Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/04/19760.08 COMMISSIONERS L Present Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent MR on Ayes Absent r1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Regular Planning Commission Meeting Place: City Council Chambers Time: 7:00 P.M. Date: March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX * X X X X X *Arrived at 7:15 P.M. X EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS R. V. Hogan, Community Development Director Hugh Coffin, Assistant City Attorney Benjamin B. Nolan, City Engineer STAFF MEMBERS James D. Hewicker, Assistant Director - Planning William R. Foley, Environmental Coordinator Shirley Harbeck, Secretary * * * * * * * * X Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 12, X X X X 1976, were approved as written. Commissioner x Beckley abstained as he was absent from the x X meeting. * * * * * * * * X Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 19, X X X X X 1976, were approved as written. x x * * * * * * * * Items No. 1 and No. 2 were heard concurrently because of their relationship, however, separate actions were taken on each item. * * * Item #1 Request the approval of a Final Map to subdivide FINAL MAP TRACT NO. 21.717 acres into 69 lots for single family resi- dential development and one lot for recreational 9260 purposes. APPROVED Location: Portion of Blocks 92 and 97, CONDI- Irvine's Subdivision, located on TIONALLY the southeasterly side of New MacArthur Boulevard, adjacent to the Big Canyon Reservoir, in Harbor View Hills. (Phase I - Broadmoor- Pacific View) Zone: P -C Page 1. CAL 0 E COMMISSIONERS i CITY OF March 4, 1976 NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES INDEX Applicant: Broadmoor Homes, Inc., Tustin Owner: Pacific View Memorial Park, Newport Beach Engineer: Raub, Bein, Frost and Associates, Newport Beach Item #2 Request the approval of a Final Map to subdivide FINAL MAP TRACT NO. 13.583 acres into 49 lots for single family resi- 9261 dential development and 3 lots for landscape purposes. APPROVED Location: Portion of Blocks 92 and 97, ONDI- Irvine's Subdivision, located on TONALLY the southeasterly side of New MacArthur Boulevard, adjacent to the Big Canyon Reservoir, in Harbor View Hills, (Phase II - Broadmoor- Pacific View) Zone: P -C Applicant: Broadmoor Homes, Inc., Tustin Owner: Pacific View Memorial Park, Newport Beach Engineer: Raub, Bein, Frost and Associates, Newport Beach Staff distributed a new list of street names which had been submitted for consideration. The names on the.new list begin with "Yacht" whereas the previous list submitted began with "Calle." Robert Bein appeared before the Commission on behalf of Broadmoor Homes., Inc. He commented on their compliance with various conditions which were imposed on the tentative map and advised of their concurrence with the staff report and the recommended conditions in connection with the final tract maps. Commissioner Williams commented on streets with double names and the difficulties encountered by the residents, especially as to spelling, and Page 2. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 4, 1976 INDEX suggested that the applicant consider elimination of the word "Yacht" preceding each street name. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made that Plannin Ayes X X X X X X Commission make the following finding: Absent X 1. The Final Map of Tract 9260 can be made to conform with Tentative Map of Tract 9047, subject to the conditions noted below. and recommend to the City Council that Final Map of Tract 9260 be approved, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. That all conditions of Tentative Map Tract 9047 be fulfilled. 2. That the loop street (Lot "A ") improvements be extended to connect to New MacArthur Boulevard at its northerly end as shown on Tentative Map Tract 9047 3. That all of the improvements on New MacArthur . Boulevard, as specified in the conditions of approval for Tentative Map Tract No. 9047, be completed. 4: That the utility easements shown as two feet wide adjacent to the private streets be made at least three feet wide as shown on Tenta- tive Map Tract 9047. 5. That the 5 foot sidewalks be incorporated into and added to the private street right -of- way as delineated by the lettered lots for private streets as required by Condition No. 18 of Tentative Map Tract 9047. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following finding: Absent X 1. The Final Map of Tract 9261 can be made to conform with Tentative Map of Tract 9047, subject to the conditions noted below. and recommend to the City Council that Final Map o • Tract 9261 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all conditions of Tentative Map Tract 9047 be fulfilled. Page 3. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m z y p P Z N RO9CALL 0 • MINUTES March 4, 1976 INDEX 2. That the loop street (Lot "A ") improvements be extended to connect to New MacArthur Boulevard at its northerly end as shown on Tentative Map Tract 9047. 3. That all of the improvements on New MacArthur Boulevard, as specified in the conditions of approval for Tentative Map Tract No. 9047, be completed. 4. That the utility easements shown as two feet wide adjacent to the private streets be made at least three feet wide as shown on Tentative Map Tract 9047. 5. That the 5 foot sidewalks be incorporated into and added to the private street right -of -way as delineated by the lettered lots for private streets as required by Condition No. 18 of Tentative Map Tract 9047. Item #3 Request to create two parcels of land for residen- RESUB- tial development where three lots now exist. DIVISION N . 