Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/16/1975COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH r ^ $ m Regular Planning Commission Meeting Place: City Council Chambers MINUTES 0 M p„ ,,,,,, � p z � Date: October 16, 1975 INDEX Present X X X X X X X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney Gail Pickart, Subdivision Engineer STAFF MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning Tim Cowell, Advance Planning Administrator David Dmohowski, Senior Planner Shirley Harbeck, Secretary Motion X Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 2, 1975, All Ayes were approved with the following changes: 1. Page 7, Line 28, that the word "effect" be changed to "district." 2. Pages 10 and 11, that the text and motion regarding Amendment No. 453, "Delaney's Cannery Village" indicate that the matter was reset for hearing on November 6, 1975 and renoticed rather than being continued. 3. Page 13, that the Minutes show that Conditions Nos. 2 and 3 of Use Permit No. 1769 were revised by an amended motion. 4. Page 14, that the amended motion for Use Permit No. 1769 reflect that Conditions Nos. 2 and 3 were revised to read as follows: "2. That an off -site parking agreement shall be approved by the City Council, guaran- teeing that a minimum of 28 parking spaces shall be provided on the subject off -site parking lot located on 30th Street in Cannery Village for Assistance League members.and staff. "3. The off -site parking lot shall be access- ible and usable for members of the Assistance League and staff for parking at all times." Page 1. 0 9 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH October 16, 1975 MINUTES INDEX Item #1 Request to permit the subdivision of 33.702 acres TENTATIVE into three lots for commercial development. MAP TIC T Location: A portion of Lot 5 and Lot 6, Tract 9063 7953, located on property bounded by Birch Street, Von Karman Avenue APPROVED and MacArthur Boulevard in "Koll Center Newport." CONDI- TILY Zone: P -C Applicant: Koll Center Newport Owner: Same as Applicant Engineer: Raub, Bein, Frost and Associates, Newport Beach Commissioner Seely voiced concern with the pro- posed findings as they related to the proposed development. Staff advised that these were foot- print lots on which development had already been made in accordance with the policies previously approved for the development of Koll Center Newport, that the subdivision was being made following development rather than.prior to development as was the normal procedure, and that any development of the large remnant parcel at a later date would require further resubdivision and approval by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Seely then suggested that the findings refer to the existing development only and not future development of the remnant lot. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Robert Bein of Raub, Bein, Frost and Associates appeared before the Commission on behalf of Koll Center Newport and concurred with the staff report and recommended conditions. He requested clarifi- cation of Condition No. 2 and felt that the C.C.& R.s which have already been recorded would suffice. In order to preclude the recording of a document each time there was a subdivision, he suggested that Condition No. 2 be changed to read "The recorded C.C.& R.s document shall be satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Director of Community Development or shall be amended to provide for the continued maintenance and operation ....... etc." Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES P p Z 3 ROIL CAIt N October 16, 1975 INDEX Assistant City Attorney Coffin commented on the matter and advised that the condition could be reworded as suggested by Mr. Bein or that a clause could be added to the existing condition which would state "...unless the C.C.& R.s already recorded are adequate for these purposes." There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed the findings at some length, as well as the procedures for development under the planned community text and subdivision of land in accordance with the Map Act. The public hearing was reopened and Robert Bein appeared before the Commission to comment on the findings and assure the Commission they would have further review of the remnant parcel at such time as it was resubdivided for new development. The public hearing was closed. MfPon X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the A Ayes following findings: 1. That the proposed map and development shown thereon is consistent with applicable general and specific plans and the Planned Community Text. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in the tentative map. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development as set forth in the Planned Community Text. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH \11\ DAFAl October 16, 1975 MINUTES INDEX 7. