Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/09/1997• n LJ 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Regular Meeting - 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Fuller, Ridgeway, Kranzley, Gifford, Adams, and Ashley - Commissioner Selich arrived at 7:10 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager, Community and Economic Development Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Development Services Manager Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary Minutes of September 18. 1997: Motion was made by Commissioner Fuller and voted on to approve, as written, the September 18, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes. Ayes: Fuller, Ridgeway, Selich, Kranzley, Ashley Noes: none Absent: none Abstain: Adams, Gifford Public Comments: none Postina of the Aaenda: The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, October3, 1997 outside of City Hall. INDEX Minutes Public Comments Posting of the Agenda • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 SUBJECT: The Cannery Restaurant (Western Canners Company, Inc., applicant) 3010 Lafayette Avenue • Use Permit No. 1521 (Amended) and Use Permit No. 1684 (Amended) Request to allow a change in the operational characteristics of an existing restaurant facility (Use Permit 1521) to permit the addition of a dance floor on the second floor. Also included in the application is a request to allow the use of amplified sound in conjunction with the permitted live entertainment which is currently prohibited by the conditions of approval of Use Permit 1684. Patrick Alford, Senior Planner presented the staff report noting the following: • unique use under the regulation of two use permits, one for the restaurant and one for live entertainment • staff recommends Use Permit 1684 for live entertainment be permitted to lapse (due to expiration) and the rights granted by it be incorporated into an amended Use Permit 1521 • no current conditions on the hours of operation for restaurant nor for the live entertainment • • applicant proposes the restaurant be open for food and beverage service between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m., seven (7) days a week • applicant proposes the live entertainment (with amplified sound) and dancing be allowed between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and 12:00 noon and 1:00 a.m. on Saturday, Sunday, and on holidays. • a change to dance floor would increase overall occupant load from 28 to 60 persons requiring an additional eleven (11) parking spaces • currently there is a surplus of two (2) parking spaces, the proposed change would create a deficit of nine (9) parking spaces • an occupancy limit of 278 persons will insure that the off - street parking demand will not exceed the number of spaces currently available. • noise measurements have been taken in the area during evening hours with no violation of the Community Noise Control Ordinance found • citizens have complained of noise disturbances by patrons who arrive and depart the area as well as from loud music • the character of live entertainment is best addressed through the live entertainment permit • recommended additional conditions to address security, loitering, special events, adjacent area problems, occupancy levels, numbers of live entertainers, etc. INDEX Use Permit No. 1521 A Use Permit No. 1684 A Continued to November 6"h • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 • numerous letters received by staff from citizens • proposed changes do not change the net public area • proposed changes do change the intensification of a portion of the net public area (from dining to dancing) It was clarified that existing conditions do not prohibit amplified vocal entertainment (i.e., from a singer, disc jockey, comic, etc.) nor do they prohibit amplified recorded music; sound measurements are made at different times and on different nights throughout the week; and both of the use permits are old and have few conditions. Commissioner Selich asked how Condition No. 10 would be implemented. He was answered that this condition sets a frame work within which the department determines if a noise violation has occurred. Techniques are then devised to help mitigate the problem through sound monitors, improved internal softening devices, dual glazed glass, etc. Condition 15 is being proposed as part of a program being developed for a comprehensive alcohol control ordinance. Commissioner Adams asked about any records of noise and /or operation complaints in the last year and if they are logged. He was • answered that there were recorded complaints by residents to the code enforcement officer and to the police department. Commissioner Adams asked how the city would enforce the maximum occupancy to mitigate parking shortfalls? Staff answered that this is a difficult situation but the objective standard can be used. A common practice for bar operations is to have a doorman do an actual patron count coming in the door. This could be a proposed condition in association with this operation, particularly when live entertainment and dancing is occurring on site. A cafe dance permit is similar to a live entertainment permit and requires a check of the applicant, description of all activities that occur; security measures and personnel. The cafe dance permit does not run with the land and can be revoked by the City Manager with certain criteria. Public Comment was opened. Mike McDermott, Supervisor of Vice Detail