508 Location: Lots 4, 5, and 6, Tract No. 673, located at 346 and 352 Poppy Avenue,APPROVED on the southeasterly side of Poppy Avenue adjacent to the "Five Crowns" CONDI- IONALLY Restaurant in Corona del Mar. Zone: R -1 Applicant: George R. Stephenson, Santa Ana Owner: Van -Frank Investments, Inc., Los Angeles Engineer: Same as Applicant Community Development Director Hogan advised that the reason for the resubdivision was to relocate a water line easement and allow for the possible remodeling of the Five Crowns Restaurant on the adjacent property at some future time. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Page 4. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m m A DAPA,I m Z w March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX George Stephenson, applicant, 1326 S. Barton, Santa Ana, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the property owner and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. Roger Moore, 327 Poppy, appeared before the Commis- sion to question the disposition of the dwelling known as the "cottage" and commented that it was being used for commercial purposes rather than a residential use. Arthur Wynn, Senior Vice President of Van -Frank Investments, Inc., appeared before the Commission in response to the above question and advised that the "cottage" was owned by the corporation and was used for out -of -town guests and businessmen associated with the corporation. He also comment- ed on parking adjacent to the restaurant and the remote possibility that same would take place. Community Development Director Hogan reviewed the zoning of the parcels on which the restaurant is located as well as that of the subject resubdivi- sion. He also pointed out that any proposal for a parking lot would require a use permit and public hearing. Planning Commission discussed the use of the "cottage" and staff advised that the matter would be investigated and if there were any problems, appropriate action would be taken. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Motion X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the Ayes X X X X X X following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans since the subject parcels exceed the minimum lot width of 50 feet and the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet as required by the Municipal Code. • 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Page 5. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH C n y P T m p A i N Ro4?CAU March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control • Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. That the existing nonconforming side yard setbacks on the subject parcels will not,_ under the circumstances of the 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 injuri- ous to property and improvements in the neigh- borhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. and approve Resubdivision No. 508, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That before the parcel map is filed with the Orange County Recorder, the following instru- ments be recorded: • (a) A new 10 -foot wide easement for water line purposes having the southwesterly sideline of the easement coterminous with the property line between the two proposed parcels. Page 6. Iv* 0 0 COMMISSIONERS P P Z 3 N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 4. 1976 MINUTES iwncY (b) A Quitclaim Deed from the City of Newport Beach for the recently dedicated 10 -foot wide easement for water line purposes, the southwesterly sideline of which is located one foot southwesterly of the property line between the two proposed parcels. Item #4 Request to create two parcels of land for residen- RESUB- tial development where two lots and portions of DI ISION two other lots now exist. NO. 509 Location: Lots 12 and 13, and a portion of APPROVED Lot 14, Block 15 of the East Side CONDI- Addition to the Balboa Tract and TIONALLY that portion of the W2 of Section 35, T6S, R10W, S.B. Meridian, located at 1024 -1028 East Balboa Boulevard, on the northwesterly corner of East Balboa Boulevard. and "C" Street on the Balboa Peninsula. Zone: R -3 Applicant: William J. McGee, Newport Beach Owner: Mr. and Mrs. Floyd A. Blower, Santa Ana Engineer: Same as Applicant Planning Commission briefly discussed the require- ment for 50 foot wide lots in subdivisions and the applicability of that provision to existing nonconforming lots. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. William J. McGee, 613 W. Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the owner and advised that two spaces exist in the garage on Parcel 2. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker advised the Commission that although two spaces may exist in the garage on Parcel 2, they cannot be used independently of one another. Page 7. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH QAceli N March 4, 1976 MINUTES INUCA Floyd Blower, 1024 E. Balboa Boulevard, appeared before the Commission to comment on the use of the garage and felt the garage was adequate for two cars without further alteration because of the length of the garage. Community Development Director Hogan advised that the ,garage in its present configuration (15' X 23') did not meet the Code. Staff pointed out it was their understanding that the garage could be made to conform to Code. Mr. Blower, however, advised that was not so. Mr. Blower also advised that a parking space in front of the garage would be lost if the garage was made to conform. Assistant Community Development Director Hewicker commented on the modification which was approved in February, 1976 to move the entry from the west side of the structure on Parcel 2 to the "C" Street side and the information furnished at that time indicated that the size of the garage was 23' X 23'. He advised that one of the conditions of the . modification was that a two car garage conforming to City standards be provided at all times. Planning Commission discussed parking in front of the garage and whether or not an actual parking space would be lost through the widening of the garage. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission further discussed the parking and it was pointed out that if the modification were exercised, two conforming garage spaces must be provided on Parcel 2. As to the resubdivision, it was the staff's feeling that if the modifica- tion were not exercised, the condition to maintain two conforming garage spaces should be imposed on the resubdivision in order to guarantee that a conforming two car garage would be provided on Parcel 2. Commissioner Parker commented on the requirement for two conforming garage spaces and felt this • requirement may eliminate the space in front of the He garage. questioned whether or not the condition could be eliminated from the resubdivi- sion. Staff advised this could be done, however, the condition would still remain on the modifica- tion. Page 8. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH n t p���e11 March 4, 1976 MINUTES uanaY Planning Commission discussed the possibility of continuing the matter in order to work out the, discrepancies and Chairman Beckley requested comments from the applicant and owner.in this regard.. Mr. Blower advised it would be an inconvenience as they were ready to begin work and all they want to do on Parcel 2 is change the entrance from one side of the house to the other. He reiterated there was no way the garage on Parcel 2 could be made to conform to Code. Les Kephart, Architect, appeared before the Commission to comment on the plans and advised that although the garage was 23 feet wide, posts which support the structure are located in such a way as to preclude widening the interior space. Staff advised that this information was not presented at the time the modification was con- sidered, nor was it included on the drawings presented. • The public hearing was again closed. Motion X Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the following findings: 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the • proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the Page 9. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 4, 1976 lunry 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. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. That the widths and areas of the subject parcels are consistent with the existing residential properties to the east and west of the site. and approve Resubdivision No. 509, subject.to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That each new parcel be served by individual water and sewer connections in a manner satisfactory to the Public Works Department. 3. Any unused curb cuts shall be closed up. 4. Should Parcel Nos. 1 or 2 be sold, the existin harbor permit ( #11 -1024) shall be revised to show joint ownership of the pier and float bayward of this resubdivision. Commissioner Seely commented that the objectives of the staff were proper and in line with the policies expressed in the Municipal Code and his concern with the potential loss of a parking space in front of the garage was not as great because providing conforming garages eliminates the need for on- street parking plus less transient parking is attracted to the area. He also commented on the information which was not made available to the Modifications Committee or the staff and was reluctant to go against the staff recommendation without their having the opportunity to investi- gate the matter. Ayes X X X The above motion was then voted on and failed. N *nt X X X X A Motion X New motion was made that Planning Commission make Ayes X X X X the following findings: Noes X X Absent X Page 10. COMMISSIONERS ➢gym m> m m� o9 PAI a CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 4, 1976 MINUTES !NDEX 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan= tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality. Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (Commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. 9. That the widths and areas of the subject parcels are consistent with the existing residential properties to the east and west of the site. and approve Resubdivision No. 509, subject to the following conditions: 1. That there be a minimum of two independently accessible and conforming garage spaces maintained for the existing dwelling on Parcel No. 2. . 2. That a parcel map be filed. 3. That each new parcel be served by individual water and sewer connections in a manner satisfactory to the Public Works Department. Page 11. Motion Ayes Absent • COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX 4. Any unused curb cuts shall be closed up. A p Z N 5. Should Parcel Nos. 1 or 2 be sold, the exist- ing harbor permit ( #11 -1024) shall be revised , CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX 4. Any unused curb cuts shall be closed up. 5. Should Parcel Nos. 1 or 2 be sold, the exist- ing harbor permit ( #11 -1024) shall be revised to show joint ownership of the pier and float bayward of this resubdivision. Item #5 Request to adjust lot lines on five single family RESUB- residence lots in Tract No. 7386 and Parcel Map DIVISION No. 61 -3. N0. 510 Location: Lots 20 through 24 of Tract No.7386 APPROVED CONDI- and Parcel Nos. 1 through 5 of Parcel Map 61 -3, located at 60, 62, TIONALLY 64, and 66 Drakes Bay Drive and 57 Goleta Point Drive in "Spyglass Hill." Zone: P -C Applicant: John D. Lusk & Sons, Inc., Newport Beach Owner: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Engineer: Raub, Bein, Frost & Associates, Newport Beach Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Rob Carley with Raub, Bein, Frost & Associates, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and concurred with the staff report and recommendations. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. X Motion was made that Planning Commission make the X X X X X X following findings: X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans and the Planned Community Text. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Page 12. ROR 0 COMMISSIONERS 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES March 4, 1976 imnay 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development as set forth in the Planned Community Text. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause. serious public health problems. 7. 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. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed, subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (Commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. and approve Resubdivision No. 510, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That the subdivider be responsible for relocating the existing street light adjacent to Parcels 4 and 5 if proposed driveway approach construction creates a conflict. Item #6 Request to create two parcels of land for commer- RESUB- cial development. DIVISION NO. 511 Location: Lot 2, Tract No. 7694, located at 3601 Jamboree Road and 800 Dove APPROVED Street, on the northeasterly side TONDI- of North Bristol Street between TIONALLY Jamboree Road and Dove Street in "Newport Place." Page 13. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES e„•, ,,, N March 4, 1976 uner Zone: P -C Applicant: Edker and Blanche Pope, Irvine Owner: Same as Applicant Engineer: Donald E. Stevens, Inc., Costa Mesa Planning Commission discussed the status of athletic facilities in existence or proposed for the area. The Public Hearing was opened in connection with., this matter. Bill Langston, 18 Oak Crest Lane, appeared before the Commission to comment on the proposed develop- ment for the parcels being subdivided, i.e. an athletic club and a family -type restaurant or coffee shop. He also commented on the access points to Parcel 2 and requested that both access across Parcel 1 as well as a right- turn -only on • North Bristol be appro.ved. Mr. Langston commented On the required easements for public utility and sidewalk purposes, as well as the area required for landscaping, and following clarification as to the location of these items, advised there would be no conflict. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed the access points to the parcels especially as to right- turns -only on North Bristol and it was felt that this could satisfactorily be worked out between the applicant and the Traffic Engineer. Motion X Following discussion, motion was made that Plannin Ayes X X X X X X Commission make the following findings: Absent X 1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans and the Planned Community Text. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable • general and specific plans. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Page 14. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES RRICA4l March 4, 1976 INDEX 4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development as set forth in the Planned Community Text. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substan- tially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the pro- posed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 8. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in or add to any violation of existing requirements prescribed • by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the Water Code. and approve Resubdivision No. 511, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a parcel map be filed. 2. That all public improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That each new parcel be served by individual water and sewer connections in a manner satisfactory to the Public Works Department._ 4. That P.C.C. sidewalk having a minimum width of six feet be constructed adjacent to the curb along Jamboree Road, North Bristol Street, and Dove Street. 5. That an easement for public utility and side- walk purposes be dedicated along North Bristol Street. The easement shall be four feet wide within Parcel 2, and shall vary within Parcel a 1 to a maximum width of 6 feet. 6. That no vehicular access be taken from Jamboree Road (access rights were dedicated on the Final Page 15. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Motion Ayes Absent Motion A Ant MINUTES March 4, 1976 unev T Map of Tract 7694); and that the location and O F F 2 3 RN CALL Motion Ayes Absent Motion A Ant MINUTES March 4, 1976 unev Map of Tract 7694); and that the location and design of vehicular access to Dove Street be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. 7. That all vehicular access rights to North Bristol Street be dedicated to the City of. Newport Beach, and that access to Parcel 2 be taken from Dove Street across Parcel 1 by . means of an appropriate easement. Additionally, a single access point to North Bristol Street for right turns only may be provided; subject to review and approval as to location and design, including the design of the portion of the drive on private property, by the Public Works Department and by the State. A determination as to access confi.gura.- tion shall be made prior to recordation of the parcel map. The dedications of access rights shall be shown on the Parcel Map; together with the aforesaid access to North Bristol Street, if approved. tem #7 Consideration of Specific Area Plan No. 5 "Mariners MENDMENT Mile" and adoption of Mariners' Mile Specific Plan 10. 458 District. ONT. TO Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach 4AY 6 X Planning Commission continued this matter to the X X X X X meeting of May 6, 1976. X tem #8 Consideration of redesignating the southerly por- kMENDMENT tions of Lot C of Tract 919 to R -1 from C -1 -H. 10. 