Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1975COMMISSIONERS TG F P 7 Present Absent 0 LJ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Regular Planning Commission Meeting Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:00 P.M. natae Santamhar 1R_ 1975 MINUTES X xxxx X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney Benjamin B. Nolan, City Engineer STAFF MEMBERS William R. Foley, Environmental Coordinator Tim Cowell, Advance Planning Administrator Shirley Harbeck, Secretary * * * * * * * * Items No. 1 and No. 2 were heard concurrently because of their relationship. * * * Item #1 USE. Request to permit the construction of illuminated tennis courts in the Unclassified District in MMIT conjunction with the Marriott Hotel facilities. Location: Parcel Nos. 1 and 2 of Parcel Map APPROVED 37 -49 (Resubdivision No. 305) and CCNDI a portion of Block 55 of Irvine's TIUNIELY Subdivision, located at 900 Newport Center Drive West, on the southwest erly corner of Newport Center Drive West and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center. Zones: Unclassified, C -O -H Applicant: Marriott Properties, Inc., Washington, D. C. Owner: The Irvine Co., Newport Beach * * * Item #2 Request to establish one buil.ding site where two RESUB- parcels and a portion of the Irvine Coast Country ISION Club property now exist so as to permit the con- struction of tennis courts on the expanded Marriott Hotel site. APPROVED CONDI- Location: Parcel Nos. 1 and 2 of Parcel Map T OT NAY Page 1. 0 Motion Ayes Absent E COMMISSIONERS m <p jD� Z3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH September 18, 1975 MINUTES E .ND X 37 -49 (Resubdivision No. 305) and a portion of Block 55 of Irvine's Subdivision, lcoated at 900 Newport Center Drive West, on the south- westerly corner of Newport Center Drive West and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center. Zones: Unclassified, C -0 -H Applicant: Marriott Properties, Inc., Washington, D. C. Owner: The Irvine Co., Newport Beach Engineer: Williamson and Schmid, Irvine Planning Commission reviewed the time restrictions placed on other tennis courts within the City. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Jack Shacklett with William Blurock and Partners appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter. He distributed copies of an agree- ment between the Marriott Hotel and the Irvine Coast Country Club relative to the drainage which consists of a positive drainage.system connecting to the storm drain thereby eliminating flooding across the golf course. He also concurred with . the staff report and recommended conditions as modified. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X X X X X X following findings: X 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate offstreet parking spaces exist on -site to accommodate the immediate develop- ment of the tennis courts inasmuch as they will be used exclusively for the hotel guests and that the project has been conditioned so as to require additional parking spaces for the pro shop at such time as it is constructed Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 71 111r, Can +amhar 1R IQ79 MINUTES INDEX 3. The tennis court lighting shall be designed, located and maintained so as to shield the light source and confine any glare to the site area. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1763 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons resid- ing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1763, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan. 2. That a landscape plan shall be approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. Said plan shall provide for the screening of • the tennis court fences from Santa Barbara Drive. The landscaping and watering system shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, and shall be properly maintaine . 3. That all exterior signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. That all storage of trash shall be shielded from view within a building or within an area enclosed by a wall not less than six feet in height. 5. The lighting fixtures shall be designed, located and maintained so as to shield the light source and confine glare to the site area. 6. Prior to securing a final utility release, the applicant shall submit to the Department of Community Development a statement from a licensed electrical engineer certifying that the lights have been installed in accordance with Condition No. 5. Visibility and field check of the lighting impact to motorists on • Santa Barbara Drive shall be reviewed by the Traffic Engineer prior to the operation of the night lighting. Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES s,�.... SeDtember 18. 1975 imney 7. Use of the tennis courts shall be confined to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. daily. All court lights will be out by 10:00 P.M. 8. The use of outdoor loud speakers shall be limited to individual paging units at each court. 9. That there shall be no professional tourna- ments or exhibitions scheduled on the pro- posed tennis courts. 