with the Police Department - established his responsibility to investigate complaints involving ABC licensed establishments. Commissioner Adams asked about the incident list received from the police department and wanted to know the frequency of resident complaints in the area regarding the Cannery operation. • Mr. McDermott stated that most of the complaints received go in INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 through dispatch and are logged if an officer is dispatched. There is no distinction as to the caller of the complaint whether they are a resident or a restaurant patron or employee and sometimes the caller does not give a name. The complaints are logged as reporting statistics in the reporting district which encompasses Newport Pier to Coast Highway up Newport Boulevard. The list of complaints provided are all attributed to the Cannery Restaurant. This list is a little larger than other operations within the Cannery Village area. To determine if a place is overpopulated to where an unsafe condition exists (shoulder to shoulder, blocked aisles, unable to get to tables or bars which means fire access and aisles are blocked) the place is shut down and everybody is counted out one at a time. If they are over capacity, a citation is issued. The patrons are then counted back in until at capacity. The Vice and Narcotics detail (6 investigators) go in about twice a month to check up as well as patrol officers who check more often. Mr. Bill Hamilton, President of Western Canners Company, operators of the Cannery Restaurant spoke in support of his application. He thanked staff for the report. Continuing, Mr. Hamilton gave a brief history of the Cannery as a fish cannery for the first 50 years and more recently, a • restaurant, harbor cruise and entertainment center. He has been financially involved since 1971. Since that time, many changes have happened, most notably the application to add live entertainment and dancing. This is not an unusual request as live entertainment has been allowed in the area. Zoning, as it exists now, does not preclude this type of operation. All activities will be inside the restaurant. Studies have been made by both his sound engineer as well as the city's to prove that the noise can be contained within city standards. There have been problems within Cannery Village but there are eight (8) major late night establishments within the area. The Cannery, if allowed to proceed, could have a more stable type of clientele, people who will stay in the restaurant and not wander in the streets, people who will respond to a better security system. He concluded asking for a chance to deal with the deteriorating business. If this is granted, then the license will be taken out by himself as an individual. The license is not permanent, if he leaves then a new licensee must apply which would allow the city an opportunity to deal with any problems. At commission inquiry, he stated that he has read and agrees to the findings and conditions of approval and would be amenable to further comply with any studies if necessitated by the city while operating with live entertainment and dancing. He had no suggestions to mitigate the noise that happens outside the establishment, but stated that his outside security people can encourage people to be quiet. Ms. Terry Heidelberg, general manager of the Cannery Restaurant . stated that there are three (3) valets on Friday and Saturday and four INDEX City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 (4) security officers outside that go through the Cannery area and there are five to six security officers inside the restaurant depending on the business. Bartenders within the Cannery Village are encouraged to attend training that is sponsored by the ABC through the police department. The class is on alcohol awareness of staff in determining if a patron is intoxicated as well as knowledge of the laws that affect the business. At commission inquiry she stated that the patrons are between 30 and 35 years of age after 9 p.m. There are approximately 75 to 90 people that go into the lounge after dinner. The lounge area capacity is approximately 125. The following citizens spoke in opposition to this application asking that this application be denied : 1. Mr. Reginald Thatcher - 611 Lido Park Drive, #4F 2. Pamela Plotkin - 509 31 ss Street 3. Donald Gregory - 601 Lido Park Drive - introduced petition in opposition signed by 37 residents at both 601 and 611 Lido Park Drive 4. George Leeper - 419 30th Street 5. Roy Shlemon - 611 Lido Park Drive, #BE 6. Victor Yack - 611 Lido Park Drive, #3D • 7. Thomas Dixon - 31 st Street - introduced video The stated reasons of opposition were: • noise and itinerant merry makers • lack of and disturbance of residential sleep • peace and quiet is disturbed • noise complaints (both from inside and outside the building) have been made to the Police Department • loitering in area while patrons sober up before driving home • daily vandalism and theft to nearby gift shop • problem of urine and defecation on streets and on sidewalks • squealing tires from parking lot of the Cannery Restaurant • live entertainment would increase noise level and trouble • fender base reverberates (sound that goes through an amplifying speaker) from music coming from Cannery • concerns of stabbing that occurred just recently • other discos in the area have been closed due to rowdiness • connection between the Malarkey's outside noise and the Cannery noise • late