HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/06/199411\2\0 ; ZpaZy9tr
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PLACE: City Council Chambers
TIME: 7:30 P.M.
DATE:
MINUTES
October 6 1994
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Present
*
Chairman Glover and Commissioner Edwards were excused.
Absent
Y t Y
EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT:
James Hewicker, Planning Director
Robert Burnham, City Attorney
Y s :
William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager
Don Webb, City Engineer
Dee Edwards, Secretary .
Y s s
,.
Minutes of September 22 1994
Minutes
of
On page 11, Chairman Glover's action to the motion of Use
9/92/94
Permit No. 3539 was corrected from Aye toAbstain. Commissioner
Gifford requested that page 21, third paragraph, be amended to
state best way to do planning is not to try to use it to conform zoning
violations..
Motion
*
Motion was made and voted on to approve the September 22,
Ayes
1994, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED.
Abstain
Absent
Y Y Y
Public Comments:
Public
Comments
No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on
non - agenda items.
• Y Y
•
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
51 :1994
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Posting of the Agenda:
Posting
James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning
the
Agenda
s
Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, September 30,1994, in
front of City Hall.
A. Use Permit No. 3517 (Continued Public Hearing)
Item No..
Request to permit the establishment of a 24 how Taco Bell drive -
UP3517
through, take -out restaurant facility, with indoor and outdoor
ancillary seating, on property located in the RSC -H District. The
T999
proposal also includes: a request to waive a portion of the
Conti d
required off - street parking spaces; a modification to the Si p' Code
to
so as to allow two free standing pole or ground signs where the
11/10/94
Sign Code permits only one free standing sign per building site;
.
and an exception to the Sign Code so as to allow a restaurant logo
on the special purpose directional signs, whereas the Sign Code
prohibits such logos on directional signs; and the acceptance of an
environmental document.
AND
B Traffic Study No 99 (Continued Public Hearing)
Request to approve a traffic study in conjunction with a drive -
through, take -out restaurant facility on property located in the
RSC -H District.
LOCATION: Lots 48 through 53 and a portion of Lot 54,
Tract No. 1210, located at 1400 West Coast
Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast
Highway, across from the Balboa Bay Club.
ZONE: RSC -H
•
-2
�9�OA X09 �1'p
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
aCtobp
ROLL CALL
INDEX
APPLICANT: Taco Bell Corp., Irvine
OWNER: City National Bank, Los Angeles
Commissioner Adams stated that he listened to the tape of the
September 8, 1994, public hearing regarding the subject item
inasmuch as he did not attend said meeting.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams with
respect to the subject use permit, William Laycock, Current
Planning Manager, replied that the Sign Code allows one free
standing pole sign and the applicant requested two pole signs, and
the request included restaurant logos on the special purpose
directional signs whereas the Sign Code prohibits special purpose
directional signs. Don Webb, City Engineer, replied that Taco
Bell representatives and the adjacent residents reached an
agreement that the drive -up order board and speaker be installed
.
on the West Coast Highway side of the building and that an
employee with a remote order unit be used during peak periods to
expedite the orders so there would not be back -ups in the stacking
lane onto West Coast Highway. James Hewicker, Planning
Director, replied that the retaining wall would be 14 feet high with
an arched logo on top of the wall. Commissioner Adams
expressed his concerns regarding the appearance of the retaining
wall and the request to construct the logo into the wall. Mr.
Hewicker further replied that the logo into the wall would be
considered a sign. Mr. Webb replied that it has not been
determined if parking on the street would be removed if West
Coast Highway would be widened; however, on- street parking
probably would be removed. Commissioner Adams stated that on-
street parking would be a safety net for the restaurant whereby he
expressed his concerns regarding the number of on -site parking
spaces that are being proposed. In reference to Condition No. 8,
Exhibit "A ", stating That all employees shall park their vehicles on-
site, Mr. Hewicker explained that the condition is a standard
condition that is placed on use permits and that on -site parking
requirements includes employees and patrons of an establishment.
