HomeMy WebLinkAboutMcDonalds Corporation (PA2001-115)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 4
August 21, 2003
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: James Campbell, Senior Planner
(949) 644 -3210
icampbel I @ city. newport- beach.ca. us
SUBJECT: Use Permit No. 2001 -029 and Development Plan No. 2002 -001
APPLICANT: McDonald's Corporation
11682 El Camino Real #400
San Diego, CA 92130
INTRODUCTION:
The McDonald's Corporation requests the approval of a Use Permit and a Development
Plan to reconstruct the existing drive -thru restaurant located at 700 E. Coast Highway in
the Mariner's Mile area. The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures
and the parking areas. New construction would include the construction of a new dive -
thru restaurant, new parking lot, site lighting, landscaping and signage. The existing
concrete retaining wall located at the base of the bluff will be reinforced as the existing
wall is beginning to fail. The new wall will have a natural stone veneer finish as depicted
in the photographic rendering presented at the previous meeting. The restaurant is
proposed to be operated 24 -hours a day.
This item was continued from December 5, 2002. The Commission directed the
applicant to make substantial changes to the project to make it more compliant with the
Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework and the Zoning Ordinance. The
applicant has made significant changes to the project as a result, and the applicant has
prepared a detailed response to each of the issues (Exhibit No 1). The minutes of this
meeting are attached as Exhibit No. 2.
The project was viewed as falling short in several areas, and this report will focus on the
following key points and the applicant's revisions to the project:
Building roof design — the proposed building lacked roof screening elements
required by the Zoning Code and the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design
Framework.
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 2
2. Building color — the use of red awnings was criticized and a more "maritime" look
was suggested.
3. Building location — a deeper front yard setback was suggested to afford
increased landscaping.
4. Site circulation — the Traffic Engineer identified potential vehicle maneuvering
conflicts and the use of a double order /drive system was questioned by the
Commission.
5. Landscaping — The landscape plan was not in strict compliance with landscape
standards and a wider front yard landscape strip at the parking lot was
requested.
DISCUSSION
The gross floor area of the proposed building has increased from 3,113 square feet to
3,174 square feet and the project remains compliant with the 0.3 floor area ratio
standard. The floor plan has also been modified but the proposed new public area has
not changed; however the seating has been reduced from 56 to 50 seats. The site plan
has been changed, which will be discussed below, and one parking space has been
eliminated. The reduction in provided parking by one stall does not change staff's initial
recommendation for approval of the parking modification due to the parking demand
analysis of the current location that supports the conclusion that the 30 spaces will be
adequate. Additionally, the reduction of 6 seats supports this recommendation.
Building Roof Design
The applicant has redesigned the project with two options for roof screening. The first
option has a partially open roof screen using an open wood truss system and
corrugated metal panels. The second option is similar to a wood trellis cover. The
revised drawings include a roof plan, section drawing and elevation drawings for both
options.
Neither option screens the entire roof. Option #1 provides more screening of the roof
and the equipment located on the roof than Option #2. Based upon the roof plan of
Option #1, three exhaust vents would protrude through the metal screens that are not
shown on the elevation drawing. The roof plan for Option #2 shows 5 unscreened vents.
In staff's opinion, Option #2 is unacceptable and Option #1 provides adequate
screening while providing adequate ventilation necessary for the proper operation of the
equipment. The applicant has submitted a letter from an engineer stating the opinion
that the type and amount of roof equipment cannot be completely enclosed.
From an architectural or design perspective, Option #1 is "interesting." The design is
very similar to what the applicant originally proposed, but was later eliminated from the
project by the applicant. A drawing of the original roof is attached to the December 2002
v
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 3
staff report. The sloping design of the screen makes it similar to a roof, but its size,
location and open nature reduces its appearance and makes it more subordinate to the
main building. The proposed screen is close to the roof and from the ground its
appearance will be further minimized. Aside from the open truss, the corrugated screen
panels may stand in contrast to the horizontal clapboard siding of the building; however,
the use of corrugated roofing with clapboard siding is used in Mariners Mile, specifically
at the property located at 2429 -2505 W. Coast Highway. The corrugated metal will be
pre- finished at the factory and not painted. Although the sample of the roof is reflective,
the material dulls with exposure to the elements and should not prove a nuisance to
residents above on Kings Road.