night alcohol • security system hired by the restaurant is not effective • high rise building with 48 units was first occupied in 1960 • amplifiers are still at the restaurant • auto alarms • noise vibrations • • charter buses with diesel fumes that park illegally INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 • foul- mouthed drunks • change tone of neighborhood; with live entertainment and dance floor the Cannery will become a nightclub • property values will be affected • under 30 set will come to dance 9 p.m. to 2 a.m. • no elderly people will come to dance • video introduced that documented several instances during summer of 1996 while Cannery Restaurant was in violation of the use permit by having live amplified music and dancing on the premises Commissioner Adams clarified that if Commission does not act on this application tonight, Use Permit No. 1684 will expire and as the applicant was under a permit where a maximum of three (3) live entertainers could perform with no amplified music and no brass and /or percussion instruments, they will no longer be able to have live entertainment. Staff further clarified the following issues are present: whether there is live entertainment or not; live entertainment with amplified music or not; or dancing permitted or not. A matrix could be introduced and expanded by different hours of operation as well. Commission could give staff direction to modify terms or conditions, or continue item to • allow a new set of conditions to be drafted. If the Commission does not approve the request before them, live entertainment will no longer be permitted. Commissioner Ashley reiterated that Commission has no ability at this time to restrict the hours of operation or the live entertainment of the Cannery Restaurant. What is being proposed today is for the City to be able to regulate the hours of operation and the type of entertainment inside the building. The amount and loudness of the excessive noise that is currently going on are not related to the live entertainment which has been going on for some time now. Motion was made by Commissioner Fuller to continue this item to the Planning Commission meeting of October 23, 1997. He stated that noise is the issue of most concern as expressed by the volume of letters received and the testimony of the citizens. Mr. Hamilton needs to be given an opportunity to address the concerns of the internal and external noise problems. Commissioner Adams stated that dancing and amplified music at this location is not appropriate. The main reason is what seems to be a fairly flagrant violation of the existing conditions and until things are more under control, Commission should not be entertaining intensification of this use. This will change the nature of the operation and perhaps at some future time, the operation could be given the . opportunity to try out this new way of doing business, but not until they INDEX . City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 can show that they can do their current business properly. This is a fine restaurant and he respects the applicant, but until it is shown that the operation can be run the way it should be, Commission should not give them a chance to try something different. He concluded stating he favors incorporating a live entertainment component into UP 1521 that would be similar in nature to the intent of UP 1684, where it is limited to 2 or 3 entertainers, no amplified music. Also, impose some hour restrictions and a working program to allow additional protection to the neighborhood. After these are in place, then give the applicant the opportunity to change characteristics. Commission needs to try to improve conditions then maybe in the future, take up a change in the operational characteristics. This is a mixed use area and the apartment building was there first. Commissioner Gifford asked staff about the noise ordinance. If the noise can be internally contained and a noise problem is generated from the outside area - how were the measurements made, types or location of noise, definition of night club and how is it applied in the Zoning Code. Further, thought needs to be given to this application with ways to resolve the noise problems (source, responsibility and mitigation measures). It is evident from the testimony tonight that there • is plenty of annoyance with noise. She supports a continuance to enable standards to be drafted to identify problems, mitigation and responsibility. Commissioner Selich commented that staff seems to be recommending a higher degree of supervision over this facility. The dancing and live entertainment permits are issued outside the Use Permit. If these permits are allowed and the noise and activity are not controlled, the City Manager can yank these permits immediately. He concluded supporting approval of the project with the recommendations by staff and allowing permits to be issued. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that Mr. Hamilton has a business that must not be denigrated. Commission has to strike a balance. The evidence from the neighborhood is persuasive. There is a social issue. At this point in time this is the wrong place for dancing. It would be turning an eatery into a night club. He supports a continuance to hear about mitigation of off -site problems, noise attenuated in the interior of the restaurant and effectiveness of the security guards. Commissioner Ashley expressed his support of continuing this item. He stated that no one wants the Cannery to go out of business. The applicant needs to come back and explain why the amplified live entertainment would not cause problems to neighbors. There is loud noise happening now that is in violation of the community control noise . ordinance that has not been stopped. 