10. All grading shall be done in accordance with provisions of a grading permit issued by the Community Development Department and the excavation and grading chapter of the Uniform Building Code and any special provisions of the permit. The grading plans shall be prepared by a civil engineer, and shall be based on the recommendations of the site soils engineer and engineering geologist.. The site soils engineer and engineering geologist shall perform a complete and . comprehensive geotechnical investigation and the recommendations of this investigation when approved by the Building Official shall be incorporated into the grading plan. Upon completion of grading, the design civil engineer shall verify to the Building Officia that the grading has been completed in accord ance with the approved plans and the require- ments of the grading permit. The site soils engineer and engineering geologist shall submit their final reports on the grading along with their approval of the earthwork performed. Reproducible copies of the "as- built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be fur - nished to the Department of Public Works. .Special attention shall be given to design, construction and maintenance of desiltation and erosion control measures during the grading operations. 11. That a minimum of 1 parking space for each • 250 square feet of gross floor area shall be for the shop. provided pro Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p F Z N io 1 Q7 MINUTES Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with appli- cable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 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 the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause.... substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- . posed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or' the pro- posed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within. the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste 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. 9. That the proposed development on the expanded hotel site will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 10. That the resubdivision conforms with all. zoning requirements and presents no problems. from a planning standpoint. and approve Resubdivision No. 497, subject to the • following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That the water capital improvement acreage Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH rTn ap rpr T i A F` Z 1;/ R09 CALL • 9 MINUTES September 18. 1975 fee be paid -for that area in excess of Resubdivision No. 305. 3. That storage capacity in San Joaquin Reservoir equal to one maximum day's demand be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. Request to adjust parcel lines.on a commercial parcel and a common parking area parcel so as to permit the expansion of the Glendale Federal Savings and Loan site in Block 100 of Newport.. Center. Location: Parcels 1 and "A" of Parcel Map 52 -37 ( Resubdivision No. 368) „SVGA Item #3 RESUB- DIVISION T9-r- APPROVED D— CON TON-7FLLY located at 100 Newport Center Drive East, on the southeasterly corner of Newport Center Drive and.Newport . Center Drive East in Newport Center. Zane: C -0 -H Applicant: Glendale Federal Savings & Loan Association, Glendale Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Engineer: Simpson - Steppat, Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that this resubdivision was being process- ed as a result of problems which existed in con- nection with the approval of the.use permit for the drive -up teller window and the adjustment in lot lines would no way detract from any parking or landscaping. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Ken Rempel with Glendale Federal Savings and Loan appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ':c P P Z 3 oo rsu Sentamher 18. 1975 MINUTES unev Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission made the Ayes X X X X X X following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 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 the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed_ improvements are not likely to cause . substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste 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. 9. That the proposed resubdivision is minor in nature and presents no problems from a plan - ning standpoint. and approve Resubdivision No. 498, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That building construction on Parcel 1 be • kept clear of the existing water line in the common parking and landscaping area. Page 7. E 0 COMMISSIONERS p A Z CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Seotemher 1R_ 1975 MINUTES Request to create three parcels where one lot now INDEX Item #4 RESUB- exists so as to permit the construction of a DIVISION Bullock's Wilshire store, boutique shops, and a 9_9 subterranean parking structure in Fashion Island. APPROVED Location: Lot 18, Tract 6015; located in the CONS— southwesterly portion of Fashion T-IDITKULY Island in Newport Center. Zone: C -O -H Applicant: The Irvine Co., Newport Beach. Owner: Same as Applicant Engineer: Simpson - Steppat, Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that the resubdivision would not result in any additional driveway cuts on the ring road after the development had been completed and that Fashion Island would still have in excess of 75 parking spaces beyond the City's requirement. Jan Vail with the Commercial Division of The Irvin Company appeared before the Commission in connec- tion with this matter. He reviewed the proposed development and its relationship to the total development of Fashion Island and advised that this was Phase II of their expansion program. He commented on the parking, architecture of the mall shops, and reviewed a model of the proposed development. He reviewed the plot. plan, the circulation around the proposed development and concurred with the staff report and recommendation He advised that with the exception of the property presently occupied by the temporary facility for Glendale Federal Savings and Loan on which a restaurant was proposed, this development would complete plans for the expansion of Fashion Island He also advised that one of the main reasons for the parking structure was to replace some of the lost parking adjacent to Desmonds and Buffums. Commissioner Williams questioned the energy required to ventilate an underground parking structure as opposed to roof top parking and was advised by Mr. Vail that the matter was explored but found to be esthetically unfeasible. Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH D m A x t r Rif Cell September 18 1975 MINUTES ' �nvea Commissioner Beckley questioned the utilization of the parking lot where the development was proposed and Mr. Vail advised that on an average day during peak hours in July, the lot was 39% full and that on their biggest day at Christmas time, the lot was 80% full. He also advised of their projection that after expansion, the parking lot would be.52% full at peak hours during an average day. The staff report made the statement that "The applicant has indicated to the staff that the proposed development includes all of the remaining plans for the expansion of Fashion Island" and Planning Commission questioned if the applicant would agree to this as a condition of the resub- division. Mr. Vail advised that would not be possible because of the site for the proposed restaurant which was presently occupied by the... temporary Glendale Federal Savings and Loan facility. He advised there was no ground lease and therefore no fixed parcel established at the present time, however, The Irvine Company had. determined that it would be either a 6,000 square • foot restaurant or a restaurant with a parking:.. requirement of 135 cars. Planning Commission then questioned if the condition would be acceptable provided the restaurant site was an exception and Mr. Vail consented. Planning Commission questioned whether or not any restaurants were proposed for the new mall shops and were advised that none were proposed. Staff also pointed out that a restaurant would require a use permit. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the following findings: 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvements of the pro- posed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 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. Page 9. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES e& PAN. 4antamhar 1R_ 1Q7F Wnev- -r 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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. 8. That the discharge of waste 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. • 9. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 10. That adequate parking will be provided in Fashion Island in conjunction with the existing and proposed development. and approve Resubdivision No. 499 subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That the existing water, sewer, and storm drain lines within the project area be relocat ed as necessary. 3. That easement rights for the relocated water, sewer, and storm drain lines be established in accordance with the approved improvement plans. 4. That there be a document recorded satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Director of Community Development providing for the operation and continual maintenance of the off -site loading, parking and landscaped • features proposed for construction within the common areas (Parcel 3) for the duration of the proposed use on Parcels 1 and 2. S. That no further development of Fashion Island Page 10. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT. BEACH D� � Z A T p f Z D p P DZ V 111 CALL Ayes Dent 0 MINUTES September 18, 1975 unEv other than the proposed restaurant or other" structure utilizing no more than 134 parking spaces be undertaken. (NOTE: Condition No. 5 was subsequently deleted following further reconsideration under Additional Business.) Discussion of Condition No. 5 included the follow- ing comments: Assistant City Attorney Coffin advised he had some reservations regarding the condition, however, as long as the applicant had consented to the condi- tion, his concerns were not as great. . Commissioner Parker voiced concern with the condi- tion which would preclude any further development from taking place even on a minor basis without first going through the public hearing process and preferred that the condition not be imposed. X X X X X X Following discussion, the motion was voted on and X carried. Item #5 Request to permit the construction of a single MODIFI- family dwelling where a portion of the structure CC T� encroaches to within 7 feet of Big Canyon Drive 939 (where the Planned Community Development Standards require a minimum 20 foot setback from a loop APPEAL collector street). DENTED Location: Lot 25, Tract 7323, located at 30 Royal St. George Road, on. the northeasterly corner of Royal St: George Road and Big Canyon Drive in "Big Canyon." Zone: P -C Applicant: David Manookian, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant Appellant: R. S. Bennett, Newport Beach Assistant Community Development Hewicker advised that the Modification Application was filed as the result of an error in the plan check made by the Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T K a t Z ID s41 vAl\ Can+amhar 19 . 197F MINUTES -r Community Development Department staff and pointed out that the development had the approval of The Irvine Company and the Homeowners Association prior to the time plans were submitted to the Community Development Department. Commissioner Parker suggested that.if condition No. 4 were to remain, approval of the color should be with Mr. Whitley only so long as he resides at 12 Pinehurst Lane. Public Hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Dave Manookian, owner of the property at 30 Royal St. George, Big Canyon, appeared before the Commission and read letters received from R. L. Whitley, William E. Mader, and William D. Randolph indicating they had no objection to the develop -. ment. 