Commissioner Adams stated that parking on West Coast Highway
•
-3-
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
0- ober 6, 1994
ROLL CALL
INDEX
may be more appropriate for employees because parking
movement would not be frequent, and that high turnover parking
be located on -site.
Mr. Hewicker referred to the restaurants that are open 24 hours.
He commented that the drive -up portion of the Jack -In- The -Box
Restaurant at West Balboa Boulevard and West Coast Highway is
open 24 hours a day, and the use permit for the 24 hour operation
was approved by the Planning Commission in April, 1985. He
addressed the correspondence that the Planning Commission
received from several of the adjacent residents suggesting revised
conditions, and he referred to the suggested revised conditions
concerning hours of operation, lighting, and future dedication of
West Coast Highway contained in the September 8, 1994, staff
report. The restaurant standard requirements allow light standards
not to exceed a height of 10 feet in parking lots, and that lights be
shielded and directed down to the pavement. The Police
.
Department requires at least one foot candle of illumination on
the parking surface to adequately illuminate the parking surface
and the area surrounding the use.
Mr. Laycock stated that Mitigation Measure No. 5 addresses the
screening of the masonry wall with landscaping. The September
8, 1994, staff report states that the applicant indicated to staff that
the proposed directional signs will no longer have logos; therefore,
the exception permit is no longer necessary.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams regarding
the Jack -In -The -Box Restaurant, Mr. Hewicker stated that during
the past two years there were disturbances in the parking lot
where the Jack -In -The -Box Restaurant is located on West Coast
Highway. Commissioner Adams stated that it would be valuable
to have factual information from the Police Department regarding
the activity surrounding the drive -in restaurant.
Acting Chairman Gifford stated that she listened to the tape and
reviewed the minutes of the September 8, 1994, public hearing
regarding the subject use permit.
•
-4-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
if
WDEX
The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and
Mr. Doug Boyd, 2101 East Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the
Planning Commission. He suggested that the employees park at
the City's Municipal Parking Lot located on Avon Street so as to
provide additional on -site parking for restaurant patrons, and he
expressed a concern with respect to the applicant's request for a
24 hour operation.
Mr. Ayres Boyd, resident of Bayshores community, appeared
before the Planning Commission to oppose the subject request.
He expressed concerns that a 24 hour operation could set a
precedent; that a Taco Bell Restaurant would be located across
West Coast Highway from The Balboa Bay Club; and the patrons
coming to Taco Bell during the late hours could be an undesirable
group. He said that the City would lose its lustre by the
proliferation of fast -food restaurants. In response to a question
posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Boyd stated that noise is transmitted
.
from the speaker box located at McDonald's Restaurant to his
neighborhood.
Mr. Chuck Daniels, 1411 Kings Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission to object to the requested 24 hour operation
inasmuch as it would attract an undesirable clientele.
Mr. C. G. Reynolds, 1301 Kings Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission to express his concerns regarding noise, the
type of customers that would come to the take -out restaurant
during the late hours, lighting, and parking.
Mr. James Person, appeared before the Planning Commission on
behalf of the applicant. He addressed the meetings that the
applicant had with the adjacent property owners, including the
Balboa Bay Club. He stated that as a result of the meetings the
applicant relocated the menu board to the southeasterly comer of
the building in an effort to block noise that may transmit up the
wall, that the rooftop mechanical equipment on the building would
be painted to blend in with the building, the outdoor dining would
be closed at 11:00 p.m. seven days a week, logos would be
-5-
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
R LL CALL
INDEX
eliminated from the directional signs, the menu board would be
installed on the building, the logo on the wall would be removed,
and the wall would be textured with something appropriate prior
to the landscaping. The Balboa Bay Club indicated that they were
comfortable with the results of the report provided by the sound
engineer. If there would be problems concerning the 24 hour
operation some time in the future the applicant would be willing
to come back to the Planning Commission to review the conditions
of approval as stated in Condition No. 43, Exhibit "W'. Mr. Person
addressed the problems that previously occurred at the Jack -In-
The -Box Restaurant.
