Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes6 0 n U Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes March 18, 2004 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Cole, Toerge, McDaniel, Selich, Kiser and Tucker- all present STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Transportation/Development Services Manager Patrick Alford, Senior Planner Rosalinh Ung, Assistant Planner Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary PUBLIC COMMENTS: Dr. Linda Orozco discussed the issue of drug and alcohol rehab businesses on residential properly and potential Zoning Code violations. , POSTING OF THE AGENDA: The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on March 12, 2004. CONSENT CALENDAR MINUTES of the adjourned and regular meeting of March 4, 2004. Motion was made by Commissioner Kiser to approve the minutes of March 4, 2004 as modified. Page 1 INDEX PUBLIC COMMENTS POSTING OF THE AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 Approved Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 • Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, McDaniel, Selich and Kiser Noes: None Absent: Tucker Abstain: None HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: Zinc Cafe (PA2003 -225) 3222 E. Coast Highway Request an amendment to Use Permit No. 2001 -040, to allow the restaurant portion of Zinc Cafe and Market to extend its hours of operation to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week and to allow the establishment to operate with a Type 41 (On -Sale Beer and Wine Eating Place) License, pursuant to the Alcoholic Beverage Outlet' Ordinance (ABO). Commissioner Eaton clarified with staff that the two issues of this item could be enacted upon separately. John Secretan, applicant noted the following: • • Request is to extend the hours to 10:00 p.m. for economic reasons. • Business has been spotty to make the dollars that are required to make the business continue. • The business has been well received in the community. • The restaurant is not noisy, and is designed to be comfortable and relaxing. • He does not expect any problems with the sale of beer and wine. • Deliveries will be done in the morning hours and done through the parking lot, not the alley. Commissioner Selich noted: The original approval had a finding that the operational j characteristics of the use, particularly the hours of operation, were the reason for the granting for a parking waiver. One of the reasons was that the use did not overlap into the other j restaurants in the area and compete with parking. These permits run with the property, not the person /entity. • If the applicants cafe would leave, whatever restaurant came in would be under that use permit. We have to be careful that I we do not get another restaurant in that building that overlaps i hours and causes parking problems. • He then asked the applicant if the proposed extended avPninn Mum could hp until 7 nr 7B0 n m to nPt the aarly. Page 2 ITEM NO.2 PA2003 -225 Approved Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 dinner crowd but not the whole evening. • He then expressed his concern about granting full operation, j to 10:00 P.M. j Mr. Secretan answered that: • He would find it unsuccessful to limit his use to 7.30 p.m. as' his clientele eat between 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. • If the time does not get granted, he stated that he would not be inclined to stay in Corona del Mar. • It would be a mistake to not grant him the additional hours. • Overall, this cafe is used by the local residents and is something for the City to be proud of. Commissioner Selich noted: If another restaurant comes in then we would be able to review this use from the beginning as this is such an unusual, use there now. He asked if the Commission could grant extended hours and have this item come back in twelve months for review. Ms. Temple answered yes, that subsequent review has been done in the past. Mr. Secretan answered he would accept that condition. Ms. Clauson noted that the condition would be to review this use permit in a year to see if there are any problems. If there are problems a year from now, the Commission will not be able to withdraw the condition and take away the approval just because they are not successful and are leaving town and someone else is coming in. Public comment was opened. Beth Rasmussen, a local citizen noted her concerns and asked that the hours not be extended: Traffic and safety - speeding and near misses with pedestrian crossings Parking - additional parking from extended hours of the cafe would only increase the lack of parking and cause additional competition for parking in residential areas. Drunk and disorderly - Quiet Woman facility patrons use Larkspur until 2 in the mornings. At Commission inquiry, the speaker noted that since Zinc Cafe moved in it is very difficult to find parking in front of her apartment. Additionally, since it opened, the no parking situation adds Page 3 is Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 adaitional trattic. 