7 INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Uniform closing hours for establishments in Cannery Village was discussed by Commission. Commissioner Kranzley stated that he has been involved with several meetings with citizens and business people. He stated that there is a compliance and enforcement issue in the Cannery Village. People are not allowed to vandalize and relieve themselves. There should be bicycle police there to patrol the areas during the week as well as on weekends. The three main issues of the Cannery are noise. Commission is not granting any increase in noise to the Cannery. A live entertainment permit does not say to ignore the noise ordinance and play that music louder then recorded music. Crowding - there is no increase in the maximum occupancy of the restaurant. No relationship between dancing and crime /drunkenness. Commission is limiting the number of hours of operation and use of live or recorded music and now have a quicker trigger if Mr. Hamilton does not comply with the noise ordinance and dancing issues. A relationship has to develop between the residences and the business and part of that is making sure that if people who visit residences and business come out and make loud noises act against the law, there will be consequences. He • does not support a continuance. Commissioner Adams stated that having live bands and dancing changes the nature of the establishment as well as the area outside the establishment. Chairperson Kranzley stated that there needs to be a discussion on live entertainment with amplification and the limit of three performers. Motion by Commissioner Fuller was restated to continue Use Permit No. 1521 to November 6th and extend Use Permit No. 1684 to November 6th to allow time for the applicant to address the concerns addressed this evening. With one objection (Commissioner Kranzley), motion carried. xsa SUBJECT: Franklin Realty Animated Copy Sign (Jeffrey Stem, applicant) 3250 East Coast Highway • Exception Permit No. 51 Request for an exception to the Sign Code to allow the replacement of an existing conforming pole sign with a pole sign which contains a • marquee type sign with mechanically changeable copy (animated INDEX Item No. 2 Exception Permit No. 51 Continued to 10/23/97 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 sign). Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway to continue this item to October 23rd. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. SUBJECT: Revised Regulations to allow convenience markets in conjunction with service stations (Continued Public Hearing) An amendment to Chapter 20.80 and Chapter 20.03 of Title 20 of the Municipal Code to update regulations for service stations and to allow the co- development of convenience markets and eating and drinking establishments. Motion was made by Commissioner Selich to table this item and refer it to Committee to address complex concerns raised in the staff report. • Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. SUBJECT: Harbor View North • General Plan Amendment No. 97 -2 • Amendment No. 865 • Development Agreement No. 11 Amendments to the General Plan, a pre -zone amendment, a Planned Community District development plan, and a development agreement for the Harbor View North area (formerly Bonita Village) to establish pre - annexation entitlements in association with the proposed detachment of this area from the City of Irvine and annexation to the City of Newport Beach. Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway to continue this item to October 23rd. Without objection, the motion carried by acclamation. • •• • INDEX Item No. 3 A No. 863 Item tabled and referred to Committee Item No. 4 GPA No. 97 -2 Amendment No. 865 DA No. 11 Continued to 10/23/97 • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 SUBJECT: TLA Restaurant (Jonathan Rodriquez- Atkatz, applicant) 3100 West Coast Highway • Use Permit No. 3612 and • Traffic Study No. 112 The project involves a use permit, a traffic study and a negative declaration, to allow the construction of a 1,500 square foot, two -story drive - through restaurant facility with a 300 sq. ft. storage building and related off - street parking. The applications include the following requests: • waive a portion of the required off - street parking. • allow an elevator shaft parapet wall and mechanical equipment screen to exceed the maximum area of 25 square feet permitted by the Municipal Code. • a modification to the Zoning Code to allow an architectural feature (steel frame facade element, 32 feet high at its peak) to exceed the permitted 31 foot maximum peak height limitation. • • waiver of development standards specified by Section 20.82.