Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/10/1981REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COMMISSIC)NEitS Place: City Council Chambers Time: Date: 7:30 p.m. September 10, 1981 CIO City of Newport Beach CALL X X X K x x x All Present. :t x EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney * • x STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator Fred Talarico,.Environmental Coordinator Craig Bluell, Senior Planner Donald Webb, City Engineer Pamela Woods, Secretary * x � • APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Motion K Motion was made to approve the Minutes of the Regular All Ayes X X X X K K Planning Commission Meeting of July 9, 1981, as written, which MOTION CARRIED. Motion X Motion was made to approve the Minutes of the Regular All Ayes X X X X K K K Planning Commission Meeting of July 23,. 1981, as written, which MOTION CARRIED.' Commissioner Winburn referred to Page 3 of the August 6, 1981 Minutes and requested that her statement be clarified to reflect that the participation in the City's tennis lesson program has dropped 30 to 35 Motion X percent in the past three years. Commissioner Winburn All Ayes X X X X X X X then made a motion to approve the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of August 6, 1981, as revised, which MOTION CARRIED. Motion X Motion was made to approve the Minutes of the Regular Ayes X X X X X Planning Commission Meeting of .August 20, 1981, as Abstain X X written, which MOTION CARRIED. -1 MINUTES INDEX Motion A11 Ayes Motion Ayes Noes • • September 10, 1981 m City of Newport Beach Staff advised the Commission of the following requested continuances: Item Nos. 1 and 2 - Use Permit No. 2008 and Resubdivision No. 692 to be continued to September 24, 1981; Item No. 12 - Use Permit No. 1905 (Amended). to be continued to September 24, 1981; Item No. 14 - Use Permit No. 2020 to be continued to September 24, 1981. Staff advised that Item No. 5 - Use Permit No. 2014 has been withdrawn at the request of the applicant. Staff further advised that Item No. 13 - Use Permit No. 1956 (Amended) has been removed from the calendar at the request of the applicant. Motion was made to continue the above listed items,- )( X X which MOTION CARRIED. - X I XI X I X I Motion was made to Element, when the MOTION CARRIED. hear Item No. 8 - The, Housing City's consultant arrives, which Request to permit the construction of a four unit residential condominium project and related garage spaces in the R -4 District. A modification to the Zoning Code is also requested inasmuch as the proposed development encroaches: a) 10 feet into the required 20 foot front yard setback on West Bay Avenue; b) 3 feet into the required 10 foot front yard setback along 19th Street; and c) 1 foot into the.required 3.5 foot side yard setback along Vilelle Place. UMF Request to create one parcel of land for residential condominium development where two lots now exist. - LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 130 -20 -21 ( Resubdivision No. 590) and a portion of Lot 1 of Block B, Newport Tract located at 1824 Vilelle Place and 1821 West Bay Avenue on the northeasterly side of 19th Street and Vilelle Place on the Balboa Peninsula. -2- MINUTES INDEX Item #1 USE PERMIT NO. 2008 F:�] Item #2 RESUB- OTV —IS ION NO. 692 Both con - tlnn to Sept�em er 24, 1981 September 10, 1981 COMNUSSKYI ERS MINUTES Gza 1 City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX ZONE: R -4 APPLICANTS: Sweeney, Smith, Rosi, Eadington, Newport Beach OWNERS:. Same as applicants. Staff advised that these items have been requested to be continued to the meeting of September 24, 1981. Commissioner Allen requested that parking spaces be included in the buildable area as a comparison in the staff report on these items. Motion X Motion was made to continue these items to the Planning. All Ayes X X X X.X X Commission Meeting of September 24, 1981, which MOTION CARRIED.. • Request to permit the temporary use of a modular It building for a San Marino. Savings and Loan Branch with a drive -up teller facility in the C -1 -H District. LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2 of Tract 1210, located at u$ 300 West Coast Highway on the northwesterly corner of West Coast Highway and Dover Drive., across from Bayshores. APPROVED . ZONE: C -1 -H C N� DI- TIONALLY APPLICANT: San Marino Savings and Loan Association OWNER: Leonard Horwin and Arnold S. Gordon, Beverly Hills, There being no one present to speak on this item, Commissioner Balalis made the following motion: Motion X' Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 2010 'subject All Ayes K X X X X X X to the following findings and conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: -3- September 10, 1981 MINUTES City of Newport Beach INDEX 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. Adequate off- street parking spaces are being provided for the proposed development. 4. That the proposed development.is temporary in nature, and will not preclude the preparation of a development plan for the ultimate use of the property. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 2010 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. . CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the submitted.plot plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That landscape plan for the parkway areas by approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and the Public Works Department. A landscape plan for the remaining portion of the project shall be approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and the Planning Department. The applicant shall agree to maintain all such landscaping. 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from West Coast Highway and adjoining properties. 4. Any lighting system in the off - street parking area shall be designed to eliminate any glare and ambient light to adjacent public roadways or residential areas. 5. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Sign Ordinance, Chapter 20.06, of the Municipal . Code. 6. That this permit shall extend for a period of three years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee: -4- c VMn+v�mt� September lo, 1981 MINUTES i City :of Newport Beach CALL I INDEX 7. That the final location of the proposed ground sign shall be subject to the City Traffic Engineer's approval so as to insure appropriate sight distances at the intersection of West Coast Highway and Dover Drive. S. That the drive approach to Dover Drive be signed for "Entrance Only, No Exit ". 9. That a resubdivision be approved and a parcel map be filed to create one building site where two lots now exist. Request to establish an. automobile leasing agency in Item #4 the M -1 -A District. LOCATION: Lots 30 of Tract No. 3201, located at 4360 Campus Drive on the easterly USE PERMIT side of Campus Drive, between Dove NO. 2013 Street and MacArthur Boulevard, across from the John Wayne Airport. • ZONE: M -1 -A APPROVED CC N�DI- APPLICANT: Ralph and Debbie Gray, Newport Beach TrONALLY OWNER: Commercial and Industrial Enterprises, Inc.,.Costa Mesa The Planning Department staff presented recommended revised conditions of approval for this use permit. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Richard Hogan, representing the applicants, presented background information on this item. Mr. Hogan referred to revised Condition No. 4 and requested that minor repairs and servicing be permitted inside of the building. In response to a question posed by Commissioner King, Mr. Hogan stated that all major repairs and servicing will be handled at an off -site location. Motion 1 X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 2013, subject A11 Ayes X X X X X X X to the following findings and the recommended revised conditions, including the revision that minor repairs and servicing be permitted inside of the building, which MOTION CARRIED as follows: -5- a/WJJKJIVtIC� September 10, 1981 m Citv of Newport Beach FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed, use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. Furthermore, the proposed development.is similar to other automobile agencies that have been approved by the Planning Commission adjacent to the John Wayne Airport. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 2013 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to. the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to • property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved revised plot plan and floor plan. 2. That no more than 26 rental automobiles shall be permitted on the site at any one time, including_ 6 automobiles parked in the warehouser 3. That all vehicles shall be limited to passenger automobiles only, with the exception that one tow truck shall be permitted. 4. Minor repairs and servicing of vehicles shall be permitted inside the building. No major repairs or servicing shall be permitted on -site. 5. That the revised parking lot layout 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. • IIIIIIII -6-' MINUTES INDEX September 10, 1981 MINUTF5 11201111Citv:of Newport Beach INDEX Request to establish a take -out ice cream shop in the Item #5 Mariners' Mile Specific Plan Area, and to waive a portion of the required off - street parking spaces in IT PERM conjunction with said use. USE USE PERM LOCATION: A portion of Lot H, Tract 919 located at 2633 West Coast Highway on the southerly WITHDRAWN side of West Coast Highway between Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue in the Mariners' Mile Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Malcolm Marlis, D.D.S., Newport Beach OWNER: Nelson Grey, Newport Beach Staff advised that this item has been withdrawn at the applicant's request. • Request to remodel and expand an existing, non- Item #6 . conforming duplex in the C -1 District. The proposed development also includes the construction of a cupola that exceeds the height limit in the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District. USE PERMIT NO 2016 LOCATION: Lot 25, Block 9, Section 1 of the Balboa Island Tract, located at 124 Agate Avenue on the easterly side of Agate Avenue between Park Avenue and APPROVED South Bay Front, on Balboa Island. CONDI- TIONALLY ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Julie and John Peterson, Balboa Island OWNER: Same as applicants Mr. Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, stated that Commissioner Allen and Commissioner Winburn.would be eligible to participate in this item, in that they had reviewed the staff report and corresponding minutes. The public hearing opened in connection with this item . and Mr. John Peterson, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. -7- September.10, 1981 rl In response Balalis, Mr. rezoning his permit. to a question posed by Commissioner Peterson stated that he is not desirous of property, but is only requesting a use Commissioner Beek expressed his concern with residential uses being located in commercial zones. He suggested that a public hearing be scheduled for rezoning a portion of the block from commercial to residential uses. Commissioner Beek stated that the proposal should be required to provide three parking spaces on the property. Mr. Peterson stated that this proposal was presented to the Balboa Island Improvement Association. He stated that the Association voted to approve a double garage space rather than two single garage spaces. He stated that providing the third parking space would present a considerable economic hardship. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, • Planning Director Hewicker explained that the recommendation of the staff was arrived through an interpretation of the language in the General Plan, along with considering past Planning Commission actions on Agate Avenue. Commissioner Allen asked staff if there is a problem with the design of the building. Planning Director Hewicker stated that there is no problem with the design or exterior appearance of the building for either residential or commercial uses. He stated that additional parking would have to be. provided in the event a commercial use was ever requested. Mr. Gary 'Toshich, the architect for the project, discussed the commercial and residential uses in the area. He stated that this project will create a positive. atmosphere in the area and requested approval of the use permit with a provision that only two parking spaces be required. Motion X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 2016 subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "B ", which includes the requirement for three on -site parking • spaces. -8- MINUTES RUB]", September 10, 1981 Me Beach Amendment X Amendment to the motion was made to approve Use Permit Ayes X X X No. 2016, subject to the findings and conditions of Noes X X X K Exhibit "B ", with an amendment to Condition No. 2 that two parking spaces shall be required in a double car garage as recommended by the Balboa Island Improvement Association, which AMENDMENT FAILED. All Ayes IXIX�XIX �X �il Motion for approval by Commissioner Beek was now voted ! I on as follows, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1., That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 2. With the exception of the minor encroachments into the front and rear setbacks the proposed develop- ment meets or exceeds all of the development standards of the C -R District. 3 That the expanded residential duplex is an approved use in the C -1 District subject to • 11111111 securing the subject use permit. 