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. That the proposed map complies with the "footprint lot" concept permitted under the Planned Community zoning on the site, and meet all zoning and Uniform Building Code require- ments of the City. and approve Tentative Map of Tract 9063, subject to the following conditions: 1. That setbacks shall be provided between all buildings and surrounding property lines so as to comply with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 2. That there shall be a document recorded satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Director of Community Development which pro- vides for the continued maintenance and opera- tion of the off - street parking and landscaped areas within the common area (Lot 3) and which provides for perpetual access to the buildings on Lots 1 and 2 as required by the Uniform Building Code unless the C.C.& R.s already recorded are adequate for these purposes. 3. That all public improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That the boundary of the final tract map be checked by the County Surveyor before being submitted to the City for approval. 5. That Section 19.16.030 of the Subdivision Ordinance regarding map scale be waived pro - vided that maps drawn accurately to a scale of 1" = 100' are furnished to the Public Works Department immediately after approval of the final map. Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ycm m> m m£ TrL Z 9 L r1 u MINUTES October 16, 1975 INDEX Request to permit the construction of an athletic club in "Newport Place." Location: A portion of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 57 -2 (Resubdivision No. 406) located at 1701 Quail Street, on the south- westerly side of Quail Street, southeasterly of Birch Street in Item #2 USE PERMIT 1771 APPROVED C NDI- TI NALLY "Newport Place." Zone: P -C Applicants: Robert Zukin and W. Clark Graves, Irvine Owner: Newport Project, Emkay Development Co., Newport Beach Planning Commission briefly discussed the informa- tion provided in connection with the Long Beach Athletic Club, restrictions on tournaments, park- ing requirements, and serving of alcoholic beverag s. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Mr. Garduno of Garduno Design Associates, 1300 Quail, Suite 103, Newport Beach, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicants. He concurred with the staff report and recommended conditions except Condition No. 9. He advised that racquet ball was not a spectator sport and very few people could stand around to watch a game because of the design. He pointed out that 35% more parking was being provided than was recommended by the staff and that the club was being planned as a private facility and should not incur the parking problems of other clubs which are maintained on a public basis. He requested that Condition No. 9 be reworded or deleted in order not to preclude some inter -club tournaments. Mr. Garduno reviewed the general method of opera- tion with the Commission. Planning Commission questioned Mr. Garduno rela- tive to increasing the number of required parking under Condition No. 8 to 77 spaces since they had indicated that number of spaces would be provided. Mr. Garduno referred this matter to the applicant who was also present. Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p A Z 3 o *rA„ N October 16, 1975 MINUTES iuncr Robert Zukin, one of the applicants, appeared before the Commission and advised that because some of the parking spaces may be lost due to installation of landscaping and requirements for enclosed trash areas, he would consent to an increase to 67 spaces for required parking. When questioned on the matter of alcoholic beverages, Mr. Zukin advised they do not anticipate serving of alcoholic beverages at the present time, however, they may wish to do so in the future. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made that the All Ayes Planning Commission make the following findings: 1. That the proposed development does . not conflict with the intent of the Planned Community Development Plan and the General Plan. 2. That the athletic club facilities will be compatible with existing and planned office • uses which will surround the site. 3. That adequate on -site parking spaces are being provided for the use of the proposed develop- ment. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1771 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons resid- ing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the genera welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1771, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations, except as noted in Condition No.2. 2. That all required yard setbacks shall be maintained, including the required 10 foot side yard setback. 3. That a landscape plan shall be approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. The landscaping and watering system shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, and shall be properly maintained. Page 6. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A F Z N L n U MINUTES October 16, 1975 INDEX 4. That all exterior signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development 5. That all storage of trash shall be shielded from view within the clubhouse or within an area enclosed by a wall not less than six feet in height. 6. The lighting fixtures for the volly ball court shall be designed, located and maintained so as to shield the light source and confine glare to the site area. All lights shall be out by 9:00 P.M. 7. Prior to securing a final utility release, the applicant shall submit to the Department of Community Development a statement from a licensed electrical engineer certifying that the lights have been installed in accordance with Condition No. 6. 