'He reviewed the plot plans, floor plans, renderings and a model of the proposed construc> tion and advised of their.attempt to maintain a low profile. He also presented slides of the • area indicating the present development.and pro- posed construction and pointed out the area of encroachment. In answer to the present status of construction, Mr. Manookian advised that the framing was approximately 40% completed. R. S. Bennett, appellant, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter. Although it had been stated at the Modifications Committee meeting that the matter was to be considered as though the property were vacant, he questioned whether the matter could be considered in that manner since construction was actually in the framing stage. He pointed out that a roof would be placed on the structure and felt that .an 8 foot wall on the property line with 20 feet of open space behind it, properly landscaped, created less of a visual constriction than the proposed construction. He commented on the precedent which would be set, modification pro- cedures, and felt the criteria requirement had not been met for granting the modification. Planning Commission discussed the height of the proposed roof and the encroachment into the set- back adjacent to Big Canyon Drive. Bernie Rome, President of the Big Canyon Community Association, appeared before the Commission and commented on the errors surrounding this matter Page 12. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y i A P Z A CAL � September 18, 1975 MINUTES INDEX including the fact that they were never notified of the hearing. He advised that the Big Canyon Community Association owned the streets and guard- houses and were not the association which granted the architectural approval. There being no others desiring to appear and. be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that the Planning Commission deny Ayes X X X X X X the appeal of Modification No. 939, and uphold the Absent X decision of the Modifications Committee and make the following findings: 1. There are special circumstances applying to the parcel which do not exist for similar residen- tial parcels in Big Canyon. The ^long dimension of the parcel is parallel to Big Canyon Drive, leaving the minor dimension of the site avail- able for building purposes perpendicular to Big Canyon Drive. Should the 20 foot setback be strictly applied, the flexibility of architec- tural design necessary to achieve a reasonable • development of the site would be unduly restric ed. 2. A principal purpose of the 20 foot setback along Big Canyon.Drive is to enable the maintenance of an open feeling along the street; however, the zoning regulations also permit the construc- tion of 8 foot high fences within the setback area, and 2 story dwelling units are permitted. By applying appropriate conditions of approval to the Modification (restricting fence construc- tion), the open feeling along Big Canyon Drive can be maintained, the development of the site. Will be consistent with the original intent of the zoning regulations, and the development as a whole will not be detrimental to the neighbor ood. 3. That although an error did occur in is.suing the building permit, the Modification will be appro- priate and well within the exact language of the Ordinances set forth in Chapter 20.47 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 4. That a greater attempt has been made to preserve a sense of openness along that portion of Big Canyon Drive than other properties which have a • greater height and maintain. a .fence along the property line thereby creating more of a "corridor" effect. 5. The Community Association maintains guides and regulations as to the exterior color which coin Page 13. • COMMISSIONERS m s q w T < P CALL N • • Motion Ayes Absent CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES Sentember 18. 1975 ,.,.,C.. be used, which will therefore reduce the visual impact of the structure to be built. 6. That the establishment and maintenance of the building would not, under the circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general wel- fare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and the Modification is consistent with the respective interest of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. and approved Modification No. 939, subject to the following conditions (deleting therefrom Condition 4 as imposed by the Modifications Committee): 1. That development shall be in substantial con- formance with the approved plot plan,elevation and model display at the Planning Commission meeting. 2. That no additional walls.or fences shall be constructed within the 20 foot setback adjacen to Big Canyon Drive other than those walls indicated on the approved plot plan. 3. The height of the structure shall not exceed the approved elevations. . * * * * * * * * Item 06 USE Request to consider the revocation of Use Permit No. 201 and Use Permit No. 411 which permits the PERMIT. operation of a motel, restaurant and cocktail 0� 1 AND lounge and dancing in conjunction with said motel, 411 ' restaurant and cocktail lounge at 2101 East Coast Highway, Corona del Mar (Sandpiper Inn), to deter- REVOCA- mine whether or not said use permits currently TION held by Graphicon Industries, Inc. should be PROCEED - revoked for failure to comply with Chapter 3.16 GGS of the.N.B.M.C., Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax TERK N- ATED Law and Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Planning and Zoning. Zone: Unclassified Initiated by: The City of Newport-Beach Due to the fact that the taxes were paid which was X the reason for the initiation of the revocation X proceedings, motion was made to terminate these proceedings. Page 13a. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF N EWPORT BEACH r� M M °r X', �, i ,"ate -� �` <Z A F Z N R� CALL 0 E MINUTES September 18, 1975 ,.,,,cv Request to permit the establishment of a school of law in the M -1 -A District. Location: Lot 31, Tract 3201, located at 4400 Campus Drive, on the south- easterly side of Campus Drive Item #7 USE FERMIT 1766 APPROVED irON6i_ between Dove Street and MacArthur IyN'KTLY Boulevard, across Campus Drive from the Orange County Airport. Zone: M -1 -A Applicant: Irvine University School of Law, Irvine Owner: Richard K. Rifenbark, Pacific Palisades Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised that the applicant, at the request of the staff, was attempting to provide a more desirable location for the 22 off -site parking spaces- and had been working with the Don Koll Company to secure the right to utilize 22 spaces located on the lot immediately north of the subject property on Campus Drive. Mr. Hewicker recommended,that . if the Commission approved this use permit.request, they indicate their approval to the proposed off - site parking on the lot owned by the National Systems Corp. as outlined in the proposal as well as approval of the lot to the north owned by.the Don Koll Company in the event the applicant is able to complete that arrangement. Commissioner Tiernan voiced concern with the parking requirement and questioned whether it was sufficient as he felt more parking would be needed for the students and support personnel. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Egon Mittelmann, Dean of Irvine University School of Law, appeared before the Commission in connec- tion with this request. He concurred with the staff report and requested clarification of Condition No. 4 Commissioner Tiernan again questioned the adequacy of parking for the proposed development. Page 14. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF N EWPORT BEACH T F ?a x < Z s. rsu N September 18. 1975 MINUTES ,Mnev Ken Layman who is connected with Judge Calvin Schmidt's office and is on the advisory committee for the school, appeared before the Commission and commented on the status of securing an agreement for off -site parking with the Don Koll Company. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Following discussion of the parking, motion wa.s Ayes X X X X X made that Planning Commission make.the following Noes X findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and will be compatible with surrounding uses. 2. Adequate offstreet parking. spaces are being provided for the proposed school use during evening hours and on weekends.. The 22 parking spaces on a separate lot are justifiable for the following reasons:. • a. The lot is adjacent to the school site wit easy pedestrian access to the classrooms. b. Parking on the subject lot will not create undue traffic in.the surrounding .hazards area, since most of the office uses will be closed at night and on weekends. 3. The approval of Use Permit No. 1766 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. and.approve Use Permit No. 1766, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan and plot plan. 2. That a maximum of 120 students shall be • permitted in the classrooms at any one session 3. Classroom activity shall not be permitted on the site prior to 7:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a" 2 "a i T i m P A � ; L N A CAL 0 Motion Ayes. Absent 0 MINUTES September 18, 1975 .n V&A 4. That this approval shall be for a two year period from the effective date of this action. Any request for extension shall be acted upon by the Modifications Committee. 5. That an off -site parking agreement, providing a minimum of 22 parking spaces on either the National System Corp. property or the Don Koll Company property for the school use between the hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and on weekends, shall be approved by the City Council and that the pedestrian access between the subject property and the off -site parking lot shall remain open and unobstructed. 6. That one additional parking space shall be marked in the parking area to the rear of the existing building, meeting Ordinance require- ments. 7. That all signing shall be approved by the Department of Community Development. Item #8 Request to permit the construction of a hotel in USE the C -1 District. PERMIT 7� Location: Lot 13, Block 21 of Newport Beach, located at 114 - 22nd Street, on CONT. TO the southeasterly side of 22nd. OCT. 2 Street between West Balboa Boule- vard and West Ocean Front in Central Balboa. Zone: C -1 Applicant: R. L. Lawrence, Newport Beach Owner: Same as Applicant X Planning Commission continued this matter to the X X X X X X meeting of October 2, 1975. X Page 16. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p P Z R� CALL L, J 0 MINUTES September 18, 1975 INDEX Request to permit the establishment of a heliport Item #9 USE for police use in conjunction with the City of PERMIT Newport Beach Police Facility in Newport Center 1768 and the acceptance of an environmental document. APPROVED Location: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 55 -31 C Dr-- (Resubdivision No. 400) located at TTII N—ALLY 870 Santa Barbara Drive, on the northeasterly corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Jamboree Road in Newport Center. Zone: C -O -H Applicant: The City of Newport Beach Police Department Owner: The City of Newport Beach Environmental Coordinator Foley commented on the approach and departure patterns and recommended the addition of a condition which would provide that the approach and departure patterns be from and to the south across the Irvine Coast Country Club golf course. He reviewed a map indicating the revised approach pattern and answered question of the Commission relative to the project. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Capt. Lou Heeres of the Newport Beach Police . Department appeared before the Commission to answer questions and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. Planning Commission questioned the effect of the landings on existing and proposed residential development in the area and Environmental Coordin- ator Foley advised that a review of this matter indicated there would be no serious or immediate complications. Jim Golfos, Chief Pilot with the Newport Beach Police Department, appeared before the Commiss.ion and answered questions relative to altitudes during approach and departure, noise levels, and. location of high tension wires in the area. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Page 17. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES P A Z 3 A CAL\ w Se n tember 18 1975 INDEX , Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission accept the negative declaration, make the following findings: 1. The proposed heliport does not conflict with the General Plan. 2. The proposed heliport will be constructed and operated in accordance with all applicable regulations of the F.A.A. and the California Department of Transportation, Divis.ion..of Aeronautics. 3. The proposed heliport will be constructed in accordance with all applicable Fire and Building Codes. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1768 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. and approve Use Permit No. 1768, subject to the following conditions: 1. That airspace approval be obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration. 2. That an application be filed with and approved by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics in accordance with the provisions of the California Administative Code, Title 4, Chapter 9, Subchapter 2.1. 3. That no fueling be permitted. 4. That no maintenance other than emergency repairs be permitted. 5. That the facility comply with the requirements of the N.F.P.A. Standards, Pamphlet #418 and the Uniform Fire Code Article 33. 6. That the facility comply with all Provisions of the Uniform Building Code. 7. That use of the heliport shall be limited to police helicopters only. Page 18. COMMISSIONERS , 9 ded Motion Ayes Noes Absent Ayes Absent Motion Ayes A:en t CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ce +�mtie iu 107G ,unev 8. That the standard approach and departure patterns be from and to the south across the Irvine Coast Country Club golf course. Commissioner Beckley requested that two additional conditions be given consideration, 1.) That the approval be reviewed by the Planning Commission in one year and 2.) That the number of take -offs be limited to a maximum of 4 per day excluding emergencies. These two additional conditions were discussed and Commissioner Seely advised that he would accept the condition "That this approval shall be for a one year period from the effective date of this . action. Any request for extension shall be acted upon by the Modifications Committee." However, he felt that the condition relative to-limiting the number of take -offs and landings.was inappropriate . Commissioner Williams commented on the concern of people with helicopter flights and that if there was no limit to landings, possibly review should be made by the Planning Commission and, therefore, made an amendment to the motion that the condition X X X pertaining to review after one year be changed to X X X provide for review by the Planning Commission X rather than the Modifications Committee. Motion failed. X X X X X X The original motion, which included the following X condition, was then voted on and carried: 9. Tha.t this approval shall be for a one year period from the effective date of this action. Any request for extension shall be acted upon by the Modifications Committee. Item #10 Request to set public hearings for General Plan GENERAL PLAN Amendments on October 16, 1975. AMEND -. 1. Motion was made to set for public hearing on ME�S(TS. X X X X X X October 16, 1975, a request to consider X alternate land uses for the property between SET MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, just iF�iE RINGS north of Coast Highway. 2. Irwin Hoffman, Vice President of Shorecliff Property Owners Association appeared before Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES A CAL, N September 18, 1975 INDEX the Commission in favor of the deletion of proposals for trails within Buck Gully. Mr. Hoffman was advised that the Commission was only setting the date for hearing and.that he should again appear and present his informa- tion at the public hearing. Nigel Baily, President of the Corona Highlands Property Owners Association, appeared before the Commission in favor of setting the hearing to consideration deletion of the trails in Buck Gully. For the Commission's information, Chairman Beckley advised that the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission was opposed to deleting the trails in Buck Gully. Following discussion, including the suggestion that a walk be made through Buck Gully by the Planning Commission, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, and any other interestec persons, prior to the hearing in order to X better understand the situation, motion was Apion s X X X X X X made to set for hearing on October 16, 1975, Absent X a request to consider deleting the proposal for a hiking trail, and the possibility of a bicycle trail, in Buck Gully. 