Loading...
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-