Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/19801MISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:30 p.m. Date: November 20, 1980 IF N Citv of Newport Beach Present X X X Commissioner Allen and Commissioner. Cokas were Absent * I absent.. * * * Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney * * * STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: MINUTES William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrato Donald Webb, Assistant City Engineer Pamela Woods, Secretary * * * Chairman Haidinger suggested that approval of the November 6, 1980 Minutes be continued to the next • meeting, as the Commission has not had adequate time for .their review. Therefore, approval of subject minutes was continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of December 4 1980. * * * Request to consider the revocation of Use Permit No. 1866 that permitted a restaurant facility with on -sale beer and wine in an existing build- ing in the C -1 District. This public hearing is to determine whether or not said use.permit should be revoked for failure to comply with certain required conditions of approval. LOCATION: Lot 13, Tract No. 1210, located at 500 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast High- way, across from Bayshores. ZONE: APPLICANT INITIATED BY: OWNER: C -1 -H Carina E D. Matteo The City of Newport Beach Bob Taube, Newport Beach -1- INDEX : Item #1 atiOn Continued to Decem- ber 18, 1980 COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES d In � y � City of Newport Beach 17�OLLCALL INDEX Mr. Laycock stated that subsequent to the Sep- tember 18th hearing on this matter, the escrow proceedings have been terminated and that the ownership has been retained,by the applicant. Mr. Laycock referred the Commission to Page 4 of the staff report and stated the foillowing: Condition No. 4 - Exterior Lighting and Signs, this condition has been met with the installa- tion-of directional shields; Condition No. 5 - Mechanical Equipment and trash Areas - the roof top mechanical equipment has not been completed and the trash enclosure is only partially completed; Condition No. 6 - Parking Lot Resurfaced and Restriped - the parking lot has been restriped, however, the number of parking spaces now existing.on the site and adjacent property only • contains 13 spaces, whereas 16 spaces are re- quired; Condition No. 7 - 'Landscaping, this condition has not been met which would require additional landscape planters; Condition No. 9 - Handicapped Conditions, this condition has not been met; and, Condition No. 10 - Parking, this condition has not been met. Mr. Laycock stated that at this time, the appli- cant is still attempting to sell the property as a restaurant, but is no longer in operation at this time. He stated that the applicant may not be in attendance of this meeting.because of an illness in the family. Chairman Haidinger noted that the applicant, or her representative, were not in attendance. Chairman Haidinger asked staff if the use permit were to be revoked, how much would it cost an applicant to apply for the total use permit pro- cess. Mr. Laycock stated that it would cost $360.00 and take approximately 6 to 8.weeks for its approval. -2 -. November 20, 1980 , I �r WX CIO City of Newport Beach MINUTES M ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Harling appeared before the Commission. Mr. Harling stated that he was representing a gentlemen who is interested in the building. He.stated' that he has not as yet, had an opportunity to go over the problems o.f the building with the owner. He requested that a two week continuance be granted so as to allow his party to make a decision. Commissioner Balalis asked Mr. Harling if the. gentlemen he is representing is.interested in the restaurant itself, or the property. Mr. Harling stated-that he is interested in the restaurant itself, as the parcel is owned by someone else. Chairman Haidinger stated that .nothing can be gained by continuing this item again. The oper- ation as it stands now, is in violation. A new . applicant can certainly apply for a use permit to bring the operation up to Code. Commissioner McLaughlin stated that,a continuance would give the applicant time to comply with the conditions that they are attempting to comply with. Commissioner Balalis stated that i,f this use permit is revoked, it would only give the proper owner reason.to leave the property as is for the remainder of the lease. He concurred with Com- missioner McLaughlin, that a continuance would at Teast afford the applicant with the opportuni to sell the restaurant business as a restaurant site. Commissioner Thomas stated that he would rather not penalize the applicant so that] -she may sell the restaurant use at this time. Motion X Motion was made to continue the Revocation of Ayes X X X Use Permit No. 1866 to December 18, 1980, which Noes X MOTION CARRIED. Absent -3- COMMISSIONERS1 November 20, 1980 .Wei .11.9 1 City of Newoort Beach MINUTES Request to permit the expansion of.an existing sing.le - family dwelling in the R -1 District that already exceeds the maximum allowable building area of T.5 times the buildable area. A modi- fication to the Zoning Code is also requested inasmuch as two -off- street parking spaces are provided where three parking spaces are required. LOCATION: A portion ofjot 52, Block A, Tract 673, located at 328 Hazel Drive, on the easterly side of Hazel Drive between East Coast Highway and Ocean Boulevard in Corona del Mar. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Charles E. Prichard, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same as applicant • Mr. Bill Laycock noted that letters of opposition had been received from Mr. Norman Tillner and Mr. & Mrs Robert Cooper. He also noted that a letter had been received from the applicant's attorney, Mr. Milan Dostal, dated November 19, 1980. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Milan Dostal,:representing the appli cant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Dostal noted that the applicants,Mr. & Mrs. Prichard were in attendance of this meeting. Mr. Dostal referred to his letter of November 19, 1980 and stated that the square footage of the enclosure referred to is in error, and should be 352 square feet as indicated in the staff report. Mr. Dostal stated this particular variance re- quest is minor in that it is merely requesting the.addition of 3 walls, which will not.add to the height, width.or depth of the building. He stated that this request will also not increase the density or traffic in the City. Therefore, the 1.5 buildable area provision should not apply • The .building has been in existence, the useage contemplated and in existence, long before the Ordinance was passed.. -4- INDEX Item #2, VARIANCE NO. 1081 Continued to Decem- e —rte- 9 November 20, 1980 w City of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Dostal stated that this request.has had great neighborhood acceptance and presented to the Commission 'a petition in favor of the requested variance. He stated that the enclosure has been designed with the neighbors in mind, ,so as not to interfere with any.sunlight or.air acces.s.to,the neighbors. Mr. George Wiseman, architect for the project, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Wiseman stated that hardships necessitate applications for variances to the Ordinance as written. He stated that there are certain areas of the City which should have flexibility with the 1.5 pro - vision. He stated that this would be a typical case to' =provide for that flexibility, because of the natural surroundings and Buck Gully.itself. He stated that the curvature of the creek bed at the bottom of the gully causes this particular lot to be the shortest lot in the entire block. • He stated that the hardship that occurs, is that the.applicant.is not able to enjoy.the same oppor- tunities as that of the surrounding neighbors. Mr. Wiseman stated that practically no portion of the request will.be seen from the public right -of- way and referred to pictures of the residence He stated that because of the 6 foot sideyards between the residences, strict attention has been given to the privacy, air and light ventilation requirements of the neighbors. Mr. Robert J. Cooper of 332 Haze.1 Drive, appeared before the Commission in op.position:to this var- iance.request. Mr. Cooper stated that the con- struction only affects the two adjacent neighbors to the property. He stated that the construction is detrimental to.the value.of his property in that it encloses off the light to his residence and deprives him of the view access to Buck Gully. He also stated that any future plans he would have for construction would be diminished by this request. Chairman Haidinger asked Mr. Cooper if he used • the balcony area on,his property. frieq.uently. Mr. Cooper stated that he and his wifelspend a con- 111111 lsiderable amount of time on the balcony. -5- • November 20, 1980 g O LD N 1-1. F1 City of Newport Beach MINUTES Commissioner.Balalis asked Mr. Cooper, if .he would object.to the space being covered, as long as it was not used as living area. Mr. Cooper stated that if it were in accordance with the Code and the Ordinance, they would have no objection. He stated that they are objecting—to the additional square footage as it blocks in their residence and negates his property value. Mrs. Joyce Tillner of 324 Hazel Drive,.appeared before the Commission in opposition. Mrs. Tillne read to the Commission a letter she had prepared. She stated that the signatures on the applicant's petition are not those which will be adversely affected by the request. She stated that she will be losing the canyon's loveliness with a 16 foot shear wall constructed on the .subject proper She stated that her property will become devalued by a relaxation of regulations. She stated that they have lived at their residence for 23 years and do not have continual fires or burn trash, but have only had barbecues on their property in the past. She stated that the wall will destroy the open affect of the canyon and.that she would like to see the wall taken down. Chairman Haidinger asked Mrs. Tillner how they utilized their lower. deck area. Mrs. Tillner stated that they use their deck asia backyard recreation area. Chairman Haidinggr'stated that. it appeared to be a storage area. Commis:sioner Thomas stated that.the. way in which people.utilize their backyards is a property right Chairman Haidinger stated that he felt as though the questions asked were relevant to the case. Commissioner Beek noted that the petition the applicant submitted identifies.the'signatures in an honest manner, as it indicates the "impacted area" signatures and addresses andj.the "Newport Beach Residences" signatures and addresses. Mr. Charles Prichard, the fore the Commission. Ae sent a letter encouraging • in the impacted area, to being considered. am applicant, appeared be- stated that they had everyone, particularly come and see what is INDEX. COMMISSIONERS1 November 20, 1980 MINUTES. City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Prichard stated that there is a. large .tree to the north, on Mr. Cooper.'s prope'r'ty. He state that the tree extends over and across the front end of his house and is the real cause of the darkness in the canyon between the two houses. He stated that clipping the tree would allow more light to occur in the canyon. Chairman