that Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended), Finding No. 11 and Condition No. 32 nullified Site Plan Review No. 49, Vesting Resubdivision No. 876, and Traffic Study No. 48 (Revised) because he intends to use the site for parking spaces for the restaurant. Commissioner Merrill referred to Finding No. 6 of Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) which states "That the restaurant site and the off -site parking areas are in the same ownership". Mr. West explained that the property is in escrow until the owner locates another piece of property; however, he has approval to use the location from the property owner. Mr. Dear explained that Mr. West has an agreement with Mr. Shokrian to use the property. Mr. West stated that the original China Palace Restaurant will be demolished immediately. Commissioner Pers6n stated in the event the Planning Commission approves the subject project, that the action was not based on stories in the newspapers that state that Mr. West has an intention of suing the City. Mr. West stated that no further action has been taken with respect to the pending lawsuit. Commissioner Pers6n stated that he would not condone violations to the Newport Beach Municipal Code by approving anything that the applicant may desire if the Planning Commission should approve the project. Mr. West stated that he would accept Commissioner Persfin's statement. Commissioner Debay stated that the Planning Commission has the revocation of a use permit as a weapon if a project is violated, and she asked what kind of a threat that is to an applicant that operates a restaurant without a use permit? Mr. Burnham explained that the City Attorney's office filed a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the applicant's operation of a restaurant in the absence of a use permit. He said that it would be his opinion that in the absence of the applicant's application for a use permit the City would have been successful in its lawsuit.. He said that the City would be able to enforce through the revocation process or through an independent action in Superior Court any conditions of approval that the Planning Commission is imposing on the project. -15- COMMISSIONERS 0 MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( INDEX 10 Mrs. Gail Demmer, 2812 Cliff Drive, represented herself and as a member of the Newport Heights Community Association before the Planning Commission. She said that the Association cannot deny the application. Mrs. Demmer stated that the Association is concerned with the growth surrounding Avon Street, that they do not want to see ingress and egress on Avon Street, and the overflow of traffic from West Coast Highway mitigated to Avon Street into the residential community. Mrs. Demmer stated that when the adopted General Plan was initiated, the intent was that development shall not generate more traffic than the ultimate circulation system could accommodate and that the commercial and residential areas shall be compatible and serve each others interests. Mrs. Demmer questioned the need for a restaurant at the subject site, and the impact the project will have on the community and the traffic on West Coast Highway and Avon Street. Mr. Burnham stated that the adopted General Plan intended to lower permitted intensities of development throughout the City. Mr. Burnham referred to the staff report, and he addressed how the subject project adheres to the 0.5 FAR and the flexible floor area ratios adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council for uses that generate traffic. He explained that the floor area ratio of the subject area is 0.5, the weighted floor area ratio, including the restaurant and the automobile uses on- site, is 0.389; therefore, the use is consistent with the General Plan and a use that is permitted under the General Plan. Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 - 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. Dr. VanderSloot referred to his letter to the Planning Commission dated September 7, 1989, and he requested that the Planning Commission deny the subject traffic study and use permit. He stated that the Newport Heights Community Association did vote to deny the use permit. He addressed his concerns with respect to the proposed traffic circulation off of Avon Street and West Coast Highway; that the 3,300 square feet that was deleted from the dealership because of the restaurant tilted the TPO to .906; the assumption that 20 percent of the customers relate directly to the dealership should be included in the 3,300 square feet; recalculate the traffic study involving 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway based on the 20 . percent walk -in traffic; that to give 20 percent allowances demeans traffic studies as far as a TPO is concerned and it makes for arbitrary decisions; security lighting at the rear of the property is not turned off as required in Condition No. 13 of -16- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 is =CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the lights do not turn up into the residential area; and he concluded his presentation by stating that the applicant was flouting the laws and getting away with it. In response to a questions posed by Chairman Pomeroy with respect to what affect the deletion of 3,300 square feet and the 20 percent walk -in would have on the TPO, Mr. Webb replied that he did not believe the deletion of 3,300 square feet would "tip" the TPO; however, he said that the 20 percent walk -in may affect the TPO. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy with respect to Condition No. 13 concerning the lighting, William Iaycock, Current Planning Manager, stated that the applicant has not turned the lights off at 10:00 p.m. as required in the original use permit. However, the applicant has now requested to delete or modify that condition of approval. He explained that Finding No. 7 has been added to the subject use permit which states '"That the requested security lighting adjacent to Avon Street will be operated so as not to be objectional to residential properties on Cliff Drive and from the public view park. on the same street.". Commissioner PersBn asked if the City Engineer and the City Traffic Engineer are satisfied that the traffic study represents an accurate view of the situation that the Planning Commission can make an intelligent decision from? Mr. Webb responded "yes ". Dr. VanderSloot explained that a traffic calculation that he tabulated with the City Traffic Engineer diverting to Tustin Avenue was .905, and he said that to direct two automobiles to Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue would be .906. Mr. Burnham explained that the 3,300 square feet proposed as a restaurant will generate traffic at a certain rate, and that rate would be greater than if the 3,300 square feet would be a part of the