4. That the approval of this project with only two off - street parking spaces will, under the cir- cumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improve- ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 5. That the existing deck encroachment into the re- quired 10 foot rear yard setback is minor in nature and 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 injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 6. That the height of the proposed architectural features, in excess of the basic height limit, • will not be objectionable to surrounding property owners and are reasonable additions to the structure as they relate to the architectural style of the building. -9- MINUTES INDEX 5� I�1 U is COMN,fb5 1O NLK5 September 10, 1581 MINUTES cr City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX 7. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 8. The approval of Use Permit No. 2016, will.not, under the circumstances of this case, be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, - comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detri- mental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the' City. CONDITIONS: - - 1. That development shall be in substantial con- formance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That there shall be three on -site parking spaces -- provided for the proposed project and that said parking spaces shall be designed in accordance with the City's residential parking standards. 3. That the proposed development shall be limited to two dwelling units. A. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 5. That all vehicular access be provided from the adjacent alley. 6. That the existing drive apron on Agate Avenue be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk and that all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 7. That a standard subdivision agreement and accom- panying surety be provided to guarantee satis- factory completion of the public improvements, if . if is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. " 8. That each dwelling unit have individual sewer lateral and water service connections. • a Item No. 7 was heard later in the agenda. -10- VvmJt IAV " September 10, 1981 MINUTES Cit y P :of Newport Beach 114301 CII INDEX Request to create two parcels of land for residential Item #7 development where two lots and a portion of a third lot now exist. RESUB- LOCATION: Lots 903,904, and a portion of Lot 905, DIVISION Tract No. 907, located at 309 Via Lido NO. 994 Soud, on the southwesterly side of Via Lido Soud between Via Dijon and Via - Eboli, on Lido Isle. APPROVED C NDI- ZONE: R -1 TIWLLY APPLICANT: Church Engineering, Inc., Newport Beach OWNER: Howard W. Meister II, Newport Beach ENGINEER: Same as applicant �. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Ruel del Castillo, representing Church Engineering, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this application. Motion X Motion was made for approval of Resubdivision No. 694, All Ayes X X X X X X K subject to the following findings and conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets all applicable general or specific plans of the City, and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision 'presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That if the.exception were denied, the.petitioner would be deprived of a substantial property right enjoyed by others in the area. 4. That the granting of this exception is compatible with the objectives of the regulations governing light, air and the public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare. • IIIIIIII -15- mac September 10, 1981 MINUTES of Newport Beach INDEX 5. That the proposed resubdivision is in conformance with the General Plan, and that the proposed development is compatible with the objectives, polices, general land uses and programs specified in said plan. 6. That there are special circumstances of conditions affecting the property in that the proposed parcels are of greater widths and areas that the existing non - conforming 30 foot wide parcels 8n Lido Isle and the proposed resubdivision will reduce the number of parcels. 7. That the granting of an exception to the Subdivision Code will not be detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the property is located. 8. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 11That 1. CONDITIONS: a parcel map be filed. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvement if it is desired to record the parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to. completion of the public improvements. 4. That the existing drive apron be removed and replaced with rolled curb and sidewalk, if the redevelopment of the property requires relocation of the existing driveway. 5. That each dwelling unit have individual water services and sewer laterals. 6. That a Condition Survey of the existing bulkhead along the Bayside of the property be made by a civil or structural Engineer, and that the bulkhead be repaired in conformance with the . recommendation of the Condition Survey to the satisfaction of the Building Department and the Marine Department. -16- September 10, 1981 F City of Newnorl Beach MINUTES RIWL CALL INDEX Proposed revisions to the Housing Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and the acceptance of an Item #8 Environmental Document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach HOUSING Mr. Ward Connerly, the City's Housing Consultant, - appeared before the Commission. Mr. Connerly stated ELEMENT that the comments have been received from the State Department of Housing and Community Development. He also stated that these comments have been considered. GPA 81 -1 Mr. Connerly then stated that the Housing Element, ash recommended, follows a sound course by letting the market place dictate. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas, Mr. Connerly stated that 'rents are increasing more - APPROVED rapidly than purchase value. Commissioner Thomas stated that by increasing the ownership, the rental stock is decreased, which drives up the rents. Mr. Connerly also stated that increasing ownership opportunity takes, pressure off of the rental supply. Commissioner Thomas • stated that the rental prices will rise in any event. Commissioner Balalis stated that in todays' market, money is not available for the construction of rental housing. He stated that many individuals are buying ownership units for the purpose of renting. Commissioner Thomas expressed his concern in that the transfer of equities, inflates the price of the rentals. Commissioner Beek stated that the real.estate market does not provide for more or less housing, only how much the people who own the housing will get paid for it. Mr. Connerly stated that movement from within the housing market must be allowed to occur. He stated that even if one additional unit is never built, the. housing market can be very dynamic. Commissioner Thomas stated that this Element should not be interpreted as a housing market stimulation program. He stated that the intent of this program is to provide more housing and to deal with the present demand, in terms of providing more than what is already existing. Mr. Connerly stated that the purpose of the Housing . Element is not to just produce more housing, but to also provide the opportunities for movement within the housing market. . -11- COMMISSIONERS September lo, 1981 MINUTES Cr City of Newport Beach L07COALL INDEX Commissioner King stated that the dynamics of the housing market process and the creation of new housing opportunites for different income levels are being created outside of our controls. He stated that the housing market moves in cycles. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Connerly explained the negotiated development . process, along with assessing the housing impact for a project. He stated that this process has been used effectively with Stanford University and how the housing demands will be responded to. Commissioner Allen concurred with the concept that the economic forces should be working together to solve the problems. Commissioner Allen expressed her concern with the 25 percent density increase and clarified that the intent is not to increase any one, undeveloped site by the total of 446 units, which would be a City -wide 25 percent increase. Commissioner Balalis stated that the Housing Element • provides alternatives which may be considered, it does not dictate that the alternatives.must be utilized. Commissioner King stated that HCD should have placed more emphasis on the recognition of the total land values. He stated that the negotiated development aspect of housing has the potential of becoming a workable solution. He explained a program utilized by a major corporation and developer in Mission Viejo which allocated a percentage of the housing to the employees for purchase. Commissioner Beek stated that Commissioner King's .. suggestion is very constructive and recommended that the major employers throughout the area be invited to a study session to discuss this concept. Commissioner King stated that he could invite the developer of the project to add his insights to the discussion. Commissioner Beek asked Mr. Connerly if the option is implied that the City may turn down a development which makes the housing imbalance worse. Mr. Connerly stated that the objective is to provide housing for the development which is occurring. He stated that the solution is not to turn the project down because it is • having a housing impact. Mr. Dave Dmohowski, representing The Irvine Company,. . distributed to the Commission a letter dated September . -12- CONNM►55►VNtK�) MINUTES September 10, 1981 n (a Cr s City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX 10, 1981, from Mr. Thomas Nielsen, Vice President of Community Development regarding the Newport Beach Housing Element. Mr. Dmohowski stated that The Irvine Company views the draft Housing Element, as a reasonable and defensible attempt to meet the intent of State law and also accommodate the specific :needs and conditions of Newport Beach. FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. . 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other con- siderations make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternatives to the • proposed project; and 4. Mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project are listed in the Draft EIR - General Plan Amendment 81 -1 (H) Housing. -1.3- In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Dmohowski stated that with regard to the 25 percent density increase, each individual site must be evaluated on its own merit. Commissioner Allen asked Mr. Dmohowski, if it was their understanding that the City's intention in this Element has implied, in anyway, an overall 25 percent density increase on The Irvine Company's undeveloped residential sites. Mr. Dmowhoski stated that they do not believe that the Element, or the testimony and discussion by the Commission has indicated that this would be the City's intention. Motion X Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1071 approving _ RESOLUTION NO. 1071 General Plan Amendment 81 -1 (H) the draft Housing • Element of the City of Newport Beach, with the . revisions contained in the new Section IV (revised) . The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the comments received by HCD. The staff is directed to prepare a Statement of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Said approval includes the following findings: FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. . 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other con- siderations make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternatives to the • proposed project; and 4. Mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project are listed in the Draft EIR - General Plan Amendment 81 -1 (H) Housing. -1.3- September 10, 1981 MINUTES City of Newport Beach RW CALL INDEX Amendment X Amendment to the motion was made to eliminate the Ayes X X X condominium conversion references contained in Noes X X X X' Objective 9 of the Implementation Plan in the draft Housing Element, which AMENDMENT FAILED. • Ayes Noes • (Commissioner Beek submitted the following written statement in the interest of saving time. The Planning. Commission members did not have the opportunity to review and discuss his comments). Commissioner Beek requested that his following comments be included into the Minutes for the record: "I shall vote against the motion because: 1. It provides for the elimination of affordable housing by condo conversion at a time when the City is under attack in the courts for not providing enough affordable housing. The State has advised us that this provision is contrary to the intent of the law and has notified the plaintiffs of this advice. If we adopt the provision nonetheless, we are adding to our legal difficulties. 2. It does nothing to address the one facet of our housing problem which could be usefully addressed - the lack of housing for employees of the City's business enterprises. 3. It presents its statistical data in a confused and mislabelled fashion. 4. It fails to state plainly the overriding fact that housing whose .price is determined by the open market_. can never be affordable in Newport Beach unless it is substandard or undesirable in some way. These shortcomings, particularly No. 2, could have been overcome if the Planning Commission had shown some initiative, had made an effort to interest and involve the public, and had held 'a series of hearings on the Housing Element. Instead, the Commission has postponed the matter from one meeting to the next all summer, and has held no hearings." X X X Commissioner King's motion for approval of General Plan X IX Amendment 81 -1 (H); a revised Housing Element of the City of Newport Beach, adopting Resolution No. 1071, was now voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. * • x -14- *on A11 Ayes X x i 1 2 mks C September.10, 1981 Of t Beach MINUTES INDEX Request to permit a drive -up teller facility in Item # 9 conjunction with a proposed bank in the Koll Center Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 120 -44 USE PERMIT (Resubdivision No. 579) located at 4670 N0. 