Haidinger asked Mr. Prichard to explain . his reasoning for starting.on this project without the.approval of a variance. Mr. Prichard admitted that he was wrong, but stated that this was done in an effort to protect his property. He stated that there were approximately eleven fires between September and August when they first moved in, which caused a considerable amount of smoke coming into his downstairs area. Mr'. Prichard stated that construction was stopped as soon as the second stop.work order was posted on the property. Mrs. Tillner.stated they only barbecue in the •summertime and use .small logs.for their fire. She stated that they would gladly stop barbecuing if the wall on the adjoining property were re- moved. Commissioner Balalis stated that it appears that the three families living next to each other, each enjoy the canyon. He suggested that the three families should sit down tolfind a solu- tion-which would be of benefit to all parties involved. He stated that possiblylthe City could act as an intermediary to help create a solution. He suggested that perhaps a glass wall would solve the problem. Commissioner Thomas stated that tho public aspect of the case is that the rules have been broken. He stated that this is essentiallyla pr•:ivate matter between three neighbors. Rather than have the C'i'ty mediate, the three neighbors should try to find a solution together. Commissioner Balalis asked Mrs. Tilllner if an attempt of this nature between thelneighbors, would be possible. Mrs. Tillner s ated that there has been no attempt by the applica�t for any dis- cussion on this matter. She stated that they feel -7- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES 5 In y City of Newport Beach .L INDEX that the building restrictions should be upheld for the benefit of the canyon and the canyon users. Mr. Dostal stated that the suggestion by Commis- sioner Balalis may be a viable solution. He stat:ed that there has been an error of judgement by the applicant, but that construction was stoppe immediately when the notice was posted. He stated that this was not reflected in the staff report. He stated that the neighbors have been invited over to discuss this matter with the applicant, but there have been no discussions as yet. Mr. Dostal stated that perhaps windows could be placed on the top.of the wall to solve any impairments of the view. He stated that this could be done on both sides of, the building. Commi.ssioner Balalis stated that there may be other possible treatments, such as six foot high windows,at the rear of the room addition, or per- haps . miter the corners of the windows so as not to obstruct the view. He stated that as it stands now, the view is blocked.. Mr. Dostal stated that a view is not a protected right, but this issue is being considered and is of concern. Commissioner Beek stated that the staff report and Mr. Dostal's letter seem to be in conflict on th.e'history of the project. Mr'. Dostal re- ferred to his letter dated November. 19, 1980 and stated that a building permit was.issued. in December of 1966 and described the work to be done as follows: "To excavate under house, retain walls and construct recreation room - no construc- tion outside of existing building lines." He stated that this was before the Prichard's bought the house. Commissioner Beek stated that it sounds as though it refers to the billard room and other rooms that are now enclosed in the house, rather than the deck which is the subject of controversy. Commissioner Beek asked when the deck was built. Mr. Dostal stated that it was built along with the enclosed billard room, under the same building permit in 1966. so November 20, 1980 3 y w City of Newport Beach MINUTES Commissioner Beek stated that the deck was per- mitted on the grounds that it would be at least half unenclosed, but asked how th.e billard room was .permitted to built, as it would constitute a third floor. Mr. Do.stal stated that it was his understanding that it was included in the buildin permit that was approved at that time. Mr. Layco stated that perhaps the enclosed billard room was partially below grade at the time, and was con - sidered a basement. Commissioner Beek stated that the existing deck can be one -half enclosed by a .wall. He-stated that perhaps the wall would be more acceptable to the neighbors, if it were glass, or the top half of it of glass. He stated that this may be a starting point for negotiations or compromise. Mr. Laycock stated that the Ordinance has changed since 1966 and this project would now be consi- dered , a three story building "inasmuch as the area be.tw -een natural grade and the .main living area would now be considered a ''story ". Commissioner McLaughlin stated that the suggestioi on glass walls and windows may not be feasible, because of the useage of drapes for privacy. She stated that other solutions for arbitration shouli be considered. Mrs. Elizabeth Cooper of 332 Hazel Drive, stated that Monday evening was the first time that Mr. Prichard had invited them over for any discussions She.stated that their light disappeared over one weekend, not over a period of time. Commissioner McLaughlin suggested that the variant be continued to December 18, 1.98Q. Commissioner Balalis stated that he would be in support of.sucl an action, but would only be beneficial if the parties involved make a .concerted effort to come up with a solution. Commissioner McLaughlin.state that if a solution can not be made in the interim; a formal vote will be taken on December 18th. -9- Chairman Haidinger stated that the burden of proo • in a situation such as this would be on the party -9- Md'Ci on Substitu Motion Ayes Noes Absent 0 COMMISSIONERS X *1 1 1* November 20, 