Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2004 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page 1 of 26 file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and Daigle - all present STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney Tamara Campbell, Senior Planner James Campbell, Senior Planner Rosalinh Ung, Assistant Planner Rich Edmonston, Transportation & Development Services Manager Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary Woodie Tescher, EIP PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on July 30, 2004. CONSENT CALENDAR SUBJECT: MINUTES of the adjourned and regular meeting of ITEM NO. 1 July 22, 2004. Approved Approved as written. Motion was made by Chairperson Tucker to approve the minutes as written. file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 2 of 26 Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and Daigle Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None HEARING ITEMS SUBJECT: Newport Sports Museum (PA2004 -092) ITEM NO.2 100 Newport Center Drive PA2004 -092 General Plan Amendment to increase entitlement in Statistical Area Recommended L1 to facilitate the expansion of the existing Newport Sports Museum. for approval John Hamilton, applicant noted he had read the findings and conditions and is agreeable to them. Public comment was opened. Public comment was closed. Ms. Temple clarified the planning application number listed on the agenda was incorrect. It is correct on the staff report. Mr. Ramirez noted that the public notices that were mailed out also had the correct number. Motion was made by Commissioner Toerge to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -001 and Use Permit No. 2004- 017 to the City Council. Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and Daigle Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None SUBJECT: Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club (PA2004 -002) ITEM NO.3 1601 Bayside Drive PA2004 -002 An amendment to Use Permit No. 1437, to allow the reduction of required Continued to on -site parking from 122 to 95 spaces and to increase the dry storage boat 08/19/2004 capacity from 100 to 200 boats. The request requires consideration of a parking waiver per Section 20.66.100 of the Municipal Code. Ms. Rosalinh Ung, Associate planner noted the following: file: //H:IPlancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 3 of 26 The original application received for the June 17th meeting was to amend the 1969 Use Permit in order to reduce the required on -site parking and to increase the dry boat storage area as a result of an un- permitted change to the club's operational characteristics. • Following the public testimony of June 17th, the Planning Commission continued this item to June 22nd to allow the applicant to augment their use permit application with a parking study and parking management plan. • The Commission directed the applicant to cease the operation of the un- authorized control entry gate and to discontinue the use of the reserved parking spaces on -site. . On July 19th, the applicant submitted a revised proposal to staff. . The Commission continued the meeting to August 5th to allow staff time to review the new material. . For consideration tonight, there is a modified application containing a revised site plan showing a new on-site parking design for the yacht club, a parking demand study and a parking management plan. . The applicant proposes to remove the access gate located at the main entry way, eliminate all reserved club parking, eliminate a portion of the dry boat storage for parking in a manner consistent with the original use permit and provide a total of 129 parking spaces on -site and increase that number to 150 through the use of a valet parking arrangement. • The outdoor dry boat storage will be limited to the northwest corner of the property, the same location noted in the original 1969 use permit. • The proposed physical improvements to the site will provide better vehicular access to the on -site parking lot, thereby reducing off -site parking in the neighborhood streets. . Staff supports these proposed changes as demonstrated on the submitted site plan. . The applicant informed staff today that they have successfully secured off -site parking from the property across Bayside Drive. This provision will alter slightly the parking supply provided by the applicant, which has not been identified or addressed in the staff report or through the conditions of approval, file : //H:\Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 4 of 26 The revised resolution forwarded to the Planning Commission yesterday was a draft to address and clarify some of the concerns and comments raised by Commissioner Eaton and our City Attorney. The revised draft resolution did not contain any changes proposed by the applicant. The 2nd revised draft resolution before you now contains most of the changes proposed by the applicant. Staff has had an opportunity to review these proposed changes and most of the changes are acceptable. However, there are several conditions that staff would like the Planning Commission to discuss tonight. . Staff is also proposing minor changes to finding number 4 per the City Attorney's direction. . She then introduced Paul Ireland, from Hogle Ireland and Michael Bates from the Mobility Group who prepared the parking documents. Chairperson Tucker asked about the Code parking requirements for this facility the way it is operated today. If they had 166 parking spaces, would it be correct to say all the use permit language on parking would not be necessary? Ms. Ung answered, noting hand written page 41 of the Parking Study and Parking Management Plan, that the 166 parking spaces is considered to be the total number of parking spaces required on -site if you calculate all the assembly area of the first and second floors of the establishment. The original staff report of June 17th calculated only the main floor area, which is the largest assembly area, and that is where the 131 parking spaces came from. If you calculate all the assembly areas that comes to 166 parking spaces per code. Commissioner Cole asked why the requirement was only 122 spaces for the original use permit? Ms. Ung answered at that time everything was computed on -site per the City Code, which equated to 146 parking spaces. A survey was done of all the parking provisions within the yacht clubs in the City and they found that the parking for those facilities was lower than what the Code required. The Use Permit approved in 1969 essentially gave a parking waiver based on the logic of controlling the number of people in the main assembly area plus the number of employee parking to be provided at that time. That is how the 122 parking spaces were derived and included the parking provision for the boat slips that were under the control of The Irvine Company at that time. Now, the boat slips are controlled and owned by the applicant. file : 1/14:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 riannuig Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 5 of 26 Commissioner Eaton asked if the Parking Management Plan will regulate what the occupancy can be with the off -site parking and if so, do the conditions provide that the Parking Management Plan has to be complied with? Ms. Ung answered the way it is written the Parking Management Plan provides a mechanism to have the flexibility on -site through self parking as well as valet