Building Color
The applicant has revised the color sample board and is using blues, light grays and an
off -white color. The use of red and yellow will be limited to trademarked signage which
is shown on the elevation drawings. As noted, the roof screen will be open at the ends
with corrugated metal panels that will have the natural gray or "galvanized" finish. Staff
believes the color scheme is consistent with the Mariner's Mile Design Framework.
Building Location
The revised plan has the building being set back from the Coast Highway 35' -10", which
is an increase of 12' -10" from the previous plan and the depth of the landscaping in this
area has increased from 12' -6" to 17' -6 ". The most remarkable change to the project,
which was not suggested by the City, is the movement of the proposed restaurant as
shown on the revised site plan. The site plan presented in December had the proposed
restaurant building located on the western 1/2 of the site where the revised plan has the
building on the eastern 1/2 of the site. In essence, the revised site plan is close to a
mirror image of the previous plan with a few notable exceptions. The applicant has
eliminated the double drive thru /order system and one parking stall has been lost; 30
spaces are now proposed. The drive -thru circulation pattern remains in a counter
clockwise direction with the entrance to the drive -thru now located on the street side
close to the eastern driveway. The order station will be located at the southeast corner
of the building as opposed to the north side of the building as previously proposed. This
change in location might alleviate some of the concerns expressed about noise from the
order station. The cashier and pickup windows now are proposed on the north side of
the building.
Site Circulation
The proposed change in the site plan and drive -thru alleviates staff's concern with the
previous plan regarding vehicles exiting the drive -thru lane. However, other issues
arise. The previous plan (with dual order lanes) accommodated up to 13 vehicles in the
queue where the revised plan accommodates 6 vehicles before a conflict at the eastern
driveway could develop. The previous proposal had a long and separate drive -thru lane
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 4
for vehicle stacking at the back of the site near the existing retaining wall. The applicant
proposes to use the central drive isle for additional stacking during peak operational
times.
A separate drive -thru lane remains in the revised plan, but it is now on the exit side of
the drive thru pattern. This feature will assist drive -thru exiting. The decrease in vehicle
stacking for the drive -thru lane concerns staff. If more than 6 cars stack at the order
position, a vehicle would stop and wait in either the eastern driveway or drive isle. As
noted, the applicant would use the central drive isle that is parallel to Coast Highway for
additional stacking. When that would occur, vehicles would impede access to the
parking spaces and possibly block the drive isle leading from the eastern driveway.
The Traffic Engineer requested additional study of the drive -thru queue to see if the
capacity is adequate. The consultant prepared the requested analysis, which indicates
that there are short periods of time between 11:45AM and 1:OOPM when the queue
would exceed capacity necessitating the use of the central drive isle. With effective use
of the central drive isle, adequate on -site capacity will exist. In order to reduce vehicle
conflicts during lunch when the central drive isle might be necessary, the Traffic
Engineer suggests a condition of approval where the applicant is required to station
several employees in the parking lot to effectively direct traffic when the queue from the
order board exceeds 6 vehicles. Due to the limited amount of time the queue might
exceed 6 vehicles and effective vehicle management, the Traffic Engineer believes the
site plan will be acceptable although it is not optimal. Staff further suggests that should
the project be approved, the operation of the drive -thru should be monitored by a
qualified traffic engineer at the expense of the applicant and future corrective measures
be implemented if serious vehicle conflicts materialize.
Landscaping
In response to the Commission's request to increase landscaping along Coast Highway,
the applicant has abandoned the dual lane order system allowing an increased building
setback. As previously noted, the building will be set back further from the Coast
Highway with the depth of the landscaping being increased from 12' -6" to 17' -6 ". The
parking lot has been set back an additional 7 feet creating a 14 -foot deep landscape
planter along Coast Highway. Parking spaces, the drive isle and two interior planter
areas were reduced in depth to account for the increased depth of the planter abutting
Coast Highway. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the changes to the parking lot and
indicates only minor changes to facilitate improved access to the proposed parking
spaces.
The landscape plan has been modified and enhanced to indicate compliance with
applicable Mariner's Mile standards. One notable exception is the requirement to
provide a hedge and palm row along the front property line. The Zoning Ordinance
requires a continuous Ligustrum hedge with Washingtonia robusta palm trees to be
planted at 18 -foot intervals (clustering is also possible). This hedge and palm row was
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 5
an important feature of the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework in
that it would create a continuum throughout the Mile creating a sense of place. The
proposed plan has a Ligustrum hedge; however, it is proposed to be located at the front
of the parking lot as opposed to the back of the sidewalk. The landscape plan does not
include the use of Washingtonia robusta palms, but proposes to use 15 existing queen
palms of varying heights to be relocated to the locations shown on the plan as the
addition of 2 new queen palms. The sizes of the queen palms as noted on the plans
exceed the minimum size (8 -foot brown trunk height) for Washingtonia robusta palms.
