Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/1979 (2)COMMISSIONERS I Regular Planning Commission Meeting MINUTES Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7 :30 P.M. Date: October 4, 1979 r Ur City of Newport Beach 019 ROLL CALL i. INDEX Present x x x x xx x iEX- OFFICIO MEMBERS R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director Hugh Coffin, Acting City Attorney STAFF MEMBERS .'James Hewicker, Assistant Directo.- Planning Robert Lenard, Advance Planning A ministrator !Don Webb, Assistant City Engineer !Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator !Glenna Gipe, Secretary !Minutes Written By: Glenna Gipe Motion Motion was made that the Planning Commission ap- A* Ayes prove the minutes of the regular flanning Commis- sion meeting of "September 6, 1979 as written. ! Motion x'Motion was made that the Planning Commission ap- Ayes x x x x x xiprove the minutes of the regular lanning Commis - Abstain 'sion meeting of September 13, 197 , as written. Motion x i !Motion was made that the.Planning Commission ap- Ayes x x x x xlprove the minutes of the regular Planning Commis - Abstain x Ision meeting of September 20, 1979, as corrected to include a comment made by Commissioner Allen on Page 1 and to modify a comment made by her on Page 13 of the minutes. !Request to consider proposed amen ments to the Item #1 Land Use, Residential Growth and ecreation and Open Space Elements of the Genera Plan, and;the GENERAL preliminary review of a screen ch ck Initial:PLAN Study. TWENDMENT INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach 79 -1 AND -1- ROLL CALL Motion Ayes x Noes ix w i w October 4, 1979 z MINUTES quest to consider proposed amen ments to the Ci lation Element of the General P an, and the ac- ptance of an Environmental Docu ent. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach !The Public Hearing regarding this land Ron Hendrickson, The Irvine C before the Planning Commission.an ;that the mobile home park current Ithe Castaways site is a very subs Zone that has been long anticipate that if the real intent is to pre mobile home park site for moderat (that it would not be economically !commended that this area be a pub quested that the Planning Commiss ;leaving it at its present General iof Marine /Commercial or provide ,a Iternatives. item continued mpany, appeared .pointed oust . y located at andard park and to go, and erve this as a cost housing, feasible. He r is use and re- on reconsider Plan designatio couple of al- was made to reconsider the designation on 1411lotion the lower portion of the Castaway site, upon which a .Straw Vote was taken. Motion x ;Motion was made that the lower 5 icres of the Ayes x x X x.. !Castaways site be changed to Recr ation and Ma- Noes x K x.rine Commercial, with the underst nding that Ma- Irine Commercial is not to include a hotel /motel, [upon which a Straw Vote was taken Motion x .Motion was made to reconsider the previous straw Ayes x x K x x vote regarding density transfers. Noes x Motion x Motion was made to make the dens[ y transfer to .the North -Ford Site over and abov the already - 'approved industrial and commercia designations, land that residential is an additi nal use per - .mitted on the North -Ford Site. Motion x :Amendment to the Motion was made chat Newport Ayes U x (Center be an optional site in addition to North- Noes x x.Ford, upon which a Straw Vote was taken. Aos x x x Ix x (Straw Vote was then taken on the lotion, which �_M =N CARRIED. -2- Item #2 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 7 REMOVED FROM THE CALENDAR Motion 0 Ayes Noes Motion All Ayes 0 x October 4, 1979 M Beach Motion was made that the Planning adopt Resolution Number 1046, .app straw votes as have been taken by Commission over the last four mee the finding that Environmental Do the proposed project is under pre cordance with the California Envi Act, and forward same to the City Commissioner quested be a included as MINUTES Commission oving all the the Planning ings, including umentation on - aration in ac onmental Qualit Council.' Allen presented a paper which she re part of the record,jvnhich paper is an addendum.to these inutes. Commissioner Beek then made the f ments:_ "The major planning probl Beach is that there is too much c and too little residential zoning much employment and too little he employees have to live as far awa This amendment reduces the remain development about 30 %, and reduce residential development about 50� the imbalance worse instead of be to eliminate all remaining commer ment. While aredoction of 30% i right direction, it is so abusrdl that I cannot condone it with an vote." Motion was then voted on, which llowing Com- m i.n Newport mmerci,al zoning We have too sing. Our as Riverside. ng commercial the remaining .This makes