parking and the ability to seek additional parking off-site and using the ratio identified in the parking plan will regulate what is on -site in terms of occupancy. Ms. Temple noted that the issue related to ongoing and numerous potential changes to conditions for approval and based upon testimony and discussion and direction given to staff, staff may request that while the public hearing could be closed, staff could be directed to bring back a final resolution with final refined conditions of approval at the next meeting. Given the interest in this project and some of the difficulty in understanding some of the old conditions, we would like to make sure that they are structured exactly right so that they can be administered easily. In this particular case, it is important that the Commission gets the opportunity to look at the final words and make any other adjustments consistent with their decisions. Chairperson Tucker noted he does not want to look at these on the fly. He wants the conditions to be clear, as staff does. He then asked about the agreement across the street, is it an off-site agreement or an agreement where if they have the need to exceed the parking that can be accommodated on -site for a given event, they then go across the street to use those spaces on an as needed basis so that when we are viewing the total parking spaces that the club has, it not only includes the spaces that are on the club's property but the spaces across the street as well? Ms. Ung answered that the off -site parking information provided to staff and included in the staff report and the analysis was not focused on the off -site parking arrangement because at that time the applicant wasn't sure they would be able to accomplish that. It is always in the background that the off -site parking would be the ideal situation for them, but it is not required parking spaces that the club has to provide. They volunteered to essentially enforce their own operation by the number of parking spaces that are available on -site. If they secure additional parking off -site then they would be able to increase' the activities and the occupancy based on the parking ratio that is identified in the Parking Management Plan. If they have a meeting function they can increase the parking allowance by one car for one person, if it is for a social event, then it is two for one. That is how they tailored that plan to that portion for off -site. For any additional, future parking, that can be secured elsewhere. The applicant can give you more information, as he can expand on the numbers and file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 nammmg Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 6 of 26 requirements. There are about 25 self parking spaces available across the street, with a valet configuration, it is about 32 -33. Staff has not been able to look at that off -site parking location as yet. Commissioner McDaniel noted he would like to know the conditions of this off -site parking agreement as they lost it once before. If they lose it again, what will happen? It makes it difficult to approve something without all the necessary information. Chairperson Tucker noted that the applicant's ability to have extra occupancy will be based upon having the use of those spaces. We should be able to tailor the conditions to meet that set of circumstances. Senior Planner, James Campbell note: . Conditions are not set up to regulate occupancy as there is not necessarily a link between the number of cars parked and the number of people occupying the facility because people are out in the boats. . For administration purposes it was felt it was far easier for staff to deal with it on a vehicle count basis. . It would allow greater flexibility for occupant load as it would not reduce the occupancy in the building when there wasn't a parking problem. . As long as they have the required number of parking spaces, occupancy is not the issue, the sufficiency of parking is. That is how the conditions have been structured. . We don't have a copy of the off -site parking agreement. Commissioner Daigle asked about the 129 spaces and then 10 spaces to be provided inside the dry storage area in condition 7. Has it been considered to convert other areas into 10 spaces for employee parking and then segregate the storage area so that there is a distinct physical boundary between what is boat storage and what is parking. Ms. Ung answered that many different configurations of the parking layout were reviewed. Given the site constraints and needs, the applicant has made an effort to return the site layout to the originally approval in 1969; however, there is still not enough parking. The applicant is proposing to carve out some of the area inside the gated dry storage area for additional parking that works for ingress and egress for employee and /or valet parking only. Isolating the boat storage is too hard to achieve. file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 7 of 26 Mr. Paul Ireland of Hogle Ireland, representing the applicant noted the following: . Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to address the neighbors' and Commission issues and concerns raised at the June meeting. . The set of actions now proposed are different from the original proposal in June. . The club, by operating outside of the provisions of its conditional use permit (CUP), has impacted homes on Bayside Drive and a few of the neighbors in Irvine Terrace. . This has given the impression to the community that the club doesn't care and that is neither the projection it wants to make nor the reality. . The club has conducted a parking study since June. The results confirm what your staff has told you and that is 95 spaces proposed in the initial application are inadequate to handle the traffic on -site. . The CUP approved in 1969 required 122 parking spaces on- site. The club has been operating for the past 32 years with only 86 spaces. . The club did not realize it was operating outside of its CUP until last year. . We have been working with the neighbors and the club for the past six weeks with two objectives in mind. First, is to be sensitive and responsive to the rights of the neighbors. Second, preserve the rights of its club members (346) to operate within the provisions of the Zoning Code. To resolve the issues so far: conducted parking study done giving actual counts and observations during one of the busiest times of the year; removed the gate to the parking; eliminated all reserved parking spaces for officers in the club, which opened up eleven spaces; and the club employees are to park on -site. Additionally, we are increasing the number of striped parking spaces on -site from 86 to 129. We have done some modifications within the existing parking area itself by eliminating some of the boat storage area. We have increased the on -site parking by 50% over what it was before with an increase of 43 spaces. fi le: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 8 of 26 . When more parking is required, additional parking will be supplemented with 21 valet parking spaces on -site. Since the last report was written in June, the club has reached an agreement with the owners of the office across the street and this will provide the club with an additional 28 striped spaces and probably 4 valet parking spaces. We are now looking at parking over 180 cars with all of these proposed changes. This amounts to an increase of more than 100% for