The minimum number of trees is based upon the street frontage, including driveways,
and the 18 -foot interval. Therefore, 17 Washingtonia robusta palms are required and as
noted, the applicant proposes 17 queen palms.
The recommended design is to have the hedge and palm row be a linear feature at the
back of the sidewalk with the palms evenly spaced at 18 feet, although deviations from
the 18 -foot interval are allowed with clustering of a 3 minimum of the palms. The
applicant's hedge and palm plan is not strictly in line as some of the palms would be
located in front and some behind the hedge row, which would not be located where the
Design Framework guideline would have it. Other landscape plantings would be located
between the hedge /palms and the sidewalk and the applicant also proposes to cluster
the palms.
Staff believes that the proposed design does provide a linear landscape feature in
keeping with the intent of the Design Framework; however, the use of Washingtonia
robusta palms is required by the Zoning Code. Staff has discussed this plan with the
author of the Design Framework and his opinion is that the species selection is very
important to the long term integrity of the policy and vision for Mariner's Mile. Therefore,
staff recommends that the landscape plan be modified to include Washingtonia robusta
palms in accordance with standards and that the relocated queen palms be used
elsewhere on the site.
Environmental Review:
As noted in the previous staff report, staff believes the project qualifies for a Class 2
exemption for the replacement or reconstruction of an existing commercial structure
located on the same site of substantially the same size, purpose and capacity.
Public Notice:
A public notice was prepared in accordance with the Municipal Code and was made
available more than 10 days in advance of this continued hearing. It was published in
the Daily Pilot, posted at the site and mailed to property owners and nearby
homeowners associations as required by Section 20.91.030 of the Municipal Code.
r�
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 6
Conclusion & Recommendation:
Staff believes that the applicant has modified the project sufficiently in response to the
Commission's concerns and the staff believes that the project as modified can be found
consistent with the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework and the
Zoning Code. Additionally, staff believes that the findings to support the parking
modification can be made. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Use Permit No. 2001 -029 and Development Plan No. 2002 -001, subject to the
findings and conditions of approval within in the attached draft resolution.
Alternatives:
The Planning Commission has several alternatives in addition to the recommended
action:
1. Further modify and approve the project — staff recommends this action if the
Commission believes that additional alterations to the project are minor in nature
and need not be re- evaluated by the Commission before project approval.
Changes and alterations should be clearly articulated within a motion for
approval or conditions of approval.
2. Modify and continue the project — this alternative is recommended when changes
to the project are substantial and the Commission desires to review them before
project approval. Should the Commission desire a further continuance, the
applicant must consent to an additional extension of the timelines established by
the Permit Streamlining Act. Should the applicant refuse consent for the
extension, staff would recommend project denial.
3. Deny the project — this option is recommended should the Commission be unable
to make the required findings for project approval. The key finding here is the
size of the lot being insufficient to accommodate the type and intensity of use that
is proposed. This finding may be supported by the limited amount of parking
provided and the potential for vehicle conflicts with the drive -thru lane. Findings
for denial are attached.
Prepared by:
- Im CA! m 10
WJame . Campbell
Senior Planner
Submitted by:
ui4ia I. Lamg
Patricia L. Temple '
Planning Director
XF
Mariner's Mile McDonald's
August 21, 2003
Page 7
Attachments:
1. Letter from the applicant in response to each of the Commissions concerns
about the from the December 5, 2002 meeting on this project.