dealership. Dr. VanderSloot and Mr. Burnham discussed the auto dealership use of the 3,300 square feet. Mr. Burnham stated that the traffic generation characteristics that are counted on auto dealerships are based on gross square footage of the structure without regard to what area within that structure is going to have more activity than other areas. The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:08 p.m. -17- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES n�°'oV" \° September 7 1989 0 \� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I ROLL CALL J I J J J J J J I INDEX Mrs. Karen Harrington, 441 Santa Ana Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission to request that the Planning Commission deny the project on the basis that a projected 600 automobiles on Avon Street would have an impact on the area, and she asked what the future plans are to expand Avon Street. Mr. Webb explained that the current plans do not provide for the extension of Avon Street beyond what is presently under construction, and there is no funding to extend Avon Street. Mrs. Harrington stated her concern that Avon Street would be eventually extended to Santa Ana Avenue so as to alleviate the traffic impact on Riverside Avenue and West Coast Highway. She commented that the encroachment of commercial business in the area has an impact on the residential area. Commissioner Pers6n asked if the project at 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway, as proposed, would be deleted and the subject project approved, what would be the difference in the number of trips on Avon Street? Mr. Webb explained that a retail office is 13 trips per 1,000 square feet which would be 300 trips. He said Is that with respect to the restaurant, based on 50 percent of the trips using Avon Street, instead of 528 trips, there would be 260 trips. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mrs. Harrington indicated that she did not know how many Newport Heights neighbors have been using the restaurant. She said that Ruby's Restaurant is well -known and more residents will be walling and driving to the facility. Chairman Pomeroy explained that the TPO calculations consider all of the approved projects even if said projects have not been built, and the traffic count does not represent the traffic condition that would occur based solely on the subject use permit. Mr. Burnham stated that the TPO analyzes the traffic impact of a project as a .worse case possible based on the existing projects in addition to the committed projects that have not been built, resulting in an I.C.U., and added to the I.C.U. is project traffic. Commissioner Debay commented that approval would be based on the escrow closing and the additional parking provided, and • the applicant's word that parking would be provided. Mr. Burnham stated that if the transaction is not consummated, the applicant would not be able to satisfy a condition and cannot complete the project. Mr. Burnham stated that the applicant is In COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX. area to be used for parking as long as the restaurant is in operation; however, he said that before the covenant can be recorded, the applicant needs control of the property. Mr. Burnham stated that typically Off -Site Parking Agreements are 5 years. Mr. L.aycock stated that the property owner, Mr. Shokrian, confirmed that the property located at 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway is in escrow and in the event the applicant does not purchase said property, the applicant has a 5 year lease that would allow the applicant to do whatever he wants to with that property during the 5 years. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr.' L,aycock stated that the applicant would be required to apply for a sign permit. Mrs. Marian Rayl, 426 San Bernadino Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mrs. Rayl addressed her concerns with respect to the traffic circulation at Avon Street; the reduction in the traffic count on West Coast Highway; the 20 percent walk -in traffic; that there is every reason to believe that Ruby's Restaurant will be successful and there will be an increase in traffic on Avon Street; that Mariner's Center is a traffic hazard; that post office employees park in the Newport Heights residential area; the number of businesses in Mariner's Center that have in -lieu parking; that the Municipal Parking Lot is not being used by the local businesses; that Newport Heights is being surveyed to see if the residents want to add traffic signs to their parking signs to alleviate the business parking in the neighborhood; that the traffic from a future project located at 2912 and 2930 West Coast Highway will be circulating off of Avon Street in addition to the 30 parking spaces that are proposed in conjunction with the subject restaurant; that the lights from the subject dealership are disturbing the adjacent residents; that a traffic signal is proposed at Mariner's Center; the applicants do not have a good track record inasmuch as they have violated conditions of the use permits; and the Planning Commission has discretionary powers to deny the project inasmuch as the proposal would not be good for the area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover. with respect to the 20 percent walk -in, Mr. Webb explained that staff looks at projects individually. He said that with respect to the subject proposal, there is a chance that there will be walk -in traffic on -site as well as from the surrounding neighborhood. He stated that there is no way to determine what the walk -in rate -19- COMMISSIONERS o ' O CITY OF NEWPORT MINUTES September 7, 1989 BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX question with respect to why automobiles are not proposed to ingress and egress from West Coast Highway, Mr. Webb explained that Newport Imports was proposed to ingress and egress off of Avon Street and West Coast Highway. He said that staff attempted to distribute traffic and there was a need to eliminate left turns out of the dealership on West Coast Highway. Commissioner Glover commented that Avon Street is considered a residential street in Newport Heights and the restaurant traffic should be from West Coast Highway and should not encroach into the residential neighborhood. Mr. Webb explained that Avon Street is a service access road at the rear of the property for Newport Imports and the adjacent properties. Commissioner Glover and Mr. Webb discussed the reasons for diverting West Coast Highway traffic to Avon Street. Mr. Webb commented that ingress and egress on West Coast Highway for the restaurant would lower the I.C.U. at Riverside Avenue because it would take trips off of Riverside Avenue. Mrs. Rayl commented that the median would be extended westward on West Coast Highway so it would be impossible to • make a left turn into the restaurant. Mr. Webb confirmed that the median will be extended, and left turns are restricted out of Newport Imports by a previous condition. He said that the new driveway at 2912 West Coast Highway will be protected so no left turns can be made into the driveway. However, left turns into the site from West Coast Highway can be made at the main entrance to the auto dealership. Mrs. Rayl and Mr. Webb discussed the traffic circulation on West Coast Highway at the subject site. Mrs. Rayl concluded that if everything does not go right with the subject project, then the TPO could be tipped by the project. Mr. Chris Hansen, 22 Encore Court, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hanson commented on the traffic congestion created by the post office. In response to Mr. Hanson's concerns, Mr. Webb explained the circulation pattern at the post office until construction on Avon Street is completed. Mr. Hansen and Mr. Webb discussed the businesses that will be using Avon Street from Mariner's Center. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. • Commissioner Edwards and Mr. Webb discussed the variable traffic counts on West Coast Highway and what the automobile -20- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES \ a.,l�&Vn.` V- ON', September 7, 1989 i \ � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J I TI J I INDEX Mr. Burnham requested an amendment to Condition No. 13 as approved by Mr. Dear and Mr. West. He stated that some of the problems created at the subject location have not surfaced because it is not common knowledge that the restaurant is operating and open to the public. He said that to allow the restaurant to install signs upon approval of the subject application and then satisfy the conditions of approval to the use permit could create problems. He proposed that Condition No. 13. of Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) be amended to state "that no signs shall be erected until permittee has complied with Conditions No. 7, 14, 15, 20, and 21." He explained that said conditions are relevant to the parking and traffic and access concerns that the residents and Planning Commission have raised. Mr. Dear concurred that the conditions would be acceptable. Commissioner Di Sano stated that the Planning Commission's discretionary powers are limited to when the Planning Commission can make findings. Mr. Burnham concurred, and he 0 added, when the facts are present to support the findings. Motion * Motion was made to approve Traffic Study No. 58, and Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended), subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", including the foregoing Condition No. 13 as amended by Mr. Burnham, and added Finding No. 11 and Condition No. 32 as suggested by staff in the addendum to the staff report with respect to the applicant's use for off -site parking at property located at 2912 West Coast Highway. Commissioner Pers6n stated that in order for the Planning Commission to come up with findings to deny the application there has to be a factual basis, and he explained there are no facts to create findings for denial. Commissioner Pers6n stated that Mr. West agreed to the conditions of approval making the use permit contractual in nature, and said conditions are . expected to be abided by. He commented that he has a concern with respect to Condition No. 12 regarding the service of alcoholic beverages and that said condition may need to be modified at a future date if there are any further problems. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the entitlement to property located at 2912 West Coast Highway will be deleted and the entitlement to the existing China Palace Restaurant will be deleted, concluding that the subject project will have less impact than the foregoing establishments. Commissioner Debay supported the motion. She said that because of the technical information given to the Planning -21- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Substitute Commissioner Glover made a substitute motion to approve Use Motion * Permit No. 3229 (Amended), and Traffic Study No. 58, including modified Condition No. 13, added Finding No. 11 and Condition No. 32. Commissioner Glover requested that Finding No. 8, Condition No. 20, and Condition No. 24 be deleted so as to force the ingress and egress off of West Coast Highway and off of Avon Street. Commissioner Debay stated that she would not support the substitute motion because there is no way to make a left turn onto West Coast Highway from the establishment. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Commissioner Pers6n explained that there is no evidence to not allow alcoholic beverages. Commissioner Edwards stated that be had a concern with respect to alcoholic beverages and automobiles. • Commissioner Glover stated that the proposed project will have an impact on the residential neighborhood. Ayes * The foregoing substitute motion was voted on, MOTION Noes k * * * DENIED. Chairman Pomeroy commented that the information contained in the Traffic Study as it relates to walk -in traffic is not adequate to make a proper decision, and he requested a continuance so Substitute as to be given further information concerning the impact of Motion 0 walk -in traffic. He commented that it is a legitimate concern inasmuch as the percentage is arbitrary and it is necessary to find out if it would tip the TPO. Mr. Burnham addressed the responsibilities that the City Council delegates to the Traffic Engineer as described in Council Policy S -1. Withdrawn The substitute motion was withdrawn at this time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay. with respect to a change in the traffic counts in 1990, Mr. Burnham explained that the Planning Commission has the power under • the use permit to modify conditions of approval to address changes and circumstances. He said that if the change in traffic manifests itself and some problems occur, the Planning -22- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES o d d September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX that the problem is resolved. In reference to the Traffic Engineer's responsibility, Mr. Burnham explained that if the Traffic Engineer could be persuaded to decrease the amount of walk -in traffic for a particular establishment, it would have a great affect on the validity of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. In response to Commissioner Edwards' question with respect to revoking the application, Mr. Burnham explained that revocation has to be based on violations of the conditions of approval as opposed to change in circumstances. In response to Commissioner Edwards' question with respect to Condition No. 31 regarding the Planning Commission's rights to modify the use permit, Mr. Burnham stated that the intent of the condition is to put the applicant on notice that if there is a violation that the Planning Commission has the right to recommend revocation. Motion was voted on to approve Traffic Study No. 58, and Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) subject to the findings and • conditions in Exhibit 'W', including added Finding No. 11, Ayes * * * * * * modified Condition No. 13, and added Condition No. 32 as No * previously stated. MOTION CARRIED. A. Traffic Study No. 58: Approve the.Traffic Study, making the findings listed below: Findings: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and Council Policy S -1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major', 'primary- modified', or 'primary' street. B. Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended): Approve the use . permit, making the following findings and with the following conditions: -23- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Fin in 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environ- mental impact. 3. That adequate parking exists to serve the subject restaurant. 4. The off -site parking areas are located so as to be useful to the proposed restaurant use. 5. Parking on such off -site parking areas will not create undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. 6. That the restaurant site and the off -site parking areas are in the same ownership. 7. That the requested security lighting adjacent to Avon Street will be operated so as not be objectional to residential properties on Cliff Drive and from the public view park on the same street. 8. That the subject project increases traffic on Avon Street which may result in the need to provide a traffic signal in the future. 9. The waiver of development standards as they pertain to walls and parking lot illumination will not be detrimental to the adjoining properties. 10. The approval of Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) under the circumstances of this case will not 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. -24- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 =CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J J J J J J J J I INDEX located at 2912 West Coast Highway for off site parking in conjunction with the proposed restaurant will nullify the previous approval of Site Plan Review No., 49, Vesting Resubdivision No. 876 and Traffic Study No. 48 (Revised) inasmuch as there is insufficient parking on said property to satisfy the parking requirements of both projects. 1. That the subject project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan and restaurant floor plan. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of approval. of Use Permit No. 3229 shall be fulfilled and shall remain in effect. • 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from view. 4. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odor and smoke to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 5. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer .system and not into the Bay or storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 6. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 7. That all restaurant employees shall park their vehicles in the off -site parking areas. I I( I I I I 8 That a minimum of one parking space shall be provided for each 40 sq.ft. of "net public area" (33 spaces) in the proposed restaurant facility. -25- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I J J J J J J I TINDEX shall be limited to 7:00 am. to 10:00 p.m. daily. 10. That a trash compactor shall be installed in the restaurant facility. 11. That no live entertainment or dancing shall be permitted unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 12. That the service of alcoholic beverages shall be incidental to the primary food service operation. 13. That all signs shall conform with Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code unless a sign exception is approved. That no signs shall be erected until permittee has complied with Conditions No. 7, 14, 15, 20, and 21. • 14. The applicant shall record a covenant, guaranteeing that the subject parcels used for off -site parking for the restaurant shall remain in the same ownership as the property on which the restaurant is located. 15. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the off -site parking area and shall be used solely for hand- icapped self parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 16. That the on -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation system be subject to further review by the Public Works Department and the City Traffic Engineer. 17. That prior to the issuance of any building permits or implementation of this Use Permit, the applicant shall dedicate to the City for street and highway purposes, the applicant's interest in the strip of land (varies in width between 15.4 feet and 16 feet) adjacent to West Coast Highway and across the West Coast Highway frontage. The strip is to be • used in the future for the widening of West Coast Highway. That portion of the existing structure at the southeasterly corner of the property that is in the dedication area may remain until West Coast -26- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 611 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I I J J I I J J I INDEX roadway widening will perform the modifications to remove interfering portions. 18. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 19. 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 obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 20. That the intersection of Avon Street and the driveway shall be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour. Landscaping, 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 Traffic Engineer. 21. That the existing median island in West Coast Highway shall be extended 35 feet westerly and that vehicular access to West Coast Highway be limited to right turn in and out and signs be posted to indicated this restriction. 22. That the sidewalk be reconstructed to a 12 foot width and the existing drive depression be removed and replaced by a drive conforming to City Standard 166 -L along the West Coast Highway frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the California Department of Transportation 23. That a landscape and irrigation plan for the site shall be approved by the Public Works, Planning, and Parks, Beaches and Recreation Departments. The landscaping shall be installed in accordance . with the prepared plans. 24. That 25 percent of the cost of a traffic signal at Riverside Avenue and Avon Street be bonded for -27- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J 1 j j j) J I INDEX E • years after a certificate of occupancy is issued for the development. 25. That site drainage flowing toward West Coast Highway be collected in a drain and conveyed to the existing storm drain in the highway. 26. That the development standards pertaining to walls and parldng lot illumination are hereby waived. 