ter. We need ial develop - a step in the .inadequate ffirmative ION CARRIED ommissioners Beek,'Allen and The as individually tated that they would reserve th right to for - ard a minority report to the Cit 'Council re- ardina the General Plan Amendmen . Motion was then made that General Plan Amendment 79 -2 be removed from the calendar Don Webb, Assistant City Engineer regarding General Plan Amendment that the change that is being pro Avocado couplet begin northerly o Hills Road as opposed to southerl a-nd that when the City Council wa Positive traffic solutions progra that this change could be made as be in- corporated into the General General Plan Amendment 79 -2 will tol couplet which presently shows Plan as a single roadway and is n couplet. -3- made a comment 9 -2, stating osed is that th San Joaquin of said road discussing its m, they directed soon as it coul Plan, and that include the Bris in the General ow physically a MINUTES October 4,1979 i City of Newport Beach :Commissioner Beek exp.ressed his feeling that the ;documentation from the consultants for the use of the traffic model is not complete, stating that he had not gotten any clear indication that ;either the Planning Commission or City Council (wishes to use the traffic model any further. Commi.ssioner Haidinger expressed his feeling tha :the model is tailored to give the kind of resul.t needed to accommodate the test data and stated that he didn't have much confidence in its re- liability as a predicter. !Richard Hogan, Community Development Director, :stated that the consultant selected to prepare ;the EIR is VTN and VTN is using the Traffic 'Consultant as a sub- contractor and they feel that they would be the best sub - contractor on this particular EIR; however, if the Planning • !Commission feels that this particular consultant !should not be used as a sub - contractor, then 'staff will inform VTN that either they find a- inother sub— contractor or that they will have to select another consultant. All Ayes iMoti.on was then voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. The Planning Commission recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m. Motion x !Motion was made that Item No. 15 be continued All Ayes to the.regular Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 1979, that Item No.._16 be contin- lued to the regular Planning Commission meeting lof October 18, 1979 and that Item Nos. 11 and 14 Ibe withdrawn. (Request to amend a previously approved use per - imit that allowed the construction of a restaurant • with on -sale alcoholic beverages so as to permit 'an additional freestanding identification sign on the site. -4- I.tem #3 Y � ,` Y I DENIED 0 MINUTES i October 4, 1979 HOW W W WS City of Newport Beach LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 60 -30 (Re- subdivision No. 425) located at 3300 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast High- way, east of Newport Boulevard on Mariner's Mile. ZONE: Specific Plan Area No. 5 APPLICANT: Allyn Cano, dba.. Cha Cha's Mexican Food, Newport Beach OWNER: Byco, Inc., Newport Beach The.Public Hearing was opened regarding this item And Erick Strickland, 1505 Clay Street, appeared before the Planning Commission to propose the pol sign in place of the monument sign which was ap- proved at the meeting four weeks ago. He express his feeling that this sign would be much more fit ting architecturally, and that it would be unfair to deny a pole sign to them when the other restau rants in the vicinity enjoy a pole sign. harles Ascov, General Manager of Cha Cha's, ap- eared before the Planning Commission and stated hat their volume of business had dropped 50% ithout a proper identification sign, and that the uilding immediately east is on the sidewalk, giv- ng them only 50' visibility, and virtually no isibility with a monument sign.on westbound traf- ic down.Pacific Coast Highway and with the east- ound bridge obstruction. onald Olson, Newport Beach, appeared before the lanning Commission and expresse.d his sympathy hat the - building immediately adjacent is built p to the sidewalk and is a barrier to said Testa ant. llyn Cano, Owner, appeared ommission and expressed her ave people coming into the t.is Cha Cha's, due to the dentified sign. 1611 before the Planning concern that they restaurant unsure tha absence of a properly INDEX COMMISSIONERS 99WR 7 i N X r October 4, 1979 Of Beach MINUTES John Howenstein, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission and addressed himself to the aesthetics of the color and style of the proposed sign, showing its complement to the building and immediate area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Allen, Mr...Howenstein replied that their sign would be comparable in height to the Newport Heights sign. In response to another