The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12/10/1987COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES PLACE: City Council Chambers TIME: 7:30 \ym "V DATE • : December . 10, 1987 Present ri • VA EA rA EM rA" xlxlxlxIx CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH All Planning Commissioners were present. • rr w, EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney Y !( 4t William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Patricia Temple, Principal Planner Don Webb, City Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary Minutes of November 19, 1987: Motion was made and voted on to approve the November 19, 1987, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. + e x Public Comments: No persons came forth to speak on non - agenda items. • x • Posting of the Agenda: James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Friday, December 4, 1987. Site Plan Review No. 43 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit alterations and additions to an existing commercial building on property located in the Corona del Mar Specific Plan Area where a Specific Plan has not been adopted. The proposal also includes a re- quest to satisfy a portion of the required off - street parking spaces with in -lieu parking spaces in the Municipal Parking Lot located at the northwesterly corner of Bayside Drive and Marguerite Avenue, and the approval of modifications to the Zoning Code so as to INDEX Minutes of 11 -19 -87 Public Comments Posting of the Agenda Item No.l CDB V, AZ Approved COMMISSIONERS _ 9y MINUTES December 10, 1967 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL 7CALL INDEX allow the use of tandem parking spaces in conjunction with a full time valet service; to allow a reduced parking aisle width in conjunction with wider than normal parking spaces; and to allow a portion of the required parking spaces to encroach into the required 10 foot rear yard setback adjacent to an alley. LOCATION: Lot 2, Block Z, Tract No. 323, located - at3519 East Coast Highway, on the southwesterly side of East Coast High- way, between Narcissus Avenue and Orchid Avenue, in Corona del Mar. -- ZONE: C -1 APPLICANTS: Joseph and Flora Hills, Costa Mesa OWNER: Same as applicants Chairman Person referred to Chapter 20.01.070 of the Newport .Beach Municipal Code, regarding the • requirements to apply for a Site Plan Review Application, and the dictionary's definition of "reconstruct ". He suggested that the Planning Commission not take action regarding the subject application, but refer the Site Plan Review back to the staff to approve this matter on the basis that a Site Plan Review is not required. - James Hewicker, Planning Director, referred to Modification No. 2496 dated March 6, 1980. He compared the alterations and additions of the commercial building located at 3222 East Coast Highway, to the subject building which has been proposed to leave two walls adjacent to the side property lines standing and a portion of the rear wall remaining. In reference to . Modification No. 2496, Mr. Hewicker explained that staff contacted building officials, the Coastal Commission, and the County Assessor's Office to determine what constituted a remodel and what constituted a new building, and he read the information that was transmitted to the staff by said officials. Mr. Hewicker concluded that if the Planning Commission decides that the subject application constitutes an alteration or remodel of an existing building and the applicant is required to provide only two additional parking spaces, then staff would feel that the • applicant would have a new building with a minimum number of parking spaces. -2- COMMISSIONERS i'9 .off $� �OONO�B CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Chairman Person stated that Modification No. 2496 pertains to Chapter 20.30.030 B (2) of the Municipal Code regarding non - conforming uses. Mr. Hewicker responded that the information from both Chapters of the Municipal Code would be the same. Chairman Person maintained that the Zoning Code does not clearly define remodel, reconstruct, and rebuild, and he recommended that the City Attorney's Office submit modifications to the Zoning Code to the Planning Commission at a later date. Commissioner Koppelman asked what the practical ramification would be in requiring a Site Plan Review? Mr. Hewicker replied that the building officials, Coastal Commission and County Assessor would recognize the project as a new building, and that they would evaluate the project accordingly. Mr. Hewicker explained that if the Planning Commission decides that a Site Plan Review is not required, and they require only two parking spaces in addition to the four parking spaces that are currently provided on -site, then he • concluded that the new building would be providing less than half of the required offstreet parking spaces. Chairman Person asked if the Planning Commission decided to pursue the proposed modifications to the Zoning Code, and if the applicant agreed to provide 12 on -site parking spaces including the tandem parking spaces in addition to other conditions that the applicant agreed to, would the conditions legally bind him to provide said 12 parking spaces? Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney, replied that the applicant would be responsible if he agreed to the conditions. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that an individual could rebuild a structure in phases so as to avoid the provision of providing additional parking. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Craig Hampton appeared before the Planning Commission as_ counsel for the applicant. Mt. Hampton described the alternatives that the applicant. had regarding the site after the property was purchased. He indicated that after discussing with staff if the applicant could demolish a portion of the building and replace the demolished portion with new parking and relocate the lost square footage to the • second floor, he submitted plans which included 12 63 -3- COMMISSIONERS 4 q ;moo y F�oN�m 9y Oy (! 4iC 9y - CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROM 'CALL INDEX new on -site parking stalls and a structure that had not been increased by more than 10 percent of the existing building. Mr. Hampton stated that when he submitted the plans, he was informed that the square footage that was demolished could no longer be counted as existing square footage. He advised that after deliberations between the applicant and staff, that staff suggested four off -site in -lieu parking stalls. Mr. Joseph Hills, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. In response to questions posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Hills stated that he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B ", and the conditions that apply to the modifications to the Municipal Code. He agreed that he would maintain at least 10 parking spaces, or 12 tandem parking spaces, on -site at all times. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Hills replied that the beauty salon and • boutique would employ approximately 11 employees. - Mr. Hills and Commissioner Winburn discussed the use of the parking spaces, and the use of the Municipal parking lot by the employees. Mr. Hills concurred to a condition suggested by Commissioner Koppelman which would state that the four - in -lieu parking spaces would be used for employee parking. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person;. Mr. Hills replied that staff had informed him in- lieu. parking fees are subject to change. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr: Hills replied that he was not aware of the previous number of employees employed on -site. Mr. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr.. Nichols stated that the proposed project should be considered new construction; that all new constructed buildings have required parking on -site; that the customers will be parking on the side streets in the residential, neighborhood; that the Site Plan Review did not state that a boutique was proposed in the .salon; and that tandem parking spaces do not work. Chairman Person and Mr. Nichols discussed definitions and interpretations of reconstruction and -4- COMMISSIONERS - Gyy coy �C vo vy . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX remodel in the Zoning Code, and the City's density restrictions because of lack of on -site parking. Further discussion ensued regarding use permit require- ments for restaurants and take - out restaurants. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission. He explained that the Planning Commission should consider the applicant's request, because the applicant is providing an increase of eight parking spaces and not substantially increasing the square footage of the structure. Mr. Joseph Hills reappeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hills stated that his intent was to improve the parking in Corona del Mar; that the proposed increase of 357 square feet fell within the 10 percent as he interpreted the Zoning Code; and he concluded that to ask a property owner to remove a part of a building, to improve the parking, and to not recover the lost floor space appears to be unreasonable. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Site Plan Review No. 43 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" which includes in -lieu parking, with the assurance that the applicant will use the in -lieu parking spaces in the Municipal Parking Lot for his employees. Commissioner Koppelman asked the maker of the motion to Amend x consider adding Condition No. 15 which states "that the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Site Plan Review or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Site Plan Review, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Site Plan Review, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community ", and to add Condition No. 16 which would state that "the Site Plan Review be reviewed by the Planning Commission one year after the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy regarding the parking to determine if more in -lieu parking is necessary or if the Planning Commission will have to request a reduction in the floor area." • -5- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 INDEX -6- The maker of the motion concurred with the recommendations to add Conditions No. 15 and No. 16. Chairman Person asked the maker of the motion that the Amend x following be added to Condition No. 5 regarding valet parking: "The City reserves the right to prohibit valet parking at any time provided that no reduction of floor area will be required." He commented that the Planning Commission would have the opportunity to remove said parking if it does not succeed. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person regarding valet parking off of the alley, Don Webb, City Engineer, replied that the loading and unloading would take place on -site; therefore, the Public Works Department would not object to the concept of valet parking. Chairman Person commented that the applicant should not be given the impression at this time that if the Planning Commission would be removing valet parking that the applicant would be requested to reduce the floor area. He pointed out that valet parking is not often considered for the size of commercial use, and he suggested that the Planning Commission leave their options open. Commissioner Merrill addressed the lack of parking in Corona del Mar. Chairman Person stated that he would support the motion reluctantly. He further stated that the Zoning Code is deficient because it is open to a number of different interpretations, and he suggested that the City, take some steps to rectify the situation. He commented that he has concerns regarding the chain of events that took place from the time Mr. Hills initially contacted staff to the subject public hearing. Chairman Person maintained that similar construction and remodeling of buildings have previously been viewed differently in other areas of the City. He said that he would support, the motion only with the assurance that the Planning Commission has the opportunity to review Chapter 20.30.030 and Chapter 20.01.070 of the Municipal Code so as to better define the guidelines under which these types of applications will be presented, processed, and applied. Commissioner Pomeroy concurred that the Zoning Code should be corrected so as not to discourage property from being upgraded and at the same time containing the same use with substantial improvements in parking. -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX Commissioner Koppelman agreed that there is an ambiguity in the Zoning Code that needs to be clarified. She stated that she would support the project because she was familiar with the use that was previously on the property, the number of employees that were on -site, and that the 8 additional on -site parking spaces and the 4 in -lieu parking spaces would be a fair trade -off for the area. The motion was voted on to approve Site Plan Review No. 43 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" including in -lieu parking, amended Condition No. 5 regarding valet parking, and the addition of aforementioned Conditions No. 15 and No. 16. MOTION All Ayes CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local. Coastal Program and is compatible with surrounding • land uses. 2. Required off - street parking is being provided through a combination of on -site parking and in -lieu parking within a nearby Municipal Parking Lot. 3. The proposed development is a high - quality proposal and will not adversely affect the benefits of occupancy and use of existing properties within the area. 4. The proposed development does not adversely affect the public benefits derived from the expenditures of public funds for improvement and beautification of street and public facilities within the area. 5. The proposed development will not preclude the attainment of the specific area plan objectives stated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, or the Local Coastal Program. 6. The proposed development promotes the maintenance of superior site location characteristics adjoining major thoroughfares of City -wide • importance. -7- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 INDEX 7. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 8. The proposed modification so as to allow the rear yard encroachments, the use of tandem parking spaces, a reduced parking aisle width and valet parking will not, under the circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modifications are consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. CONDITIONS: • 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as may be noted below. 2. That the applicant shall purchase on an annual basis four in -lieu parking spaces for the duration of the proposed project and that the annual fee shall be in accordance with Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. That a minimum of 12 parking spaces shall be provided on -site. 4. That the four in -lieu parking spaces in the Municipal Parking Lot at Marguerite Avenue and Bayside Drive shall be used by the employees of the subject property. All but four of the employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 5. That a valet parking attendant shall be provided at all times that the subject building is open for business. The valet shall not park vehicles on any public street, nor utilize the alley for loading or unloading purposes. The City reserves the right to prohibit valet parking at any time provided that no reduction of floor area will be required. -8- COMMISSIONERS • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH C1 MINUTES December 10, 1987 That all parking areas shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 7. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 8. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjoining properties, East Coast Highway and from the alley. 9. That all proposed signs shall be in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 11. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 12. That approximately 300 square feet of deteriorated and damaged sidewalk be reconstructed and the existing trees be root pruned or replaced as approved by the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and that the deteriorated portions of curb be reconstructed along the East Coast Highway frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the California Department of Transportation. 13. That project shall be so designed to eliminate light and the glare spillage on adjacent uses. All parking lot lighting shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. 14. This site plan review shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.01.070 J of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 15. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Site Plan Review or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Site Plan Review, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Site INDEX COMMISSIONERS - Nn % - �� ; o yy . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Plan Review, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 16. That the Site Plan Review shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission one year after the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy regarding the parking to determine if more in -lieu parking is necessary or if the Planning Commission will have to request a reduction of floor area. x x x A. Use Permit No. 1534 (Amended) (Public Hearing) - Item No.2 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which UP1534(A) permitted the establishment of a McDonald's take -out restaurant facility on property located in the C -1 -H 8859 District. The proposed amendment involves a request to install a drive - through service facility within the Approved existing take -out restaurant, and a request to waive a • portion of the required off - street parking spaces. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact parking for a portion of the required off - street parking and to allow the installation of two free- standing menu signs in addition to an existing free - standing identification sign. AND B. Resubdivision No. 859 (Public Hearing) Request to combine six existing lots into a single parcel of land for commercial development. LOCATION: Lots 18 -23, Tract No. 1210, located at 700 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway, across from Bayshores. ZONE: C -1 -H - APPLICANT: McDonald's Corp., San Diego - OWNER: Same as applicant - Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to a condition suggested by the Public Works Department that was -10- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing concerning traffic circulation from the drive -thru restaurant to West Coast Highway. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Koppelman regarding said condition, Mr. Webb explained that if traffic congestion occurs on West Coast Highway related to the drive -thru restaurant, the City would depend upon the Police Department, staff, or the public to make a complaint so that the situation could be reviewed with McDonald's Restaurant or if a solution would not be satisfactory, the use permit could be called up for review by the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by ,Chairman Person regarding previous traffic accidents in the McDonald's Restaurant area, Mr. Webb reported that after reviewing accidents filed in the vicinity of McDonald's Restaurant this year, staff found that there were no reported accidents relating to the ingress /egress the subject restaurant. • William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, referred to a previous use permit regarding a proposed drive -thru operation on the subject property wherein there was a conflict between the stacking lane and the on -site parking spaces. He explained that the subject stacking lane was now designed for at least fourteen automobiles before there would be a conflict with the on -site parking spaces. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman regarding the number of drive -up windows, Mr. Webb replied that the applicants indicated that their intent was to have one order window, one delivery window, and that the applicants were considering incorporating into the structure the ability to add additional windows. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bill Robards, Real Estate Manager for McDonald's Restaurant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Robards briefly explained the circulation system for the drive -thru restaurant and the stacking lane. He stated that the stacking lane with space for more than 10 automobiles would be more than adequate; that fifty percent of their business would be utilizing the drive -thru facility; that some • of the present outdoor seating will be removed; that parking demands will be diminished because of the speed -11- COMMISSIONERS �"1' �0 yy oy f ! $q C y yo - CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX of the drive -thru service; that the tandem drive -thru booths would consist of an ordering station, a pay booth, and a delivery booth which would keep the traffic flowing; that the take -out restaurant's peak weekday hour is between 12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m. on Friday which is not the peak hour on West Coast Highway; that the applicants will assist with any problems that may occur because of traffic congestion that may be created by the drive -thru restaurant; and that the applicants agree to dedicate the 12 feet for the widening of West Coast Highway. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Robards stated that the applicants concur with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A "; however, they have requested that the encroachment permit be expanded for their review. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay regarding the speaker boxes, Mr. Robards replied that the menu boards and speaker posts may be adjusted to monitor the decibel levels. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Robards replied that no specific information is available pertaining to an increase in business for a drive -thru facility when it is raining, but surveys have shown that the restaurant business is generally down; that the highest sales volume shown by their surveys during the peak hour has been automobiles and some walk -up business; and that the tandem booth service consisting of a cashier's booth and a presentation booth would allow thirty- second food service. He commented that a second order station could be installed if needed. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission to state his concern regarding the 12 foot dedication related to the widening of West Coast Highway. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1534 (Amended) and Resubdivision No. 859 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" including the • aforementioned added Condition No. 23 as submitted by the Public Works Department. Commissioner Di Sano commented that he was approving the project on the basis that the tandem windows would move the service -12- COMMISSIONERS y�G9y99NOyy�`�$o - 9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX line faster because he did have a concern regarding the traffic on West Coast Highway. Commissioner Winburn stated that she would support the motion. She commented that by closing the middle driveway and flaring the other two driveways, the automobiles will not have to stop before entering the restaurant site. Commissioner Winburn pointed out that Condition No. 22 enables the Planning Commission to call up the Use Permit if the drive -thru operation created congestion. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would not support the motion because the proposed plan is too intense for the site, and that he has a concern regarding the automobile headlights facing eastbound traffic on West Coast Highway. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1534 (Amended) and Resubdivision No. 859 subject to the x x x x findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" including added x x Condition No. 23. MOTION CARRIED. USE PERMIT NO. 1534 (Amended) Findings: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the waiver of the take -out restaurant development standards as they relate to a portion of the required parking will be of no further detriment to adjacent properties inasmuch as the proposed drive -in and take -out restaurant is an existing operation which has demonstrated that the addition of the proposed drive - through facility will reduce the parking demand for the site and that adequate parking is being provided on- site. 3. Adequate provisions for traffic circulation are being made for the drive -in and take -out restaurant facility. 4. The proposed drive - through facility is inconsistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan inasmuch as said facility is located within the proposed widening area for West Coast . Highway. However, the interim use of the -13- COMMISSIONERS y�G�y �NOy9C� � o _ qZ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX dedication area would be consistent with the Circulation Element. 5. That the Police Department has no objections to the proposed development. 6. That the proposed compact parking spaces and the use of two additional free standing menu signs in conjunction with the new drive - through facility 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 improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modifications are consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 1534 (Amended) will not, 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. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations except as noted below. 2. That the development standards pertaining to 17 of the required parking spaces shall be waived. 3. That all signs shall conform to Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code except as approved in conjunction with this application. 4. That two free standing menu signs shall be permitted. 5. That all trash areas shall be screened from adjoining properties and from West Coast Highway. 6. That the service of any alcoholic beverages in the take -out restaurant facility is prohibited unless an amended use permit is approved by the City. -14- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 6�� December 10, 1967 '91. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROE CALL INDEX 7. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 8. That landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and Public Works Department. 9. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall b subject to further review and approval by the Traffic Engineer. 10. That 52 off - street parking spaces (including 10 spaces in the drive -up stacking lane) shall be provided on -site. 11. That all employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 12. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be located in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 13. That the proposed directional signs shall not exceed 6 square feet each and shall not include the restaurant name or.logo. 14. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 15. That grease interceptors shall be provided on all fixtures in the restaurant facility where grease . may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 16. That exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 17. That a trash compactor shall be installed and • maintained. -15- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 0 0�n't0 FO & 1 December 10, 1987 dG �N 99'•°0 9y'Wj, Ah y ` % CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R&MCALL INDEX 18. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated solely for handicapped self - parking and shall be identified in a manner acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. Said parking spaces shall be accessible to the handicapped at all times. One handicapped sign on a post shall be required for each handicapped parking space. 19. That all conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 849 shall be fulfilled. 20. That all applicable conditions of Use Permit No. 1534 shall be maintained. 21. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090.A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 22. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 23. That the drive -thru facility shall be operated in such a manner that vehicles will not be allowed to block access driveways. This shall be monitored at all times by the applicants' representatives at the site. If back -ups occur, the incoming customers shall be directed to bypass the drive -up facility. If a traffic congestion problem occurs on West Coast Highway related to the drive -up facility that is not immediately corrected, the Planning Commission may recommend to the City Council revocation of this Use Permit. RESUBDIVISION NO. 859: Findings: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific -16- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 4. That the change in use will increase traffic in the area contributing to the need to widen West Coast Highway to six lanes as provided for in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. 5. That the proposed use is inconsistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, but that the proposed widening is not anticipated to occur in the next 5 years and until widening occurs, the • extra right -of -way will not be needed for public purposes. Conditions: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of building permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works and Planning Departments. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 5. That the intersection of streets and drives be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 45 miles per hour. Landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the -17- COMMISSIONERS A j 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL rCALL INDEX sight distance line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. 6. That unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk; that all existing and new drive aprons be reconstructed or constructed per City Standard 166 -L and that the tree damaged sidewalk be reconstructed. 7. That 12 feet of right -of -way be dedicated to the public for street and highway purposes along the West Coast Highway frontage; that the proposed railings and planter be allowed to encroach until such time as the City Widens West Coast Highway, and at that time the City shall pay only the cost of removing the improvements from the public right -of -way, and the applicant shall change the operation of the take -out restaurant to eliminate . drive -up service unless an amended use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. It is estimated that widening will not occur for at least five years. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public works Department for improvements in the 12 foot dedication area and execute a nonstandard improvement agreement to provide for the maintenance and removal of said improvements. If the City required removal of improvements in less than 5 years, the City will pay a pro -rated share for said removal. 9. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. x • � Use Permit No. 3063 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which permitted the conversion of the former "Corrigan's Seafoods" retail /warehouse building into a travel agency and marine related offices on property now located in the "Recreational and Marine Commercial" area of the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. Said approval also included an off -site -18- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 mG 9N �9� •��y2 yy. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9� ROL CALL INDEX parking agreement for a portion of the required parking UP3063A spaces. The proposed amendment involves a request to delete the existing requirement to provide a portion of Approved the required off - street parking on the off -site lot located at the northwesterly corner of Newport Boule- vard (northbound) and 28th Street, and to: 1.) satisfy a portion of the required off - street parking spaces with in -lieu parking spaces in the Municipal Parking Lot located at the northwesterly corner of Newport Boulevard (southbound) and 28th Street; or 2.) waive a portion of the required off - street parking spaces. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 190 -17 (Resub- division No. 726) and Lots 27 and 28, Block 225, Lancaster's Addition, located at 2800 Lafayette Avenue on the north- easterly corner of 28th Street and Lafayette Avenue, in Cannery Village. ZONE: SP -6 - . APPLICANT: Ruth Zimmerman, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant - Chairman Person stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jerry King, 550 C Newport Center Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. King presented a brief background relating to the previous on -site marine uses and how those uses related to the parking. Mr. King requested that the Planning Commission grant approval of the subject application regarding in -lieu parking spaces, or a waiver of said . parking spaces, based on the prior uses. Mr. King . referred to the City's recommendation that the in -lieu parking spaces be accessible within 300 feet of the project, and he requested that this guideline be waived inasmuch as there are exceptions throughout the City. He stated that the travel agency is not a destination point, that they have maintained their off -site parking agreement and previously approved conditions; that they purchased and maintained an off -site parking lot; and that the applicant is .requesting that they be granted. approval of a waiver of a portion of the parking spaces • or an allowance towards the purchase of in -lieu parking spaces. -19- COMMISSIONERS y�G1 _ �y oy f� � � vy . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman regarding the applicant's off -site parking lot located at 28th Street and Villa Way, Mr. King explained that the adjacent restaurant utilized the parking lot until the applicant was counseled that she would be held legally responsible, and then she installed a chain and lock on said parking lot. In reference to Condition No. 3 of Exhibit "B ", Commissioner Winburn and Mr. King discussed the use of the parking lot for the tenants of the subject building. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. King replied that the applicant has requested in -lieu parking spaces because the applicant has been unable to locate additional parking spaces in the area, and that she has been advised that the in -lieu parking fees will be increased in the future. In reference to Condition No. 4 regarding the request that the applicant submit a written report to the Planning Department every six months, Mr. King maintained that the City has never requested this type of report before from any previous applicant, and he asked why the City has recommended a written report. James Hewicker, Planning Director, responded that the purpose is that there are now sufficient parking spaces in the off -site parking lot to provide parking for the portion of the building that is presently occupied. Mr. Hewicker further explained that the City is interested in knowing that if the City is going to allow the applicant to purchase in -lieu parking spaces in a Municipal Parking Lot at a location several blocks from the building that the tenants are going to be using the Municipal Parking Lot for their parking needs . and not parking in another area. He concluded that the City is requesting verification that the applicant will be using the parking lot said Municipal Parking Lot. Commissioner Merrill clarified Condition No. 4 which would state that a report shall be submitted "...which shall detail use 'by the applicant' of the subject Municipal Parking Lot." In reference to Condition No. 3 regarding use of the applicants' off -site parking lot, Mr. Hewicker referred to the aforementioned statement by Mr. King regarding the applicant's liability in the off -site parking lot, and he questioned the applicant's liability with any -20- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1967 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH other commercial owner whose property is also in close proximity to a restaurant? In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. King replied that the applicant installed the chain and lock shortly after the construction of the parking lot was completed, and that the concern regarding liability was that there were restaurant customers who had consumed alcohol. He commented that the applicant has contacted individuals in the area that the parking lot could be used in the off hours when there was not a conflict with the intended use for her property or for the business. Mr. Hewicker commented that staff would not object if the applicant chained the parking lot when the subject building is closed; however, he commented that a chained parking lot during the day could discourage customers or tenants. Acting Chairman Pomeroy commented that the chained parking lot may be deterring people from parking in the parking lot. Mr. King compared the distance of the in -lieu parking, that the applicant is currently using to the requested in -lieu parking, and he pointed out that the difference in feet would be the width of Newport Boulevard. In response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. King stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" with the exception of Conditions No. 3 and No. 4. He commented that Condition No. 3 could be compromised; however, he requested that Condition No. 4 be deleted. Mr. King maintained that the Zoning Code does not require that the in -lieu parking spaces actually be used. Mr. Hewicker indicated that in order to have the use of a Municipal Parking Lot, the Planning Commission will have to make a finding that the parking lot is close enough to the use and that there is a reasonable expectation that the parking lot is going to be used. He pointed out that Condition No. 4 has only been suggested by staff. Commissioner Winburn commented that the Planning Commission has required that St. Andrews Church review parking on their property; however, she said that Condition No. 4 would be the first time that a condition has required that an applicant.report the use -21- INDEX COMMISSIONERS Mh �'y N y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX of a Municipal Parking Lot when they have paid for the in -lieu fees. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3063 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" including added Finding No. 4 which would state "that the Municipal Parking Lot located at the northwesterly corner of Newport Boulevard (southbound) and 28th Street is approximately 550 feet from the subject office building and is within reasonable proximity to the building "; modify Condition No. 3 by deleting "Said lot shall not be chained off at the entrance or made otherwise unavailable to building visitors during regular business hours. ", and add "Said lot shall have appropriate safeguards to assure that parking is available to visitors and occupants during the day with the safeguard procedure to be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. ". In reference to modified • Condition No. 3, Commissioner Koppelman explained that there appears to be no problem during the evening; however, during the day there is a necessity for the chain to stay in place or an arm to be installed so that the parking spaces will be available for. the building rather than for the restaurant. Add to Condition No. 4 "..., the applicant shall submit a report to the Planning Department every six months which shall detail use "by the applicant" of the subject Municipal Parking Lot. "; add Condition No. 7 which would state "That the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission in one year regarding the parking and the circumstances existing at that time. During the one year period the applicant shall use all best efforts to find alternatives of . parking to the in -lieu parking." She indicated her desire that the City will be pursuing the development. of the new parking lot within the Specific Area Plan. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Webb replied that the parking lot discussed within the Specific Area Plan is located at the southwesterly corner of 30th Street and Villa Way, which would be approximately the same distance from the subject building as the existing Municipal Parking Lot. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, the maker of the motion stated that she would not agree to an amendment to the motion by deleting Condition No. 4. The maker of the motion explained -22- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1967 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX that the small Municipal Parking Lot and the size of the subject building could be easily monitored, and because the building's tenants and employees would be using the Municipal Parking Lot, the Planning Commission would have the opportunity to see if the additional distance would be too far to the Municipal Parkin Lot. Acting Chairman Pomeroy pointed out that when the use permit comes back to the Planning Commission for review in one year, Condition No. 4 could be deleted. Commissioner Winburn explained that the Planning Commission should be consistent regarding Condition No. 4, and that the request to monitor a Municipal Parking Lot has not been made in the past. She further explained that the public should be aware of what will be expected of them regarding in -lieu parking. Substitute Substitute motion was made to approve Use Permit No. n x 3063 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" including added Finding No. 4, modified Condition No. 3, delete Condition No. 4, and add Condition No. 7. The public hearing was reopened at this time, and Mr: King appeared before the Planning Commission requesting clarification. Mr. King inquired if the building's: tenants would be issued an annual sticker for the use of the Municipal Parking Lot, or if the tenants Mould: have to be concerned about feeding the parking. meters throughout the day. Mr. King and Mr. Hewicker discussed the availability of the in -lieu parking spaces, and fees that the City has established. In response to a question posed by Acting Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Webb replied that said Municipal Parking Lot could allow blue parking meters to be installed. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared I before the Planning Commission regarding in -lieu parking fees and parking spaces in the McFadden Square area. The public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Winburn referred to aforementioned Condition No. 4 and commented that the City should be consistent regarding in -lieu fees, and she further -23- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX commented that it could be very difficult to be sure that the automobiles are parking in the Municipal Parking Lot. Commissioner Koppelman indicated that future requests could be done on a limited case basis, but that the subject application can be monitored. Commissioner Di Sano questioned what the written report would contain? He commented that he agreed with staff that in -lieu fees should require the Planning Commission to know if the public is using the parking spaces, or if they are just paying the fees and parking where they should not be parking. Mr. Hewicker replied that the report would indicate that they have a specified number of square footage occupied by specific tenants, the number of employees for each tenant, and to the best of their knowledge the number of employees who are parking on a regular basis in the Municipal Parking Lot. Substitute Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit -- No. 3063 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" including added Finding No. x x x 4, amended Condition No. 3, delete Condition No. 4, and Noes x x x add Condition No. 7. MOTION FAILED. - Absent x. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3063. (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "B" including added Finding No. 4, amended Ayes x x x x x x Condition No. 3, modified Condition No. 4, and add Absent x Condition No. 7. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. 2. The project will not have any significant environ- mental impact. 3. The approval of this amendment to Use Permit No. 3063 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 and improve - ments in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -24- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX 4. That the Municipal Parking Lot located at the northwesterly corner of Newport Boulevard (southbound) and 28th Street is approximately 550 feet from the subject office building and is within reasonable proximity to the building. CONDITIONS: 1. That all applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3063 as approved by the Planning Commission on November 10, 1983 shall remain in effect. 2. That the applicant shall purchase on an annual basis ten in -lieu parking spaces for the duration of the project and that the annual fee shall be in accordance with Section 12.44.125 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. That a portion of the parking spaces on the off -site parking lot located at the northwesterly corner of 28th Street and Lafayette Avenue, shall be designated "for customer use only" in conjunction with the development. Said number of spaces shall be determined by the Planning Department after the entire building is occupied. Said lot shall have appropriate safeguards to assure that parking is available to visitors and occupants during the day with the safeguard procedure to be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 4. That at such time as more than 2,750 sq.ft. of floor area of the building is occupied, the applicant shall submit a report to the Planning Department every six months which shall detail use by the applicant of the subject Municipal Parking Lot. 5. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval of this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare •of the community. -25- COMMISSIONERS C • MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 6. This amendment to Use Permit No. 3063 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 7. That the use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission in one year regarding the parking situation and the circumstances existing at that time. During the one year period the applicant shall use all best efforts to find alternatives to in -lieu parking. * x The Planning Commission recessed at 9:32 p.m. and reconvened at 9:48 p.m. a x t A. Use Permit No. 3300 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a four unit residential condominium development and related garages on property located in a P-C District where a Planned Community Development Plan has not been adopted, and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND B. Resubdivision 857 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide an existing parcel of land into a parcel for residential condominium purposes. AND C. Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 12 Request to approve a Residential Coastal Development. Permit for the purpose of establishing project compli- ance pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the implementation of the State Law relative to .low and moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone. LOCATION: A portion of Section 28, Township. -6 South, Range 10 West, S.B.B. & M., located at 701 Lido Park Drive, on the northeasterly side of Lido Park Drive, on the Lido Peninsula: _ -26- INDEX Item No.4 UP3300 R857 CRDP No.12 Approved COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX APPLICANT: Russell E. Fluter, Newport Beach OWNER: 701 Lido Park Partnership, Newport Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, referred to the addendum to the staff report that was distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing. He explained that staff is recommending that the vertical access to the bay be deleted and that the City require an irrevocable offer of 21 years for a 6 foot wide lateral public access easement across the waterfront in the event that the City is successful in obtaining a corresponding easement from the adjacent property owners. Mr. Hewicker commented that staff has discussed the recommendation with the Coastal Commission. Chairman Person commented that irrevocable offers have been completed in other locations within the bay area. • The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Russ Fluter, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Fluter stated that he concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the deletion of Condition No. 8 in Use Permit No. 3300, and the addition of Condition No. 10 in Resubdivision No. 857, as previously explained by Mr. Hewicker. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard,: the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3300, Resubdivision No. 857, and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 12 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the deletion of Condition No. 8 in Use Permit No. 3300, and the addition of Condition No. 10 in Resubdivision No. 857. Chairman Person stated that he would support the motion, and that the project contains the appropriate density. He pointed out that the developments adjacent to the subject property are of much greater density. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3300, Resubdivision No. 857, and Coastal Residential Development No. 12 as previously stated. MOTION yes CARRIED. _ -27- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 lwv�; K CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH R CALL INDEX Use Permit No 3300 FINDINGS: 1. That each of the proposed units has been designed as a condominium with separate and individual utility connections. 2. The project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. 3. That an adequate number of on -site parking spaces will be provided for the residential condominium development. 4. The project will comply with all applicable, standards, plans and zoning requirements for new buildings applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located at the time of ap- • proval. 5. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared and that the proposed project, as conditioned, will not have any significant environmental impact. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3300 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental 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 and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS:' 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. That development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by both the Building and Planning Departments. . 3. That a grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, -28- COMMISSIONERS y AA 9m �G9 �o99C � yQyz $may` Z CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 4. That adequate provisions be taken to insure that no excessive debris or foreign material be permit- ted to enter the bay during construction. 5. That a siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall be submitted and be subject to approval by the Building Department and a copy shall be for- warded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. This shall be a complete plan for temporary facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 6. That the siltation, dust, and debris control plan shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, waterings, and sweeping. program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 7. 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 Elec- trical Engineer with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 8. Deleted. 9. That all conditions of approval of Resubdivision No. 857 shall be fulfilled. 10. That two garage spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit at all times. 11. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised - within 24 months, from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • -29- COMMISSIONERS Z � fie^ �o OinO�m BG 9w �y'ap y 'Px CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Resubdivision No. 857 FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivi- sion. CONDITIONS: - - • 1. That a parcel map shall be recorded prior to occupancy of the dwelling units. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a build ing permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit be served with an indi- vidual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. That standard curb, gutter, sidewalk and drive aprons be constructed along the Lido Park Drive frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department and that the existing monument wall (located on the northerly side of Lido Park Drive) be removed to provide sight distance. 6. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. -30- COMMISSIONERS m 99,u9 G9 m�yy! C yob CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX 7. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. B. That a condition survey of the existing bulkhead along the bay side of the property be made by a civil or structural engineer, and that the bulkhead be repaired in conformance with the recommendations of the condition survey and to the satisfaction of the Building Department and Marine Department. The top of the bulkhead is to be a minimum of elevation 9.00 ft, above M.L.L.W. (6.26 MSL). 9. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. 10. That a twenty -one year irrevocable offer of dedication to the City be provided for a 6 foot wide lateral public access easement adjacent to the bay. The City will only accept the offer of dedication in the event that a public access connection has been made to one of the adjacent parcels. Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 12 FINDINGS: 1. That a feasibility analysis has been performed which has indicated that it is not feasible to provide affordable housing on- or off -site in conjunction with the proposed development. 2. That the proposed development has met the require- ments of City Council Policy P -1. CONDITION: 1. That all conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3300 and Resubdivision No. 857 be met. • -31- COMMISSIONERS 7EA Aaj ¢O�a ti � c^ x'0.0 9Mm �G oP9� c^ y'9x qy . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 3302 (Public Hearing) Item No.5 Request to permit the continued use of a temporary UP3302 office trailer which was previously permitted for a 90 day period, in conjunction with the Newporter Pacific Approved Boat Sales facility located in the "Retail and Service Commercial" area of the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan Area. LOCATION: A portion of Lot A, Tract No. 919, located at 2200 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast High- way, across from Cano's Restaurant, in Mariner's Mile. ZONE: SP -5 APPLICANT: Swan Enterprises, Inc. dba Newport Pacific, Newport Beach OWNER: Ardell Investment Co., Newport Beach • The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Bob Swan, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. In reference to Condition No. 7 requesting that a 6 foot wide sidewalk be constructed along West Coast Highway, Mr. Swan advised that because - he has a month to month lease with the property owner, it would be difficult for the applicants to construct a $10,000.00 sidewalk. In response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Mr. Swan stated that the applicants concur with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A "' with the exception of Condition No. 7. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Swan replied that he has attempted to change the terms of the month to month lease for a longer term. Chairman Person referred to the July 9, 1967, Planning Commission meeting, and he indicated that the applicants stated that they were requesting a summer - use only on -site. Chairman Person stated that he was having difficulty in continuing temporary uses on sites which will expire by their own terms, and then the applicant must return to the Planning Commission. He commented that the Planning Commission should be • looking at redevelopment in the area. Mr. Swan commented that the subject business has been expanding. He addressed the improvements that the _32- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES f ' � 0 December 10, 1987 y�G� . � y y ` �9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX applicants have made, and that, it would not be financially feasible for the applicants to purchase property on West Coast Highway today. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Swan replied that he had not contacted the property owner regarding the sharing of the .costs to construct the said sidewalk. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission. He objected to the Public Works Department request that a sidewalk be constructed. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve approve Use Permit No. 3302 subject to the findings and conditions for approval in Exhibit "A ", including an amendment to Condition No. 2 which would state that this use permit shall be granted for a period of two years instead of three years, and to delete Condition No. 7 requesting sidewalk construction. Substitute Substitute motion was made to approve Use Permit No. Motion x 3302 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" including staff's recommended Condition No. 2 and Condition No. 7. Commissioner Winburn stated that the structure that was developed on the subject property is compatible with the structure that is on the front of the property, and that the applicants should be responsible to construct the sidewalk inasmuch as that site is the only area on West Coast Highway that does not have a sidewalk. Ayes x x x x x Substitute motion was voted on, and SUBSTITUTE MOTION - Noes x x CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have a significant • environmental impact. -33- COMMISSIONERS O yOG� R90c��9,oA 9 09j, 9� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX 3. The Police Department has indicated that it does not contemplate any problems from the proposed operation. 4. Adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3302 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 and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. that the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan except as noted below. 