27. That the overhead utility lines serving the off -site parldng areas shall be placed underground and the poles removed. 28. The applicant shall make all required alterations to that portion of the building used for restaurant purposes which may be determined to be necessary by the Building and Fire Departments. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for all such alterations. 29. That the applicant shall obtain the approval of the Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of any building permits or opening of the restaurant. 30. That Condition No. 13 of Use Permit No. 3229, approved by the City Council on March 23, 1987, is amended to read as follows: "That the illumination of automobile display areas shall be maintained in such a manner so as to eliminate direct light and glare on adjoining properties northerly of Avon Street and on West Coast Highway. All lighting facing toward. the bluff at the rear of the site, except for approved security lighting, shall be turned off by a timer at 10:00 p.m. each night. The five existing security lights at the rear of the building, shall be maintained and operated in a manner so as not to be objectional to the adjoining residential properties on the bluff side of Cliff Drive." 31. That the Planning Commission may add to or 10 COMMISSIONERS L�] ROLL CALL 0 MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 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. 32. Implementation of Use Permit No. 3229 (Amended) as approved by the Planning Commission on September 7, 1989, shall nullify the previous approval of Site Plan Review No. 49, Vesting Resubdivision No. 876, and Traffic Study No. 48 (Revised.) x x x The Planning Commission recessed at 10:05 p.m. and reconvened . at 10:10 p.m. x x x Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended)(Public Hearing] Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the expansion of the existing Hoag Hospital facility on property located in the A -P -H and Unclassified Districts. The proposed amendment is a request to establish an employee child care facility and related parking to be located on the lower southwesterly portion of the campus, adjacent to the future Hoag Hospital Cancer Center in the Unclassified District; and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 172, Block 1, Irvine's Subdivision, .located at 4050 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway, between Newport Boulevard and Superior Avenue, on property known as Cal Trans East. ZONE: Unclassified • I I I I I I( I APPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Newport Beach C011.7 ►1�1ii Same as applicant -29- Hospital Presbyterian, INDEX UP1421A Approved COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL j j) j 1 1 J J I INDEX IN Mr. Michael Stephens, President, Hoag Memorial Hospital, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Stephens concurred with the findings, conditions, and mitigation measures as set forth in Exhibit "A', with the exception of concerns regarding Conditions No. 4 and No. 7 of Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended). He reviewed background information pertaining to sites that the applicants considered prior to selecting the subject site adjacent to .the Cancer Center on the Cal -Trans parcel. Mr. Stephens explained that said site presented the best opportunity to have a suitable day care program that would be safe and would have the least potential infringement on the Master Plan that the applicants are developing. Commissioner Pers6n commended the staff of Hoag Hospital who, he said, came up with a reasonable alternative to the sites that were previously proposed. Mr. Mel Wright, Geological and Petroleum Consultant, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of Commissioner Debay's concern with respect to the methane gas that is in the area. Commissioner Debay asked if there would be a hazard to the children in the area. Mr. Wright stated that there would not be a hazard to children playing outdoors. He said that the subject site that is proposed for the child care center is probably one of the safest and he explained that he was recently involved with recent drilling in the area. He explained that the child care center will be constructed on a site that does not have gas on the surface, it will 'be constructed on clay that was removed from the cancer center which will be compacted, and the facility will be built off the ground. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay, Mr. Wright replied that the child care center is as safe as the cancer center. Robert Burnham, City Attorney, suggested an addition to Mitigation Measure No. 12 stating that, "the property owner shall comply with any Ordinance requiring mitigation of methane gas hazards provided the Ordinance is effective within 90 days of when the use permit is effective." He explained that the City Council will take action on the methane gas mitigation Ordinance within sixty days which, he said, would be ample. time for the applicants to design and install a system. Mr. Stephens stated that the applicants would concur with said condition. In response to a request by Mr. Stephens, Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 7, and requested that said -30- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I I J J J J I I I INDEX system tie into the cancer center sidewalk system and that a 4 to 5 foot sidewalk be constructed.. ". Mr. Webb explained that because the applicants are considering landscaping between the sidewalk and curb, a 4 foot sidewalk would be agreeable to staff. Mr. Webb further suggested that the following sentence be added to said condition: "The sidewalk is to be in place when the signalized intersection is open to traffic." Mr. Stephens referred to Condition No. 4 which states "That the child care facility shall be limited to 100 children.. ", and he suggested that said condition be modified to state "That the child care facility capacity shall be initially limited to 100 children and will not require a further use permit amendment for expansion if it conforms with the adopted Master Plan." He explained that if the capacity exceeded 100 children and the Master Plan would be in effect, then the Master Plan would control the child care center. • Mr. Chris Hansen, 22 Encore Court, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hansen requested that the intersection of Placentia Avenue and Hospital Road be modified to allow a left turn traffic signal. Mr. Webb responded that staff agrees that the restriping and widening of the intersection should commence; however, he said that the hospital has requested that the item be delayed until the Master Plan has been approved. Mr. Webb stated that staff is currently working with the applicants to implement Condition No. 11 which states "That the applicant shall widen