2. Minutes from December 5, 2002.
3. Drive -thru queue and parking demand analysis prepared by LSA.
4. Draft Resolution for project approval including findings and conditions.
5. Findings for denial.
6. Revised project plans.
7. Colored elevations
8. All previous Panning Commission staff report (recycled).
1-
Exhibit No. 1
Letter from the applicant in response to each of
the Commissions concerns about the from the
December 5, 2002 meeting
9
• HOGLE- IRELAND
A . Land Planning & Development Consulting Finn
April 29, 2003
Mr. James Campbell
Senior Planner
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
SUBJECT: REVISED PLANS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 2001 -029 AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN No. 2002 -001); MCDONALD'S DRIVE -THRU
RESTAURANT; LOCATED AT 700 WEST COAST HIGHWAY, NEWPORT
BEACH,CA
Dear Mr.Campbell:
On behalf of McDonald's Corporation, I am pleased to provide the revised elevations, site plan,
and planning package as requested by the Planning Commission at the December 5, 2002
hearing. At the December 50' hearing, the Planning Commission continued McDonald's request
to scrape and rebuild the existing restaurant and requested that McDonald's revise their building
design and site layout prior to the Planning Commission making . a recommendation.
McDonald's has evaluated the Planning Commission's comments and has revised their plans
accordingly.
In response to the Planning Commission's requirement to provide adequate screening for
McDonald's roof mounted equipment, McDonald's has worked diligently with the their architect
and mechanical engineer to provide a roof design(s) that will both satisfy the mechanical code as
well as the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines. In an effort to satisfy the Commission's design
goals, McDonald's has developed two (2) elevation options. Option (1) illustrates a solid roof
structure with the adequate ventilation openings necessary to satisfy the mechanical
specifications and code requirements. Option (2) has been designed to satisfy the same
mechanical specifications while attempting to match the architectural materials proposed for the
restaurant. In support of McDonald's position concerning the difficulty to "fully" screen the
roof mounted equipment from the residents above, McDonald's mechanical engineer has
prepared a letter stating that the proposed screening has been designed to the best of McDonald's
ability and that he has not seen nor engineered any type of roof mounted equipment that can
satisfy the City's requirements and the building code requirements. A copy of the letter has been
attached to this resubmittal package.
In addition to the proposed elevation designs, a roof plan illustrating the resident's view from
above has been provided for both options. Both of these designs will adequately screen the roof
equipment from the residents above.
42 Corporate Park, Suite 250, Irvine, California 92606 • 949,1553-1427 • FAX 949 / 553 -0935 • www.hogleirelandxoun
tRV1NE . R]' V ERStDE 11
April 29, 2003
Newport Beach CUP No. 2001- 029lDP No. 2002 -001
Page 2
The following identifies the Planning Commission's comments and how McDonald's has revised
their plans:
Planning Commission Comments
Fully screening roof mounted equipment from residential view above: As mentioned
prior, McDonald's has provided two (2) design options that best address this comment
(Sheet A 2).
2. McDonald's architectural design should be modified to reflect a "nautical' theme:
McDonald's observed several buildings along Mariner's Mile and has revised their
proposed elevations accordingly to reflect a nautical theme (Sheets A 3 and 4).
3. Eliminate the "red" color from the restaurant: McDonald's has revised the color pallet
for the restaurant and eliminated the red colors as requested. As a result, the building is a
grey color and the awnings are blue. Color name is "Sapphire Supreme ".
4. Eliminate the disposing of bottles in the McDonald's trash dumpster late at night: At
the December 5fl' Planning Commission hearing, a resident identified his concern related to
McDonald's dumping bottles into their trash dumpster late at night. Since McDonald's
does not use glass bottles with their operation nor do they dump trash late at night, it has
been concluded that the noise in question is generated from the restaurant to the west of
McDonald's.
5. The landscape setback along P.C.H. should be increased to the greatest extent
possible: To satisfy the Commission's request, McDonald's has revised the site and the
corresponding landscape plan to illustrate a landscape setback ranging from 14' up to 21'
along P.C.H. (Sheet C -1).
6. Ensure that new lot lights are in conformance with Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines:
McDonald's will work with the Planning Department to ensure that all the existing lot
lights will be removed and that all proposed lot lights are in conformance with the City's
lighting requirements and the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines.
Sheet C -1 (elevations) shall be accurately illustrated and coordinated with one
another with retaining wall material/elevations also shown on plans: The elevations
have been closely reviewed to ensure that they all coordinate with one another. Secondly,
the retaining wall with a natural stone finish has been included on the south elevation
(Sheet A 4). This will give an accurate view of the building and wall elevation from P.C.H.
8. Determine whether to propose wall sign on the rear of the restaurant: Due to the lack
of visibility for this sign, McDonald's has decided not to propose a wall sign on the rear of
the restaurant. The sign has been remove as illustrated on the north elevation (Sheet A 3).
IZ.