parking. In combination with the other issues that we have addressed, such as the gating, etc., this should address the vast majority of the objections. The club has already given notice to the boat owners in the dry boat storage area that their contracts will expire this month. This will allow the club to complete all the site improvements within 60 days although we are asking for one exception to that and that is the entry into the club facility itself, which we believe will both disrupt the neighbors and our own operation, and we ask that this be delayed until January when the club will be basically shut down. . Many of the employees are now parking in the dry boat storage area to alleviate on- street parking. • Through a combination of letters, emails, telephone conversations, and small and large group meetings, we have been working with the neighbors to improve the parking situation and I think we have come up with things that really do work. It is a balanced plan and a fair plan. • The events to be held at the club will be restricted by the availability of parking at the club. This approach is more fully detailed in the parking management plan that has been prepared. . Through the increase of the on -site parking spaces, additional valet parking and additional parking across the street and changes in the operational characteristics of how the club intends to use the parking lot itself with monitoring of attendance, we are convinced the problem will be resolved. The actions the club has taken proves it is a good neighbor. He then asked that the Planning Commission approve the use permit. Mr. Barry Levy, Commodore of the Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club, noted the following: . The club should have hired professional planners in the file : //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 9 of 26 beginning. He then apologized to staff and to the neighbors for any inconvenience. . He noted that the club has now hired Hogle Ireland to help the Club address the concerns. . The boat storage had been increased at the expense of parking on -site in the first years of the club existence. . The intensity of club utilization varies year from year, this is a banner year. . BCYC encourages boating in the harbor, supports the Christmas Boat Parade, the Fourth of July Old Glory Parade, the Newport to Ensenada NOSA event and also will be hosting one of the Corona del Mar centennial events. They also host a variety of community organizations and functions for meetings at no cost. • BCYC cares and gives back to the community. • The Board members present will be the future commodores and are committed to operating their club within the City guidelines. • The proposal that is before you tonight will reduce the parking congestion on the streets. • He concluded by asking that this plan be approved as submitted. Commissioner Toerge, referencing the staff report, asked about the facility being open to the general public, when did that occur and how does the facility operate differently since that occurrence. Mr. Levy answered that the club has operated the same way for thirty years and is not open to the public. They operate as a yacht club and open the club up to community events. We do have wedding events where members can sponsor a friend or relative to use the facility and have had at times, quite a few. Generally, they are scattered throughout the year. However, part of their new programming through planning will adjust our functions. There have been no changes to the By -Laws. We do not want the club open to the public, only to planned events that we control. Commissioner Selich noted he would feel more comfortable with the 166 required spaces rather than relying on a parking management plan. Looking at the site plan, the boat storage area has a travel lane. It seems it would be easier to get more spaces in there and with valet parking you would be able to come up with 166 spaces. How much boat storage would you lose if you lost that space and what is your criteria for boat storage? It seems like Ws pretty expensive land file: //14:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 10 of 26 to be storing large boats and trailers on. I am looking at parking first and storage second. How many boats are currently parked in that area now? Mr. Levy answered approximately 20 boats are stored in that smaller area now. The yacht club has multiple size boats, some are very small dinghies that can be stacked, a lot of them are junior boats (18 feet long), and a variety of classes of boats up to the 30 foot range. We invested in a crane to be competitive with other yacht clubs in the area. The larger boats are specific class racing boats. The club members need these boats for their activities as a yacht club. Commissioner Daigle noted her concern of the parking that has increased in demand but with a decrease in supply. She noted the off -site agreement for the 25 spaces, in the past those agreements did not last. If the agreement does not last, how would the club respond to that? Mr. Levy answered that if the agreement does not last, we are prepared as an organization to make adjustments in scheduling. We have addressed that and would like the opportunity to negotiate with other people, possibly build a parking structure, but these would take time and money. We are currently operating with more attendance than we ever had, but it is cyclical. This year is a banner year and there has been a lot going on. Commissioner Daigle, referencing the site plan, asked about the possibility of moving the gate so that dry storage is behind the gate and parking is clearly defined. Mr. Levy answered that there were many discussions and many configurations. The reality is that it must fit into our guidelines for space sizing and room for cars backing out. The room along the building front has had parking; however, now there is no parking there because it is not to Code, the cars can not back out. That is the problem we have. We have a group of people who have tried various configurations and have worked with the consultant. Maybe we can get waivers because we have been doing this for thirty years, I don't know. The professionals need to look at this and work with the City. Commissioner Daigle noted that traditionally parking has been linked with occupancy and the amount of square footage. Yet, there are events that may not use the facility such as sailing races. So when you look at a yacht club, it is more than just a facility, it is a gateway to the bay and the ocean. Is there a way to link parking to events is a sentiment that has been brought up. Mr. Levy answered that the club changes month to month. We have to be versatile in order to survive. This is the first time in thirty years file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 11 of 26 that we are here. We can work things out with our neighbors. Michael Bates of the Mobility Group, preparers of the parking study, noted the following: . Many discussions were held regarding the conditions. It is a simple process to manage space count and what we have given the club is the tool to accomplish that measure. . In the report, we related certain lot sizes to certain thresholds of activities in the club house. That had to be made on certain car occupancies which we feel are reasonable assumptions based on the observations that have been made. . The difficulty of having operating conditions based on building occupancy is that if they