Commissioner Ridgeway commented that the property owners on
the subject staff report are listed as City National Bank and the
property owners listed on the September 8, 1994, Planning
Commission staff report were Levon and Zarouhi Gugasian. Mr.
Skip Leonard, Dana Point, real estate manager for Taco Bell,
.
appeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that when
the application was submitted Mr. Gugasian was the property
owner; however, the property was foreclosed and the new property
owner is City National Bank. Mr. Leonard stated that Taco Bell
would be a tenant of the Bank. He further stated that Mr.
Gugasian is making an effort to take back the property.
Commissioner Pomeroy addressed a letter from John Yeager,
dated October 3, 1994, suggesting hours of operation from 6:00
a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Thursday, and from 6:00 a.m. to
2 :00 a.m. Friday and Saturday, during the summer months, and
from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and from
6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight Friday and Saturday during the rest of
the year. Mr. Person stated that as an alternative to the 24 hour
operation in the event the applicant would have to come back to
the Planning Commission, the applicant would accept the hours of
operation suggested in the September 8, 1994, staff report as
follows: That the hours of operation of the proposed facility shall be
limited between 6:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Thursday,
and between 6:00 am. and 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday.; however,
•
-6-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Mr. Person suggested that the facility be permitted to open at 5:00
a.m. rather than 6:00 a.m.
Mr. Hewicker stated that within the past few months the City
established a Restaurant Review Committee that consists of
several City Departments so as to review plans for restaurant uses.
The review request for the subject application was submitted to
various Departments in June, 1994, prior to the formation of the
Review Committee. As a result of the Review Committee, the
Police Department has indicated a special interest in the hours of
operations of restaurant requests, and the Police Chief
subsequently informed Mr. Hewicker that they would not have
been in favor of the requested 24 hour operation. The original
I
review request that was received by staff from the Police
Department in June, 1994, did not indicate a concern regarding
the proposed hours of operation.
.
Commissioner Adams and Acting Chairman Gifford questioned
the type of complaints that would trigger a review of the use
permit by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hewicker stated that
Condition No. 43 states that ...the Planning Commission may
recommend revocation of, and the City Council may revoke, this use
permit upon a determination that the operation of the take -out
restaurant causes injury or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace
or general welfare of the community. Mr. Hewicker stated that only
one complaint could bring the use permit to the attention of the
Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission could take
enforcement action immediately. Mr. Person concurred with
Condition No. 43, and he stated that the applicant would agree to
a modification of a condition if the Chief of Police and /or the
Planning Director deemed it necessary to modify the condition
upon a finding by the Chief of Police and /or the Planning
Director.
In response to questions posed by Acting Chairman Gifford
regarding the request for a 24 hour operation, Mr. Leonard
reappeared before the Planning Commission. He explained that
to provide value menus at reduced prices and in order to make
i-7-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
profit, Taco Bell would have to increase volume; therefore, in
order to make each store profitable it is necessary to increase the
volume and a 24 hour operation would provide value to the
customers. He stated that Taco Bell does not want undesirable
patrons, and a telephone call regarding any problem at the take-
out restaurant would be addressed immediately. He stated that if
the hours of operation as stated in the staff report or as requested
by Mr. Yeager would be approved, the take -out restaurant would
be in jeopardy, and if the hours would be imposed at a later date
after the facility has opened and the investment made, the
restaurant would be operating in the negative.