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Staff presented the report stating that this project involves demolition of certain buildings on Coast Highway which are currently vacant and formerly occupied by an automobile sales facility. The proposed project would occupy 50% of the site. This proposed project is unique in that it has no walk -up or on -site dining, no alcoholic beverage sales and high turn -over drive- through service only, resulting in no patron parking demand. The stacking lanes will be the patron parking, with consideration given to the capacity and ability to sustain demand for the facility. Parking will be provided for the employees. A key issue is the access and on -site circulation. Concern has been raised regarding a sole access driveway for patron usage for both ingress and egress. Due to anticipated conflicts of a dual left turn lane serving the site, access into the property from a left turn on east bound Coast Highway could be accommodated, but if so, on exiting movement left turn to east bound Coast Highway would be conflicting and create a safety hazard. Public Works has therefore strongly recommended that left turn movement be precluded. This proposed project will conduct order processing through menus distributed by on -site employees with no speaker boxes. To ensure new development be designed to maintain the Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee recommendations, a condition has been included to have this project reviewed by a design consulting team retained by the City for the Mariners Mile area. • 10 INDEX Item No. 5 Use Permit No. 3612 A TS No. 112 Denied • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 In response to Commission inquiry, Mrs. Wood commented that the city has no design review authority. The Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee felt that if the city could provide some advice, keeping in mind the overall goals of the Mariners' Mile area, that there might be compliance. Commissioner Ridgeway asked about the twelve (12) foot right of way for the widening of Coast Highway. What would be the impact of stacking on this proposed site? Staff answered that the project has been designed with those setbacks provided, but the actual dedication is not being required except through a lease hold commitment. At Commission inquiry, discussion continued on restrictions, placements of exits and entrances. The conditions of the project make it clear if at some point later on that patrons complain about the inability to make a left turn, Public Works will not change that condition due to the safety factors. A U -turn can be done at the intersection that services Hoag Hospital and Balboa Coves. One of the concerns of the Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee is the number of driveways in the area. • Commissioner Selich asked for clarificationof the number of parcels. Staff answered that the proposed project is on a single parcel and the driveway that is there currently provides access to three parcels. Ms. Temple stated that in checking assessor records and parcel maps it is actually two parcels that look like three in terms of the way the buildings are situated on them. It was determined that the site plan in the packet depicts just the part of the parcel this project is on. To get access to the remaining portion of the auto facility's parcel and the small parcel next door, there will have to be two (2) additional driveways. Discussions had been held with the realtor who was marketing these parcels and discussion with potential buyers of the other two parcels. The other areas are being marketed as separate parcels. Public Works had been asked and provided a letter to the realtor indicating that the "other half' of this large parcel would be granted an additional driveway because that was a major concern of the property owner. But no access to the third smaller parcel was discussed. If this is truly a single parcel, then a single driveway with multiple use by three entities may be desirable, but given the layout of the site as proposed, may not work. Discussion continued about the possible placement of one driveway in relation to the proposed project and /or the addition of multiple driveways on the large parcel. Public Comment was opened. • INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Jonathan Rodriguez - Atkatz, 3100 West Coast Highway - spoke in favor of this application. He thanked staff for their direction received on this project for the past few months. It is his objective to have a novel and unique drive- through facility and he has spent two (2) years in development. The retail design is akin to public art having aesthetic value and sensibility that transcends which would be typically encountered in this area of commerce. The appearance of the building with the lighting and landscaping will be aesthetically pleasing. Systems for handling flow and traffic management have been reviewed by hired top traffic engineers in the country to analyze how this site functions. The queuing system has been specifically designed to address one of the basic flaws of fast food. We have the ability to que on site in excess of 32 vehicles. The building has been set back to address the requirements that might happen in the future and created landscape buffers in between that point. The operation dovetails the delivery of the product and service orientation that is expected of this type of approach. There are no speaker boxes nor menu boards. There are people on site who will greet patrons face to face. Newport Beach represents the demographic and density sought to make this business a realty. He concluded asking Commission to approve this application. • Commissioner Adams stated that there has been an apparent change in the operational characteristics. The traffic study indicated that there would be menu boards and now there are not. Where are the menus going to be given to the patrons? The queuing now relies on sixty (60) seconds