1 ne parKmg is Tully usea Trom is to 'lu P.M. I ne cafe employees frequently do not park in the public lot across Marguerite as they are supposed to. Robert Green, local citizen noted the following concerns: • Has called the cafe owner regarding employees parking in front of the apartment housing on Larkspur. • The cafe owner has not been a good neighbor due to parking and issues with delivery drivers. • The parking problems have increased since the cafe opened. • There is quite an elderly population in Corona del Mar and to increase the parking demand in the residential areas is problematic to them. • He then noted his petition with 28 signed petitions to not grant the increased hours. Ms. Clauson noted Mr. Green had called her and asked that ADA requirements be addressed. The ADA (American with Disabilities Act) appointed liaison of the City is Mr. Faysal Jurdi, Deputy, Building Official. That was done in the early'90's for purposes of implementing the ADA. Now, what he does is implement Title 24, which is the regulations that the City is responsible for of its own properties and development and also for any building permit that is; issued. Under the Title 24 regulations, there is nothing that requires ADA accessible parking on City streets. We deal with ADA in parking lots and for public facilities. Pamela Frey, a local citizen, noted the following: • The evening parking is being used by the restaurants in the area now and allowing the cafe additional evening hours will only compound the problem. • As It is now, she has to park two blocks away when she: comes home in the afternoon. • This is a nice establishment, but if it leaves as the owner is threatening, what will happen to the neighborhood if another venue comes in with beer and wine with the extended hours? • There is a lot of noise now, and my peace and enjoyment of my property is compromised. • In my opinion, my property is not as enjoyable as it was since the cafe moved. • She asked that the Commission not let the hours be increased due to parking problems and noise. Debbie Ashton, a local citizen, noted the following: Asked that a stop sign be installed at Larkspur and 2nd Avenues due to the increased traffic resulting from the cafe as there have been many near misses and accidents in that area. Page 4 • lJ Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 H`SACU dUUUI 1JCIIIIIL PdIRII19 IUI ICSIUCIItA" U.UU P.M. iU O.UU a.m. • Noise is a problem especially when patrons go back to their cars in the evening. • Trash is a problem from cafe patrons. • If this is granted with alcohol established for this property, would it somehow set a precedent for hours to be extended and it could become another bar? • The establishment as it is now is a lovely place. Mr. Doug Ashton, a local citizen, noted the following: Supports and agrees permit parking for local residents. 1 Distributed pictures of trash containers overflowing from' breakfast and lunch business and asked with the addition of a dinner business, where is the extra trash going to go as they are allowed only two trash receptacles? Cafe was originally opened with the condition that employees and patrons use the municipal parking lot over by Bandera's. With the added evening hours, parking will overflow from the lot into the residential areas. Ms. Temple noted ftt the establishment of a residential parking permit program is not within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission and would have to come from the City Council. However, there is one area in town that has a resident permit program and that is in Newport Island. Mr. Edmonston noted that there is also a resident permit plan around the area of Newport Harbor High School that allows parking up to two hours but longer with a permit. The Newport Island program is effective from May 15th to September 15th, and therefore is a summer restriction. The City has in the past looked; at residential permit programs in Corona del Mar. There have! been logistical problems dealing with it and how the City would; address the fact that there are a lot of commercial establishments' that don't have enough parking to remain in business if all the. residential parking was taken away from them. It is an issue that is further complicated by the fact that the south side of the highway is in the coastal zone and they have a say in any parking restriction programs as well. Public comment was closed. Commissioner Selich noted: • A large part of the parking waiver that was given was due to this establishment closing down when other eating establishments are gearing up for the evening dinner hour. • After 6:00 p.m., the parking lot is full at Bandera's, as is the adjoining City lot. • %Alc nnnci'Icror! #Laic vcv norcfi dhi asM1acn #Faic i#cm Firo# romn Page 5 U u Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 •1Y ,IJVYYV 4 •Y� VI41r 11 NIIJ 111 IIIJt VMIIIV up and I am sympathetic to the applicant's problems. would like to come up with some hours of operation that may, overlap into the dinner hour; however, I can not support the; operation being opened until 10:00 p.m. and recommend i 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Kiser noted: • After reviewing the decision the Commission made two years ago, it is a difficult issue to extend the evening serving hours. • Currently the business is well maintained