are able to achieve more people per car, then in effect it is a false operating procedure, because the real issue is the number of cars in the lot, not the number of people in the building. That is the City standard. . We have come to the conclusion with City staff that the conditions as agreed in terms of management to space count is the best way to go. . The information in the report has given the club the mechanisms and tools they need to manage their activities on -site to meet those space requirements. Commissioner Eaton asked for details of the off -site agreement. Is there 27 or 28 and what are the terms of the lease, how long will it last, is it renewable and what are the priorities? Mr. Ireland noted the parameters of the parking agreement are: It is after six in the evening and all day Saturdays and Sundays and provisions for some holidays when there is no conflict with the office building. It is a two -year agreement with a succession of years in advance. For example, the club is entering into a two year agreement now and one year from now we will see if it will be extended for another two years. If not, then the agreement will terminate one year after that. There will be a minimum of two years and hopefully successive two years thereafter. . If it does terminate, the provisions of the parking management plan kick back in again and basically the club will be restricted with regard to the size for events that it can hold at the club. file : //H:1Plancomm\200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 12 of 26 I counted 28 spaces available at the off -site location across the street and with another 4 -5 with valet parking. The total should amount to in excess of 180. . The sequence would be to fill up the 129 spaces on -site first then the open spaces in the office structure and then valet parking. Chairperson Tucker noted that, what is being proposed, the club is going to have an event and we are going to limit the size of the event based upon how many cars it's going to take to fill the lot. We are not talking about the occupancy of the building but there is going to be an assumption made as to the occupancy of each car. Are you expecting them to say how many people are going to come in each car? Mechanically, how is the club going to know the right size of the event that is going to fill the lot and not overfill the lot? Mr. Ireland answered that the club has kept very good records over the last few years on their events and the parking needs. We looked at those records for the various types of event. When they have a wedding that is 2001100 etc. people, they are able to control the parking. Basically they can control any event parking. The parking study has looked at the club's characteristics on weekday, weeknights, weekends and the size and threshold of those events can be different depending upon what portion of the week the event occurs. They have taken into consideration the utilization of boats, dining activities by members of the club and so on. All those pieces have been incorporated into the overall basis for determining what size of event can occur. We have to develop some trust with our neighbors and when something is not working in the community, we hope we hear it first in order to attempt to address those concerns. We feel we have enough additional parking and the board is committed to be aware of any problems and are willing to take care of those problems. In response to Commission inquiry, he added that the club has started already on overseeing the attendance at their events and the potential parking problems. The available parking across the street will allow the club to operate with the level of activity they have had all year, which has been a very high level. By that parking study they are committed to look at the levels of activity and when they look at an event or schedule an event it will be up to a 200 person event. Chairperson Tucker noted that if the parking plan goes forward and doesn't work, one of the things we will look at is to look at parking over boat storage. That is the way it is and everyone needs to understand that. There will be a review, assuming we approve something, to make sure it is actually working. He then noted that the goal of the Commission is to get the information from the public that is relative to zoning issues. file: //H:1Planeomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08105/2004 Page 13 of 26 Bill Rauth, noted he has worked with the applicant. The concerns of the neighbors have been put in writing and are a matter of public record. We did see the revised conditions today that until today may inadvertently convert the use of the facility to a non - member organization. I don't think this is intended by the City or the club and can be fixed quickly. The neighbors are concerned about policing the parking. He then asked about restricting parking in the neighborhood as a means to police the parking. There are no sidewalks and no bikeways in front of his house and he noted his concern of safety. Commissioner McDaniel noted that the speaker has been dealing with the applicant and asked if he was confident with the club's response. As a matter of trust, do you have that with the applicant? Mr. Rauth noted he was primarily concerned with the gate use and reserved parking. He noted that the club is a good citizen especially with all the events they host. We agree with that, but that is the problem. It is not the yacht club that creates the problem, it is when they host these events, that is where the parking issues arise. Chairperson Tucker noted that we will be crafting a set of conditions that will allow the club to fully use its facility without having all their parking spilling off the site. We do not have a problem with the full use of the facility, that is their right. We do have a problem when they start imposing on their neighbors. Occasionally that will happen, we can't make the world perfect. Our goal is to come up with conditions that will be amenable to the club and neighbors both. If this doesn't happen then we will deal with it in some other fashion. How they use their property is up to them as long as they keep their impacts on their property. People such as yourself will have to get involved by your input. There will be a condition that will allow the City to re -visit this Use Permit if they do not live up to the conditions. Someone from the neighborhood will have to call and say there is a problem, hopefully to the club first and only call us if you can't work it out with the club. Mr. Rauth noted he understands. Public comment was opened. Nancy Levy, Junior Program Advisor of Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club, gave a brief talk on the goals and achievements of the Junior program. She concluded by asking that the Commission accept the BCYC's proposal. Jim DeBoon, noted the Rotary Club of Newport Balboa has been meeting at the club for several years. He stated that with the removal of the gate and the re- striping of the parking lot, cars that normally park on the side streets will now be parking on -site. He noted that in the past, the club has called him to let him know if there was to be file: //H:\Plancomm\2004 \0805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/0512004 Page 14 of 26 another meeting with a large membership. Our members then made other arrangements and we are willing to continue this practice in the future. Ray Kennedy, President of the