service time for the initial que. Referencing the exhibit on the wall, Mr. Rodriguez- Atkatzanswered that it will happen approximately 100 feet in to the site where the one lane splits to two. It will take approximately, from decision to order time, two to three minutes. Commissioner Adams continued saying that the difference between 60 seconds and 2 and Y2 minutes is huge. If the whole project is based on the 60 second service time for the initial stop how will that huge difference be resolved and can you demonstrate that the queuing at the first service is adequate? The traffic engineer hired was under the assumption that there was going to be an order board. Now the operation has passing out a menu, looking at the menu and then ordering. Those are two completely different things. If this project was designed based on order boards and the design has not been changed, I am concerned with the queuing capacity in the first part of the driveway. When a patron has ordered, how do they know which pick up lane to go to? He was answered that people on site will direct them to the appropriate lane. . Commissioner Adams asked if there was a three dimensional model 12 INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 showing the project and site and was answered that there was not one here tonight at the meeting. He stated that the exhibits on the wall were very confusing. Commissioner Fuller asked if this was the first project and was answered that this is the first one. Commissioner Fuller asked if on the project rendering it was a surf board and was answered that it is a fabric sculpture meant to reflect the maritime and nautical aspect. Discussion continued on the possible placement of a drive through to Avon Street, demographics, efficiency, stacking concerns, number of patrons, concern of number of parcels involved and safety. Commissioner Adams asked staff about the traffic report recommending left turn access out of the project. Were the U -turns at Superior taken into account? Staff answered that the study is based on the assumption that left turns could be done, the conclusions are the same. Mark Vanderzan, Boora Architects, of Portland Oregon - talked about the height of the building as a functional efficiency of the layout of the site. It allows the flow and function to be efficient with direction by professional • traffic consultants with a 3007o contingency for queuing built into the projections for the needs based on order times. The building has been put up thirteen (13) feet high so that any vehicle could travel underneath it with no conflict of the functional use which necessitated the slightly higher than normal two (2) story building. The mechanical systems and elevator parapet are included. The building has been designed to fit into the Mariners' Mile district. The character is derived from the marine imagery with canopies for shade to customers. They are elaborate works of art and depict boat sails. The main objective is to create something pleasing to the eye with the landscaping. A cost of one million, five hundred thousand dollars is being spent on this project. Commissioner Adams expressed concern regarding the issue of two parcels or one parcel of property. The City may have been misled with regards to what is being proposed here. A separate parcel is not being created or sold or designated for this project? Mr. Vanderzan stated that this issue is with the staff and had been brought up at the pre - application meetings when the process was reviewed as to what might be necessary with that situation, whether the parcels would have to be created or re- delineated. This is a single parcel now and we are leasing the easterly half of this parcel of land. Commissioner Fuller stated his understanding is that there are two parcels, a small parcel and a larger parcel. This is the easterly half of the larger • parcel that the proposed project would be built on. 13 INDEX . City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Ms. Temple stated that the Theodore Robins.holdings is a lot that is approximately 200 feet of frontage on Coast Highway. This project involves the easterly plus or minus 100 feet of the Theodore Robins holdings. The remaining 100 feet then beyond to the west of these holdings is a separate smaller parcel which does not go through to the dedicated area of Avon Street. All land had been utilized in the past functionally as a single parcel. Commissioner Ridgeway stated that the westerly parcel, if not a separate parcel but part of this 200 feet of frontage, how will it be accessed in the future? Mr. Edmonston reiterated that at the meeting with the Public Works Director and the realtor representing the Theodore Robins people, it was understood that there were two parcels. As a result of that, Public Works sent a letter to the realtor indicating that there would be, based on the discussion that day, a second driveway allowed on what was thought to be the westerly parcel. Now, it appears to be the westerly half of the one big parcel. • Mr. Rodriguez-Atkatz presented a copy of this letter (with map) that the realtor had given him prior to their signing the lease. The letter states that two driveways would be permitted for the property. Commissioner Ridgeway stated the Commission concern of accessing the future parcel. It appears, in looking at the map, that the city engineer has been somewhat misled. This map shows a new twenty -four (24) foot driveway location to be determined. The problem is not the