and is a plus for the neighborhood. • Another business coming in could create problems. • The alcoholic beverage license is not a problem and I am in favor of it as it is conditioned. • He then suggested that the evening hours could be extended to between 8 and 8:30 p.m. as he is not supportive of 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Eaton noted that a very substantial parking waiver was granted on this business two years ago that was based upon the hours. The latest he could go would be with an 8:30 p.m. closing and allowing the alcoholic beverage. This would preclude a bar type successor business from wanting it. It doesn't make sense to extend the hours later than that. Commissioner Toerge noted the following: Prior to opening in Corona del Mar, H enjoyed Zinc Cafe Laguna several times. He was happy to hear that Zinc was considering a location in CdM, but he was concerned that they would not get approved as parking in the vicinity is very tight in the evening. The nearby public parking lots and street parking are full by 6:30 to 7:00 p.m. presumably by customers of other restaurants in the immediate area including the Quiet Woman and Bandera's. When he heard that Zinc was proposing to close prior to dinner, he was supportive of its approval. He does not object to the beer and wine operation. Pursuant operating provided. to our Code, 29 parking spaces are required for the characteristics of the cafe. There are 11 parking spaces; The remaining 18 required parking spaces were waived. Based upon his review of Zinc's initial approval, there are 64 seats for restaurant dining. If we assume that half of the patrons walk to the restaurant and further assume that the remaining customers travel two per car, 16 spaces are required to serve seated Page 6 Planning Commission Minutes 03118/2004 UUbLUI I ICI.7. DabVU UNUII LII IU, djJVIIQ 1UUI I, UIUY CXPIVLA 1.1161. U 1.0 O employees are required to serve dinner. This equates to a demand for 22 to 24 parking spaces for employees and seated customers. This parking demand does not account for other non - seated customers visiting the restaurant for coffee or other purchases. He concluded by stating that he could not support extending the hours of operation to 8:00 p.m. as doing so would place increased pressure on parking that is simply not available, especially considering that parked cars of Zinc customers seated at 8:00 p.m. will still be parked at the time of greatest demand in the neighborhood. Commissioner Cole noted his concurrence with the previous speakers. He added that based on the testimony tonight there is currently a definite parking problem that could only be exacerbated by extending additional hours. I agree that we keep the existing hours in place and am in support of an alcoholic beverage license for daytime use. Commissioner Tucker noted: • Some early evening hours might be a possibility and would support 7:30 -8:30 p.m. range. • Would prefer no alcoholic beverage license so as to not have patrons linger. Chairperson McDaniel noted his concern about the parking impact in the residential hours. He then asked for and received the Commission's views on the extended hours and alcoholic j beverage license. Motion was made by Commissioner Selich who noted his support of 8:30 p.m. closure with the alcoholic beverage license. He suggested that this item come back in twelve months for review due to the issues of employee parking; deliveries and trash. The employees are supposed to park in the municipal lot and if they are not, then they are violating the intent of what we did in granting the initial permit. The owner needs to be more zealous in the employee parking. Mr. Secretan noted his support of the motion. Commissioner Toerge noted he could not support the motion due to the parking conflict that will exist at 8:30 p.m. At Commission inquiry, Ms. Temple noted that use permits do vest and run with the land; however, the City has the regular condition that a permit can be either called back for further review or revocation if there are problems with the operation. 0 Page 7 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 • Commissioner Kiser noted his support of the motion as with the 8 :30 p.m. closing hours, it will not develop into a bar or an alcohol sales related enterprise. 0 Ms. Temple noted that typically with an 8:30 p.m. closing time,! restaurants would not seat anybody after 8:30 p.m. For this type of operation it would by 30 to 45 minutes after 8:30 p.m. before It was emptied and closed. The Commission could actually stipulate that, it be closed and emptied by 8:30 p.m., staff could handle it either' way. The maker of the motion clarified that the cafe will be closed and emptied by 8:30 p.m., with last seating at 8:00 p.m. Chairperson McDaniel note he would not support this item as the impact is too great. The applicant indicated at the original hearing that the hours of operation were what he needed and therefore, we granted the extensive parking waiver. Now, he is here asking for something else and I am not comfortable with it. Ayes: f Eaton, Cole, Kiser, Selich, and Tucker Noes:. Toerge, McDaniel Absent: I None Abstain: I None SUBJECT: Local Coastal