question posed by Commis- sioner Allen,.Richard Hogan, Community Develo.pmen Director, replied that a 25' x 200 sq. ft. sign ;would be allowed. i Commissioner Beek stated his preference of monume t :signs to pole signs. In response to a question posed by Commissioner • Thomas, Don Webb, Assistant_City Engineer, replie that moving the monument sign closer to.the side 'walk would block view for the traffic. Motion xiMotion was made that the Planning Commission make Ayes x x x':the findings as recorded in Exhibit A of the Staf Noes x x NX, !Report and approve Use Permit No. 1671 (Amended), subject to the conditions as recorded also in Exhi.bit'A of the Staff Report. Motion x iMotion was made to deny the application to modify Ayes x x Ithe previous approval (Use Permit 1671, Amended). Noes x x i Abstain x iRequest to consider a Traffic Study for a proposec Item #4 ;development and redevelopment of facilities at 'Hoag Memorial Hospital- Presbyterian. TRAFFIC STUDY— AND :Request to amend a previously approved use permit APPROVED that permitted the construction of Hoag Memorial CONDI- Hospital- Presbyterian facilities on the site so a TIONALLY to remodel and expand the existing hospital com- plex, and the acceptance of an Environmental!Docu Item #5 • ment. USE PER -, LOCATION: Parcel 1, Record of Survey 15/30, MIT NO. located at 301 Newport Boulevard, 1T -6- October 4, '1979 Of Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I III I I I I I INDEX 0 ZONE: �PPLICANTc I OWNER: on the southwesterly corner. of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road. A -P -H Hoag Memorial Hospital- Presbyxer- ian, Newport Beach. Same as Applicant ;Commissioner Allen stated that she would be ab- istaining from deliberation regarding this item, ias she had for many years been involved in rais- ing money specifically for the expansion of Hoag iHospitaI. ;The Public Hearing was opened regarding this item land Michael Stevens, Administrator at Hoag Memo- rial. Hospital, appeared before the Planning Com- .mission and shared slides of the history of the !hospital, identifying the areas slated for ex- pansion. In response to a question posed by Commissioner 'Thomas, Mr. Stevens replied that the consideratio ;of the lease- purchase of the Caltrans parcel be- gan after they had completed the planning docu- ment, as a necessity for additional parking and a la possibility of long -term development of.some of Ithe possibly ansillary and administrative manage - Iment apartments and.not as part of this phase. IIn response to a question posed by Commissioner ;McLaughlin, Mr. Stevens replied that they cannot .proceed until they have completed the EIR. Commissioner McLaughlin stated her opposition to the expansion due to her feeling that the hospita needs are on the opposite side of the Bay. Mr. Stevens replied that they are not prepared to go into the subject of need as they did not under stand this as the purpose of the hearing. In response to a statement from Commissioner Mc- Laughlin regarding over-bedding-as according to -7- ARPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY CALL L 0 �m MINUTES October 4, 1979 of Newport Beach the Orange County Health Planning Council, Mr. Ste.ven.s replied that the projected is that by 1983 there will be a deficit of medical- surgical beds. Commissioner Thomas stated his understanding that according to the Coastal Bill that there would be a special exclusion of the Caltrans land for a period of one year. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Beek, Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, replied that upon review, the more appropriate noise level.would be the 55 dBA, which condition is accepted-by the hospital. Commissioner Beek stated condition be amended to ffrom.existing as well as d'quipme.nt shall not exce In response to a questio Beek related to the meas level rather than the gr Hoag Memorial Hospital, in contact for several m concerned who had contac this.item, and funds were noise factor which exist Nina Groover, Westec Ser .the Planning Commission coustical engineer will mine the best method and ing that the standards sider model's; 2) measu of time. his preference that the include noise generated new rooftop mechanical ed' 55' dBA. n posed by Commissioner uring of dBA at a higher ound level, Lou Kaa, replied that he had been onths with the individual ted the hospital regardin approved to reduce the s currently: vices, appeared before and stated that an ac- have to be hired to deter the two ways of determin will be met are: 1) con - re noise over a long perio Mr. Kaa stated that the condition requires.that they demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Com -, fiunity.Development Department meeting the require dents of a licensed acoustical engineer, which they intend to do. He then addressed Condition Flo. 36:; they are in the process of negotiating a lease on this property and the condition of the lease as the only one acceptable to the hospital grounds would present a safety hazard in conflict N COMMISSIONERS October 4, 1979 Of Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I III Jill! I INDEX 0 9 ith said condition, as the parking structure ouses 980 cars, the majority of which use this oadway and bicycles and pedestrians coming in th rea would present a safety hazard. IMr.