Hospital Road to provide a left turn for east bound traffic, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department." In reference to Mr. Hansen's request to install a left turn arrow, Mr. Webb explained that it is not the intent of said condition; however, Hospital Road will be widened by approximately 6 feet. Commissioner Pers6n and Commissioner Edwards indicated that they would agree with delaying further improvements of said intersection until the Master Plan has been approved. Mr. Hansen explained the dangers of passing through the intersection. I I I I I I I Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 - 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission with respect to his concerns regarding the protection and preservation of the wetlands. Mr. Webb • I ( ( I I I I explained that the project would not affect the wetlands inasmuch as the development is easterly of the entrance drive and the wetlands are westerly of the entrance. -31- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES im September 7, 1989 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J J I J J J J J I INDEX public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended) and related environmental document subject to the findings, mitigation measures, and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the foregoing modified Mitigation Measure No. 12, and Condition No. 4, and No. 7. Commissioner PersBn commended the applicants' proposal. Commissioner Di Sano supported the motion based on the need for a child care center. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the subject site solves many of the concerns that the Planning Commission had with respect to the sites previously suggested by the applicants. Motion voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended) and related environmental document including the Ail. Ayes aforementioned modified conditions. MOTION CARRIED. A. Environmental Document: Accept the environmental document, making the following findings and requiring the following mitigation measures: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and Council Policy K -3. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. Mitigation Measures: 11111111 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading 0 permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. -32- COMMISSIONERS U MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 1 1 1 J J J 1 I I INDEX It • • temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize impacts from silt, debris and other water pollutants. 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering and sweeping program designed to minimize the impact of haul opera- tions. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. The grading, excavation and recompaction of the site shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on the recommendations of a soil engineer or an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 6. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of the landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. Prior to the. occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan. 7. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and the approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments. Said plan shall give special emphasis to the landscaping provided for the purpose of screening the fence enclosure around the outdoor play areas. 8. All rooftop and other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 dBA at the property line, and that all mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. -33- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 l INDEX E 0 a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL and the outside play areas shall be sound attenuated to a maximum of 65 dBA CNEL as measured from the area expected to experience the highest sound levels. Measurement and certification of compliance with this condition shall be completed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy by a registered engineer practicing in acoustics. 10. The .lighting system shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to conceal light sources and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential areas. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer; with a letter stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 11. The structure shall be designed to protect the building from gas accumulation and seepage, based on the recommendations of a qualified geotechnical engineer. 12. The building shall be equipped with methane gas sensors. Such sensors shall be installed in areas of likely accumulation, such as utility or other seldom used rooms. Sensors can monitor on a continuous basis and can be tied into fire alarm systems for 24 hour surveillance. Installation of the gas sensors and alarm system shall be verified by the Building and Fire Departments. The property owner shall comply with any Ordinance requiring mitigation of methane gas hazards provided the Ordinance is effective within 90 days of when the use permit is effective. B. Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended): Approve the Use Permit with the following findings and subject to the following conditions: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding uses. 2. That adequate parking will be provided to serve the child care facility. -34- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J j I ) J ) ) ) I INDEX 0 conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 4. That the approval of this amendment to Use Permit No. 1421 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. 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended) shall be fulfilled. 3. That the intersection of the private streets and drives be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping and walls 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 Traffic Engineer. 4. That the child care facility capacity shall be initially limited to 100 children and will not require a further use permit amendment for expansion if it conforms with the adopted Master Plan. 5. That the hours of operation of the child care facility shall be limited to 6 :00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily. 6. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 7. That the child care sidewalk system tie into the cancer • center sidewalk system and that a 4 to 5 foot wide sidewalk be constructed along the northerly side of the private street between West Coast Highway and the child -35- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 0 =CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL iNQEIC signalized intersection is open to traffic. 8. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. • 9. That County Sanitation District .fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. 