Plan (PA2003 -098) City of Newport Beach Senior Planner, Patrick Alford noted the following: • Issues and proposed changes are contained in the staff report. • A number of items of correspondence have been received since the staff report was published. • They are listed in the order they were received and are in a matrix which summarizes the issues involved and refers you to the appropriate section of the draft document. Public comment was opened. John Lindgren, spoke as the president of the Cameo Homeowners' Association noting the following: Policy 3.1.5 -2 - regarding future gating of communities. The association does not currently have gates, but would like to keep that option open. He presented staff with some Page 8 ITEM NO.3 PA2003 -098 Continued to 04/22/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 suggested verbiage to be incorporated. • At Commission inquiry, he noted that their is no public access to the Cameo Shores today. There is a city sign that indicates no public access, but there is public beach access from Pelican Point or from Little Corona along the beach. David Moore, a local citizen, read his email that he had sent to staff and Commissioners referencing: • Policy 4.1.4 to 4.1.5 regarding eel grass, dredging, legality of Coastal Act, vessel berthing and mooring areas. He recommended that the Section(s) on eel grass be completely removed as eel grass is not on the endangered and _, threatened species list nor is it on the list of habitats for endangered and threatened species. Seymour Beek, local resident read from his page of comments that he distributed, noting: • Policy of 4.1.1 regarding eel grass, recommended the: verbiage be changed. • Policy 3.0 Public Access and Recreation - "walkways along all appropriate commercial areas of the harbor including Lido Marina Village Boardwalk, Rhine Channel Walkway, Lido Village to Mariners Mile and Mariners Mile Walkway' By making these policies, we are getting way ahead as these walkways have not been studied much and we are far from conclusion that they are needed. He suggested this wording be stricken from this document. • Policy 3.1.4 -4 regarding residential piers is too restrictive i because flagpoles, swim ladders, benches, planters, fishing rod holders are common and limiting appurtenances and storage areas to those related to vessel launching and berthing would eliminate those items. • Policy 2.6- 4, -5 -6 regarding Federal Government offshore drilling leases. Is this something that needs to be dealt with in the LCP? John Corrough, local resident noted the following: • Supports staff recommendations on Section 2.3 Visitor- serving and Recreational Development. I • Supports staff recommendations on Section 4.1.4 to change language as the biological consultant concluded that it would be appropriate to remove the sentence in question regarding the least terns. Page 9 • Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 RCl:U111111C11Ub llldl llltl LUldl liUdZitdl rItIll UC ICliUI11111CI]Uuu for approval and forwarded to the City Council. Commissioner Eaton noted a communication from Mr. Paone regarding a change to Policy 2.3.1 -2 regarding providing waterfront - oriented commercial uses, including eating and drinking uses and recreation and entertainment uses, as a means of providing public access to the waterfront. Does staff support this and do you support this? Mr. Alford answered yes, staff feels the language changes contained in that communication are supportable. Mr. Corrough answered that he supports the verbiage change. Tom Billings, local resident, read from a list of issues that he distributed to staff and the Commission, noting: • Coastal Bluffs/beach development. • Set back requirements; definition of 'altered' vs. 'unaltered land' as it pertains to coastal bluffs. • ESHA - definitions as it pertains to Coastal Act and this document. • Public access issues - Balboa Bay Club not currently . enforced. • California Coastal Trail - complete lateral trail from 36th to Santa Ana River. • The current General Plan has 11 categories - the new. proposed LCP has 27 categories. • Would like to see more alignment with the General Plan designations and densities with the LCP. • He then concluded by questioning the amount of time given j for public review of the document and the level of public participation in its development. Commissioner Toerge, speaking as a representative of the sub -. committee on the LCP along with 3 Councilmembers and 2' additional Commissioners, commented on the public outreach that 1 had been done to date: • 17 public meetings between February 2002 and January J 2004. City Council had an update July 2002, • Harbor Commission had an update, • Speak Up Newport presentation, • Public review of the draft LCP land use plan in March 2003, • (,PAR and FnAR nracantatinnc Page 10 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 • • EDC presentation, • Corona del Mar Chamber of Commerce presentation, • Harbor Commission update, etc., • Several more presentations, too numerous to list. Continuing, he noted that there has been and will continue to be a strong effort made to make this a document to represent the will of the people of Newport