- Webb stated their major concern that as a par !of the Ver'saille:development, joint use of the :access road was required in which bicycles and pe idestrians were to be allowed to utilize this.road !to gain access to a possible view -park type atmos 1phere on the bluffs. !In response to a question posed by Commissioner IBalalis, he added that a possibility would be to !construct a fence along the roadway to keep bicy- cles and pedestrians from going through the hos- pital parking area. IIn response to a question posed by Commissioner (Beek, Mr. Webb replied that they would ask that !the easement continue down to Pacific Coast High - Iway.t.o create the alternate use and that they !would ask that it not be used as'a bicycle trail juntil. the City made the other connection. As another reason why they do not accept that con. lditi.on, Mr. Kaa stated that they do riot wish to have bicycles and pedestrians entering the hos- pital from that proximity, necessitating patrol - jing anal policing and gating for emergency.veh.icle use. !John Forner appeared before the Planning Commis -. jsion and asked that everyone question what is to !be gained by an easement and circular bicycle Itrail, at would be the case in this situation, to which Mr..Webb replied that the bicycle trail !would be strictly a recreation trail and not a destination - oriented trail. In response to an expression of displeasure by Commissioner Thomas regarding a bicycle path that was not allowing a connector over the bluff, when they have the .only access to the bluff, Mr. Webb replied that if this easement is not grantedand the connection is not made, there would be agate which would restrict entering from this roadway into the hospital property. M112 MINUTES October 4, 1979 a I N ;City of Newport Beach lChris Donahue, Hospital Consul, appeared before ;the Planning'Commission and expressed his feeling .that they had lost sight of the fact that this is .a community hospital serving ill patients,.which 'is not in keeping with a bicycle trail. ;Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that the employees would have access to the park - ling lot down below if Hoag Hospital is successful lin obtaining that, and since the access from the !northern part . to the Caltrans parcel would be 'through a road that.will be closed to the general .public, the employees will be able to get to the hospital from Coast Highway anyway. Commissioner Beek stated his preference to leavin it as a view trail with access only on Superior ;Avenue and'to delete from the condition on the hospital. • iMr. Stevens again appeared bedore the Planning iCommission and stated that completion is schedule ;for approximately 5 years from now, allowing time tq meet the projected need. • Commissioner Beek posed a question of staff re- lating to siltation, to which Mr. Talarico re- plied regarding Condition No. 17 that 10 days is the standard amount of time usually applied as a recommendation from the Regional Water Quality Board's staff as the amount of time it will take them to.review the plans. In response to.a second question asked by Commis - sion.er Beek regarding Condition No. 14, Mr. Kaa repl.ied that they are satisfied that they can mee this condition. Commissioner Beek stated his preference that the statement, "This plan shall provide for the re- lease of storm waters from the site at non = eros.iv velocities. "; -be added to - Condition No. 13, ;to which Mr: Kaa agreed. -10- 5 w �cw October 4, 1979 71 MINUTES ROLL CALL i I I I I I 1 1 1 1 INDEX Motion CONTIN- Ayes x Noes motion was made to approve the addition of the Abstain , Motion x Ayes x Noes Abstain Motion Motion was made that the aforementioned addit'ion- Ayes x Noes Abstain 01 sentence be added to Condition No. 13. Motion Ayes x Noes x l�tain ion Ayes x Noes Abstain Commissioner Beek then suggested a Condition No. 39 to read, "The project shall be approved by the Orange County Health Planning Council. ", to which Mr. Stevens expressed their agreement. equest to amend the Planned Community Developmen lan for Harbor: View Hills so as to permit the ex ansion Area No. 8 (Baywood Apartments) of the lanned'Community for additional multi- family re- idential units, and the acceptance of an Environ ental Document. Item #6 AMEND - RENT —No S 