project but this additional driveway which the Commission is trying to prevent. The Commission is concerned with access to the other 100 linear feet on this parcel. Commission needs to resolve this before a determination can be made on the proposed project. Commissioner Adams stated that city staff has told the applicant that the city is okay with two driveways on this parcel back in July. Mr. Edmonston stated that is correct and it was subsequent to that time, after the letterwas sent, he became aware of the Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee and their guidelinesto try to reduce the number of driveways. Discussion ensued with design contingencies of the project on site with a center driveway in the larger parcel. Taken into consideration during the discussion was time and money spent, ingress and egress. At Commission inquiry, Mr. Rodriguez - Atkatz stated he has read and • agrees to the findings and conditions of Use Permit No. 3612. He stated 14 INDEX City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 that he had read the recommendations Committee. Public Comment closed. the Mariners' Mile Advisory Commissioner Ashley stated that he and Commissioner Fuller were members of the business and citizens planning advisory committee for the Mariners' Mile group. The committee recommended and the city council accepted the following: • reduce number of curb cuts for driveways along Mariners' Mile • consolidate parcels • off -site parking For the applicant to come in now, with the request that Commission deal with only the easterly half of a unified parcel and not know what would be developed on the westerly half would be contrary to what the Mariners' Mile Citizen's Advisory Committee was trying to achieve. Maybe this is a good use, but until such time as to what would happen on the west side, Commission would not know if this was a good or bad use. The group wanted to restrict left turning movements on Coast Highway . except at locations where there were signals. This is a very stressful location for this type of use due to the left turning that would be required going over the median strip to enter the facility. Staff has proposed that there be only a right turn out so there would not be a left turn movement going into the opposite direction. The committee was also hoping to promote some form of design without expressing any particular architectural idiom that would be somewhat emblematic of a nautical community. We were hoping to avoid a catch 22 character as there is presently. This design does not appear to be of that intent due to the fact the project represents more curb cuts and left turning movements across a very busy highway at a very stressful location and does not provide any solution for release to Avon Street. The proposed use is very good and should be in Newport Beach, as this is a very innovative idea, but this is the wrong location for that use. This just doesn't seem to fit at all with what the committee has recommended to City Council. Mrs. Wood stated that a consultant has recently been retained by the City to address design issues and the contract is to prepare the development framework to establish guidelines for architecture, signage, and public spaces along Mariners' Mile. There is an option in the contract that the city can give them proposed plans for development on private property to review and make comment on. That is what staff is trying to do with one of the proposed conditions. The timing did not allow staff to give this to them earlier, additionally, these consultants have not been retained to provide any advice with regards to land use, purely design. • 15 INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Discussion ensued on the location of the project on the parcel, unified circulation, serious access issues, extension of Avon Street to the property line, cul -de -sac, basic recommendations of Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee, letter written indicating a second driveway could be allowed, design criteria, time constraints, lease, height modification, accommodation of other uses, perpetuating the problems on the highway, concept of a drive through at that location on Coast Highway, minor walk -up service, curb cuts and vested rights. Following the discussion of possible Avon Street extensions and resulting problems, a straw vote of the Commission for support of a premise of a drive - through of this type at this location concluded with 4 Ayes and 3 Noes. Assistant City Attorney Robin Clauson stated that a continuance would allow concern about drive approach, letter from city engineer and the Mariners' Mile Advisory Committee to be addressed. Just because that letter went out does not mean that the Commission has to approve this project when there are other reasons for denying it. If a continuance is in order it is more specifically in order for an evaluation of the effect of the drive approach. Motion was made by Commissioner Gifford to continue this item to • November 61h to allow applicant time to explore possible answers of concerns raised. All Ayes. Public Comment was re- opened. Mr. Rodriguez- Atkatz, applicant stated he would not be here today if at the outset of this process he knew he could not gain access to this property or in fact if he knew this use was not appropriate for this location. He concluded stating he does not want a continuance of the application. Chairperson Kranzley stated that the Commission will consider a drive - through