Beach. Chairperson McDaniel noted that this is the second Planning Commission meeting on this issue and that it had been heard and continued from the meeting of March 4, 2004. Dan Daniels, spoke on behalf of the Mariners Mile Business Association noting: • Support the revised language in Policy 2.3.1 -2. • Requested the need to include references to the desirability of mixed uses along the waterfront. • Mixed uses provide traffic benefits and allow revitalization in a way that single uses simply can't do. • The LCP both protects the waterfront and stimulates revitalization, such language is badly needed. • He volunteered to help staff come up with some language. Doug Dryer, local citizen and business owner noted the following: Lido Marina Village is in need of help. He is concerned about articles published in the papers and the sale of businesses in that area. Policy 2.3.1 -2 referring to a change from retail services to visitor serving commercial in this area will only benefit the visitors and not citizens of the City. Kathryn Moore, resident of Linda Isle noted the following: • She purchased a 38 foot boat in July, which is currently) sitting on the bottom of the harbor. • She is unable to have her mooring area dredged as the next door neighbor is currently doing because a few blades of eel grass have been found in her area. • Referring to the California Coastal Act of 1976 reference to dredging of wetlands, estuaries shall be permitted to maintaining existing or restoring previously dredged channels, vessel berthing and mooring areas. I believe that . means in front of my home. Page 11 0 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 • Right now, because of this LCP, she is not allowed to dredge. • She suggests that Section 4.1.4 be stricken from the LCP and if that can't happen, suggests that the existing language f from the Coastal Act be placed into this plan. Dr. Linda Orozco, local resident, noted the following: • The California Coastal Commission focuses on maximum public access. • Referring to a map she distributed, she noted that there are 6 ; rehab houses operating with a State license in Newport Beach. All of them are either on the waterfront, or within one block from the ocean. • The one at 1810 W. Oceanfront is a 35 foot lot that has 57 people operate out of that one residential property that has access off from an alley only. • She noted that those 57 people need to park and there is only 3 parking spaces provided. Any public access in the immediate area is used up by the rest of the people from this one residential property. • The LCP needs to address the land use designation for each property. • The Zone Code needs to be enforced. • She then noted that she is concerned with Policy 3.1.1 -2 regarding protection and enhancement of street ends for public access. At Commission inquiry, the speaker noted she will send an email to staff with specific language for her proposed changes. Paul Watkins, local citizen, noted the following: • There are a number of good reasons not to extend the boardwalk beyond 36th Street to the river. • The public has indicated a preference for an active area on the boardwalk and a more quiet, peaceful family oriented beach experience not involving distractions with a more intense boardwalk use. • He asked that you not include extend the boardwalk. • The pathway along Seashore pedestrians and precludes the sandy shore. Jessica Johnston, a local citizen noted: any language that would provides a safe way for need to concrete over the Page 12 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 • Supports redevelopment and would like to see an increase! • in density through the use of mid and high rise condominium; projects especially in Cannery Village. • The LCP language regarding the bluff along Bayside Drive that is within the currently exempt neighborhood of Irvine. Terrace, seems to be conflicting. • Section 2.2.3 recommends Irvine Terrace be maintained 'categorically exempt as it is a built out neighborhood. • Section 4.4.3 states that even in areas where there has been alterations to the bluff, new development must be set back' with no bluff face alteration allowed. • What is the intent of the LCP? Jan Vandersloot, local resident noted the following. • Policy 4.1.3 - Environmental Studies Area, add #14 Cliff/ Drive Park west side, #15 Bayview Landing, #16 Jamboree and MacArthur intersection, #17 Bonita Creek because all of these contain wetlands. • Policy 4 -28 - Study Area 12 Castaways, 'non- native grasslands in the center of the site', is no longer true as it is i being currently restored. • Policy 4.1.1 -5 - '...limit the uses within ESHA uses that are . dependent on such resource except where limitation result in taking of private property.' Who determines that? That; language is not consistent with the Coastal Act and should be consistent. • Page 4 -4, '...or as isolated in a manner that precludes its use by most wild life species...', the habitat area does not meet the statutory definition of ESHA as contained in Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act, therefore such habitat area does not warrant the special land use and development restriction of Section 302.40 