10. That the primary entrance located on West Coast Highway shall not be used to serve the child care facility or the Cancer Center until the West Coast Highway widening has been. completed and the traffic signal installed. 11. That the applicant shall widen Hospital Road to provide a left turn for east bound traffic, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 12. That the outdoor play areas shall not extend toward the bluff more than 30 feet from the proposed child care building. 13. That the applicant shall obtain the approval of the Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of building permits. 14. 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. 15. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -36- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Item No.7 Request to permit the construction of a 30 unit residential RDB condominium development and related parking on property — located in the R -3 -13, P -R -D District which includes a 100 SPR 51 percent density bonus so as to provide 15 affordable housing units and 15 market rate units. TTM14113 AND Removed from B. Site Plan Review No. 51 (Public Hearing) Calendar Request to permit the construction of a 30 unit residential condominium development and related parking on property located in the R -3 -13, P -R -D District. The proposal also includes the approval of a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a portion of the structure to encroach into the required reverse corner setback adjacent to Domingo Drive. AND C. Tentative Map of Tract No. 14113 (Public Hearing) Request to subdivide an existing lot into a single lot for a 30 unit residential condominium project on property located in the R -3 -B, P -R -D District. LOCATION: Lot 7, Tract 5425, located at 777 Domingo Drive, on the southwesterly corner of Domingo Drive and Amigo Way, in Eastbluff. ZONE: R -3 -B, P -R -D APPLICANT: W. F. Webster. Enterprises, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Robin Hamers & Associates, Inc., Costa Mesa William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, stated that the applicants have requested that this item be removed from calendar. -37- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Item No.8 Request to amend Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to establish the Multi- Family Residential (MFR) A687 (Res. 119 7) District. Approved INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Commissioner Pers6n stated that inasmuch as he reviewed the August 24, 1989, Planning Commission Minutes and read the staff report, that he is prepared to participate in the subject public hearing. Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Manager, addressed the changes that were made to the proposed Amendment subsequent to the August 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting. He suggested that to encourage covered garage parking in the R -3 and R -4 Districts, that a floor area ratio of 1.75 FAR, excluding covered parking, be permitted. Mr. Lenard explained that after • reviewing a limit of 400 square feet per dwelling unit to account for a two car garage, that staff has suggested 200 square feet per required parking space. Chairman Pomeroy and Mr. Lenard discussed a floor area allowance in the garage that could accommodate a washer and dryer. Mr. Lenard addressed the building height limit, and he referred to a list of recently constructed buildings in the R -2, R -3, and R -4 Districts. Mr. Lenard addressed concerns regarding required parking. He explained that 2 1/2 parking spaces per unit were traditionally required by the Planning Commission and the City Council in large multi - family projects; however, the requirement differed in duplex and triplex units. Mr. Lenard indicated that 2 parking spaces per unit is a reasonable requirement for all projects; however, he said that it would be a judgment call to know where to draw the line to require the additional 1/2 parking space per dwelling unit. Mr. Lenard indicated that Exhibit 1 compares requirements in the R -2, R -3, R -4, and proposed MFR Districts. He said that Exhibit 2 provides information regarding developments in R -3 • and R-4 Districts with respect to FAR with and without covered garage spaces, the height of buildings in the front and the rear, and how the square footage was developed on the site. Mr. Lenard referred to the display area and explained that the -38- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 0 "7 \ \�\\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL) I J MI J I INDEX I� within the City, and he pointed out that few MFR sites will remain on the Balboa Peninsula. Sandra Genis, Senior Planner, appeared before the Planning Commission to explain a slide presentation describing characteristics of recent developments in the R -3 and R -4 Districts, including floor area ratio, the number of garage spaces, front and rear building height, and setbacks. Mr. Lenard concluded that there were few structures in the R- 3 and R -4 Districts that were built at close to 3 times buildable area. He stated that the large structures were not developed significantly larger than the suggested 2.0 times buildable area, including covered parking, or 1.75 times buildable area, excluding covered parking. Mr. Lenard addressed the rear yard and alley setbacks. He explained that the Ordinance has been amended to state that a 10 foot setback is required except adjacent to alleys. Mr. Lenard stated that a reference has been made in the Ordinance to the Municipal Code that relates to setbacks and alleys. Chairman Pomeroy stated that the flat, straight roof gives the appearance of more bulk, and he asked what would be required to encourage the use of pitched roofs inasmuch as the pitched roofs tend to mitigate the bulk. Mr. Lenard explained that a pitched roof may go 5 feet higher than a flat roof to provide an incentive; however, he said that flat roofs are being constructed to maximize the amount of living space. He stated that the standards could be modified to create more penalty for a flat roof and a bonus for a pitched roof. Mr. Lenard explained that the mid point of the roof may not exceed the average height limit, so in order to go up 5 feet at the ridge, another portion of the roof must be reduced by 5 feet. Commissioner Person saw no compelling reason why the Planning Commission should make the MFR Standards different than the R -2 Standards. II Mr. Philip Coleman, 1988 Port Claridge, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of Mrs. Mamie Hunt, owner of • a parcel of land that will be reclassified to MFR. Mr. Coleman addressed concerns with respect to the proposed 28 foot bridge that will be constructed over the Santa Ana River to Huntington Beach, and he commented that the proposed required building -39- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL)) ))))) ) { INDEX Iff 0 ensued between Mr. Coleman and Don Webb, City Engineer, with respect to the