Mr. Bill Dunlap, 400 Snug Harbor Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission and he expressed his opposition regarding
the proposed 24 hour operation. He referred to his letter dated
October 5, 1994, and an attached Wall Street Journal article dated
September 22, 1994, indicating incidents in San Jose, California,
.
that had occurred at Taco Bell establishments in 1993. He said
that all of the residents' concerns expressed at the September 8,
1994, Planning Commission meeting were addressed by Taco Bell
with the exception of the 24 hour operation, and Taco Bell never
compromised on the 24 hour issue. In response to questions
posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Dunlap replied that the
hours of operation should be compatible with McDonald's
Restaurant; however, if Taco Bell would demonstrate that they
would operate the facility in good faith, then the hours could be
extended at a later date. Discussion ensued between
Commissioner Ridgeway and Mr. Dunlap with respect to the
aforementioned revised Condition of Approval No. 3 as stated in
the staff report compared with McDonald's Restaurant's hours of
operation inasmuch as the suggested condition has longer hours of
operation than McDonald's Restaurant several months of the year.
Mr. Dunlap stated that he would he would be willing to consider
the suggested condition.
In response to comments by Commissioner Adams with respect to
the residents' concerns regarding the 24 hour operation, Mr.
Dunlap replied that the ambient noise on West Coast Highway is
-8
COMMISSIONERS
0 f
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
less at 3:00 a.m. based on the fact that businesses located in the
City are inactive. Mr. Dunlap stated that the residents are
impacted by noise and smell when the prevailing winds blow. He
further stated that he would have no problem if the restaurant
opened at 5:00 a.m. as opposed to 6:00 a.m.
Mr. John Sturgess, 601 Cliff Drive, appeared before the Planning
Commission to express his concerns regarding the legitimacy of the
application. He represented himself and he also represented and
spoke "on behalf of and not for, the Cliff Haven Community
Association'. He referred to his letter dated October 6, 1994, to
the Planning Commission wherein he requested answers to the
following questions: the, possible conflict of interest for a
Commissioner; the legitimacy of the application and use of the
property; the institution of the Restaurant Outreach Program and
he stated that Taco Bell is not a destination restaurant and that
contradicts the efforts of the Outreach Program to the current
.
restaurant owners; the 24 hour use would set a precedent; and he
expressed a concern regarding security to the homeowners. He
said that he is not opposed to the applicant but to the application
and use of the property.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr.
Sturgess replied that his concern with respect to conflict of interest
was directed to Chairman Glover. Bob Burnham, City Attorney,
explained that as a general rule there is not a conflict of interest
as a Planning Commissioner or City Councilmember unless there
would be a financial interest in the decision, and financial interest
is defined as an occasion when it is reasonably foreseeable that the
decision could have a material financial affect on a source of
income. A source of income could be someone who gave money
equal to or greater than $250.00 or an affect on personal assets.
The Political Reform Act describes the foregoing with the
exception of the definition of the term gift which excludes political
contributions. In the case of a political contribution made by an
individual is not a source of income under the Political Reform
Act, and it would not create a conflict of interest. Mr. Sturgess'
foregoing letter discusses conflict of interest based upon
•
-9
COMMISSIONERS
4' BOA �O'e0 r�o
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
membership of a special interest group. Both sides have a right to
a fair hearing when considering a use permit or variance
application. Mr. Burnham stated that he was not familiar with the
special interest group that was referred to in the letter (i.e.
Mariner's Mile Merchants Association) and without knowing more
about the group, there would have to be something about the
position taken by the group that would cause the member of the
Commission not to be able to give both sides a fair hearing. In
response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Gifford, Mr.
Burnham concurred that the appropriate action if any conflict of
interest is identified is for the Commissioner not to vote wherein
Acting Chairman Gifford indicated that Chairman Glover was not
present at the subject public hearing to vote on the application.
He said that there could be a conflict of interest based upon an
individual's participation in the decision or action to influence
other members of the Commission to reach a result on the
application.
Mr. Sturgess, Acting Chairman Gifford, and Commissioner
Ridgeway reviewed the discussion that occurred between
Chairman Glover and Mr. Sturgess during the September 8, 1994,
Planning Commission meeting regarding conflict of interest.
Commissioner DiSano and Mr. Sturgess discussed the statement
in the foregoing letter regarding "legitimate" business.