Irvine Terrace Community Association with 385 homes noted: The club is a good neighbor. The safety issues of El Paseo and Bayside Drive parking. Valet parking should be in place at designated times. . Contracted parking agreement. . Signage outside the club. At Commission inquiry, he noted that having a set valet schedule would address any overflow issues that would develop. The way the plan is it doesn't stipulate valet parking. Richard Luehers, President and Chief Executive of the Newport Chamber of Commerce, noted his support of the application: . The BCYC has been a supportive community member since 1988. • This is an organization with volunteer leaders. • The new management has taken steps to solve problems. • The club has hired professionals to work with the City and the neighbors. • Parking close. to the harbor is at a premium and the cost to provide that parking grows daily, . The City has an emphasis on making sure we retain our marine facilities throughout the harbor as access to the harbor is important. . It is difficult to maintain a business within the community. . He asked that the Commission approve the applicant's request. Ted O'Connor, noted his support of the proposal noting: . The Junior program. f ile: //H:1Plancomm12 0 0410 8 0 5.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 15 of 26 . The need for the various sized boats. . Soccer programs also impact parking on El Paseo. BCYC now has a plan that is fair and workable and is an improvement and addresses the neighbors' issues. Chelsea Dill, spoke on behalf of the Junior Program and the need for the dry boat storage area at the club. Val Skoro, resident of Irvine Terrace noted that when there are late night events, he can hear the noise. He asked if there is a time limit when events will be cut off from a noise standpoint. He then noted his concern of parking on El Paseo as there is a disregard when people dump things in the middle divider. It is the entrance to Irvine Terrace and we object to it being used as a parking lot for the yacht club. He then noted his concern of valet parking across the street as there are no crosswalks and discussed the size of the parking stalls with SUV's. Commissioner McDaniel asked staff about the spacing sizes. Ms. Ung noted the newly created parking stalls are in conformance with the City Standards size. Mr. Edmonston added that the City's Standard since 1988 is for 90 degree parking such as this is, the stall is 8 feet 6 inches wide, 17 feet deep, and a back up aisle of 26 feet. The stalls meet the City standards that was adopted when the trend was going towards compact cars. There are still smaller cars on the road and there are SUV's that are bigger than our stalls, particularly in length. Chairperson Tucker noted there are noise ordinances that deal with those issues. Barry O'Neil, noted his support of the application as they have proven to be a good neighbor. He lives directly across the channel and through his experience of working with the club he has found them willing to discuss noise issues and ways they could do to alleviate the problem. The neighbors can trust this organization based on his experience over the years. Mike White, past Commodore of Voyager's Yacht Club, asked that the Commission not change the character and history of the harbor. The 346 members of the yacht club are also residents of Newport Beach and your neighbors. Denise Peters of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society noted her support of the application. She gave a brief history of the society and file: //H:\Plancomm\2004 \0805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 16 of 26 the support and contributions given by the BCYC. Dan Trimpalla, local resident noted his support of the application noting that noise and cars is part of living in Newport Beach. He noted that there are two yacht clubs that contribute to the parking problem in this area. Karen Winnette, Director of Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club noted that there is a provision in the off -site parking agreement that says the parties will give each other one year notice of termination. This was done to make sure that the club had plenty of time to schedule its calendar for the next year and adjust its events downward in the event that parking is lost. Public comment was closed. Chairperson Tucker then asked staff if there was a list of issues that they needed guidance on. Ms. Ung answered yes and referred to the revised resolution distributed at the meeting and discussed the items highlighted in yellow: . On Page 2, number 4 under the 'WHEREAS', is a finding that the City Attorney suggested be refined. The change clarified when the club has to provide 150 parking spaces and unless the additional off -site parking is secured, they would be able to provide additional parking for the facility. Commissioner Cole noted that the actual occupancy has not been determined. What is the ratio on average that 150 spaces represents? How many people equate to the number of spaces? Chairperson Tucker asked if this was going to be effectively an amended and restated Use Permit so that we subsume the language of the 1969 Permit? Staff answered yes. Ms. Clauson addressed the issue of private club /yacht club issue. These changes were suggested based upon what their use was and what the approved use was. Originally, the words private yacht club were used. If you go to the City's Code and definition, we do not have a definition for a private yacht club. We have a definition for clubs and social clubs and subsumed within that is a sub - section for yacht clubs. There is a definition in there that fits this particular yacht club without needing to use the word private because they have to fall within the qualifications of that designated use that has been authorized and that is primarily for use for yacht club purposes. It also has primarily for use by the club members. You have that primary condition, which they would have be, If they changed over to file: //H: \Plancomm\2004 \0805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 17 of 26 primarily open to the public and for general uses, then you would have a change in operational characteristics inconsistent with the use classification. If the Commission would like to give direction to staff to add to the conditions that it is to be primarily for the use of the club and its members and to restate the definition that is used, that is something staff could do to clarify that issue so that it is not a question in the future. For instance, if there is a change in the use classifications. Commissioner Selich asked if through this Use Permit and Parking Management Plan and conditions are we holding this club to a higher standard than other clubs in the harbor? Are all the other clubs permitted by right of are they under use permits. Ms. Temple answered she can not talk about every individual yacht club and their existing use permits and the conditions under which they operate specifically. The issue we are trying to address in this Use Permit has been documented for some period of time and that is the deficiency of on -site parking supply. To the extent that this consideration is to insure a sufficient amount of on -site parking supply, we are not being more onerous than might otherwise present itself in other areas. For example, the most constrained club from a parking point of view is Newport Harbor on Bay Avenue on the peninsula. While they may not have