3W— CONTIN- x TED —TO (Resubdivision No. 311), and a motion was made to approve the addition of the portion of Blocks 92 and 93, it - , x x 1601 San Miguel Drive, on. the aforementioned Condition No. 39. x .Hills Road, between MacArthur x Motion was made that the aforementioned addit'ion- Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apart- x 01 sentence be added to Condition No. 13. X x x Motion was-made to add the words, "existing as well as new" after the fourth word in new Con - x dition No. 22. x x x Motion was made to delete Condition No. 36. x Motion was made that the Planning Commission make x x the findings recorded in Exhibit A of the Staff X Report and approve the EIR, the Traffic Study and Use Permit No. 1421 -C, subject to the aforementio - x ed revised condition as recorded in Exhibit.A of X x x Ithe Staff.Report, and recommend same to the City x. Council. the Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. equest to amend the Planned Community Developmen lan for Harbor: View Hills so as to permit the ex ansion Area No. 8 (Baywood Apartments) of the lanned'Community for additional multi- family re- idential units, and the acceptance of an Environ ental Document. Item #6 AMEND - RENT —No S 3W— -11- CONTIN- CATION: Parcel No. 1, Parcel Map 45 -10 TED —TO (Resubdivision No. 311), and a N VEMBER portion of Blocks 92 and 93, it - , vine's Subdivision, located at 1601 San Miguel Drive, on. the northeasterly side of San Joaquin .Hills Road, between MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive in Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apart- ments). -11- ROLL is 0 October 4, 1979 m Gtv of Newport Beach MINUTES ' LONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as Applicant AND Bequest to combine one parcel and a.portion of Item #7 Blocks 92 and 93 of Irvine's Same as Applicant Subdivision into one Robert Bei.n, William Frost, & building. site so as to permit.the expansion of RESUBDI- the Baywood -Apartment complex on the property. VISION N Community District, and the acceptance of an En- vironmental 637 LOCATION:. Parcel No. 1, Parcel Map 45 -10 Plaza, generally bounded by San (Resubdivision No. 311), and.a por CONTINUEu tion of Blocks 92 and 93, Irvine's TO NOVEM- Subdivision located at 1601 San BER 8, . Miguel Drive, on the northeasterly T 79 side of San Joaquin Hills Road., be tween MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive in Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apartments). ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as Applicant ENGINEER: Robert Bei.n, William Frost, & Associates, Newport Beach AND Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the re- Inaining development in the Civic. Plaza Planned Community District, and the acceptance of an En- vironmental Document. LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza, generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive, and Jamboree Road, j in Newport Center. -12- Item #8 HASING 0 Motion 0 MINUTES October 4, 1979 of Newaort Beach LONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company OWNER: Same as Applicant In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin,. Richard Hogan, Community Development Director, replied that at the present time, 140 {a nits is the maximum number allowable in theBay- rWood expansion. Keith Greer, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Planning Commission and made a presentation of the plan, stating that this project represents an opportunity for the City and the company to pravide for housing that will encourage and permi residents to both live and work in Newport Beach, Using as the basis the existing statistics on the $20 units that are there, 41 adult residents of whi_c.h.live and work in Newport Beach, and that it also provides for affordable housing. r. Hogan relayed the three alternatives the Plan ing Commission has: 1) determine that the plan s reasonable and should be approved, in which ase it would be appropriate to reconsider the ct.ion taken in the General Plan Amendment; 2) pprove the proposal in, general with the residen- ial development, but with only 70 units as com- ared to the 140 units; 3) deny the project. n was made to the General Council. Table the Baywood Expansion Plan Amendment is heard by the In response to a question posed by Commissioner I Iaidinger regarding affordable housing, Mr. Greer replied that they are based on the County of Orange standards for moderate income, that they. refer to the guidelines established by the County ;and 'updated periodically, based on a medium incom average for the County of Orange, and that the ;rental range would be $400 to $500. -13- INDEX X October 4, 1979 M MINUTES Hugh,. Coffin, Acting City Attorney, stated that ?there is no time limit on taking action