Mr. Burnham stated that the Levine Bill requires Commissioners
who solicit contributions from individuals or who receive
contributions from individuals who have matters pending before
them, and the contribution is in excess of $250.00, to report or
disclose the contribution and it could result in a disqualifying
interest.
Acting Chairman Gifford asked the Planning Commissioners who
are present and voting if they had a conflict of interest. The
Planning Commission responded to the negative, and Acting
Chairman Gifford indicated that the five Planning Commissioners
were prepared to vote and do not have a conflict of interest.
-10-
COMMISSIONERS
o
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Mr. Arthur DeLaLoza, 220 Kings Place, appeared before the
Planning Commission. He said that the property owners, Levon
and Zarouhi Gugasian, contributed $400.00 to candidate Chairman
Glover on July 11, 1994. In response to comments by Acting
Chairman Gifford, Mr. DeLaLoza explained that the Gugasian's
have a vested interest in the property. He said that the
Government Code prohibits people from taking over $250.00 from
people who are appearing before them to ask for use permits. He
said that no person shall participate in or use their official position
to participate in the decision. Chairman Glover spoke in favor of
the subject application on September 8, 1994, and participated in
the decision, and she spoke to an employer of one of the people
who spoke against the use permit and came before the Planning
Commission on September 8, 1994. He read as follows: that no
officer of an agency shall make, participate in the making, or in
any way attempt to use his or her official position to influence the
decision in a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other
.
entitlements for use pending before the agency if the office has
willfully and knowingly received a contribution in an amount of
more than $250.00 within the preceding 12 months. Mr.
DeLaLoza stated that Chairman Glover was in violation of 84308
and that taints the entire subject public hearing, and he
emphasized that the process has to start over. The entire process
is subject to question and can be reversed in front of a judge.
Mr. John Yeager, 1826 Buttonshell, appeared before the Planning
Commission. He stated that the 24 hour request is of vital
concern inasmuch as it could set a precedent for fast food take -out
restaurants adjacent to residential neighborhoods; it could be a
crime magnet that would be a detriment to the adjoining
residential and commercial uses; the economic viability of the
proposed use; that hours of operation should be imposed and if
Taco Bell proves to be a good neighbor then the hours of
operation could be reviewed some time in the future; the
economic benefits to the City would be offset by public service
expenses that would be incurred if the restaurant would be open
24 hours a day. He said that if Taco Bell and McDonald's
Restaurant had the same hours of operation that it would reduce
•
-11-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
some of the residents' concerns. The residents also request on -site
security Thursday through Sunday evenings from dusk until closing.
In response to a question posed by Commissioner Ridgeway and
Mr. Yeager regarding revised Condition of Approval No. 3 as
stated in the staff report, Mr. Laycock explained that the revised
condition would be easier to enforce if the closing hour was the
same all year as opposed to the seasonal closing hours of
McDonald's Restaurant. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that he
was looking for a compromise of hours of operation and he
indicated that he opposes a 24 hour operation inasmuch as it could
be precedent setting and it could create crime and noise. In
response to a question posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr.
Yeager replied that with on -site security the residents would agree
to revised Condition No. 3. Mr. Yeager addressed Condition No.
43, Exhibit "A" wherein he asked that the condition be modified
as stated in his aforementioned letter.
.
Mr. Hewicker responded to Mr. Yeager's comments regarding the
status of the City's economic policies whereby he stated that there
is no fiscal impact analysis for this project.
Mrs. Barbara Yeager, 1401 Kings Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission to oppose the 24 hour Taco Bell restaurant.
She said that residents of 14 houses directly above the subject site
signed letters indicating that a 24 hour fast food restaurant would
have a significant negative impact on their neighborhood. She
requested that the hours of operation be the same as McDonald's
Restaurant on West Coast Highway, that they provide security
Thursday through Sunday, and that outdoor seating be closed at
10:00 p.m. to comply with the City's curfew. She expressed a
concern that the 24 hour request could set a precedent in the City,
and late night patrons could be an undesirable clientele.