on that property, which leaves other questions. The other questions need to be answered. You can say you are not in favor of a continuance and we will respect that. The only time that there is a ruling on whether this is appropriate is at the Planning Commission meeting and their decision can be appealed to the City Council. There has been no indication from the city if this is an appropriate use for that lot. Public Comment was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway to deny the application based on the driveway location. Substitute Motion was made by Commissioner Adams to deny on the • basis that drive - through at this location is an inappropriate land use. 5 16 INDEX • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 Ayes, 2 Noes. INDEX Motion was made to reconsiderthe Substitute Motion, All Ayes Motion was made by Commissioner Adams to deny Use Permit No. 3612 based on the revised finding in Exhibit B. - 5 Ayes, 2 Noes. FINDING: The approval of Use Permit No. 3612 will, under the circumstances of the case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City for the following reasons: • that drive through land use is inappropriate at this site SUBJECT: Activities Incorporated (Kathy Miller, applicant) Item No.6 501 30th Street Use Permit No. 3614 • • Use Permit No. 3614 Request to establish a private banquet /conference facility in a space Removed from formerly occupied by a full service restaurant. The operation will function calendar as a banquet facility, evenings and weekends, for events such as private parties and weddings with activitieswhich include: • on -site sale and /or consumption of alcoholic beverages; • a request to waive a portion of the required parking; • the use of live entertainment and dancing. Staff has determined that the application as submitted is incomplete since information including but not limited to the hours of operation and specific operational characteristics have not been adequately presented. Therefore, staff has recommended that this matter be removed from calendar. Once the additional information is submitted, the matter will be rescheduled for public hearing and re- noticing of the public hearing will be issued. SUBJECT: Hard Rock Cafe (Ryan MacAfee, applicant) Item No. 7 451 Newport Center Drive Use Permit No. 3615 • Use Permit No. 3615 Request a change in the operational characteristics of an existing full Continued to service restaurant to allow: 11/06/97 17 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 • the facility to provide live entertainment • the cessation of regular meal service prior to the closing of the restaurant and operation of the facility as a bar /nightclub with alcoholic beverage service as the principal purpose from that time until closing At staff request, this item was continued to November 6th, All Ayes SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 97 -3 Request to initiate an amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan and Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, as follows: A. 3300 -3336 Via Lido B. Office Site "B " /Koll Center Newport C. Newport Village /Newport Center D. Four Seasons Hotel /Newport Center E. The Pacific Club /Koll Center Newport • F. Newport Dunes Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway to recommended for initiation General Plan Amendment 97 -3, All Ayes YYY ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: a.) City Council Follow -up - Oral report by the Assistant City Manager regarding City Council actions related to planning - Mrs. Wood reported that at the September 22nd meeting, the Ordinance Amendment for Mixed Use /Business Hours was called up and will be considered at the meeting of October 27th; and Council directed staff to proceed with written agreements with the County on the property tax exchange, the County Fire Authority and pre- annexation agreements with the Irvine Company. The City Manager has spoken with Mr. Jones who has agreed to fund a lighting designer consultant to give advice on how to resolve the problem of the lighting on their new complex in response to the many letters received by the City. b.) Oral report by the Planning Director regarding the approval of Outdoor Dining Permits, Planning Director's Use Permits, Modification Permits and Temporary Use Permits - Accessory • Outdoor Dining Permit was issued for 102 McFadden Place; 18 INDEX Item No. 8 GPA No. 97 -3 Recommended for initiation Additional Business • City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1997 • Planning Directors Use Permit were issued for 2901 .West Coast Highway, Suite No. 110, 2618 San Miguel Drive; Modifications were approved for 3531 Newport Boulevard,700 Newport Center Drive, 206 36th Street, 305 Kings Place, 1 Thunderbird Drive, 7 Thunderbird Drive, 8 Thunderbird Drive, 90 Old Course Drive, 3903 Marcus Avenue and 6 Oakmont Lane; Modification was disapproved for 6800 West Ocean Front C.) Oral report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee- none d.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - noticing procedures; procedure of logging complaints; and discussion ensued about the quality of designs submitted by applicant. e.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report- none f.) Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Gifford excused from October 23rd meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 11:45 p.m. THOMAS ASHLEY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION • 19 INDEX