8. That a minimum of 67 offstreet parking spaces shall be maintained for the proposed develop- ment. 9. That all applicable conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 500 shall be fulfilled. 10. That the use permit shall be amended prior to the serving of alcoholic beverages. Item #3 Request to permit the construction of a two story VARIANCE 1050 single family dwelling on an R -2 lot where the proposed development does not meet the open space option requirement along the front (i.e. alley APPROVED side) property line. CND-T-_ TTORfREL Y Location: Portions of Lots 3 and 4, Block 138 River Section, located at 2042 39th Street, southeasterly of 39th Street and northeasterly of Balboa Boulevard in West Newport. Zone: R -2 Applicant: Tony Regan, Carlsbad Owners: Tony and Yvonne Regan, Carlsbad Page 7. COMMISSIONERS � T T D eNn m f A A Z A rAl1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH October 16. 1975 MINUTES INDEY Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Tony Regan, applicant, appeared before the Commission and commented in disagreement with the staff report and recommendations. He reviewed his proposal with the Commission, advising that any changes would ruin the architectural design and livability of the house. He requested that the Commission approve the variance as proposed without changes as recommended by the staff report. Gus Ritter, 212 39th Street, appeared before the Commission in opposition to the request because of the size of the lot and questioned the utility easements to the lot. Nadine Hill, 206 39th Street, appeared before the Commission and commented on the access to the garages from the narrow alley. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. • Commissioner Seely questioned the applicant on the availability of utilities and was advised by Mr. Regan that they do exist as they are currently connected to the structure proposed for demolition. Mr. Regan thought that the open space requirement pertained to duplexes and not single family structures even though the property was zoned R -2. Community Development Director Hogan commented on the recommended reduction in the size of the house in order to provide the required open space, increase the livability, and reduce the intensity of the use on this extremely small lot. Public hearing was re- opened and Tony Regan appear- ed before the Commission to comment on the inten- sity of the area and pointed out there were no restrictions as to the size of a family when a home was purchased. Public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the • following findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, referred to in the application, which circumstances or Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m+ 1 m Z = MINUTES P A Z 3 e Octoher 16. 1975 In V&^ conditions do not apply generally to land in the same district, since the site is approxi- mately 25% smaller than the adjacent residen- tial properties. 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the appli- cant. 3. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 4. That the proposed single family dwelling meets or exceeds all of the provisions of the Residential Development Standards (i.e., building height and floor area limit, parking, etc.) with the exception of the open space option requirement. 5. The development will create an adequate and usable open area on the site in addition to • the required yard setbacks. 6. That the granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the appli- cant and will not under the circumstances.of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. and approve Variance No. 1050, subject to the following conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations. 2. That a maximum number of three bedrooms shall be permitted in conjunction with the proposed development. 3. That individual water and sewer connections shall be provided to serve the new dwelling • unit. Planning Commission discussed the motion and the open space option requirements as they pertained to this and other developments in the area. Page 9. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T A p Z 3 ACAL Y� � October 16, 1975 MINUTES INDEX Commissioner Seely voiced concern that the policy guidelines which have been set up to preserve open space and discourage overbuilding on substandard lots were not being followed and if people contin- ued to circumvent the ordinance be requesting variances with full knowledge of the development standards, maybe it was time to again review the standards for possible revision in order to pre- clude these situations. Commissioner Agee felt this was an exceptional piece of property and the development proposed would provide a more livable dwelling and would not add to the density to any great extent. Commissioner Parker commented on the problems of development on nonconforming lots when the stand- ards changed from year to year and felt that the property under consideration was very unique in. that the density proposed was less than that allowed by the zone and therefore favored the development as proposed. • Commissioner Heather commented on the residential development standards as they pertained to these difficult sized lots and suggested