April 29, 2003
Newport Beach CUP No. 2001- 029/1)P No. 2002 -001
Page 3
9. The slopetbluff behind the retaining wall will need to be landscaped with materials
identified in the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines and planted approximately % up
the slope: McDonald's has revised their landscape plan and added a note to "Install
landscaping in this area per Mariner's Mile Specific Plan District" (Sheet L -1). Therefore,
McDonald's will coordinate with the Planning Department regarding this requirement.
10. Provide a specification sheettmaterials board identifying building materials and
colors: McDonald's has provided a color and materials board for the restaurant.
11. Include all revision dates on the plans: McDonald's has included all revision dates on
the plans.
12. Landscape Plans: Please note that the existing Queen Palms located on the site will be
relocated "where possible ". Also, the installation of the street trees will be completed
pursuant to City standards.
McDonald's is excited about remodeling their existing restaurant as they have made every effort
to accommodate the City's design requests and requirements to the extent possible. If you have
any questions concerning these submitted items, please contact me at (949) 553 -1427.
Sincerely,
t
Randal Kimo 0
Project Manager
Attachments: Eight (8) full sets of revised CUP plans inclusive of option 1 and 2 elevations
Twenty (20) revised site plans
One (1) color and materials board
Four (4) color elevations for both option 1 and 2
Twelve (12) reduced sets of revised plans inclusive of option 1 and 2 elevations
Copy of the Mechanical Engineer's letter
cc: Don Ikeler, Construction Project Manager for McDonald's Corporation
April 21, 2003
City of Newport Beach, Co.
Subject: McDonald's, Newport Beach
The proposed screening of the rooftop equipment has been designed to the best of
McDonald's ability in that certain maintenance, serviceability, code required clearances,
and airflow requirements for the various pieces of mechanical equipment are needed for
the equipment to function efficiently and adequately.
The hood exhaust fans have spec discharge requirements to meet code. The
refrigeration and H.V.A.C. equipment have air flow and service clearance requirements
based on manufacturers recommendations and their UL, AGA, ARI or other listings.
From my experience, I have not seen or engineered any type of roof mounted
equipment that can satisfy the above mentioned codes/requirements while being
"completely° enclosed as requested by the City of Newport Beach.
Sincerely,
A
' IIOtI(t
Martin Ostler, P. E. \ �'F�yAM��'y
M.O. Engineering �fi
OF tA%L
CC: Roberto Diaz, CRHO
M. 0, MGIN9lRING
8900 Canby Awmre, 811"101 Reseda, CA 81835 Ph! (818) 3"-2562 Fou (879) 344-2,149
6aaaH.. nroe1111hibenlobal.not
Z0 39Vd S1031IH06V OH2D 016TZEBOTL LO :ET E00ZIbZIb0 f
Exhibit No. 2
Minutes from December 5, 2002.
I�
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5, 2002
...
SUBJECT: McDonald's Corporation, Use Permit No. 2001 -029 and
Development Plan No. 2002- OO1(PA2001 -155)
700 West Coast Highway
Use Permit and Development Plan to redevelop the existing McDonald's restaurant.
The existing 3,045 sq. ff. restaurant will be demolished and a new 3,113 sq. ff.
restaurant building will be constructed with a reconfigured drive -thru. The
application also requests a partial waiver of parking.
Jim Campbell gave an overview noting:
• Existing building to be replaced with a new building located further to the
west.
• The entire site will be re- worked per the plans included in packet.
• Public Works memo requests further conditions of approval.
• Letter regarding lighting issues (attached).
• Then gave a slide presentation of the site noting driveways, retaining wall,
trash enclosure, transformer, elevation drawings (needing to be edited by
applicant),
References to Mariners Mile Design Guidelines, roof screening, colors,
landscaping.
• Coast Highway widening aspects.
• Light standard. of 20 feet height and removal of light bands on roof
structure.
• Lighting plan and slope re- vegetation was discussed.
o Photo simulation of block wall to be placed in front of the retaining wall.
Parking proposed for facility is adequate and is based on the amount of
drive -thru business expected.
Commissioner Selich verified that the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines fall under the
purview of the Commission's review of the use permit. The applicant has not made
much of an effort to adhere to the Mariner's Mile Guidelines. He then noted the
following concerns as this is the first major project to come since the Guidelines were
adopted:
Site PlanCl - the split driveway in the back where the orders are taken, I
presume there to facilitate a fast moving of traffic through the driveway. I
would be interested in why that is necessary and if the applicant can
quantitatively tell us how much the efficiency of the operation is increased.