2. That this permit shall be granted for a period of three years, and any extension shall be subject to the approval of the Modifications Committee. 3. That the customer parking areas shall be identified by movable signs which inform customers where to park their vehicles. 4. That the required number of handicapped parking` spaces shall be designated solely for handicapped self parking and shall be identified in a manner_ acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. Said parking spaces shall be accessible to the handicapped at all times. One handicapped sign on a post shall be required for each handicapped parking space. 5. At any such time as the applicant's use of the temporary office trailer ceases or the use permit expires, whichever happens first, the trailer shall be removed from the site, and the property shall be restored to its original condition. 6. That all improvements be constructed as required., • by ordinance and the Public works Department. -34- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 7. That a 6 foot wide sidewalk be constructed along the West Coast Highway frontage; and that unused curb depressions be removed and existing drive aprons be reconstructed per City Standard 166 -L along the West Coast Highway frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the California Department of Transportation. 8. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 9. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health; safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. A. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to approve a traffic study in conjunction with the construction of a 77 unit senior congregate living facility. AND B. Use Permit No. 3303 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a 77 unit senior congregate living facility on property located in the P- C:District. The proposal also includes: a request to allow a portion of the structure to exceed the basic height limit in the 32/50 Foot Height Limita- tion District; a request to establish an off - street parking requirement based on a demonstrated formula; and a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of tandem parking spaces in conjunction with a full -time valet parking service. The proposed project is similar to a previous project approved by the City Council and which is scheduled to expire on December 9, 1987. -35- INDEX Item No.6 TS UP3303 DENIED COMMISSIONERS q,j�oo FFo mG �N �9'OU x aZC` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 85 -257 (Resub- division No. 811), located at 3901 East Coast Highway, on the southeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Hazel - Drive, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: S.J.S. Development Corp., Beverly Hills OWNER: A.T. Leo's, Inc., Irvine The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Mr. Earl Sherman, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Sherman summarized the background of the subject use permit. He explained that the final permit was held up by the Coastal Commission, which is a requirement to obtain financing, because one of the existing lenders on the property refused to sign a Subordination Agreement required by the Coastal Commission in recording a Deed of • Restrictions on the property. Mr. Sherman said that the Subordination Agreement has been received and that they are prepared for the final Coastal Commission permit so as to proceed with the project. Mr. Sherman stated that there is a need for senior housing in Corona del Mar, that Corona del Mar has a high percentage of senior citizens, that the subject site is well adapted for senior citizens, that the site has previously had numerous problems with the neighborhood, that the proposed project would be compatible to the area, that the traffic would be less, than the current use, that this is the same project that was previously approved by the City Council on December 9, 1965, that there would be a financial hardship if the use permit would not be extended, and that he has reviewed and concurred with the findings and conditions for approval in Exhibit "B ". In response to numerous questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman regarding heresay that the applicants have marketed the proposed project, and that twice as many rooms could be available if the two bedroom units would be modified, Mr. Sherman replied that the applicants intend to comply with the use permit, that they have discussed the project with .financial associates and at • present there are no plans to sell the facility, that in the process of financing the project, the applicant -36- COMMISSIONERS ym F9 mm oo N m. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX has spoken to many financial people and that they have received offers from people who would like to purchase the facility. Mr. Sherman concluded that the applicants intend to be owner /operators of the facility. Mr. Dan Wiseman, 336 Hazel Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission so as to recommend denial of the proposed project for the following reasons: that the proposed 77 unit project could become a 146 unit project, that the parking requirements would not be accurate if the project did contain 146 units, that he was concerned where the employees of the proposed facility would park; and that the proposed project would impose a visual impact in the Buck Gully corridor. Mr. Dick Nichols, 519 Iris Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission to recommend denial of the proposed project. A primary concern of Mr. Nichols was that the bedrooms in the common living area could be used by • more than one person. He maintained that several of the lenders have requested that this be allowed in the rules, which he commented could be accomplished in a lease. Mr. Nichols commented that more occupants would create additional traffic, which would increase the already heavy traffic on East Coast Highway through Corona del Mar. He commented that the Corona Highlands Community Association has requested that no "U" turns be permitted at the Seaward Avenue/East Coast Highway intersection which would force traffic to use the traffic signal at the Morning Canyon Road/East Coast Highway intersection, and that would increase the traffic at said intersection. Mr. Nichols stated that the proposed project's density would be higher than many hotels within the City, and he commented on the structure's:encroachment into Buck Gully. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Nichols replied that the Corona del Mar Community Association, which he is representing as a member of the Board in addition to himself, continue to have mixed views of the proposed project similar to those views that they expressed two years ago: the project's density; that they are not against senior housing in Corona del Mar but that other areas in Corona del Mar may be more appropriate; that the project is beautiful; and that many of the project's proposed amenities previously approved have been cut back. _37_ COMMISSIONERS \�rlko� in ,�•%y r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX In response to questions posed by Commissioner Debay regarding the restriction of the number of automobiles that the residents may have, Mr. Nichols replied that the occupants who will be paying high rent will be very mobile residents and that even if they do not personally drive, they will be associated with individuals who do drive. Mr. Sid Soffer, 900 Arbor Street, Costa Mesa, appeared before the Planning Commission to comment on staff's recommendations of approval or denial as stated in the Exhibits of all staff reports. Mr. Walter Ziglar, 327 Poppy Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission as a member of the Board of the Corona del Mar Community Association. He referred to the 160 residents who signed the petition opposing the project that was submitted to the Planning Commission at the August 25, 1985, Planning Commission meeting: He commented that originally the project looked good; the majority of the residents thought the project was • high density; that the developers did not compromise with the residents; that automobile restrictions would be difficult to enforce; heavy traffic on East Coast Highway; and he emphasized that the residents had concerns regarding employee and valet parking which would overcrowd their residential area with parking. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Ziglar replied that the petition was not recirculated; however, there was discussion among the residents during the past two months and that he is not repeating concerns from two years ago. Mr. Sherman, applicant, reappeared before the Planning Commission in rebuttal to the aforementioned comments. He stated that the City Traffic Engineer has informed him that the proposed project would be a good use for the site because there would be less traffic than if the site contained a commercial use; that less than 258 of the senior citizens have automobiles; that the number of parking spaces has been calculated to be more than adequate; that there will be no more than 15 employees on -site at one time; that the project was designed so as to protect the Buck Gully view corridor; that 95% of the residents gave their support; and that senior citizens have contacted the applicants stating • that they are interested in moving into the facility. -38- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding the restriction of the number of automobiles permitted by the residents, Mr. Sherman replied that because the Coastal Commission requested that the applicants increase the garage area, the applicants have planned tandem parking] that an advantage of congregate living is that the residents do not have to provide their own transportation; and that it would be difficult to limit the number of automobiles. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding a requirement to restore excavation if the project did not proceed as planned, Mr. Hewicker replied that there was a requirement on a previous project that the applicant must restore the excavation if the applicants lost their financing. The Planning Commission and Mr. Hewicker discussed the.. Floor Area Ratio of the proposed project as opposed to projects that have been developed in Corona del Mar. Mr. Hewicker concurred that the typical approved density by the Planning Commission in Corona del Mar has been .75 - .83 Floor Area Ratio and that the proposed project is 1.98 Floor Area Ratio, or 1.60± including the subject property located in Buck Gully. In- response to a question posed by Chairman Person, Patricia Temple, Principal Planner, explained that the square footage calculations have been adjusted but that it .appears that there are increases of square .footage within the service areas. Commissioner Koppelman stated that she did not . previously support the proposed project and that she., would not support the project now. She explained that. the intensity is twice that of any structure in Corona del Mar; that there would be no extra parking available in the area if extra parking would be needed; she described the traffic patterns that would take place which would create heavy traffic on East Coast Highway and in the residential areas; that the project is too . bulky for the site and is inappropriate for the site; and that the two bedroom units could be feasibly occupied by four people. ton Motion was made to deny Use Permit No. 3303 and Traffic Study subject to the Findings in Exhibit "A ". -39- COMMISSIONERS 0 _ 9Z * fC rIlleviko CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pomeroy regarding the use permit process and the applicant's request for an extension to the use permit, Chairman Person explained that previous applications that have been more complex than the subject use permit have successfully been approved by the City and the Coastal Commission within two years. Commissioner Winburn stated that she would support the motion because there is no difference between the previous project denied by the Planning Commission and the subject application, that the traffic problems remain the same, and that there remains concerns from the homeowners as previously stated. Commissioner Debay stated that she would support the motion, but that she also has a concern regarding, senior citizen housing. Chairman Person stated that he would support the motion. He commented that he does not disagree with • the concept of senior housing; however, this project is too dense on a site which is difficult because of lack of on -site parking, and if the applicant would come back with a smaller Floor Area Ratio that maybe he could support the project but it would have to be within the Floor Area Ratio that has been previously . approved by the Planning Commission in Corona del Mar. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would support the. motion. He commented that he supports senior citizen housing; however, he opposed the project because of the intensity, the employee parking, the traffic problems, automobile restrictions would not be successful, and that the project is not in a good location. Motion was :voted on to deny Use Permit No. 3303 and Traffic Study subject to the Findings in Exhibit "A ". All Ayes MOTION CARRIED. - A. TRAFFIC STUDY Finding: 1. A. Traffic Study is not required for a project . which is denied. • -40- COMMISSIONERS , yy . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROW CALL INDEX B. USE PERMIT NO. 3303 Findings: 1. The project will be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use and detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City in that the structure exceeds the basic height limit and is larger and has more bulk than other uses in Corona del Mar and will reduce public views of Buck Gully from East Coast Highway. 2. The structure will be visually imposing and out of scale with the surrounding community. 3. The intensity of the project results in difficult site access. 4. Construction of the project will require intensive grading, which may affect the sensitive resources in Buck Gully. * R * Use Permit No. 3304 (Public Hearing) Item No.7 Request to permit the installation of a new auto spray UP3304 booth in conjunction with an existing custom car manufacturing and repair facility on property located Approved in the M -1 -A District. LOCATION: Lot C, Record of Survey 5264 -451- -- _ (Resubdivision No. 105), located at 1577. Placentia Avenue, on the westerly side of Placentia Avenue, between 16th Street and Production Place, in the West Newport Triangle area. ZONE: M -1 -A - APPLICANT: Gaffoglio Family Metalcrafters, Newport Beach OWNER: Prime Properties Development Co., Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Gordon Holcomb appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. -41- COMMISSIONERS " A .°�'t�,�Q,o. ors %O 9 Ah CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Holcomb stated that the applicants concur with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". He explained that the applicants have installed equipment that meets the South Coast Management Air Quality requirements so as to enhance the air quality. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Holcomb stated that air quality inspections are made on an annual basis. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3304 subject All Ayes to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: - 1. The proposed development is consistent with the. General Plan. 2. The proposed project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The proposed off - street parking will be adequate to serve the custom car facility. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3304 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 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 plan, and elevations. 2. That all repair,. service, body and paint • operations shall be conducted inside the building. -42- COMMISSIONERS 0 S �m qy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX 3. That noise and fumes shall be contained on the site. 4. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from adjacent properties and Placentia Avenue. 5. That a minimum of twenty -four (24) parking spaces shall be provided for the facility and that said spaces shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 6. That all employees shall be required to park on -site. 7. That all signs shall conform to Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. B. That a building permit shall be issued for the auto spray booth, and the structure shall be • inspected by the Building and Fire Departments. 9. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health,, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 10. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24. months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport. Beach Municipal Code. x Use Permit No. 3305 (Public Hearing) Item No.B Request to permit the establishment of a 24 hour private ambulance service substation on property . located in the C- O- H- District, in Newport Center. LOCATION- Parcel -7 of - Parcel Map 25 -1 (Resub- division No. 260), located at 1303 Avocado Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Avocado Avenue, between San. -43- COMMISSIONERS G9 w° 9C � Q'9x CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Miguel Drive and Farallon Drive, in UP3305 Newport Center. Approved - ZONE: C -O -H APPLICANT: Schaefer Ambulance Service, Inc., Los Angeles OWNER: Olen Properties Corp., Irvine Commissioner Winburn stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Mark Winburn appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Winburn reviewed the application and the need for the service on the east side of the bay. He stated that he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" • Mr. Winburn referred to letters that were received by the Planning Commission from two tenants located at the subject site, and he explained that the purpose for the ambulance service at the subject site would be solely for the ambulance drivers to relax between calls, and that there would not be any foot or automobile traffic. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion X Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3305 subject Ayes. x 2 X x x to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Motion Absent x voted on, 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 environ- mental impact. 3. The Police Department has no objections to the proposed use. -44- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 INDEX 4. Adequate off - street parking spaces are being provided in conjunction with the proposed develop- ment. 5. That the provision of an ambulance substation on the easterly side of Newport Bay will enhance emergency response capabilities in the easterly portion of the City. 6. The approval of Use Permit No. 3305 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detri- mental 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 improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substan- • tial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That all signs shall meet the requirements of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 3. That all employees shall be required to park at the ambulance company's central facility else- where, and that employees shall not report direct- ly for work at the Newport Center substation.. 4. That sirens shall not be utilized in the parking lot or on Avocado Avenue, San Miguel Drive, Anacapa Drive, or Farallon Drive unless a health care emergency exists at any of those locations. 5. That no more than 2 ambulances shall be stationed at the facility at any one time. 6. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare • of the community. -45- COMMISSIONERS y c^00 gNM� 9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX 7. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The Planning Commission recessed at 10:55 p.m. and reconvened at 11:00 p.m. * * z Use Permit No. 3306 (Public Hearing) Item No.9 Request to permit a change in the operational charac - UP3306 teristics of an existing nonconforming restaurant facility located in the "Retail and Service Commercial" Approved area of the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Plan Area, so as to change the permitted live enter- tainment to include jazz combos with amplified music, vocals and percussion instruments, including drums. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit the use of tandem and compact parking spaces in conjunction with a full time valet parking service. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 129 -7 -8 (Resub- division No. 600) , located at 501 30th Street, on the northeasterly corner of 30th Street and Villa Way, in the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. - - ZONE: SP -6 - - APPLICANT: Joe Sperrazza, Newport Beach - OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. John Loomis, 30th Street Architects,- - appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Loomis stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "An Mr. David Klein, 601 Lido Park Drive, appeared before • the Planning Commission in opposition to the subject application. Mr. Klein submitted a petition of 35 -46- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES °� December 10, 1987 9y CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX signatures from residents at 601 Lido Park Drive opposing the application. Mr. Klein stated that the residents are local taxpayers, that the proposed jazz music would be detrimental to the neighborhood, that the music could possibly be heard from across the bay, that the music would bring individuals to the area that would not be conducive to the tranquility that the residents are entitled to, that the customers would be leaving late at night and would be noisy, that the property values would be affected, and he referred to Finding No. 4, Exhibit "B ", which states that the approval of the use permit would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mrs. David A. Klein, 601 Lido Park Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the application because of traffic congestion. Mr. Irving Marshack, 601 Lido Park Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the use permit because the amplified music .would be heard • beyond the subject building, that there are too many restaurants and taverns in the area, that there would be traffic congestion because of the narrow streets, and there would be noise from the automobiles. Mr. Russ Fluter, 510 - 30th Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in support of the application. Mr. Fluter stated that the current location for the Cafe Lido located on Newport Boulevard is too small for the applicant's restaurant business; in response to the concerns regarding noise he said that the subject' building is a brick building and has no windows; that the subject restaurant will not have dancing and will not draw the same class of people as other nightclubs' in the area; and that the proposed restaurant will be good for the area. Mr. Tom Dixon, 428 - 31st Street, appeared before the Planning Commission in opposition to the. use permit: Mr. Dixon stated that there is a high density of saloons in the area whose customers use the alleys and streets into the late night hours and cause vandalism, that the traffic and parking are difficult to control in the area, and that the music will be heard from his. home. SMr. Loomis reappeared before the Planning Commission. He stated that the Cannery Village is a mixed use and -47- COMMISSIONERS _ 92 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 R ALL INDEX the Local Coastal Program allows commercial and residential uses. He advised that the valet service will be redesigned with the assistance of the City Traffic Engineer so that the valet service will occur in the off - street parking lot; that the proposed restaurant will not be a saloon; that the subject building has a brick facade; that there are no windows; that the two sets of doors will create an airlock and soundlock that will curtail the sound emanating from the lounge; he described how the applicant proposes to regulate the sound acoustics; that the subject building is 400 to 500 feet from 601 Lido Park and that the doors of the subject building do not face the Lido Park building. Mr. Loomis concluded that the subject building lends itself to entertainment and that the applicant has been a good neighbor in the area. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Mr. Loomis replied that the applicant is proposing the same type of operation that he has operated at Cafe Lido. • In response to questions posed by Commissioner Koppelman, Mr. Loomis replied that the applicant has submitted a seating plan that shows the cocktail tables and the drink rail in the lounge area. He further replied that the facility will accommodate seating arrangements with the exception of .about 10 customers in accordance with the Fire Code. Mr. Klein reappeared before the Planning Commission, and in response to his concerns, Mr. Hewicker explained' that the letter submitted by the applicant's representative indicates that the existing restaurant . has only background music, which is not the style of music that is currently at the Cafe Lido. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. In reference to conditions that the Planning Commission approved for Bubbles Restaurant on East Balboa Boulevard, Mr. Hewicker replied that the sound cannot exceed the ambient noise levels currently on -site, and that the applicant must demonstrate that when they are in operation, the live entertainment cannot be heard. outside of the building, and he referred to Condition No. .10 of the subject use permit. In reference to Condition No. 9, Commissioner Winburn asked if the -48- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 Amend • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH hours of operation are the same as they currently exist at Cafe Lido, and Mr. Hewicker replied that they are the same hours. Commissioner Winburn commented that the hours of operation at Bubbles Restaurant restricted the restaurant to close at 12:00 midnight during the week and 1:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday. Commissioner Di Sano referred to the mixed use in the Cannery Village area, and he commented that the subject building could be prone to vandalism if the building would not be in use. In response to a question he posed to the Assistant City Attorney because he is a property owner within Cannery Village, Ms. Korade replied that Commissioner Di Sano would not need to step down from the dais inasmuch as the subject application would not have a financial impact on him. He commented that the residents in the area have the same rights as business property owners, that the restaurant would serve a good purpose, and that the residents concerns regarding music and later hours have. been conditioned. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3306 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Commissioner Winburn requested that Condition No:. 9 which states "that the hours of operation of the restaurant use shall be limited between 5:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and 3:30 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. on Sundays." be amended to state that the closing hours will be 12:00 midnight Sunday through Thursday, and 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday. The maker of the motion concurred with the request. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Commissioner Winburn stated that the closing hours would pertain to the restaurant and the live entertainment. Commissioner Di Sano suggested that the restaurant be reviewed within one year. Commissioner Winburn referred to Condition No. 13 which states that should the conditions of the use permit not be supported, the Planning Commission may recall the application. Commissioner Merrill stated that he would not support the motion. He recognized previous restaurants that existed at the subject site; however, he indicated that restaurants should remain on the perimeter of Cannery INDEX COMMISSIONERS °� ggrN9gm9Jr. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 ROL CALL INDEX Village, and retail and residential uses should be encouraged within Cannery Village. Commissioner Koppelman stated that she would not Substitute support the motion. Motion was made to deny Use Permit Motion x 3306, subject to the Findings for Denial in Exhibit "B ". In reference to the Specific Area Plan, she stated that one of the main attempts of the Specific Area Plan was the combination of residential and, business uses, and she indicated that a restaurant /lounge use would intensify the area and that would be in conflict with the Specific Area Plan. Chairman Person stated that the project can be conditioned satisfactorily to alleviate the noises emanating from inside the building and by limiting the rest of the restaurant operation. He pointed out that the subject site is within the core of Cannery Village. He commented that he would not support the motion. Chairman Person referred to the commercial /residential area, and he pointed out that many commercial uses that • are existing within Cannery Village were there prior to the residential complexes located on Lido Park Drive. He emphasized that the Planning Commission must balance between commercial and residential uses immediately adjacent to each other; however, he said that there is a need to keep some of the traditional uses such as the marine oriented uses in the area because some of them are being forced out by residential uses. Ayes K K x Substitute motion was voted on to deny Use Permit No. - Noes x N x 3306 subject to the .findings in Exhibit "B ". MOTION FAILED. Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3306 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" Ayes x x K K including an amendment to Condition No. 9 as previously Noes x I x stated. MOTION CARRIED. - - FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed restaurant operation is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Specific Plan Area and is .compatible with surrounding land uses: -50- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 10, 1987 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the hours of operation of the subject restaurant facility and the day time office uses are such as to allow joint use of the on -site parking area. 4. That the proposed changes in the operational characteristics of the subject restaurant will not result in an increase in the number of required off- street parking spaces. 5. The proposed number of compact parking spaces constitutes 25 percent of the parking requirements which is within limits generally accepted by the Planning Commission relative to previous similar applications. 6. The proposed use of tandem and compact car spaces, and a valet parking service will not, under the is circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modifications are consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 3306, under the circumstances of this case will not 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 and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed restaurant shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, and floor plan except as noted below. 2. That final design of the on -site parking area and design of the valet parking shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. -51- COMMISSIONERS 4c o ,l 0 o,�'a G� No p�'��n9y 9X CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES December 10, 1987 R&WCALL INDEX 3. That all valet pick -up and delivery of automobiles shall be done within the on -site parking area and that no portion of the public right of way shall be used for such activity unless approved by the City Council. 4. That valet parking service shall be provided at all times during the restaurant's hours of operation. 5. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated solely for handicapped self - parking and shall be identified in a manner acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. Said parking spaces shall be accessible to the handicapped at all times. One handicapped sign on a post shall be required for each handicapped parking space. 6. That a minimum of four standard size parking spaces shall be designated for self - parking and shall be identified in a manner acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. 7. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from view. 8. That all restaurant employees shall park their vehicles on -site. 9. That the hours of operation of the restaurant use shall be limited between 5:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight Sunday through Thursday and 3 :30 p.m, to 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday. 10. That a licensed engineer practicing in acoustics shall certify to the Planning Department that the operation of the restaurant will not increase the ambient noise levels beyond the boundaries of the subject property, especially during the hours when live entertainment is featured. 11. That all windows shall be closed at all times. All doors shall be closed at all times except when entering or leaving the restaurant facility. 12. That all signs shall conform with Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -52- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES -o NDecember- 10, 1987 46 9y `qy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 13. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit so as to require additional off - street parking should the operation of said restaurant cause a - significant parking problem within the Cannery Village area; or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this Use Permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this Use Permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 14. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • • w Amendment No. 656 (Public Hearing) Item No.iC Request to consider an amendment to Chapter 20.74 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to clarify the A656 intent and redefine some of the definitions pertaining Approved to Adult Entertainment Businesses. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach - Carol Korade, Assistant City Attorney, referred to the - attached staff report from Glen Everroad, License Supervisor, to the Planning Commission, and she corrected the last paragraph to read: "The above indicated areas available for adult entertainment businesses total approximately 464.025 acres. This amount represents 32.658 of the total acreage available for commercial activities (1,421 acres), and 5.19% of the total acreage of the City (8,938.89 acres)." The public hearing was opened in connection with this. item, and because there was no one to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to amend Chapter 20.74 of the Municipal All Ayes Code, and to approve Amendment No. 656 (Resolution No. 1169). Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. -- ADJOURNMENT: 11:45 p.m. JAN DEBAY, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION -5.3-