2017 MacArthur Boulevard and Campus Drive in the Koll Center Newport Planned Community . ZONE: P -C 1APPROVED CONDI- APPLICANT:. Pacific National Bank, Irvine TIONALLY OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Ms. Lou Moore, Vice - President and cashier at Pacific National Bank, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of this use permit. II Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2017 X X subject to the findings and conditions as follows, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed Koll Center Newport development is in conformance with the General Plan and the Planned Community Development Standards and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Adequate off - street parking spaces will be provided for the proposed office building and bank facilities. 3. Adequate provisions for traffic circulation are being made for the drive -up teller facility. 4. That the proposed development will not have any significant environmental impact. 5. The City Traffic Engineer has no objections with the applicant's request. • 1!!11111 -17- September_10, 1981 m Beach MINUTES IULLCALLI III Jill I INDEX • • 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 2017, which permits a drive -up teller facility 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. CONDITION: 1. That development conformance with elevations. Request to construction directional signs and directional sign on Unclassified District. shall be in substantial the approved plot plans and x x x two new, temporary, off -site modify one existing off -site properties located in the LOCATION: Properties located at the southwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard; northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, approximately 1500 ft. southwesterly of Ford Road; and the northwesterly corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. ZONE: Unclassified. IlT7 Request to install one new, temporary, off -site directional sign and modify one existing off -site temporary directional sign in the P -C District. LOCATION: Properties located at the northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard; and the northerly side of East Coast Highway, approximately 600 ft., easterly . of Jamboree Road. ZONE: P -C so= Item #10 USE PERMIT NO. 2018 'll Item #11 EXCEPTION PERMIT NO. 9 Both continued to Septem ber 4 1 1MIJJIIJIVt1C� September 10, 1981 m � City :of Newport Beach APPLICANT: Continental Signs, Stanton OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Item Nos. 10 and 11 were heard concurrently due to their relationship. The public hearing opened in connection with these items and Mr. Dave Dmohowski, representing The Irvine Company, appeared before the .Commission and requested approval of these items. Commissioner Winburn asked Mr. Dmohowski how long they intend to have these signs in place. Mr. Dmohowski. stated that most of the signs would be taken down within a year or so because they are directional signs to projects that are currently being marketed. He added that if there is a need for an extension of this approval; it would be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee. • Commissioner King asked if there are provisions for maintenance of the signs. Mr. Bob Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, referred to the Zoning Code and stated that Section 20.06.040 requires proper maintenance of all signs. Commissioner Thomas expressed his concern that some of these signs are located in areas of the City which have a view of the upper bay. Modell X Motion was made to continue these .items to the Meeting Ayes X X X of September 24, 1981, which MOTION CARRIED.' Noes X X X Commissioner Balalis expressed his concern that major land developers are allowed to install directional signs, where no one else in the City is allowed to do SO. - Planning Director Hewicker stated that similar signs are automatically permitted under the various planned communities that the City has adopted. I I I J I I I Commissioner Thomas stated that it is his intention to I take a count of these signs prior to the next meeting. -19- MINUTES INDEX September 10, 1981 M t Beach Request to amend a previously approved use permit establishing a restaurant facility with on -sale beer and wine in Lido Marina Village so as to permit the expansion of said restaurant facility by permitting outside seating. .LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 59 -17 u (Resubdivision No. 416) located at 3420 Via Oporto between Central Avenue and Via Lido, in Lido Marina Village. ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: George's Camelot, Newport Beach OWNER: Lido Marina Village Associates, Newport Beach - Staff recommended that this item be continued to. the Planning Commission Meeting of September 24, 1981. On X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning Ayes X X X X X X X Commission Meeting of September 24, 1981, which MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES INDEX Item #12 USE PERMIT NO. 1905 ended) Item #13 Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit that permitted a nighttime and weekend restaurant/ theatre complex with live entertainment and the service of USE PERMIT alcoholic beverages, so as to permit further expansion - NO. 1956 of the proposed facility into adjacent areas in the Amended) existing structure. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 2, Tract No. 1117, - .located at 3503 Via Oporto, on the REMOVED southeasterly corner of Central Avenue FROM THE and Via Oporto, in the Lido Marina CALF Village. ZONE: C -1 -H APPLICANT: Magic Island (Mike Brooks), Newport Beach OWNER: Lido Marina Village, Newport Beach • Staff advised that this item has been removed from the calendar at the request of the applicant. x -20- CVMNUSJI(KJ September 10, 1981 MINUTES City of Newport Beach LL CALL INDEX Request to establish a restaurant facility with on -sale beer and wine and outdoor seating in conjunction with Item #14 existing retail sales operation. LOCATION: Lots 112, 1122 and a portion of Lot 1123, Tract 907, located at 3448 Via USE PERMIT Oporto on the northeasterly side of Via NO. 2020 Oporto, between Central Avenue and Via Lido, in Lido Marina Village. ZONE: C -1 -H Continued to Septem- APPLICANT:. Lido Marina Village, Newport Beach _ Fe-r24, 1981 OWNER: Lido Marina Village Associates, Newport Beach. Staff recommended that this item be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of September 24, 1981. M ion 1, 11 IIII Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning F Ayes X X X X X Commission Meeting of September 24, 1981, which MOTION CARRIED. k Request an amendment to the . previously approved Item #15 Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community District Regulations so as to reflect the deletion of a park site and increase the permitted number of dwelling units in Area 5 from 39 to 48 