similar conditions, there have been problems which the City and the club have worked together to redress through on -going provisions of additional parking supply. This is an issue we try to address whenever problems do arise and so in that sense it is not unequal treatment. James Campbell added: The language submitted indicates that the club has to manage all their functions to meet the on -site supply. Staff had discussed with Mr. Ireland if valet parking would be provided for club sponsored activities. Staff wants to deal with the adequacy of the parking as it relates to the on -site uses rather than come up with number of occupancies during the day. Ms. Temple added that once we learn more about the specifics of the availability of the off -site parking, and the terms under which it can be used, then you might even see some further refinements to this to address those transition times that are difficult for us to provide language for you tonight because we have not read what the club has told us tonight. That is the key issue for staff to get more of the final language of the terms and conditions of that agreement. It will be set up so that if the off -site parking goes away the Planning Commission file: //H:\Plancomm\2004 \0805.htrn 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 18 of 26 will not need to do anything. We think conditioning the application is better from an enforcement perspective than going inside to count heads. To the extent any problems are documented, we can either work with the club to bring it back into compliance or bring the project back to the Commission. Ms. Ung continued: Condition 2, the timing of the improvements. The applicant is asking for additional time for the construction of the new entryway and the creation of two new additional parking spaces to be provided on -site. Staff originally crafted this condition so that everything would be implemented within 60 days of the Commission's determination. Staff felt it could be done sooner than January 15th. - The Commission determined that since this extra timing was only for these two issues, the additional time to January 15th would be acceptable. Condition 2 e, would follow up on the finding regarding the parking arrangement. We are asking them that once the 129 parking spaces are full, they will go to the valet parking provision so the entire site will be able to accommodate up to 150 parking spaces. What the applicant is asking to do, is that they only provide valet parking for the non - member activities only. If it is a member only activity, such as a barbecue for the club, and they have 200 - 300 people show up, they will not provide any valet parking arrangement. They might go to the outside parking lot but it might also spill out onto the public streets. This condition was drafted before staff was made aware of the off -site parking agreement. Staff is having a problem with the provision of the valet parking arrangement for the non - member activities only. Staff recognizes a car is a car, there is no distinction. Mr. Campbell noted: • The discussion that we had with Mr. Ireland this afternoon was that the club wasn't going to be doing valet parking for members. It would only be doing if for planned non - member events. • Staff felt that valet should be done for everything in order to get the full utilization of 150 parking spaces on -site when it is necessary. . Staff doesn't have a problem with going to an off -site lot as long as the Commission accepts that and it is okay with the traffic division as a self -park or valet parked. . The valet operation being done only for specific events that file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 19 of 26 come to the club in our minds seems a bit harder to implement. We don't have the specificity of the valet parking plan yet in order to figure how the interface will work. This relates back to item 4 and when we meet with the applicant and get additional information and understand how it will be operated staff will come back with refined language. Chairperson Tucker asked Mr. Ireland why they think that the member events don't need tot be valet parked. Mr. Ireland noted that the rational was we intended to correct the problems incurred with the neighborhood. As you heard, the real issue is the outside events. The issue of treating the club activities the same way as the outside activities, and again we can calculate and deal with outside activities very accurately and control them very effectively, is that the issue is made whether or not we would be treated differently than other clubs. I think we will in that case. Other clubs function with certain parking requirements under the Code and their events are inclusive. We are saying we would like to live under those same rules and not be treated differently. We are comfortable dealing with valet parking for outsiders but it is problematic, for example a barbecue with the 135th car to bring valet parking in for 5 or 6 cars. It is an operational difficulty for us to comply. Chairperson Tucker asked if the club's operation is such that when you have barbecues, do the members have to make reservations? Does the club have to know the number of member attendees? Mr. Ireland noted that families will drop in for any event, but some events do overflow more readily than others and the barbecue is one of them. In those cases, the club members would after the 129 spaces are full, go out into the street for the overflow. Commissioner McDaniel noted that there are legitimate parking places on the streets. If it happens once in a while, I am not having a problem with it. The problem I am saying, is that the club is not paying attention. It seems you have some loud mouth litterbugs and you have to know that if you leave the premises at midnight, and go into the community, the people will be loud. You need to pay attention to those kinds of issues. If we put enough parking spaces for normal activities, then I am done. I think if you provided those and however you want to manage it is fine, but you need to pay attention. The problem isn't how many conditions we can put on this thing, if you don't pay attention you are still going to have trouble no matter how many parking spaces you have. I am okay with the number of parking spaces and the fact that it may overflow, but the club needs to pay attention. file: //H: \Plancomm\2004 \0805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 20 of 26 Chairperson Tucker asked staff if they felt comfortable that the club didn't have valet for member only events that the City would be able to figure out when the valet was not needed. Will the City have the capability to understand what the conditions are and make them workable? Ms. Clauson suggested that if the focus of these conditions is we are not going to control their occupancy, it would be the same as we are not going to control whether you are members or not members and have to worry about if its a member only whether the members can bring guests to the events or whether there is also planned some other non - membership hosted project that particular same day. That is the reason why staff thought it would limit it, figure out what it is and if you have enough parking there that should handle everything. Ms. Temple added that in the many descriptions of the worthy activities that go on at the club it seems like they have club sponsored events that may be non - members. You then get to who are we trying