on the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, but that action must b� taken on the Subdivision Map during a 50 day period,. plus a time extension not to exceed 90 d ys, and that under Section 20.51.045 of the ;Code, the Planning Commission is required to act . py an application for an amendment not later than 4 days from the first notice.of the Planning ':C mmission hearing, unless such time limit is ex- Itgnded upon mutual agreement of the parties.. Motion x im tion was revised to table the items that can ib tabled, i.e., the Parcel Map and Amendment, is d to hear the item that it is necessary to hear i mediately, .i.e., the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Commissioner Thomas stated his intent that it is not proper to be dealing with this proposal in light of the fact that the General Plan Amendment has just been submitted to the City Council. AIRS x x.x iM. Lion was then voted on, which MOTION CARRIED.. Noes x xJ Motion x M tion was made to allow a 9- minute presentation Ayes x x x x by The Irvine Company regarding the Baywood Ex- Noes x pansion. I t I I I I II Jqe Sarnecky; The Irvine Company, appeared before tle Planning Commission to briefly describe the p oposed addition to the Baywood Apartment Com- m pity, stating that it had at one time been:vo- 1 ntarily held in reserve by The Irvine Company a� part of a freeway reservation of future align - m .nt of the Corona del Mar Freeway, but that now the freeway is-no longer planned to be built in tiis..location. He then drew to the Planning C mmission's attention the colored site plan, s owing the.relationship of the project to the e isting community. He stated that the proposal i to build 140 apartment units on roughly 10h. a..res and will be an extension of the existing a)artments in terms of layout, architecture and 1 ndscape design, thus preserving the theme and c aracter of the existing community. He added t at a Traffic Study was prepared consistent with -14- INDEX COMMISSIONERS N I I MINUTES October 4, 1979 City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX i the guidelines established with the Traffic Phas- ing Ordinance as an NFIS =l Policy, that 6 cri'ti- Cal.intersections were identified for evaluation and that 3 out of the .6 are required to have ICU Calculations performed, but that none of these intersections exceeded .9 intersection capacity utilization, so that none of the intersections would be adversely affected by the proposed de- velopment. He additionally stated that this pro - Oect will provide a low - profile,.high- amenity residential environment which is in walking dis- tance.of Newport Center, and that it is consisten �ith the-General Plan, complementing and complet- Ing the Baywood community. In conclusion, he re- quested that the Planning Commission reconsider its .previous action on Baywood. Mr. O'Mara, resident of Baywood, appeared before the Planning Commission and described a flaw as he viewed it in the Baywood Expansion plan, that all the vehicular traffic that will be.generated . by the addition will be channelled along the left fork of Baywood Drive, the only entrance and exit Ito all the Baywood Apartments, suggesting future traffic congestion. r. Greer replied that they are constrained along acArthur Boulevard-and San Joaquin Hills Road as ar as access, but that the intersection of San iguel Drive and entrance into Baywood will have raffic signal potential improvements.and interio mproveme.nts, and that based on the analysis they ave seen, the left fork is adequate to serve hose parking needs. Jim Stevensone, resident of Baywood Apartments, commented that the previous resident.had made an !excellent presentation of the problem and that it !should be considered. Motion x (Motion was made to deny without prejudice Amend - ment No. 536 and Resubdivision No. 637. In. response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin, Hugh Coffin replied that the Parcel !Map would have been approved by the Planning -15- 0 Ayes x Noes Motion Ayes Noes • x MINUTES October 4, 1979 5 1 w W ON of Newport Beach Commission and would become final unless the City Council were to call it up, or it.were appealed, but that the amendment would necessarily have to go to the City Council far approval, as it re- quires:City Council action, and that if there is to be an approval, the Traffic Phasing item would have to be taken from the table and considered prior to approval of either item.. Dave Dmohowski, The Irvine Company, appeared be- fore the Planning Commission and stated the spe -, cifics of Amendment No. 536, in.cluding an amend - inent to the P -C map and P -C text, involving de- leting the freeway designation on MacArthur Boule war.d,.filling in Area 8 to indicate development u 'to the right -of -way line from MacArthur Boulevard