Mr. Keith Cox, 333 Snug Harbor Road, appeared before the
Planning Commission. He suggested that Taco Bell's hours of
operation be consistent with McDonald's Restaurant.
•
-12-
COMMISSIONERS
����L�'f'nC��A..dr9�'IL ri•ry fITA N1T�ITD/ll?T RFAf!R
MINUTES
\� 1-(,/ V[)
WW
-` ✓O
\\
\ VA a a va ate✓ �� a vs� ✓w. +���
e
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Mr. Leonard reappeared before the Planning Commission in
response to the aforementioned article in the Wall Street Journal
concerning the San Jose operations. He stated that the take -out
restaurant installed security and cameras after the article appeared
in the newspaper. He said that security would be installed at the
proposed restaurant, if necessary.
In response to questions posed by Acting Chairman Gifford
regarding the hours of operation as requested by the residents, Mr.
Leonard replied that if there would be a problem the restaurant
would address it by putting security guards on the premises. In
response to comments during the public hearing comparing
McDonald's Restaurant to Taco Bell, Mr. Leonard stated that the
average sales volume of McDonald's Restaurant is $1.92 million
and Taco Bell averages a little less than $1 million, and
McDonald's Restaurant's checks average higher than Taco Bell
wherein he explained that is why there needs to be more leverage
in order to pay for Taco Bell's costs.
In response to questions posed by the Planning Commission and
Mr. Hewicker, Mr. David C. Miller, Operations for Orange County
Taco Bell, appeared before the Planning Commission. The
proposed Taco Bell establishment would take in approximately 20
percent of their business ($2,000.00 to $2,500.00 per week) from
2:00 am. to 6:00 a.m.; and the average check would be
approximately $3.20 - $3.30; Taco Bell's highest sales volume is
approximately $1.8 million on the site located at 171h Street and
Newport Boulevard in Costa Mesa. Mr. John Yeager reappeared
before the Planning Commission. He said that the traffic analysis
indicates that the proposed take -out restaurant would have
approximately 1,392 trips per day, and 20 percent would be 280
trips between 2:00 am. and 6:00 a.m. or 70 visitors an hour.
The Planning Commission recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened
at 9:50 p.m.
Mr. Miller reappeared before the Planning Commission. He
explained that 20 percent of the business between 2:00 am. and
-13-
�y 7- �q10
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
6:00 am. would average $2,250.00 per week, an average of $80.00
per hour, or 24 transactions per hour. Sixty (60) percent of the
business would occur on Friday and Saturday nights, or $1,350.00,
and 30 automobile trips pe hour on those nights.
Mr. Keith Cox reappeared before the Planning Commission to
address the foregoing projected numbers.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pomeroy
concerning the foregoing projected business, Mr. Miller
reappeared before the Planning Commission. He said that the
take -out restaurant would be approximately a $1 million to $1.2
million restaurant if the restaurant would be open 24 hours.
Commissioner Pomeroy and Mr. Miller discussed the calculations
that Mr. Miller proposed, the percentage of business, and
automobile trips that would occur between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
.
Mr. Yeager reappeared before the Planning Commission and
stated that the number of automobiles that are proposed to pass
through the take -out restaurant between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
would create a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Person reappeared before the Planning Commission to
emphasize that Taco Bell would be a good client to the City.
Mr. C. G. Reynolds reappeared before the Planning Commission
to respond to the applicant's comments regarding the take -out
restaurant.
Mr. Chuck Daniels reappeared before the Planning Commission
to state that the proposed project would depreciate his property.
There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public
hearing was closed at this time.
City Attorney Burnham stated there may have been a violation of
the Levine Bill, a provision of the Government Code that was
previously discussed during the public hearing. The Bill prohibits
•
-14-
COMMISSIONERS
`�yf °� °•pa s-rlo
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
Getebef 6, 1994
R LL CALL
INDEX
the Commissioners from soliciting or accepting contributions while
applications or land use permits are pending, and it prohibits the
party with a pending permit from contributing to a person that is
going to make a decision. He suggested that the application be
continued to allow the City Attorney's Office additional time to
determine if there had been a violation, and if so, what potential
affect of that violation might be on the decision making process.