that a survey be made to determine the number of lots which may be effected by the development standards. She voiced concern with the fact that the Commission had to consider requests which went against the intent of the ordinance. Commissioner Williams questioned whether meaning- ful open space was being created by the suggested revision and felt the development as proposed was much better from a standpoint of livability. Commissioner Tiernan was opposed to wall -to -wall building on undersized lots and felt that the suggestion of the staff was more than generous. Ayes X X X X X Following discussion, the motion was voted on and Noes X X carried. Page 10. CAL 9 0 COMMISSIONERS Y T T roy T � i p Y p Z N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH October 16, 1975 MINUTES INDEX Proposed amendment to the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements to 1) create a "Medium- Density Residential" category, 2) add a definition of "buildable acreage," and 3) revise the wording Item #4 GENERAL PLAN ATNDMENT NO. 26 of certain sections of the elements. (Referred back to the Planning Commission by the City RES. 934 Council for reconsideration.) D PTED RECD Public hearing was opened in connection with this MENDING matter. APPROV—AL Paul Ryckoff, 1200 South Bayfront, Balboa Island, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter and pointed out that only Items 1. through 2.C. of his memo dated January 2, 1975, were being considered. He concurred with the staff report and recommendations and reviewed the changes under consideration as outlined in the Cit Council staff report of the August 25, 1975, meet- ing. He felt that the definition of "buildable acreage" was more understandable and would cause less confusion than "net" and "gross" definitions. Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter. He had no opposition to the changes in density ranges as long as they were based on "gross acreage" and not "buildable acreage." He requested that the Planning Commis- sion reiterate their previous actions and deny this request. Frank Fulton, incoming president of the Balboa Island Improvement Association appeared before the Commission in support of the amendment. Gil Ferguson, 2602 W. Ocean Front, Executive Director of C.E.E.E.D., appeared before the Commis lion and commented on the common nomenclature that was being proposed by the Society for Planners in Orange County. Goldie Joseph, 515 Via Lido Soud, appeared in opposition to the amendment and felt this was a backdoor approach to down - zoning. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission concurred that the items under consideration should be acted on separately in Page 11. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH r 2 T j x Z y MINUTES p P N Rf CALL October 16 1975 INDEX , order to obtain an overall concensus as to what should be recommended to the City Council in connection with General Plan Amendment No. 26. Planning Commission discussed the definition of "buildable acreage," its comprehensibility, and ensuing problems. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made recommending Ayes X X X X to the City Council the addition of the definition Noes X X X of "buildable acreage" to the Residential Growth Element as follows: Buildable Acreage, includes the entire site less areas with a slope of greater than two to one, and does not include any portion of perimeter streets or open space. Motion X Motion was made to change "Low- Density Residential' Ayes X X X X X from a maximum of 10 dwelling units per gross acre Noes X X to a maximum of.4 dwelling units per buildable acre. Lion X Motion was made to create a "Medium - Density Ayes X X X X X Residential" category to include developments of Noes X X more than 4 dwelling units per buildable acre with a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per build- able acre. With regard to the rewording of Pages (i), (ii), and (iii) of the Residential Growth Element, there was much in -depth discussion by the Commissioners as to whether or not the wording should be changed and if so, how it should be changed in order to reflect the current philosophies as to the future capabilities of the support systems. Motion X Following discussion of the wording and whether Ayes X X X X there was enough evidence to warrant making any Noes X X X changes to the General Plan, motion was made that on Page (i) under The Effect of Residential Growth on Support Systems, the following words be de let "As a result of these discussions, it was determined that, within the range of residen- tial growth from the lowest reasonable limit to the "Trend- Growth" projection, there are no physical constraints (in terms of limited • capacity of the physical systems) and no major "economic threshold points" (in terms of a drastic "jump" in the cost of providing services)." Page 12. Motion Ayes Noes 0 0 COMMISSIONERS p m w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH October 16. 