459 Initiated by: The City of Newport Beach ONT. TO AY 6 X Planning Commission continued this matter to the X X X X Xmeeting of May 6, 1976. X Page 16. 9 0 COMMISSIONERS DC P T n Y Item #9 USE PERMIT N0.1779 CONT. TO MAR. 8 P located at 2814 Lafayette Avenue, 3 on the easterly side of Lafayette Avenue between 29th Street and CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX Request to establish a yacht club facility in the M -1 District, and the acceptance of an offsite parking agreement for the required parking spaces. Location: Lots 7 and 8 of Block 425 of Lan- casters Addition to Newport Beach, Item #9 USE PERMIT N0.1779 CONT. TO MAR. 8 located at 2814 Lafayette Avenue, on the easterly side of Lafayette Avenue between 29th Street and Villa Way in "Cannery Village." Zone: M -1 Applicant: Voyagers Yacht Club, Newport Beach Owner: Woodco Investment Co., Long Beach Community Development Director Hogan commented on the offsite parking agreement between the Bank of Newport and the applicant and pointed out that the agreement could be terminated by the Bank by giving 30 days written notice to the applicant, therefore, questioned whether the letter or agreement met the requirements of the Code relative to offsite park- ing. Assistant City Attorney Coffin commented on the Code requirements and City Council policy wherein unless the property owners were the same on both parcels, an agreement must be entered into guaran- teeing use of the offsite parking area for a period of five years, more or less, and stated that the letter agreement which was submitted was inadequate and did not meet the requirements of the Code. Public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Don Turpin, 4120 Birch Street, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant and commented that the reason for the 30 -day clause was to satis y the Bank of Newport by -laws which specifically prohibit free use of the property. However, the Bank has indicated approval of the parking for a period of 5 years at no charge and the letter submitted was the only way they could satisfy the Board of Directors since the Bank does not want to enter into a lessee - lessor type of agreement. Mr. Turpin answered questions of the Commission rela- tive to membership, facilities for launching, typical club operation and hours, expansion of Page 17. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEY youth activities, parking for yacht clubs, and use of the adjacent lot which will be leased. Mr. Turpin requested that the use permit be approved for a period of at least 10 years. He also requested that the letter submitted be sufficient as an agreement in lieu of the usual agreements obtained for offsite parking and if this was not acceptable, requested a two -week continuance in order that they may look into the matter further. Tom Atkinson, 2816 Lafayette Street, commented on the typical functions of yacht clubs and voiced concern with the lack of parking in the area and the congestion which may be created by a yacht club at this location. Hans Dickman, owner of a boat shop on Lafayette, appeared before the Commission and voiced concern with the parking in the area. Tony Darcy, 5019 River Avenue, appeared before the Commission and advised of the various activities of the club including youth programs. . There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Seely commented on the letter agree- ment for the offsite parking and although he did not consider it as a binding agreement, felt that. the Planning Commission could impose conditions which would require the applicant's conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code pertain- ing to offsite parking agreements. Motion X Therefore, motion was made that Planning Commission make the following findings: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with the surrounding land uses in "Cannery Village." 2. Adequate offstreet parking spaces can be provided for the proposed development on the Bank of Newport property. 3. The required offstreet parking spaces on a separate lot from the building site is • justifiable for the following reasons: a. The applicant proposes to obtain a long term five year agreement for the use of the offsite parking lot during the evening Page 18. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES 1mnry hours when most of the yacht club o.,Or.l. activities occur. March 4. 1976 MINUTES 1mnry hours when most of the yacht club activities occur. b. The subject parking lot is so located as to be useful to the proposed yacht club facilities. c. Parking on the subject lot will not create undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. 4. The approval of Use Perm.it No. 1779 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detri- mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons resid -_ ing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the, general welfare of the City. and approve Use Permit No. 1779, subject to the following conditions: • 1. That this approval shall extend for a period of time not to exceed 5 years. Any extensions shall be acted upon by the Modifications Committee. 2. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan. 3. That an offsite parking agreement shall be approved by the City Council, guaranteeing that a minimum of 23 parking spaces will be provided for the members of the Voyager's Yacht Club at the Bank of Newport site, located at the northwesterly corner of 31st Street and Lafayette Avenue. 4. That all signs shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 5. That trash areas shall be enclosed with walls . not less than 6 feet in height, or all trash areas shall be within the building. 6. Should Voyagers Yacht Club desire to provide • slip facilities for their members. access to those slips to be provided from Lot 7 or 8. 7. Any work or construction in the water area (i.e. fencing, railing, etc.) constructed on Page 19. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH >� T n a F r p r c 70 Z 3 0AA1i m m p N March 4. 1976 MINUTES ipinry the bulkhead shall be subject to a Harbor Permit issued by the Marine Department. 8. Should any additional slips or floats be constructed, restroom facilities and adequate parking shall be provided in accordance with City Council Harbor Permit Policies. 9. The "future hoist" shown on Lot 7 shall be subject to a permit issued by the Building Division of the Community Development Depart - ment. Planning Commission discussed the findings which must be made in accordance with the Code and it was pointed out that the Commission must make specific findings as to the agreement and location and their recommendation forwarded to the City Council for approval. Commissioner Parker advised he could not support the findings outlined in the motion with regard to the offsite parking agreement. Planning Commission discussed the issues under consideration which were 1) to establish a yacht club and 2) to review the offsite parking loca.t.io and agreement and make a recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Seely advised that the intent of his motion was to approve the use permit subject to the applicant obtaining an agreement for the.off- site parking as required by the Municipal Code, however, since the findings pertaining to the offsite parking could not be made at this time, the motion was withdrawn. Motion X Motion was made that this matter be continued to Ayes X X X X X X March 18, 1976, in order that the applicant may Absent X have the opportunity to further pursue the offsite parking and obtain an acceptable agreement. Chairman Beckley commented on the offsite parking and his feeling that the location was unacceptable Page 20. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH T < P P 4 Z N ROLi" CALL E C� MINUTES March 4, 1976 INDEX Item #10 Request to amend Chapter 20.30 of the Newport Beac AMENDMENT Municipal Code (formerly Chapter 20.38 N.B.M.C.) N0. 463 as it pertains to the parking requirement for office buildings based on the size of the parking CONT. TO pool. A�12 1 Initiated by: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Community Development Director Hogan advised that while the staff was sympathetic with the applicant's reasons for the request, they were hesitant to change the Code in such a way that it would apply to every kind of parking pool facility over 1500 spaces because there is not enough information to indicate that the same reduction would be warrante for other uses or types of building structures. I was suggested that if the ordinance was to be changed, it should be done in such a manner as to allow for review of each case by the Planning Commission through the use permit procedure in order to determine whether the parking requirement could be reduced. Planning Commission discussed the existing parking pools throughout the City and the types of build- ings and tenants which use the parking pools. Community Development Director Hogan commented on another issue which should be given considera- tion, i.e. the Parking Management Program as recommended by the E.P.A.; the objectives of which areto reduce parking, reduce vehicle miles travele and encourage the use of other means of transporta tion. Mr. Hogan also commented on the Coastal Commission's proposal to reduce the parking for Corporate Plaza, regardless of the City's require- ments and the need for parking, in order to force the use of other means of transportation, while at the same time they are requiring more parking elsewhere for residential and commercial establish- ments. The public hearing was opened in connection with this matter. Ron Hendrickson with the Commercial Division of The Irvine Company appeared before the Commission and presented an exhibit of Block 600 for review. He commented on the previous discussion and felt that some change was needed, whether it be as suggested by The Irvine Company or through the Page 21. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 9 March 4, 1976 MINUTES INDEX use permit procedure as suggested by the staff. He reviewed the situation in Block 600 and advised that both a physical count and a computer count revealed there was a substantial surplus of park- ing in the structures. Further analysis indicated that the types of uses and number of employers in a building have been the determining factors in the reduced use of the parking structures. This, together with the use of public transportation and car - pooling, has had an effect on the number of spaces needed and felt that a reduction in parking was warranted. Planning Commission commented on the use of public transportation, car pools, additional structures proposed for Block 600, and use of parking in Newport Center. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission discussed the definition of "pool parking" and its applicability to existing • and proposed structures. It was felt that further review and revision of the proposed ordinance was needed, possibly in terms of square footage of building area rather than the size of the pool parking. It was also suggested that consideration be given to utilizing the current requirements with the provision that parking over 1500 could be modified through the use permit procedure pro- viding certain criteria were met. Staff suggested that the matter be continued in order that the ordinance could be re- written and brought back to the Commission for further review and discussion. Motion X Motion was made to continue this matter to the Ayes X X X X X X meeting of April 1, 1976. Absent X Motion X There being no further business, motion was made Ayes X X X X X X to adjourn. Time: 10:10 P.M. Absent X • JAME P RKER, Secretary Pla ing Commission City of Newport Beach Page 22.