of the Coastal Act, and should be stricken. • Page 4-42, Wetlands definition - strike out 4.2.2 -2 because you need to stick to the California Code of Regulation without exception. • Page 4 -52, -53, Dredge Spoils Disposal, Page 4.2.4 -ILA 3,; should not be codified in the LCP because an EIR/EIS is currently being prepared and LA3 is in the Newport submarine canyon where the sewer discharge from the, Orange County Ocean outfall occurs and that dredge material may be brought back to the beach. j • Page 4 -36 - Eel Grass -the only word to remove is 'critical,' it I. still is habitat for foraging of the 'least tern'. • Page 4 -55, 4.2.5 -2 -'Eel grass mitigation into adjacent areas; that did not previously contain eel grass, further mitigation fort rlrPrininn shall not ha rprmirarl' I think it chnuld he racniired 0 Page 13 Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 . We must continue to have that section in our LCP and totally disagree with the previous speakers regarding eliminating complete reference to eel grass. Chairperson McDaniel asked that the speakers submit theirwritten comments to staff in order for the comments to be addressed in a later staff report. Louise Greeley, West Newport Beach resident, noted the following: • Unfortunate that the LCP is coming before the Visioning Process is completed. • The residents of Newport Beach are very interested in maintaining the residential character of the City. • The requirement for coastal bluff setback should be at least a 200 foot setback. • It is important that our Coastal Plan be in synch with the General Plan. • The Balboa Bay Club has shut out the views of the bay. • The Technology Center on Superior is also massive and not being rented. She is concerned about other uses being put to the lease of those offices that could engender more traffic. • She thanked the Commission for their care on this matter. • 1 Public commentwas closed. Chairperson McDaniel noting the testimony presented tonight, suggested that this item be continued. Commissioner Eaton noted his agreement and asked staff to narrow down the issues that have been brought as well as the several issues brought up by the members of EQAC. Commissioner Tucker noted his agreement to continue this item. The public is just now getting involved at the Commission level. The City can not be criticized for the outreach effort, the reality is people did not focus on this until now. We should continue this item and let staff respond. The public needs to go through and write their comments with specifics for response. Following a brief discussion, it was determined that the public needs to get their comments to staff by April 2nd with specificity and asked for this deadline in order to give staff time for responses through use of the actual draft LCP. • Motion was made by Chairperson McDaniel to continue this item Page 14 Planning Commission Minutes 03118/2004 to April 22, 2004 and the public has until April 2nd to get their written comments to staff in order to be responded to in the staff report. Ayes:! Eaton, Cole, Toerge, McDaniel, Selich, Kiser and Noes :' Tucker Absent: None Abstain: None None _J ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: a. City Council Follow -up - Ms. Wood noted that at last week's' meeting, Council approved on second meeting the code' amendment regarding the height for elevators; the Port Tiffin Place modification permit had been called for review and was heard and voted on to uphold the Modification Committee's action with additional conditions; the Old Newport Blvd. medical office project was called for review, and a resolution. was adopted for a use permit that had been approved two years ago, but the minutes never showed the adoption of the • resolution, so this was clean up to get the record straight. b. Oral report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - Commissioner Selich noted that they continue to review the guiding principles or rules for GPAC to follow as they are putting together land use alternatives; and had a presentation on mixed use development. c. Report from Planning Commission's representatives to the General Plan Update Committee - Commissioner Eaton noted no meeting. d. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Local Coastal Plan Update Committee - no meeting. e. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - none. f. Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report - none. g. Status Reports on Planning Commission requests - Ms Temple noted that staff is half way through assessing the affect of the revised findings on the modification permit decision making process; the administrative draft for new sign regulations is being reviewed; and, there will be a joint study session April 13th at 4, with the Councilmembers and • Commissioners to review the General Plan Update Draft Page 15 ADDITIONAL BUSINESS • Planning Commission Minutes 03/18/2004 iecnnicai bacKgrouna rcepon. h. Project status -none. i. Requests for excused absences - Commissioner Tucker is excused from the April 8th meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 8:45 p.m. ADJOURNMENT MICHAEL TOERGE, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16