1975 MINUTES ,uncr and replaced with the following sentence: "It is recognized through the deliberations of the governing bodies of the City that there are physical constraints (in terms of limited capacity of the physical system's) and major "economic threshold points" (in terms of a drastic "jump" in the costs of providing services and that the City will continue to monitor hese constraints as it determines the need to do so." X Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 934, X X X X recommending the adoption of General Plan Amend - X X X ment No. 26, reflecting the above actions, and providing that the maximum number of dwelling units on each large undeveloped site be noted on the Residential Growth Plan (map) and that the density numbers and residential designations resulting from this amendment be computed by staff and reflected in the appropriate sections of the Land Use and Residential Growth Elements. Item #5 Consideration of developing a new system of GENERAL residential land use categories and resulting PLAN changes to the Land Use and Residential Growth AMENDMENT N0. 27 Elements. Commissioner Williams commented that since the ADOPTION NOT initiation of this amendment, background informa- tion had been obtained which would preclude fu.r- RECOM- ther consideration at this time and since this MENDED amendment could lead to confusion with General Plan Amendment No. 26, he requested that the matter be removed from further consideration. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Advance Planning Administrator Cowell reviewed maps illustrating the various densities through- out the City. Ralph Watson, resident of West Newport, appeared before the Commission to inquire if a duplex could be constructed on his property which consisted of 2,400 square feet and was advised it may be possible, but that he should contact the office staff for more definite information. Page 13. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH D R0 CALL Motion Ayes Noes lJ L MINUTES October 16 1975 INDEX , There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Following discussion, motion was made that General X X X X X Plan Amendment No. 27 not be recommended to the X City Council for adoption. Planning Commission recessed at 10:10 P.M. and reconvened at 10:25 P.M. Item #6 Consideration of alternate land uses for the GENERAL property between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado PLAN Avenue, just north of Coast Highway, and resulting AMENDMENT changes to the Land Use and, possibly, the Residen NT.—T8— tial Growth Elements. (Directed by the Planning Commission, as a result of City Council direction on the previous General Plan Amendment No. 20). ADOPTION NOT RECOM- Public hearing was opened in connection with this MENDED matter. J. R. Blakemore, President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association, appeared before the Commission and requested that the Recreation and Marine Commercial land use designation be deleted so as to preclude any development of a theater, restaurant, or shopping complex which would generate an excessive amount of noise, traffic, congestion, lights, pollution, etc. He felt that an office complex such as that approved for Corporate Plaza would be more harmonious with the area. Lyman Faulkner, 521 Avocado, appeared before the Commission and advised he would like to have a facility he could ride his bicycle or walk to and was opposed to eliminating the Recreation and Marine Commercial designation from the site betwee Avocado Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard. Bob Ensign, 2214 Port Lerwick, appeared before the Commission in favor of the existing land use designation, was opposed to any changes,and felt that Recreation and Marine Commercial uses were compatible with the area. Page 14. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH D p P Z CALL Motion All Ayes 0 0 MINUTES October 16, 1975 IMCEX Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission and concurred with the recommendations of the staff report. He advised of conceptual plans for the area which would include offices, specialty commercial and some entertainment type activity. He advised that it would be approximately six months before any definite plans could be present- ed for review and that the homeowners associations would be made aware of the plans as has been their previous practice. Planning Commission indicated the desire for a complete discussion of alternative uses for the property in the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed development. There being no others desiring to appear and b.e . heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made recommending to the City Council that no amendment be made to the General Plan pertaining to the property between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, north of Coast Highway. Item #7 Consideration of deleting the proposal for a GENERAL hiking trail, and the possibility of a bicycle PLAN trail, in Buck Gully, and resulting changes to M�MEN NU—.-2T- the Recreation and Open Space Element. Directed. by the Planning Commission at the suggestion of the Shorecliff Homeowners' Association.) RES.935 ADOPTED Community Development Director Hogan advised of RECOM- additional material previously distributed to the MENDING Commission which had been received from the AVFR—OVAL homeowners associations in the area and action taken by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission regarding this matter. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Per Trebler, President, Shorecliffs Property Owners Association, appeared before the Commission to comment on the problems of implementation of the trails due to the hazards of flooding, access to the property, fire, security, litter, lack of Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T ? T Z = MINUTES p p Z 3 October 16. 1975 ,unev right -of -way, and crossing Coast Highway. He reviewed maps showing the bicycle trails through- out the City and pointed out that no other trails were located on private property. He presented petitions in support of this amendment to delete the hiking and bicycle trails within Buck Gully and felt that some open space must remain without construction of any recreational facilities. Irwin Hoffman, Vice President of the Shorecliffs Property Owners Association, appeared before the Commission and commented on the environmental aspects of Buck Gully. He advised this was a flora and fauna preserve and felt it should remain in its natural state which would preclude construc- tion of trails of any kind. Because of the . adverse effect that any trails would have on Buck Gully, he felt that the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 29 was imperative. Nigel Baily, 576 Seaward Road, Corona del Mar, President of the Corona Highlands Property Owners Association, appeared before the Commission in • favor of the amendment in order to preserve the natural state of the canyon. Roger Hardacre, 306 Hazel Drive, Corona del Mar, President of the Friends of Buck Gully, appeared before the Commission and presented a petition of persons in favor of General Plan Amendment No. 29. He commented on the high cost of construc- tion and problems involed with the implementation of the trails. Betsy Mackenzie, Chairman of the Bicycle Trails Citizens Advisory Committee appeared before the Commission and advised there were no plans to construct a bicycle trail in Buck Gully, however, the Committee felt it would be wrong, to abandon use of the gully by the public and felt that the options should remain open. Ronald Kennedy, 550 Hazel Drive, appeared before the Commission in favor of the amendment because the area is private property and felt that con- struction of trails within the canyon would destroy it. Allen Beek, 2120 16th Street, appeared before the • Commission in opposition to the amendment as he felt Buck Gully belonged to all the people and concurred with the action of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and the Bicycle Trails Committee. Page 16. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Y� M T ➢ T T �{ - f� y A T r MINUTES *rAl October 16, 1975 iurtrY Bob Scholler, 265 Evening Canyon Road, Corona del Mar, appeared before the Commission and commented on the inaccessibility to the.canyon. Irwin Hoffman again appeared before the Commission and reiterated that the area was designated as a natural flora and fauna preserve and was incompat- ible with bicycle trails or hiking trails. Ronald Kennedy again appeared before the Commissio and commented on the delicacy of the canyon. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X In order to keep some options open and with the realization that any proposed plans for utiliza- tion of the canyon would be thoroughly reviewed, motion was made to recommend that General Plan Amendment No. 29 be approved insofar as it applied to the bicycle trails but that the potential for a hiking trail be preserved. • Planning Commission discussed the motion and there was some feeling that in this particular instance, options should not be left open and the entire amendment should be adopted, therefore an amend- ment to the motion was proposed by Commissioner Agee to include deletion of the hiking trails also. Commissioner Seely felt the motion and proposed amendment were contradictory and, therefore, he withdrew his motion. Motion X A new motion was then made recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 29 be adopted. Commissioner Seely voiced his opposition to the motion because he felt this was a resource which should not be allowed to be over -used but at the same time should not be eliminated as an available resource for citizens of the community. Commissioner Agee felt that adoption of the Gen- eral Plan amendment would merely control the area by the elimination of formalized trails. Planning Commission discussed the status of the area and it was pointed out that a public easement existed through Buck Gully. At the present time the General Plan calls for a hiking trail along Page 17. COMMISSIONERS yCm I n A A z N 0 Ayes Noes i Motion All Ayes CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES October 16, 1975 iNnry the easement with the possibility of a bicycle trail. If this amendment were adopted, the easement would still remain but development of any trails would be eliminated. Commissioner Parker supported the amendment as he felt there was a compromise in retaining the easement for access but eliminating the construc- tion of trails. Commissioner Williams commented on several parcels of public open space and felt that some resources were such that,if shared by all,would be lost to all,because people would literally love it to death. Commissioner Heather voiced concern with eliminat- ing the option to retain the trails at this point in time and felt the issue should remain status quo. With the consent of the Commission, Betsy Mackenzi pointed