a revision of the statistical table to reflect the addition.of 140 dwelling units, and an in- ;crease in the population estimate, school popu- lation projections amendment and an amendment to the fences and hedges. x Motion was then voted on, which MOTION FAILED. x x Motion was made that Amendment No. 536, Resubdi- !vision No.'637 and the Phasing Plan be continued !to November 8, 1979. Commissioner Thomas stated his opposition to the motion. !Mr'. Hogan stated that staff would provide materi.a :illustrating the previous amendment to the .pro- posed changes related to Amendment No. 536, as pe Commissioner Beek's request. !Mr. Coffin stated that continuing it for a month !would put it well past 45 days after the first !published notice of this hearing and he strongly. suggested,that they obtain permission from The !Irvine Company before continuing it. xlxl I41flotton was then voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. -16- INDEX October 4, 1979 is 5. f 8 W 0 s City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL MINUTES Motion x Motion was .made to continue the remainder of the All Ayes ;items to.the regular Planning Commission meeting November 8, 1979. Motion x Motion was made to cancel the regular Planning Ayes x x x x Commission meeting on November 22., 1979, due to Noes x !the Thanksgiving holidays. :Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remain iing development in the Civic Plaza Planned`Com- munity District, and the acceptance of an Environ ,mental Document. ;LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza, generally bounded by San Joaquin.H.ills Road, Santa Cruz • Drive, San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive, and Jamboree Road, in Newport Center. ;ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach !OWNER: Same as Applicant Motion iMotion was made to continue this item to the.re- All Ayes Igular Planning Commission meeting of October 18, 11979. Request to allow front yard setbacks between 10 feet and 15 feet measured from back of sidewalk, for garages on various custom single family resi- dential lots' in Harbor Ridge (where the P -C text provides that garage spaces facing an access street shall observe a 5 foot setback or a mini- mum setback of 20 feet, measured from back of sidewalk). • I ( I ! I I I � LOCATION: t 24, 25, 27, 28 and 29, Tract No of -17- Item #9 PHASING PLAN CONTINUED TO OCTOBER I 18 , 19 7—{ Item #10 MODIFI- CATI7. mk t' 1979 MINUTES October 4, 1979 i i� �n In � � ! itv of Newport Beach E1 Capitan Drive and easterly of Spyglass Hill Road in Harbor Ridge ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: The Irvine Pacific Development Company, Newport Beach :OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Motion Motion was made to continue this item to the All Ayes 'regular Planning Commission meeting on October [18, 1979. !Request to establish a new and used automobile sales facility in the C -1 -H District. The exist• ing building on the site will be utilized by the :existing Donique's Antiques retail sales use and • the office for the proposed automobile sales fa- cility. LOCATION: Lots 14 through 17, Tract No. 1210, located at 600 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of. West Coast Highway, westerly of Dover Drive, across West Coast Highway from Bay Shores. ZONE: C -1 -H 'APPLICANTS: Donald Brodnax, Jr., Donique's Antiques, Inc., and Greg Darling, Unique Motor Cars, Newport Beach ;OWNERS: Leonard Horwin and Arnold J. Gor- don, Beverly Hills :This item was withdrawn, as per the applicant's 'request. Request to establish an offstreet parking lot on • is temporary basis in Block 600 of Newport Center in the C -O -H District, and the acceptance of an (Environmental Document. Im INDEX Item #11 USE PER- MIT NO. 1918 WITHDRAWN Item #12. USE PER- MIT NO. 1919 MINUTES October 4, 1979 In ]Citv of Newport Beach I R O L L CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INDEX Motion x All Ayes 0 Motion All Ayes LOCATION: A portion of Lot 22, Tract No. 6015, located at 670 Newport Cen- ter Drive, easterly of Santa Cruz Drive and northerly of Newport Center Drive in Block 600 of New- port Center. ZONE: C -O -H APPLICANT: The Irvine Company,'.Newport Beach QWNER:. Same as Applicant Motion was made to.contin.ue this item to the regular Planning Commission meeting of October 18, 1979. Request to create two parcels of land for resi- dential development where one lot now exists, and the acceptance of an-Environmental Document. LOCATION: Lot 15, Tract No. 1237, located at 483 and 485 Morning Canyon Road, on the easterly side of Morning Canyon Road, between Seaward Road and East Coast Highway in Corona Highlands. 