1980 of Newport Beach requesting the variance. He stated that this will. influence him, as well as the degree that all parties are willing to compromise their position. Commissioner Thomas stated that.his tendency woul be to deny the variance because of a. record of some misleading intent. However, he,stated that he would be in favor of a continuance because thi is essentially a private ma.tter. He stated that the solution may be that the wall be torn down completely; or other negotiating options. Mr. Cooper stated that they feel very strongly about this case. He stated that there have been stop work orders, notifications and a complete defiance in obtaining building permits. He urged the Commission to take action on this matter tonight, as they will not change their minds as far as their opinions are concerned. Motion was made that the Planning Commission deny Variance No. 1081. Substitute motion was made that the Planning . Commission continue Variance No. 1081 to Decem- ber 18, 1980. Commissioner McLaughlin asked Commissioner.Beek how the neighbors are expected to negotiate. Commissioner Beek stated that this continuance wili give the neighbors more time to think about the options. Commissioner McLaughlin stated that there may be a full Commission on December 18th, if a continuance is granted. Substitute motion by Commissioner Beek was now voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. * * * -10- COMMISSIONERS1 November 20, 1980 MINUTES . y I lor I City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Request to construct a 9 unit motel in conjunc- Item #3 tion with an existing restaurant located in the C- 1.Distri.ct in Central Balboa. The proposal USE PERMIT. also includes the paying of an annual fee to NO. 1960 the City for a portion of the combined motel and restaurant parking in the Balboa Pier JAPPROVED Municipal Parking Lot., CONDI- TIONALLY • • LOCATION: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 12, East Side Addition of Balboa Tract, located at 801 East Balboa Boulevard on the.southeasterly corner of East Balboa Boulevard and Main Street, in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Max Dillman, Balboa OWNER: Same as Applicant Mr. Bill Laycock stated that two letters in favor of this request have been received from the Balboa Pavilion and`the Balboa Improvement Association. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Mr. Max Dillman, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Dillman stated that a development of this nature is needed for visiting guests of the residents in the area. He stated that Dillman's Restaurant is the only restaurant in the area with parking. He stated that there are 28 parking spaces, and that valet parking service is also provided in the summertime. He stated that they would be willing to purchase parking spaces from the City in the Municipal parking lot. He added that this would be substantial to take care of the nine extra spaces required by the nine unit motel. Mr. Dillman referred to Exhibit "A ", findings.for denial in the staff report. He stated that the proposed land use represents a land use of greater intensity, but that the traffic generatio -11- November 20, 1980 w 4 O , 1 City of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX from the use would only amount to an additional six or so cars per day,.which would not present a problem. He stated that he is in disagreement with Item No: 3, as the use of the adjacent Muni.cipal parking lot works well now. He. stated that he did not.understand Item No. 4 and.that he was in total disagreement with Item No. 5, in that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the surrounding area. Mr. Dillman added that the proposed use has wide support from the busi- nessmen and residents of the area. Mr. Dillman presented an artist's rendering of-th proposed development to the Commission. Commis- sioner McLaughlin asked Mr. Dillman where the restaurant was located in relation to the motel. Mr. Dillman stated that the motel will be located on top of the restaurant.' Mr. Dillman stated that parking will nat be a • problem for the proposed use.` Commissioner Beek stated that the Municipal parking lot may not be useful for the motel occupants, but is useful for the restaurant patrons. He asked Mr. Dillman if he would have any objection to marking nine of the spaces in his parking lo.t as reserved for the motel occupants. Mr. Dillman stated that he would object to this because of the rates in- volved. Mr. Dillman stated that the.parking rate would have to be included in the motel rate be- cause the majority of the motel related cars would be parked at that location for 24 hours, whereas - the restaurant related cars are in and out.. He stated that the motel patrons would be encouraged to parking in the Municipal lot. Commissioner Beek stated that the patrons would check-in-and unload their baggage at the motel and then park in the Municipal lot. Mr. James Person, resident of Balboa and counsel to the Balboa. Improvement Association, appeared before the Commission in favor of this request. Mr. Person stated that Max Dillman has a record of cooperation in Balboa. He stated that Mr. Dillman voluntarily provides valet parking for • his restaurant. He stated that the proposed use -12- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 w s 11 City of Newport Beach MINUTES < M ROLL CALL I III J i l I INDEX Moon would significantly enhance the aesthetics of downtown Balboa, which is much needed. He stated that by unanimous approval, the Balboa Improve - ment Association supports this project. Mrs. Hidi Helwig stated that Max Dill,man runs a fine business and that.she was in favor of the motel use. Mr. George Perlin, businessman in the Balboa area since 1952, appeared before the Commission in favor of this request. He stated that Mr. Dill - man's business would be a credit to the City. Mr. Perlin also stated that-he was a Director on the Balboa Improvement Association. Mr. Leo- Dempsey, resident of the area, appeared before-the Commission in favor of this request. He stated that the Balboa area needs a motel use of this nature. He stated that.it would.be a welcome.addition to the neighborhood. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1960 with the findings and conditions of Exhibit "B ". Amendment 1111 JAmendment to the motion was made by Commissioner Beek that Condition No. 12 be added to read, . "12) Nine spaces on the existing on -site parking lot be reserved and signed for occupants of the nine motel units." Chairman Haidinger asked Commissioner Beek what was being gained by this amendment. Commissioner Beek stated that most of the restaurant patrons park in the oceanfront parking lot anyway, and that the motel patrons should not have to park two blocks away. Commissioner Balalis stated that he would not accept the amendment by Commissioner Beek. He stated that Max D.illman runs his parking lot.and valet p.arking,service'.extremely efficiently. He stated that a motel occupant would be able to check into the motel and unload his baggage be- fore parking in the Municipal lot. AWIment 1 1 1 1 I I I (Commissioner Beek withdrew his amendment to the W drawn X motion. -13- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES AD City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX All Ayes X X X * 1 X1 Motion by Commissioner Balalis for approval of Absent * Use Permit No. 1960 was now voted on subject to the following findings and conditions, which MOT -ION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent I with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact, providing that parking demands are met. A municipal parking lot is Tocated.w ithin reasonable proximity to the proposed, motel facility, and may be useful to said business. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1960 will not, under the circumstances of t.his case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare.of per - sons residing and working in the neighborhood or.be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations. 2. That all exterior lighting and signs shall be approved by the Planning Department. 3. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from public.streets, alleys or adjoining properties. 4. That nine (9) "in- lieu" parking spaces shall be purchased from the City on an annual • basis for the duration of the motel use on the site. -14- 0 COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES 5 �a 5' y w City of Newport Beach L INDEX 5. That the 6 lots be resubdivided into one building site and a parcel map be filed. 6. That all improvements be constructed as. re- quired by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 7. That a 5 foot radius corner cutoff be at the.corner of East Balboa Boulevard and Main Street be dedicated to the public. 8. That the motel and restaurant have separate sewer laterals and water services, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 9. That a standard use permit agreement and accompanying surety be provided to guarantee the satisfactory completion of public improve- ments, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completing the public improvements. 10. That the Non - Standard Drive Approach on Main Street be removed and replaced with a ..Standard Commercial.Drive Approach. 11. That the deteriorated and tree damaged PCC sidewalk and curb be reconstructed on the East Balboa Boulevard and the Main Street frontages. The existing trees shall be root - pruned, or removed and replaced, as required by the Parks, Beaches and Recreati Department. The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. -15- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES In y City of Newport Beach 1ROLLMALL III III I INDEX Request to relocate an existing restaurant located in Central Balboa, from 202 Main Street to 105 Item #4 Palm Avenue in the C -1 District. A Variance to the Zoning Code is also request so as to waive SE PERMIT the required off- street parking spaces for said NO. 1961 restaurant use. LOCATION: tots 15 and 16, Block 6, Balboa APPROVED Tract, located at 105 Palm Avenue CONDI- on the westerly side of Palm TI�LLY Avenue between East Ocean Front and East Balboa.Boulevard in Central Balboa. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Hilda M. Helwig, Balboa OWNER: Jim West, Newport Beach • Mr. Laycock stated that two letters in favor of this request have been received from the Balboa Improvement Association and Mr. James Person. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Hilda Helwig, the applicant, ap- peared before the Commission. Mrs. Helwig pre - sented.to the Commission many letters and signatures of people in favor of her request. She stated that she was in agreement with the staff report, except for the condition of the off - street parking. She stated that she has operated for 10 years without off- street parking because her regular customers are those whom have already paid to park in the Municipal parking lot, or they are neighborhood residents who walk or bicycle to the restaurant. Commissioner.Balalis asked Mrs. Helwig if she ill be taking out all of her restaurant. equipment from the prior location. Mrs. Helwig stated that she will be moving all of the kitchen and restaurant equipment to the new location. Commissioner Balalis asked if the prior facility • would.be able to operate as a restaurant without obtaining a use permit. Mrs. Helwig