3. Advance Planning Administrator Cowell reviewed the reason for this request which was to eliminate the residential use category on land now in public ownership. Motion X Motion was made to set for hearing on October Ayes X X X X X X 16, 1975, revision of the land use designation Absent X in the Upper Bay area for consistency with the State Department of Fish and Game Agreement for the Ecological Reserve. 4. Dave Neish with The Irvine Company appeared before the Commission to comment on Item No. 4 and Item No. 5 of the staff report. Motion X Motion was made to set for hearing on October Ayes X X X X X X 16, 1975, the request for consideration of Absent X developing a new system of residential land use categories. Won X 5. Motion was made to set for hearing on October 16, 1975, reconsideration of General Plan Amendment No. 26, proposed amendment to Land Use and Residential Growth Elements to Page 20. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T i September 18, 1975 MINUTES uwev „MVCA 1) create a "Medium Density Residential" category, 2) add a definition of "buildable acreage," and 3) revise the wording of certain sections of the elements: and that this matter be heard prior to the consideration of develop- ing a new system of residential land use categories as stated in #4 above. Planning Commission discussed their obligation to hear this matter, since it.was referred Ayes X X X X X back by the City Council. Motion was then Abstain X voted on and carried. Absent X 6. Bob Kraft of Langdon & Wilson, Architects, appeared before the Commission to answer any questions regarding this item. There being Motion X none, motion was made to set for hearing on Ayes X X X X X X October 16, 1975, consideration of a requested Absent X amendment to the Land Use Element to change portions of the "General Industry" designation for the Aeronutronic -Ford site to "Administra- tive, Professional and Financial Commercial." 7. Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission and concurred with the staff recommendation that this matter be set for hearing. Motion X Motion was made to set for hearing on October Ayes X X X X X X 16, 1975, consideration of a requested amend - Absent X ment to the Land Use Element to add "Adminis- trative, Professional and Financial Commercial` as an alternate use, in addition to the "Recreational and Marine Commercial" de.signa- tion for the property at the southeast corner of Bayside Drive and Marine Avenue. 8., Advance Planning Administrator Cowell comment- ed on the uniqueness of this item in that it is located within the unincorporated county territory, but within the sphere of influence of Newport Beach. Motion X Motion was made to set for hearing on October Ayes X X X X X X 16, 1975, a requested amendment to the Land Absent X Use Element to change the designation for a • lot in the "County triangle" area (off Superio Avenue) from "Multi- Family Residential" to "General Industry." Resolution No. 933 reflects the above actions Page 21. COMMISSIONERS m <pp <ZZ N A CALI CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH September 18, 1975 MINUTES relative to setting the hearings for the General Plan Amendments. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission and requested that the Planning Commission reconsider Condition No. 5 which was imposed under Resubdivi- lion No. 499, because of the administrative difficulties which may be encountered in the implementation of such a condition. He also questioned whether he or Jan Vail had the author- ity to agree to such a condition on behalf of The Irvine Company, as the condition was being placed on the resubdivision of a relatively.small parcel, but would place a burden on the entire Fashion Island development. Assistant City Attorney Coffin advised the.Commis- sion that the matter could be reconsidered provid- ed a majority of those who voted in favor of the condition agreed to do so. He advised that if the Commission felt that further evidence was • required, it would be necessary to readvertise and reopen the public hearing, however, if they felt no additional evidence was necessary, then the public hearing would not have to be reopened and the Commission could reconsider the matter at this time. Motion X Motion was made to reconsider Condition No. 5 of Ayes X X X X Resubdivision No. 499. Noes X X Absent X Commissioner Williams commented on his intent relative to the condition under consideration which was not to prevent some minor redevelopment within Fashion Island, but was to follow the intent of The Irvine Company wherein they indica- ted that the proposed development included all remaining plans for the expansion of Fashion Island. Planning Commission discussed the matter and there was some concern that the condition could result in full scale hearings at a latter date on matters of an administrative or relatively minor nature. There was also some question as to the importance of the condition because of the fact that any major redevelopment or restaurant use would require review through the public hearing process by the Planning Commission. Page 22. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T r = MINUTES N WL CAL September 18, 1975 INDEX Motion X Following discussion, motion was made to eliminate Ayes X X X X X Condition No. 5 from the approval of Resubdivision Noes X No. 499. Absent X Motion X There being no further business, motion was made Ayes X X X X X X to adjourn. Time: 10:15 P.M: Absent X AMES M. ARKER, Secretary. Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 0 Page 23.