I would rather see a single lane of traffic back there and the building slid
back with more landscaping in front of the building, particularly with the
prospect of losing twelve feet of the landscaping in front at some point in
the future.
Speaker box location. Presently it is on the highway side of the property. I
am curious why it is proposed to be moved to the back and what kind of
sound problems that might create for the residents up above, if any.
16
INDEX
Item 5
PA2001 -155
Continued to
02/06/2003
IV
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5,20W..
• Landscape plan Ll - applicant ignored guidelines and they need to be
incorporated into the project, particularly along the highway. Additionally,
more street trees should be added.
• Traffic circulation around the building - if building is moved back, it would
be desirable to screen those cars exiting along the building from the street
and could be done either creating a landscape mound with retaining wall
behind it or doing a tiered landscaping affect.
• Slope - supports what staff has recommended. There is nothing on the
landscape plan depicting what the applicant is going to do on the slope. I
would like to see a landscape plan showing the plantings to be saved and
new plant material to be introduced.
• Wall - picture depiction is more in line with the guidelines as opposed to
what is shown on page Ci I.
Landscape strip between the drive- through area adjacent to the main
body of the parking area appears to be seven feet wide. I would think that
could be narrowed down to have a minimal amount of landscaping and
include trees that are required by the guidelines and take that extra
landscape area out onto the street where it would be much more
beneficial on the street as opposed to the back part of the properly.
• The guidelines require one canopy shade tree for the parking area for every
four parking spaces. They meet the number of required trees, the problem
is rather than using the carot wood or equivalent trees suggested in the
guidelines, they elected to go with all palm trees, which don't provide
shade or reflections of the parking lot areas to the homes above.
• Architecture of the building -these elevations do not accurately represent
what the building will look like. I don't think this is a creative design. The
City should seek to get a higher quality of building here. There needs to be
some re- design and we hove to give these people some direction: nautical
theme, screen roof equipment, a design sheet with specific material to be
used, complete specifications, color and materials board, no red on the
building, use muted neutral colors.
• Signs - elevations noted are incorrect.
• Rework with building and sign program in one package.
• Lighting needs to conform to the Mariners Mile guidelines. Lighting should
be considered with residential above and across and getting rid of glaring
fixtures and use low profile fixtures that can provide safety lighting as well.
• The applicant needs to redesign this and come back with a resubmittal.
Commissioner Tucker noted that he would love to have this site redeveloped. We
are talking about getting something of better quality. Our goal is not to thwart
something happening on the property, but we want to follow the design framework
and promote thoughtful and tasteful design while allowing creative flexibility. I am
not concemed with the parking facilities, it would be nice to shift the building to the
north, the sound may not reach the residents over the din of the traffic, project
should become less visible to the residents above if the building is shifted over as
proposed. Lighting on the property that exists should be removed and replaced
with the suggested lighting from the guidelines framework. Concerned with both
horizontal and vertical elements on the fapade of the building, which over time
17
INDEX
�y
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5, 2002
would separate and become a maintenance iteni especially close to the ocean. I
agree about the colors being muted, as bright colors do not fade well.
Commissioner Gifford noted her agreement with the previous comments on
architecture, landscaping and lighting and that the applicant would be responsive
to these comments and come back with a redesign.
Chairperson Kiser commented:
• The roof screening and how it would look from the top. What has been
suggested is a redesign on the project with how the total roof screening
would appear, from up above as well as from the street level.
• He added that he did not have a problem with the parking waiver issue; it
happens that I am familiar with the property and I have never seen that lot
full.
More thought needs to be given to the slope vegetation and how it will
look.
1 concur with the previous statements and agree that a lot of things need to
be done.
Commissioner Toerge noted:
• Inconsistent exhibits for the staff report provided by the applicant is
inexcusable.
• Loudspeaker - should be some management system in place so that as the
highway noise levels quite down, the loudspeakers can be regulated.
• Landscaping of the slope - irrigate the landscaping, maintain its lush
appeal, comply with the Mariners Mile Design Guidelines.
Dining room should stay closed from 11:30 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. instead of 2:00
a.m. as noted in the staff report.
• Agrees with comments of Commissioner Selich.
Public comment was opened.
Don Eichler, project manager for McDonald's Corporation, 11682 El Camino Real
representing the applicant noted the following: .