variable heights of the bridge. Mr. Lenard explained that variance procedures are designed to accommodate properties that have peculiar circumstances compared to other properties with similar zoning and to give relief to the properties in .hardship cases. In response to questions posed by Mr. Coleman with respect to setbacks, Mr. Lenard explained that the floor area standards are a function of land area. Mr. Bill Martin, 1824 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Martin stated that the proposed building size restrictions, density restrictions and parking restrictions have a severe impact on what can be developed in the R -3 and R -4 Districts. He disagreed with the reduced height limit from 28 feet to 24 feet, and he requested a compelling reason to reduce the height. He explained that the reduced height would curtail architectural variations. He further explained that when combined with the 1.75 buildable area it tends to force the design of the building into a standard, two - story box structure. Mr. Martin stated that architects have informed him that the extra 4 feet makes it possible to distribute the 1.75 buildable area in ways that improve the outdoor living space, provide more outdoor space, provide better view lines, and allow for staggered roof lines. Mr. Martin and Commissioner Debay discussed the suggestion to limit the height of the building front to 24 feet and the rear to 28 feet, and Mr. Martin stated that the suggestion would restrict architectural freedom. Mr. Lenard explained that there is a split height limit of 24 foot front and 28 foot rear in the R -3 District, and in the R-4 District there is a 28 foot height limit on the entire property. Mrs. Mamie Hunt, property owner of the Beach and Bay Trailer Park, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mrs. Hunt expressed her concerns with respect to her mobile park being reclassified to MFR, and the restrictions that would be put on the future development of her property. Chairman Pomeroy explained that Mrs. Hunt has residential use on the property, and the City is proposing a residential use that allows the Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to support the proposed Ordinance. Dr. -40- highest density. In response to a. concern expressed by Mrs. Hunt, Mr. Lenard discussed the procedure that was established • to notice property owners with respect to the zone changes. Dr. Jan VanderSloot, 2221 16th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to support the proposed Ordinance. Dr. -40- COMMISSIONERS r� u MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL J J J J J J J J I INDEX 11 Plan was to put restrictions on the floor area ratios and building bulk and the subject Amendment is a rational way to confront the problems. He commented that the slides projected how property owners develop to the maximum. He supported the 24/28 height limit and the limitation on the floor area ratio of 1.75 times buildable area. He stated that he would support staff's recommendation to exclude the parking. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Commissioner Di Sano made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 1197 and recommend to City Council the adoption of the proposed Amendment No. 687. Commissioner Di Sano recommended that the R -3 and R -4 District conform to the R- 2 Districts and the Multi- Family Residential District. He explained that the intent of the General Plan was to effectively downzone, especially on the Balboa Peninsula. He suggested that • 20.175.030, Building Height and Floor Area Limit, be amended as suggested by staff, to 1.75 plus 200 square feet per required parking space. Chairman Pomeroy suggested that the .5 additional parking space may not be appropriate for a triplex; therefore, he suggested that the requirement for triplexes be amended to 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit plus 1 parking space. Chairman Pomeroy proposed the 28 foot height limit as opposed to the 24 foot height limit to reduce a structure's bulk appearance. The maker of the motion opposed the recommendation. Discussion ensued regarding an acceptable height limit. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the height limit be restricted to the R -2 standards and to provide greater setbacks with increased height. Chairman Pomeroy agreed with the recommendation inasmuch as the increased setbacks would reduce the visual mass. Discussion ensued regarding roof pitch. Mr. Lenard agreed with the Planning Commission that the three story elevations on the alley with no setbacks are the least attractive. He stated that an advantage to a standardized height limit in all residential districts is that the height would be consistent in all districts, whereas the building bulk would be proportional to the lot. Mr. Lenard suggested that if the standard proposed in the MFR District does not accomplish what the Planning Commission desires in roof lines, staff could make changes to the R -2 District as well as the MFR District. -41- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 7, 1989 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX , second and third level setbacks, and review the Residential Development Standards that regulate building bulk. Mr. Lenard suggested that these suggestions be considered for the R -2 and MFR Districts. Chairman Pomeroy withdrew his previous suggestion, and he agreed with Mr. Lenard's suggestion to consider the standards at a future public hearing. The height limit would remain at 24/28 Foot Height Limitation as suggested by staff. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill with respect to a performance standard that would allow a variety of roof planes to reduce the bulk without dictating architectural design, Mr. Lenard replied that the Residential Development Standards contain provisions on open space that could be refined. Mr. Lenard further addressed previous concerns with respect to differing setback requirements at different elevations. Commissioner Merrill suggested that a higher roof pitch be considered. Commissioner Edwards asked if there would be a problem if the Planning Commission did not adopt the MFR Standard. Mr. Lenard replied that it would delay the series of zone changes. Commissioner Edwards expressed his concern with respect to legislating taste and design. The foregoing motion was voted on to adopt Amendment No. All Ayes 687 (Resolution No. 1197). MOTION CARRIED. x x x ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Additional Business Motion Motion was made and voted on to excuse Commissioner Di All Ayes Sano from the September 24; 1989, Planning Commission meeting and to excuse Commissioner Merrill from the September 24, 1989, and October 5, 1989, Planning Commission meetings. MOTION CARRIED. x x x ADJOURNMENT: 11:45 p.m. Adjournment JAN DEBAY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -42-