to place the higher form of regulation on. Staff is trying to make it as enforceable from an outside external where we can see it is working or not working and not try to delve into how many non - members attended a function to justify having valet parking. Commissioner Selich noted his support of staff and that we should make this as simple as possible. Even at 150 spaces for members, the club is still getting a 16 car break over what the Code requires. There might be times when there will be a valet for only 5 spaces, but it seems it is a small price to pay for the break that the City is giving to them. Ms. Temple added that if we have known times and a fairly secure off - site parking arrangement we don't have a problem relying on the off - site supply prior to them shifting to the valet. Commissioner Daigle asked if there are adequate standards to monitor and enforce and if there was an adequate tie in to the parking management plan and how this is going to work? Ms. Clauson answered that until this off -site parking arrangement came up it was set up in a way that it was adequate for the City to monitor and enforce and to document enforcement actions. There is going to be a need for staff to go back and work in how the off -site parking availability is going to fit into that type of plan. Commissioner Eaton noted the off -site parking is a significant number more than what the valet would give them. I would be willing to have a condition that says they did not have to provide valet parking for member only events as long as an off -site parking agreement was in place. file : //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 21 of 26 Chairperson Tucker noted the base number is129 plus whatever the off -site parking agreement is where they actually control the spaces. If they can go off -site and not get to the whatever the combination of those two numbers is, they are really not going to have a need for the valet parking. What staff is saying is if they are going to have an event that is going over those two numbers combined, they are going to have to valet. Ms. Temple noted that there are persons for whatever reason, like the other lot naturally, whenever it is available. Non - members look to that as well as a natural location. As long as the reinstatement of the use of that in the appropriate non - business hours becomes known again, I think a lot of people will park on -site because they like to park as close as they can get. Others like to park on the off -site lot whether the club lot is full or not, because it is more comfortable for them. Staff is not concerned with whether these are members or not, so much as all the parking arrangements are known and well established and that we have the ability to modify the operation if those parameters change. That is why we are concerned with the parking numbers. Mr. Campbell noted the applicant is looking to only valet for outside events and it is difficult to valet some people who are coming when you will be having a mixture of the two coming on for a particular event. Staff is looking for what is a most easily enforceable, in essence when demand exceeds supply, we want to get as many cars off the street as possible. Working with the applicant over the next couple of weeks we can pin that down. He then noted the last item on 8 g on page 6 of the resolution. The applicant wants to remove that sentence and staff would like to see that sentence in there, perhaps slightly modified because we want to really understand the full interface of how this is going to work. We have been talking about this for twenty minutes on how it is going to work so we want this identified in the valet parking management plan. Staff is not going to budge on not having this as a condition. We hope to bring these revised conditions back for your review. The applicant has indicated the changes that are highlighted in blue and in the interest of time all these other changes we do not have a disagreement. We may wordsmith these but we are not in disagreement with the general course of the applicant. Chairperson Tucker noted that staff and the applicant need to get together to come up with something that is reasonable, this should be available for any member of the public for their review. Commissioner Toerge noted another item, 9a - the employees should be made to park on -site in the areas so designated regardless of the presence of the off -site parking lot. file: //H: \Piancomm \2004 \0805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 22 of 26 Chairperson Tucker noted that he concurs. Commissioner Daigle noting condition 7 asked if there might be a way to fence off dry storage and segregate the boats from the cars. Chairperson Tucker noted that the sense is there is a plan that appears to work, we are going to refine the conditions and look to see how it all works after it gets implemented. It's worth giving it a go and the club has come a long way and is making a good faith effort. We need to give them an opportunity to show what they have come up with will actually work and then we will come back and re-look at. Commissioner Eaton noting number 2 under WHEREAS - asked where is it in the conditions that the applicant has to comply with the traffic management plan? Ms. Ung noted staff concurs with this recommendation and a condition will be added. Commissioner Selich asked about the condition that the dry boat storage area shall remain open at all times while in use by valet operations. What does that have to do with valet operations? In other conditions employees are to have card keys to operate the gate. Ms. Ung answered that the reason is so that it will be accessible to the employee or the valet parking attendants, so it has to be open and accessible. The employee parking will have access cards, but not the attendants. It will be easier for them to retrieve cars back in forth than to have it close all the time and then only accessible through a card system. Commissioner Selich asked about limiting the boat storage to 100 boats, why do we care about the number of boats? Ms. Ung answered that the applicant wanted to clarify the number boats allowed to be stored on -site in the outside dry storage area. Mr. Campbell added that the original use permit has a limit of 100 boats and they have more boats there because they actually store boats under the buildings. The clarification sought by the applicant is in essence they can live with 100 boats outside, but lets not worry about the number of boats inside. Discussion followed on a specified number of boats. Staff will address this for the next presentation. Commissioner Toerge noted he supports this item coming back to review the modifications to the conditions that have been discussed. He finds it hard to believe that the management of the club was file: //H:\Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/1312004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 23 of 26 completely unaware of the queuing and parking problems on Bayside Drive through the years. Any of us who live in the area know it creates a problem and I find it hard to believe that people occupying the site are not aware of it. At the same time, I feel a 50% of on -site parking and a potentially 100% increase with the use of valet and some off -site agreement is a completely reasonable plan to approve and review in six months. I am concerned that if the six month review does reveal that there are problems than I think there