within the overall allowed 300 dwelling units for the District. The AMENDMENT proposed amendment also includes changes to the Planned NO. 564 Community Development Standards involving garage setbacks from sidewalks or curbs and the location of future tennis courts, and. the acceptance of an environmental document. APPROVED LOCATION: The Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community, located on property bounded by Bison Avenue on the north, MacArthur Boulevard, on the east, Ford Road on the south, and .jamboree Road on the west. • 11111111 °°- 1 "" September.10, 1981 M t Beach MINUTES LULL CALL I I I I Jill I INDEX • Ir1 LJ Request to subdivide 11.48 acres into 33 lots for single family residential development and 2 lots for private landscape purposes, where there were previously 33 lots for single family residential development, 2 lots for private landscape purposes and one lot for private recreational purposes. LOCATION: Tract No. 11041, located at the south- easterly corner of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue, in the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. MIR Request to subdivide 10.09 acres of land into nine (9) lots for single family residential development and one (1) lot for private open space and landscaping. purposes. LOCATION: Lot 27, Tract No. 11043, located at the southwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard, in the Aero -_ nutronic Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, Newport Beach Agenda Item Nos. 15, 16 and 17 were heard concurrently due to their relationship. The public hearing opened in connection with these,\ items and Mr. Bob Trapp, representing the J. M. Peters Company, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of these items. Commissioner Allen referred to_ Page 9 of the staff report and expressed her concern that there are no park facilities or a private recreation facility provided for the children. Mr. Trapp stated it is the developers feeling that the residents will utilize their backyards for their private recreation. -22- Item #16 TENTATIVE M P F TRACT N0. 11604 AND Item #17 TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 11605 ALL APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY September 10, 1991 MINUTES m LF City of Newport Beach INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas, Planning Director Hewicker stated that as a result of the City Council's action, the J. M. Peters Company has deposited to the City, just under one million dollars, to provide recreational facilities for residents of the J. M. Peters developments. He stated that in accepting this money, the active park site was given up. Commissioner Thomas referred to Page 4 of the staff report and expressed his concern for the Turkish Rugging areas. Planning Director Hewicker explained the alternatives for use of the Turkish Rugging site. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Dr. Fred Sawyer, the City's Environmental: Consultant, stated that he has successfully transplanted Turkish Rugging at the University of California at Irvine (UCI) site. He'stated that there are two additional sites on the campus which would be available for the Turkish Rugging to be transplanted. • Commissioner Winburn asked Mr. Trapp where they would like to see the Turkish Rugging transplanted. Mr. Trapp stated that they would be agreeable to any of the sites. In response to a question posed by Commissioner King, Planning Director Hewicker explained the proposed "average" garage setbacks. He stated that in some cases, roll -up garage doors will, be required. He stated that the language for such requirement is contained in the Planned Community Text.. . Motion 1111 Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1072, for All Ayes X X X X approval of Amendment No. 564, subject to the following findings, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS:' 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act., and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 1 I 112. That based on the information contained in the • Negative Declaration, the project incorporates -23- September 10, 1981 Of Beach MINUTES R R I E CALL I I I I Jill I INDEX • • sufficient mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. 3. That based on the Initial Study, subsequent changes in the project will. not require revisions to the Certified Final EIR. 4. That based on the Initial Study, no new significant environmental impacts not considered in the Certified Final EIR were found. 5. That based on the Initial Study, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. 6. That based on the Initial Study, no new information of substantial importance related to the project has become available. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas, Mr. Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, stated that the recommended Condition of Approval No. 9 for Tentative Tract No. 11605, suggests that the Turkish Rugging be transplanted to acceptable sites.. He stated that there are other sites located at UCI around the marsh area and in the environmental nature center. Commissioner Thomas stated that this should be done for educational purposes, to inform the public of the Turkish Rugging, along with assuring the continuance of the plant. Commissioner Thomas stated that he would like to see the plant in both places. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Commissioner Thomas stated that his motion he would be making for approval would not include the one time membership of the developer to the environmental nature center. Mr. Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, suggested that Condition No. 9 of Tentative Tract No. 11605, be amended to include UCI and the environmental nature center. Commissioner Thomas stated that this should include the guidelines established in the EIR on Page 20, Items 1 thru 5 and Items 1 and 2. -24- September 10, 1981 1 1611- i1citV of Beach MINUTES RMFL CALL I III III I I INDEX Commissioner Thomas also suggested that Tentative Tract No. 11604 and 11605 contain stabilization measures, so that erosion control mitigation measures can be implemented to protect the site during the upcoming rainy season under the.City's Ordinance of established policies. Motion X Motion was made for approval of Tentative Tract No. All Ayes X X X X X K 11604, subject to the following findings and conditions, including the provision for stabilization measures, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans, and the Planning Commission is satisfied ' with the plan of subdivision. • I I f I I I 2. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems jJ from a planning standpoint. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type I of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the - proposed density of development. 5. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act,- and that their' contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 6. That based on the information contained in the Negative Declaration; the project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. 7. That based on the Initial Study, subsequent changes in the project will not require revision to the Certified Final EIR. • 8. That based on the Initial Study, no new significant environmental impacts not considered in the Certified Final EIR were found. -25- :* - cS�T{ September 10, 1981 Of Beach MINUTES O R M CALL I I I I Jill I INDEX • i1 LJ 9. That based on the Initial Study, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. 10. That 'based on the Initial Study, no new information of substantial importance related to the project has become available. 11. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 12. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. .13. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 14. That the discharge of water from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section_ 1300 of the Water Code). CONDITIONS: 1. That all applicable conditions of Resubdivision No. 629, Tentative Tract No.' 10391, Tentative Tract Map No. 11377 and the Aeronutronic Ford Traffic Phasing Plan shall be conditions of approval for Tentative Tract No. 11604, except as noted below in the following revised or new._ conditions. 2. That the design of the private streets conform with the City's' Private 'Street Policy, except where otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. The minimum street width, curb to curb, shall be 40 feet. -26- COMMISSIONERS September 10, 1981 MINUTES jig City of Newport Beach CALL 11 NDEX 3. That all vehicular access rights to Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue be released and relinquished to the City, except for one access to Hartford Drive on Bison Avenue. 4. That easements for public emergency and security ingress and egress and public utility and storm drain purposes on all private streets be dedicated to the City. . 5. That the design of and controlled access to the tract be approved by the Traffic Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. 6. That the traffic control plan be submitted as a part of the street improvement plans, and that the street lighting plans be submitted concurrently with the improvement plans. • 7. That the proposed water main to be constructed between Tentative Tract 11064 and Tract 11377 be 12 inch diameter ductile iron pipe. 8. That the public utility easements running across Lots 19 and 20 be 12 feet wide and that property . line walls with deepened footings be constructed adjacent to the utilities, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. The depth of the footings shall be determined by using a 1:1 slope projection from the flow line of pipe to bottom of footing. 9. That the location of the driveway openings in Lots 1 and 27 be approved by the Traffic Engineer. 10. That erosion control mitigation measures be implemented to protect the site during the 1981/82 rainy season under the City's Ordinance of established policies. -27- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES September 10, 1981 3 l I k City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX Motion X Motion was made for approval of Tentative Tract No. All Ayes K X X X X X X 11605, subject to the following findings and conditions, including the guidelines established in the EIR on Page 20 and the provision for stabilization measures, which MOTION CARRIED: - • • FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of'the City, all applicable general or specific plans, and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type.' of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project.' 6. That based on the information contained in the Negative Declaration, the project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and that the project will not result in significant . environmental impacts. 7. That based on the Initial Study, subsequent changes in the project will not require revision to the Certified Final EIR. 8. That based on the Initial Study, no new significant environmental impacts not considered in the Certified Final EIR were found. -28- COMMISSIONERS September lo, 1981 MINUTES City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX 9. That based on the Initial Study, no substantial changes have occurred with, respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. 10. That based on the Initial Study, no new information of substantial importance related to the project has become available. 11. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 12. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 13. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, . acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 14. That the discharge, of water from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300 of the Water Code). 15. That transplanted Turkish Rugging will thrive in a suitable habitat. 16. That the Environmental Nature Center can provide competent and permanent maintenance of the transplanted Rugging. 17. That the Center can show to best advantage the Rugging as an educational exhibit to students and . other visitors. That recognition be given to the fact that Rugging is growing at nine other locations in Orange County (ten including the UCI plot). These could provide additional plants for other transplant plots. •-29- c � y September 10, 1981 Of Beach MINUTES RMFL CALL I I I I Jill I INDEX • • CONDITIONS: 1. That all applicable conditions of Resubdivision No. 629, Tentative Tract No. 10391, Tentative - Tract Map No. 11377 and the Aeronutronic Ford Traffic Phasing Plan shall be conditions of approval for Tentative Tract No. 11605, except as noted below in the following revised or new conditions. 2. That the design of the private streets conform with the City s private street policy, except where otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. The minimum street width, curb to curb, shall be 40 feet. Cul -de -sacs shall have a minimum curb radius of 40 feet. 3. That all vehicular access rights to MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue be released and relinquished to the City. 4. That easements for public emergency and security ingress, egress and public utility and storm drain purposes on all private streets be dedicated to the City.. 5. That all- weather vehicular access be provided for the 16 -foot wide Southern California Edison Access Road. 6. That the design of any controlled access to the tract be approved by the Traffic Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. 7. That the traffic control plan be submitted as a part of the street improvement plans. 8. That all perimeter walls along MacArthur Boulevard: and Bison Avenue be installed as shown in the Initial Study dated August 24, 1981. 