Commissioner Pomeroy addressed the request for a 24 hour take-
out operation. He stated that if the applicant proves to be a good
neighbor that he would recommend the applicant come back to
the Planning Commission to request a 24 hour operation. He
stated that he would approve the extended hours as staff
recommended in revised Condition No. 3.
Commissioner Adams suggested that if the application is continued
that staff come back to the Planning Commission with the history
•
of the existing 24 hour Jack -In -The Box operation. In response to
a question posed by Commissioner Adams with respect to the
requested 24 hour operation, Mr. Hewicker explained the
procedure that is followed when an applicant submits the proposed
operational characteristics of an application, including proposed
hours of operation. Commissioner Adams requested that staff
consider adding the following conditions to the use permit if the
item is continued: (1) That the applicant be required to construct
driveways to meet the City's Standard 166 -L. He opined that a
wider driveway would be beneficial. (2) That no logo or surface
feature be allowed on the retaining wall. (3) That the retaining
wall be a stucco type surface feature with integral color or be
constructed with block masonry with no surface treatment, and
that surface treatment or type of masonry used extend throughout
the entire wall. Commissioner Adams and Mr. Hewicker discussed
the use of color on the wall. (4) The speaker board location as
previously . suggested by Mr. Webb. (5) and a lighting condition as
previously stated by Mr. Hewicker.
Commissioner Ridgeway supported a continuance and
Commissioner Adams' recommended added conditions. He stated
-15-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
that he would not support a 24 hour operation, and that he would
consider extended operating hours.
Commissioner DiSano stated that he would give Taw Bell, a
corporate citizen, the opportunity to show good faith. He
supported the requested 24 hour operation inasmuch as the use
permit could be brought back to the Planning Commission for
review if there would be complaints by the neighbors.
Acting Chairman Gifford supported the request for a continuance.
She did not support the requested 24 hour operation based on the
testimony by Taco Bell that they would not be able to have a
viable store with less than a 24 hour operation. Therefore, there
are not real 'teeth' in the prospect of being able to take action if
it would turn out that it is not suitable. She recommended that
the hours of operation be uniform with McDonald's Restaurant on
West Coast Highway, with the idea that the enforcement would be
.
made easier by the Police Department.
Motion
Commissioner DiSano made a motion to continue Use Permit No.
3517 and Traffic Study No. 99 to the Planning Commission
meeting of November 10, 1994.
Mr. Person reappeared before the Planning Commission for
clarification. He stated that the purpose for the continuance is to
allow the City Attorney to examine the situation concerning an
allegation that was made regarding one of the Planning
Commissioners. Mr. Burnham responded that the purpose would
be whether the allegations would have a bearing on the decision
making power of the Planning Commission or have an. impact of
what has occurred up to this date. Commissioner Pomeroy and
Mr. Burnham discussed Mr. Burnham's aforementioned comments.
Motion
Ayes
*
*
*
*
*
Motion was made and voted on to reopen the public hearing.
Absent
*
MOTION CARRIED.
0
-16-
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
ROLL CALL
INDEX
Ayes
*
*
*
*
*
Motion was voted on to continue Use Permit No. 3517 and Traffic
Absent
Study No. 99 to the Planning Commission meeting of November
10, 1994. MOTION CARRIED.
s * -
Discussion.
Items
No. i
Request to clarify a condition of approval in conjunction with the
Planning Commission's aonroval of Variance No 1199 that
permitted alterations and additions to an existing single family
V1199
dwelling on prop&M located in Corona del Mar.
No Action
LOCATION: A portion of Lot 22, Block 538, Corona del
Taken
Mar, located at 3211 Third Avenue, on the
southwesterly side of Third Avenue, between
Larkspur Avenue and Marguerite Avenue, in
Corona del Mar.
.