will be a new solution required. The parking plan seems untenable. It gives me more desire for a six month review process and I feel the review process should be public. A lot of residents don't want to write letters, they don't want to have to be a cop, they want the City to do it. That is what we are trying to do tonight. I think the review should be public and I am not sure one review between now and before next summer will be adequate. I encourage staff and the applicant to consider two reviews maybe in six month increments. We have conflicting testimony. There is only so much room on -site and it is not the City or the Commission that is dictating the Junior Program should be reduced, it is really the club's decision to engage in larger activities and larger events that is causing them to re- structure they way your yacht club is used. I think the direction of the Junior Program should be focused on the management of the club as opposed to the Planning Commission or City Council to look for some relief there, because it is the club that is attempting to get more density and more dense use out of the facility. The valet issue across the street is completely workable, we have examples all throughout the City where we are using valet parking across Coast Highway to satisfy some of the businesses in Mariner's Mile. The suggestion to tie the valet to a particular time is unrealistic and unsupportable and quite frankly I can't imagine a circumstance where I would support restricting a particular sub -set or sub -group segment of the public to not be able to park on a public street. Those suggestions do not fly with me. He then noted he was not at the public hearing of June 17th for this item but he has reviewed the staff reports and the record of the meeting and feels confident and comfortable with rendering a decision on this item. Chairperson Tucker noted his agreement of the review timing. Ms. Clauson stated that if the idea was it was going to come back to the Commission for review you could move it out further and not have it be within six months, you could do it a year from now. Or another option would be to go ahead and have it in six months and then wait until that review period, and depending on how successful this is working and how it appears they have been in fact been able to accommodate all their parking needs with parking that is provided now, you may decide you do not need another review. You do not have to set two reviews now, you can set one and then make the decision for another one if necessary. file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 Page 24 of 26 Ms. Temple noted this would be a publicly noticed agenda item for a Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Clauson pointed out that there is no condition in the use permit that deals with the hours of operation. The Commission might want to look at the hours and incorporate them into the approval. It does not need to be done, but it is an issue that has been raised. Ms. Temple noted that for an operation of this nature, the noise ordinance hours limitations for greater or lesser noise production is the most critical issue. However, this is a Use Permit and you could impose conditions and then provide relief for a number of times throughout the year for Special Event Permits. That gets us into conditions akin to those of a restaurant and may be far different than what the other yacht clubs experience. She then discussed closing the hearing to discuss the conditions only. Chairperson Tucker noted he would like to talk about the resolution and the conditions of approval. The next meeting is August 19th and Commissioners Cole and Toerge will be missing. The applicant was made aware of this. Motion was made to continue this item to August 19th. Ayes: Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and Daigle Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None SUBJECT: Guiding Principles for the General Plan Update I ITEM NO.4 PA2002 -265 At a joint study session between the City Council and the Planning Commission held June 22, 2004, the Planning Commission requested Discussion Item the opportunity to review and comment on the General Plan Advisory Committee's Guiding Principles. This item was discussed by members of the Commission, Mr. Woodie Tescher, of EIP Associates and staff at the request of the Chairman. The focus was on pages 12 through 14. Several word edits were made, but there were no substantive changes /additions/deletions of principles. Please refer to the attached report written by Senior Planner Tamara Campbell. Motion was made by Chairperson Tucker that this item go to the Council as a receive and file of the recommended changes.. Ayes: I Eaton, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, Selich, McDaniel and file: //H:1Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 No Daigle Absent: None Abstain: None None Page 25 of 26 ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS a. City Council Follow -up - Ms. Wood reported that at the Council meeting of July 27th changes to the Mariner's Mile Landscape Standards were approved; there is a Telecommunications Permit that has been continued for the parking lot at Superior and Coast Highway; and the Marinapark Resort Park and Community Plan was passed and will be on the ballot in November. b. Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - no meeting. c. Report from Planning Commission's representatives to the General Plan Update Committee - Commissioner Eaton noted that there was a recommendation to add $17,000 to the budget and add two months to the total program schedule as well as a discussion on how the alternatives will be addressed. Mr. Tescher then made a brief presentation on the analysis process. d. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting - Mr. Edmonston answered the question about a project in Corona del Mar that was under construction and is now completed, as to why it was not required to provide a sidewalk. It is a corner property and typically in Corona del Mar the Flower Streets have sidewalks. A number of streets don't except that when they come before the City as a condominium and are required to process a parcel map, then under the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Municipal Code we have the right to require additional improvements This project was processed and remains on the books as a duplex, therefore the City does not have the leverage to require a sidewalk. We do not have in conjunction with a building permit the right to require that except in the case of very select number of streets that are called 'significant link streets' and in Corona del Mar there are only two of those. If this property comes back to become a condominium, then we would be able to require the sidewalk improvement at that time. e. Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report - none. f. Status Reports on Planning Commission requests - Ms. Temple file: //H:\Plancomm1200410805.htm 08/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes 08/05/2004 commented on the updated list. g. Project status - Chairperson Tucker discussed how the St Andrews item will be addressed at the next meeting. h. Requests for excused absences - Commissioners Toerge and Cole are excused from the meeting of August 19th. Page 26 of 26 ADJOURNMENT: 11:15 p.m. ( ADJOURNMENT JEFFREY COLE, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION file: //H:\Plancomm \2004 \0805.htm 08113/2004