out that there were three lots at the bottom of Buck Gully, one of which belonged to the City, which were inaccessible unless Glen Drive were constructed, but if the City should purchase the other lots, the property would lend itself to public use and therefore the trails option should remain open. X X X X Following discussion, the motion to adopt General X X X Plan Amendment No. 29 (by Resolution No. 935) was voted on and carried. Item #8 Revision of the land use designations in the GENERAL Upper Bay area for consistency with the State P'LAw- Department of Fish and Game Agreement for the AMENDMENT Ecological Reserve and resulting changes to the N6_.TU__ Land Use Element, Residential Growth Element, and Recreation and Open Space Element, (Suggested RES. 93.6 by staff.) ADOPTED RECD Public hearing was opened in connection with this MENDING matter and there being no one desiring to appear APPAL and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 936, recom- mending to the City Council the adoption of Genera Plan Amendment No. 30. Page 18. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH yCm m> T F y' F a Z G SPA Rik CALL m Motion All Ayes 0 01 MINUTES October 16, 1975 INDEX Item #9 Proposed revision of the land use designations for GENERAL the Aeronutronic -Ford site, and resulting changes PLAN to the Land Use Element and, possibly, the AMENDMENT Residential Growth Element. (Requested by NO. 31 Aeronutronic- Ford.) CONT. TO X Planning Commission continued the public hearing NOVA. 0_ to the meeting of November 20, 1975. Item #10 Requested amendment to the Land Use Element to add GENERAL "Administrative, Professional and Financial Com- PL— mercial," as an alternate use, in addition to the "Recreational and Marine Commercial" designation ATYWRENT N0. 3 for the property at the southeast corner of Bayside Drive and Marine Avenue. (Requested by The Irvine Company.) CONT. TO N0_V_._n_ Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Dave Neish, Manager, Planning Administration, The Irvine Company, appeared before the Commission in connection with this matter. He advised that some of the uses permitted under the present zoning were not permitted under the General Plan, and this has created some problems. Also, because the site has a high land value, some uses are not economically feasible. He commented on the proposed uses which have previously been denied by the City because of their nighttime use and advised of a client who has indicated an interest to develop the property with a small office build- ing. Alternate uses for the parcel were briefly discuss- ed. Phil Ringle, 3355 Via Lido, appeared before the Commission and gave a presentation on an office building and parking structure proposed for a portion of the site. Planning Commission discussed the intensity of the proposed use, as well as other uses which could be permitted. Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH t ", T 9 T T ,min r = T < Z N L Motion Al Ayes 0 Motion All Ayes Motion Ayes Abstain 0 MINUTES October 16. 1975 uncv Because of the lateness of the hour and the many questions which could not be answered at this time, Dave Neish requested that the matter be continued. Frank Fulton, Balboa Island Improvement Associatio appeared before the Commission and requested that the matter be continued because of the lateness of the hour and the lack of opportunity to consult with the other members of the Board of Directors. X Planning Commission discussed the continuance and need for a study session, following which, motion was made to discuss the matter at the November 6, 1975 Study Session and continue the public hear- ing on General Plan Amendment No. 32 to the meet- ing of November 20, 1975. Item #11 Requested amendment to the Land Use and Residential GENERAL Growth Elements to change the designation for a PL— WN lot in the "County triangle" area (off Superior X—ME—NDMENT N0. 33 Avenue) from "Multi - Family Residential" to "General Industry." (Requested by the property owner.) CONT. TO NUV. 2T_ Community Development Director Hogan advised that normal notification procedures were followed in connection with this item,.__however, I'I : covers a__ . relatively small area and it.would be feasible to notify the individual property owners. X Planning Commission continued this matter to the meeting of November 20, 1975, and directed the staff to notify the individual property owners as recommended. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: X Motion was made that a letter be sent to the City X X X X X X Council recommending consideration within their X priorities of a traffic signal at Prospect and West Coast Highway in West Newport and indicating to the City Council that the proposed signal was in accordance with the General Plan and the Specific Area Plan previously approved by the Planning Commission and that need for the signal - ization would take on an increasing importance in light of the proposed developments for a park, Page 20. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH i T Z MINUTES A e A I 97A N October 16, 1975 library, and other adjacent public facilities. Motion X There being no further business, motion was made .All Ayes to adjourn. Time: 12:30 A.M. e�G ^G'� JAMES M. R ER, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach • Page 21.