9. That the Orange County Turkish Bugging on the site be transplanted to acceptable sites, including University of California at Irvine (UCI) and the environmental nature center. -30- 1 September 10, 1981 MINUTES City of Newport Beach 10. That a qualified horticultural consultant, approved by the City of Newport Beach, supervise any transplant process. 11. That the applicant pay for any costs and fees associated with transplanting the Rugging. 12. That J. M. Peters Company shall accept. responsibility for preparing the Center .plots, transporting and transplanting the Rugging at the Center, and installing a suitable fence to protect the 15th Street plot. 13. The planted areas will show how a rare species is being preserved in the living state. An exhibit . building at the Center will present by display and text, the subject of rare and endangered species. 14. That a sight distance for 25 mph shall be provided at the intersection of Street A and Belcourt Drive North. • 15. That erosion control mitigation measures be implemented to protect the site during the 1981/82 rainy under the City's Ordinance of established policies. L • x -31- INDEX C UMNUJJICJIVtKJ September 10, 1981 MINUTES ' m 2 4kLL City of Newport Beach CALL INDEX Request to amend the Planned Community Text for the Item #18 Block 800 Planned Community so as to allow additional gross floor area for the restaurant use and additional net floor area for office use within the existing building at 800 Newport Center Drive, and the AMENDMENT acceptance of an Environmental Document. NO..565. AND AND Request to establish a restaurant facility with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live entertainment within the Block 800 Planned Community in Newport Center. Item #19 LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 136 -22 -23 (Resubdivision No. 612) located at 800 Newport Center Drive on the USE PERMIT northwesterly corner of Newport Center NO. 2022 Drive and Santa Barbara Drive., in Newport Center. • ZONE: P -C APPLICANTS: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance-Co., BOTH APPROVED Newport Beach CONDI- TIONALLY OWNER: Same as applicant. Agenda Item Nos. 18 and 19 were heard concurrently, due to their relationship. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Will Borden, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of these items. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Planning Director. Hewicker discussed the mechanical spaces which were not counted as a part of the floor area for the individual office spaces. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr. Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, explained the square footage allocation on this project. 11 I( I I I I -32 CALL Motion A11 Ayes • me September 10, 1981 m t Beach XIX I XIxIXIXI Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 1073, approving f Amendment No. 565, subject to the following findings, which MOTION CARRIED:. FINDINC:S e 1. That the proposed additional office floor area does not exceed the total allowable development intensity for Blocks 700 and 800 of Newport Center as established by General Plan Amendment 79 -1. MINUTES 2. The proposed additional restaurant floor area is I non- public space, and therefore, will not increase the intensity of development on the property. 3. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project.. 4. That based on the information contained in the Negative Declaration, the project will not result in significant environmental impacts. 5. That based on the Initial Study, subsequent changes in the project will not require revisions to the Certified Final EIR. 6. That based on the Initial Study, no new significant environmental impacts not considered in the Certified Final EIR were found. 7. That based on the Initial Study, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. 8. That based on the Initial Study, no new information of substantial importance related to the project has become available. • 11111111 -33- INDEX RESOLUTION NO. 1073 M September 10, 1981 V MINUTES INDEX Motion X Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2022, All Ayes X X X X X X subject to the following findings and conditions, with an added provision for on -site parking for restaurant employees, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed restaurant is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2.. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 3. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use of the property or building 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 injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood of the general welfare of the City. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 2022 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 of the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans, except as noted below. 2. That a minimum of one parking space for each 40 sq. ft. of "net public area" shall be provided for both the restaurant and bar. 113. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas • I shall be screened from public streets, or adjoining properties. -34- f 1 2 I[g Ci September 10, 1981 ran t Beach MINUTES INDEX 4 That any parking lot lighting shall be designed so as to eliminate any light or glare upon surrounding properties. 5. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control odors and smoke in accordance with Rule 401 of the Rules and Regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. In addition, the kitchen hood system shall have an automatic fire protection system installed. 6. That all restaurant employees shall be required to park on -site. x ADDITIONAL BUSINESS on IXIXIX Motion was made to set for public hearing on October 8, A Ayes X X 1981, an amendment to the definition of the term "parking space ", which MOTION CARRIED. Motion X Motion was made to set for public hearing on October 8, All Ayes X X X . X X 1981, a request to establish a Mobile Home Park District, which MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Beek suggested that a public hearing be set in order to rezone a portion of Agate Avenue to R -1.5. Planning Director Hewicker suggested that a survey be taken of the street, in order for the. Commission to decide which parcels to rezone. Mr. Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, stated that a public hearing would require environmental documentation, whereas a Planning Commission Study Session would not require such documentation, but would. allow the .. Commission an opportunity to assess the issue. Commissioner Beek concurred. • 11111111 ,- September 10, 1981 M r Commissioner King requested that the following items be considered for study session discussion. First, to hear comments from developers and private employers on the housing participation program. Secondly, a discussion regarding use permits for designated projects. There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 10:15 p.m. x x ! V I I I Joan Winburn; Secretary Planning Commission • City of Newport Beach IIIIIIII -36- MINUTES INDEX