stated that -16- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES: 511 W, r LN. City of Newport Beach 17�OLLCALL INDEX she had Understood that a hardware store would be moved into that .location. Commissioner Balalis stated that it is his under- standing that if the kitchen iscmoved, the grand- father clause would no longer apply. Mr. Burnham stated that a new use permit would be required, but there would still be existing non- conforming parking requirements. He stated that there would be a six month period before the non - conforming. rights would be lost. Mr. Bill Laycock stated that a use permit does not go with..the applicant; but that it goes with the land. Chairman Haidinger stated that this is not a request to relocate, it is a request to authorize a restaurant use in a new location. Mr. Burnham stated that the current proposal should be con - sidered as a new application for a new use permit The parking requirements are subject to the • granting of a variance. Mr. Burnham,stated that the concern of the prior location may only be a helpful factor in deter- mining the parking of the area as a whole. Com- missioner Balalis stated that the nature of the business that may locate at the prior location may be relevant to the case, in terms of parking. Mr. James Person, appeared before the Commission in behalf of Mr. Phil Tozer of the Balboa Improve ment Association and representing Mrs. Helwig. Mr. Person stated that the prior location will not be used as a restaurant again because the owner is concerned with fire hazards and preserv- ing the building for historical reasons. He stated that the Commission should`.consider grant- ing a. variance regarding the parking requirement for the purchase of off - street parking spaces. He stated that the off - street parking requirement would create a hardship on Mrs. Helwig in operati her business. He stated that her customers in- clude many fisherman who have already paid to par in the Municipal lot and many neighbors who walk or bicycle to her restaurant. He added that • Hidi's Restaurant is a tradition in Balboa. -17- November 20, 1980 il City of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX Chairman Haidinger asked if the parking require- ments were to be waived, could there be a review process set up in the future in the event the nature of the,use was to change., Mr. Laycock stated that the Modifications Committee could be requested to review this use in the future. If it was determined that there was a change in the use, it could be sent to.the Planning Commission for action. Mr. Laycock added that a change such as adding beer and wine.would require a use permit in any case, as this changes the operational characteristics of the restaurant itself. Motion Motion was made that Use Permit No. 1961 be ap- proved with the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A" with the deletion of Condition No. 3 because the majority of the people that frequent Hidi's Restaurant are people of the Balboa area. Many of the fisherman who visit her facility,. have already parked in the City parking lot. Commissioner Thomas suggested that there be an added condition that in the event that the use changes, it will automatically be brought back for the Commission's review. He stated that per- haps the use may generate more traffic in the future, in which event, it should be reviewed" by the Commission. He stated that another example would be that the use may change from a coffee shop to a dinner house, at which time it should be reviewed by the Commission. Amendment Commissioner Balalis concurred and amended his motion. with the.addition of Condition No. 4 to read, "That the staff will review this case in three years to determine if there has been a change in the use." All Ayes XX X .. XK Amended motion by Commissioner Balalis was now Absent * * voted on as follows, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is • compatible with surrounding land uses. Im COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES N City of Newport Beach 17�OLLCALL INDEX 6. That the granting of a variance to the parking requirement is necessary for.the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as the existing restaurant has operated without exclusive parking for the past 10'years and the new restaurant will be substantially similar in operational character. That.the establishment, maintenance and oper- ation of the proposed restaurant with less than the required off - street parking, under the circumstances of the particular case, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such..proposed use or detrimental or injurious to property and i,mprovemen.ts in the neighbor - hood or the general`welfare of the City. I ( I I I I1. That development shall be in substantial con- formance with the approved plot plan and floor plan, -19- 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 1961 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort -and general welfare of.persons re- siding and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or im- provements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. 5. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building, and use proposed in this application as it pertains to the provision of off- street parking spaces, which circumstances and con- ditions do not generally apply to land, buildings, in district. and /or uses the same 6. That the granting of a variance to the parking requirement is necessary for.the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant, inasmuch as the existing restaurant has operated without exclusive parking for the past 10'years and the new restaurant will be substantially similar in operational character. That.the establishment, maintenance and oper- ation of the proposed restaurant with less than the required off - street parking, under the circumstances of the particular case, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such..proposed use or detrimental or injurious to property and i,mprovemen.ts in the neighbor - hood or the general`welfare of the City. I ( I I I I1. That development shall be in substantial con- formance with the approved plot plan and floor plan, -19- • November 20, 1980 City of Beach MINUTES 2. All trash or storage shall beilocated within the building or be shielded from view by six foot high walls or fences. 3. That the "net public area" of the restaurant shall not exceed the proposed area of 545 square feet. i 4. That the staff will review thiis case in three years to determine if there.hais been a change in the use. Request to permit the.installation lighting on 22 foot standards in c! with three tennis courts at the Bij Country Club. LOCATION: A portion of Blocks 5� ZONE: APPLICANT: OWNER: and 93 of Irvine's Sui located at One Big Ca on the northwesterly Joaquin Hills Road an Drive at.the Big Can Club. P -C Big Canyon Country C1 Newport Beach Same as applicant of outdoor njunction Canyon , 56, 92 division, yon Drive, orner of San Big Canyon n Country b, ommissioner Beek asked if an application .had been il.ed or an approval granted by the local commun- ty associations on this request. :Mr. Laycock tated that notice would have beenisent to the djoining homeowners associations. In this. articular case, the tennis courts•.themselv.es are: ocated at least 460.feet away from the nearest. welling units, and.so it would appear not.to.have detrimental affect. -20- APPROVED CONDI TI N LLY COMMISSIONEgSi November 20, 1980 MINUTES Of Beach INDEX Chairman Haidinger stated that many of the resi- dents are members of the .club and are probably quite aware of the proposal. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Brook Bentley appeared before the Commission and stated that he.wa.s in agreement with the staff report. He stated that this item has been discussed by the Big Canyon Country Club for sometime, and that many of the residents have been made aware of this proposal. Commissioner Beek asked if this would require ap- proval from the association. Mr. Bentley stated that association approval would mat be required because it does no.t fallwithin the association boundaries. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1962 All Ayes K X X XK with the following findings and conditions, Ab, nt * * which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impacts. 3. That the proposed illumination will be in- stalled in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjoining residential pro- . perties. 4. Th:e approval of Use Permit.No. 1962 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety,-.peace, morals, comfort and.general. welfare of: persons re- siding and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -21- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 Of CONDITIONS: Beach MINUTES 1. That development shall be in substantial con - .formance.with the approved plot plan. 2. That the lighting system shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential uses. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer; with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in.his opi.nion, this requirement has been met. 3. That the lights shall be turned off by 11:00 p.m. daily. INDEX Request to change the operational character - Item #6 istics of the existing Blue Dolphin Restaurant facility in the C4-H District, so as to include the service of beer and wine. USE PERMI' NO. 1963 LOCATION: Lot 4, Tract 907, located at 335.5 Via Lido, located on the southerly APPROVED side of Via Lido in the Lido CONDI- Building between Via.Oporto and TIONALLY Via Malaga. ZONE: C -O -H APPLICANT: Osadche Development OWNER: Blue Dolphin Restaurant, Inc. Mr. Bill Laycock stated that two letters have been received regarding this item'. One letter from Ronald E. Soderling and Associates, re- commends approval. The other letter is in opposition-to the proposed request,. which was received from the First Church of Christ, Scientist which is located directly adjacent to the restaurant. -22- November 20, 1980 of Newport Beach MINUTES ROLL CALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INDEX 0 tion X es X X stain sent I I II* • * The public hearing.was opened in connection with this item..and Mr. Jim Teeter, owner and operator of the Blue Dolphin Restaurant, appeared before the Commission. He stated that the Blue Dolphin Restaurant has been in existence since 1957 and that he has owned and operated it since 1968. He stated that in order to be competitive with the other restaurants in the area, they are re- questing a.use permit to remodel the restaurant facility and to offer its customers the availabil- ity of beer and wine with their meals. Mr..Ronald Soderling, owner.of the Lido Building and resident of Lido Island, appeared before the Commission. He stated that the Blue Dolphin Restaurant has been a landmark restaurant in the area for over 20 years. He stated that he fully supports what Mr. Teeter has requested in this proposal. He stated that to the best of his knowledge, the Christian Science Church is opposin this request because of certain fundamental reli.gi'ous beliefs.. He stated that many residents of Lido Island are in favor of this application. Commissioner Beek stated that he would be ab- staining from the vote since he shares some of the Church's fundamental objectipns and he does not drink. Motion was made to approve Use Pi with the fi,nd:ings and conditions; which MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the existing restaurant' sistent with the Land Use ElI General Plan and is compatib ing land uses. !rmit No. 1.963 as follows, use is con - !ment of the e with surround- 2. The change in operational characteristics will not create any significant environmental impacts.. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. -23- November 20, 1980 X a� � 3 i In 0111 City of .. MINUTES ROLL CALL 1 1 I .I J i l l I INDEX is 11 0 4.. The approval of Use Permit No. 1963 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or im- provements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. The development shall be in substantial con- formance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 2. That the existing on- s,ite,parking spaces be made available for the restaurant patrons after 6:00 p.m. daily. Request to consider an Amendment to Titles 19 and 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains to the mailing of Public Notices for Variances, Use Permit, Zone Change and similar application to occupants and residents of property within a prescribed distance of a property, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach Commissioner•Beek stated that possibly the public notice mailings should be limited to 50 or,100 oc He stated that the number of mailings should be keyed in with the magnitude of the project. Commissioner Thomas stated that occupants should be notified in some form. He stated that occu- pants have as much of a right as that of land owners to be notified of proposed changes. Chairman Haidinger suggested be given greater discretion that are to be mailed. -24- that staff should as to the notices Item #7 AMENDMENT I NO. 5.4 TABLED nts. COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES d N City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 0 Motion All Ayes X X Absent 0 X Commissioner Thomas stated that changes in zone, height and square footage should be used as a guideline. The Commission should encourage the staff to expand the notice requirements to occu- pants within those affected areas. Commissioner Beek suggested that the staff pre- pare some informal guidelines along those lines. Chairman Haidinger stated that this could be done orally at a.future meeting, without a formal staff report. Commissioner Balalis stated that the staff has come to the Commission with suggestions in the past, when there has been an issue of great magnitude involved. Commissioner Thomas stated that the three areas in which notice should be expanded that the polic should address are: height variances, excess square footage and zone changes. The.magnitude of the notification shall be at the discretion of the staff. Chairman Haidinger stated that rather than making an amendment to the Municipal Code, a policy will be devised to provide greater notice in certain instances. Mr. Burnham suggested additional language to be included in% the guideline as follows, "Where staf may anticipate a significant public controversy." Commissioner Balalis stated that he would rather delete the word "controversy" and use "signifi- cance or interest ". Motion was made to Table Amendment No. 548, which MOTION CARRIED. Request to consider an amendment to Title 19 of Item #8 the..Newport Beach Municipal Code as it pertains AMENDMENT to deleting the review and approval of Final N0. 553 Tract Maps by the Planning Commission, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document. APPROVED INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach -25- COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES di In a City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX There be.ing no discussion.from the Commission, the following motion was made: Motion All Ayes Absent x Motion was made to approve Amendment No. 553 and forward to the City Council, which MOTION CARRIED ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Management Guidelines Program Commissioner Thomas stated that .there are en- vironmentally sensitive areas and vacant lands within the City that should be'considered in a management guidelines program. He referred to the Buck Gully and Morning Canyon issues that were.raised in the Local Coastal Program. Commissioner Thomas asked staff to consider in- corporating the type of policy and manage.ment -map • that the Fire Department is currently using on vacant lands. He stated that.an Ordinance needs to be adopted for managing open space He stated that the management policy may be used on vacant lands for fire purposes, habitat control, drainag and sediment control. He stated that the current plan is only for fire protection. Mr. Burnham asked Commissioner Thomas if this policy would be developed for private or public property. Commissioner Thomas stated that the plan would be developed for'priv.ate vacant lands: Chairman Haidinger suggested that this item be discussed at a future study session. Studv Session.Aaendas Chairman Haidinger requested that he be able to review with the staff in advance, the proposed study session agendas. He stated that depending on the.study session agenda, he will give the staff guidance as to when the study sessions will be held. He stated that there has been a de- clining attendance by the Commission at the study sessions. -26- 1 COMMISSIONERS November 20, 1980 MINUTES x City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Excused Absence Request .Motion Y Motion was made to approve an excused absence for 'Ayes X X Y X X Chairman Haidinger for the December 4, 1,980 Absent Commission Meeting, which MOTION CARRIED. There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 9;55 p.m. • 0 George Cokas, Secretary Planning Commission City of Newport Beach -27-