4ONE: R -2 -B APPLICANT: Harold B. Zook, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same as Applicant ENGINEER: Same as Applicant Motion was made to continue this item to the re- gular'Planning Commission meeting of October 18; 1979. NUED Tn- Item #13 RESUBDI- VISION NO. 64_ CONTINUED TO OCTO - Request to pe.rmit the temporary use of relocatabl4 Item #14 . buildings as office, storage or maintenance shop facilities on the Rockwell International Site, -19- COMMISSIONERS October 4, 1979 T1 Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL I I I I I I 1 I- 1 INDEX • Motion All Ayes Motion All Ayes F and the acceptance of an Environmental Docu- ment. LOCATION: Lot 2, Tract No. 7953, located at 4311 Jamboree Road, on'the north - westerly side of Jamboree Road: between Birch Street and Mac - Arthur Boulevard in Koll Center Newport. 20NE: P -C APPLICANT: Rockwell International, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as Applicant This item was withdrawn, as per the applicant' Oequest. Request to consider an amendmendment to Section 20.87.140 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to the definition of the term, "'Dwelling Unit ", and the acceptance of an envir- onmental Document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach i Motion was made to continue this item to the jegular Planning Commission meeting on November 8, 1979. Request to consider of the Newport Beach to the establishment tial District. i an Amendment to Chapter 20 Municipal Code pertaining of a Low- Density Residen- O ITIATED BY:- The City of Newport Beach kotion was made to continue this item to the regular Planning Commission meeting of October 18, 1979. lul10 WITHDRAWN Item #15 Item #16 AMENDMENT NO. 539 CONTINUED 0`P� CTO- ER 18, 1979 Motion All Ayes 40 IR October 4, 1979 of Newport Beach i Proposed Amendments to the Planning Commission �tules.of.Procedure as they pertain to Substi- ute. Motions. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Motion was made to continue this item to the regular Planning Commission meeting of October 18, 1979. here being no further business, the Planning ommission adjourned at 11:30 p.m. A ebra Allen, Sec�"retary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach -21- MINUTES INDEX Item #17 CONTINUED TO OCTO- BER 18, 1979 r ` GPA 79-1.& �9 -2 LEGAL CONSIDERATION/ GENERAL PLAN CONSISTANCY 1)There is specific language in the existing General Plan that supports controlling and limiting development so as not to overload existing support facilities. Keeping in mind that the information in the existing general plan, was not passed by the current City Council, but was passed in 1972 thru 1974. The only Councilman who was seated then and is currently still on the City Council is Don McInnis. GP Policies,(pg8) "...the City shall limit and control the distribution, character and intensity of all land uses which would generate increased levels of traffic beyond the capcity of the existing or planned street system." Land Use Element, (pg. 23) re:Newport Center "...it is proposed that a detailed examination be made to determine the additional floor area of future office buildings that can be accomodated while assuring adequate traffic., capacity of adjacent streets." Official Policy of the City defines ADEQUATE TRAFFIC CAPACITY as an intersection operating at below .90 or level of service "D ". 2) We, as a City have too much Commercial to attain the stated goal in the General Plan for a "high quality, low density residential community." - --See Domohowski Report 3) Currently the GP is inconsistant with the above, in that only about 90°% of o :r r.awn tt�F ; s_ „_s;,,g,i P family xes; d . r is.._ OW ELMS COMMUNITY CONCERN / OVERDEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY COMMERCIAL INDUSTR. In the P -C's ;alone the City has currently existing about 8MILLION SQUARE FEET OF MAJOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL (figures from Res. 9472 and Comm. Dev. figures from Feb. 8, 1979) roughly updated by me The ADDITIONAL ALLOWABLE in the G.P. permits about 42 MILLION MORE SQ. FT. MAJOR COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL CXisTlNG A131V4q,94C: GP Policies,(p95) "The type and amount of Commercial areas shall be limited... to those whioh are consistant and compatable with the prime concept and image of the Community as a quality, low density residential area.” (pg 6) "General Industrial Development within the Community shall be limited to those areas and uses which are appropriate to and compatable with a quality residential community." GP Policies (pg 1) "The timing and pace of all future development or redevelopment shall be limited and controlled to encourage phased and orderly development and to prohibit any premature development which_ In my considered opinion, the people of this City never intended for Newport }each to be the Commercial Financial Capital of Or. County! -22-