ZONE: R -2
APPLICANT: Perry Rezvan, Huntington Beach
OWNER: Tim Krauth, Corona del Mar
James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that after contacting
Commissioner Edwards regarding his motion to approve Variance
No. 1199 on August 18, 1994, that Condition No. 6 would not be
modified and it was also staff's position that both the doorway and
a portion of the wall separating the stairway to the second floor
living area (i.e. from the railing up to the ceiling), is required to
be removed.
The Planning Commission discussed their interpretation of
Condition No. 6 when they voted on the motion to approve
Variance No. 1199.
The Planning Commission concluded that it was their
interpretation that Condition No. 6 would remain as it is stated,
without modification, in Exhibit "A'.
I
-17-
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
5, 1994
ROLL CALL
INDEX
• s s
Request of the proposed Joe's Crab Shack Restaurant (formerly
No. 2
the Sandancer Restaurant) property located at 2607 West Coast
2607WCH
Highway for an interpretation of Section 20.06.030 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to the definition of a "sign".
James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that the applicant
incorporated into their design an awning over the restaurant
entryway that is in the shape of a crab, and there is a sign above
the awning. If there would have been an awning with a sign on the
front of the awning, that area would have been designated a sign.
Staff is of the opinion that the crab is an attracting attention
device, and the applicant was informed that it would be considered
a sign.
Acting Chairman Gifford stated that if the awning constituted a
sign it would be necessary for the applicant to apply for a
modification to the Sign Code to permit the applicant to construct
and install the awning as proposed. She recommended that the
interpretation not be so broad as to be included in the definition
of a sign; and that it should be reviewed by the Modifications
Committee.
Commissioner Ridgeway, Commissioner Pomeroy and
Commissioner DiSano agreed that the construction should be
considered a crab shaped awning.
In response to questions posed by Commissioner Adams, Mr. Gary
Coburn, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission and
he stated that if he had to apply for a modifications permit that it
would delay the opening of the restaurant. Mr. Coburn stated that
a crab does not exist on the restaurant logo. The awning would
be would be covered and stuccoed.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that inasmuch as the awning would
not be visible from West Coast Highway until entering the parking
lot that it could be determined that the awning is not a sign.
•
-18-
COMMISSIONERS
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
MINUTES
Rd
netober 6- 1994
ROLL CALL
tNDFX
Acting Chairman Gifford expressed her concern regarding the
proliferation of similar signs in the City.
Motion
Motion was made that the awning would not be considered a sign.
Sub.Motioi
Substitute motion was made that the 'sign' be considered an
Withdrawn
*
awning and not a sign inasmuch as the shape is not associated with
the company logo and that it would not be visible from West
Coast Highway. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that he would not
support the substitute motion inasmuch as the crab could become
a part of the logo. Commissioner Adams withdrew the substitute
motion, and supported the original motion.
Commissioner DiSano commented that the awning could be
considered an architectural feature.
Acting Chairman Gifford did not support the motion.
**
*
**
Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED.
Absent
s r a
Request of Cup of Joe's Expresso and Rogers Gardens to install
No. 3
a coffee cart on property located at 2301 San Joaquin Hi11s Road
2301 sa,
Joaquin
William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, reviewed the
application with the Planning Commission. He stated that staff
will bring to the Planning Commission revisions to the Zoning
Code recommending that temporary uses be approved by the
Planning Director without the review of the Planning Commission.
T'he Planning Commission expressed their support of the request.
Motion
Motion was made and voted on to approve the request. MOTION
Ayes _
CARRIED.
Absent
-19-
Rd
MINUTES
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ROLL CALL
INDEX
s s s
Discussion regarding Planning Commission Meeting Dates in
No. 4
November, 1994.
11/10/94
Motion
Motion was made and voted on that the Planning Commission
PcM
Ayes
*
*
*
*
*
would meet on November 10, 1994, as scheduled. MOTION
Absent
*
CARRIED.
s s
ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 p.m.
Adjourn
s :s
TOD RIDGEWAY, SECRETARY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
S
•-20-