• Apologized for the inconsistencies of the exhibits he provided to staff.
• Elevations should have been addressed properly. . .
The side -by -side drive through, facilitates the ordering. - At Commission
inquiry stated that he thought it increases efficiency by approximately 10 %,
to 20 %, and would provide studies depicting the efficiency of this method.
Speaker box - It was re- positioned to the back and the volume can be
lowered by a technician.
• Landscape plan - we will comply with the Mariner's Mile Guidelines, we
don't have a problem with that: it is a non -issue as well as the street trees.
• Screening the cars from the drive- through - we will provide shrubs to screen
those as well,
• The back wall is going to be more than 20 feet tall and we hope not to
touch the slope very much, especially not any irrigation because there is
drainage from up above that is problematic. From a safety standpoint, we
18
INDEX
i
19
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5, 2002
don't want to touch the slope by regrading it.
• The wall material presented tonight will be applied by a shotcrete method
and will be similar to wall on the 'Taco Bell' property nearby.
• Moving the landscape island on the north side is not a problem.
• The use of palm trees was at the request of staff to use the existing type of
trees. We have a lot of palm trees that we would like to retain and reuse. If
you want different trees, we can do that as well.
• The architectural elevations are not complete; the roof structure is a big
concern and how to address that because of the mechanical nature and
the Uniform Building Code venting requirements. Two roof structures are
depicted in the exhibits. No all the mechanical equipment can be under a
screening but because of the number of fryers it is not truly representative of
the number of stacks that would stick through the roof structure. We have
about 3 vents from the grease fryers that are two feet in diameter plus vents
from the restrooms (4-5) and the vents from the air conditioning. -
Commissioner Selich noted that if you asked an architect to design the
building as a five dimensional object and to be concerned with how it looks
from above, he could come up with something..
• The signs were submitted for the Commission to look at. We can show all
the signs on the site at the next meeting.
• There is a condition that requires only one ingress point. We request two
access points as people coming in would have a second chance to make
the turn in because it does come up quickly on the site.
• The lot lighting issue we can comply with.
• The plan sheets will be dated consistently.
• The size of the existing building is larger than what is being proposed by
approximately 40 square feet. We are proposing a building about 3, 113
square feet.
The Commission further suggested:
Use of marine nautical theme for building design, use of muted colors, no
red.
Looking for a quality building with quality windows.
Design within the intent of the Mariner's Mile Design Guidelines.
Mr. Edmonston noted:
The recommendation of making the westerly driveway an exit only came
out of a concern of people entering that driveway and try to get into the
drive- through line at that point that would create a great deal of
congestion that would back out onto the highway very quickly.
To the left of that island is disabled parking but someone could use that to
cut into the drive- through lane.
• I appreciate the comment that the easterly driveway does come up
quickly because the building is at the other end of the lot and you may
have passed the first driveway.
If the cutting in line problem was solved, then he would not have a problem
with two directional driveways.
• The back up must not obstruct either of the driveways.
19
INDEX
1
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5, 2002
In the main parking lot itself, the drive aisle is five feet wider than our
minimum. Perhaps that is an area where the applicant can gain some
additional landscaping along the Coast Highway frontage by narrowing
three feet of that surplus.
Alex Dijon, 615 Qngs Road noted that he agrees that there should be a better
looking facility there and noted that he lives directly above the project site. He
noted the following:
• Speaker on the slope side - noise will carry up the hill.
Trash cans location - currently there is a lot of glass being dumped around
3:00 a.m. and that disturbs his sleep. Could the enclosure be relocated
somewhere else or something done to prevent that from happening?
Vegetation on the slope is lush and stays green all year around. He
remodeled his home about three years ago. Some color with bougainvillea
would be nice, but not strip all of the existing greenery.
• The retaining wall is dilapidated. It you just build another wall in front of it,
and seal the new wall and place it against this dilapidated wall; that wall is
still against the hillside. Eventually, that dilapidated wall will crumble will
that affect the hillside? What will that do to my property's stability?
The city trees that are about 40 feet tall heed to be removed or tended as
they obstruct my view.
The number of accidents in front of this establishment is quite high. There
needs to be some consideration for the egress and ingress onto the
highway.
Hours of operation extending to 2:00 a.m., why is that?
Commissioner Tucker noted that the trash enclosure elevations need to be seen at
the next meeting. He suggested that the speaker write his concerns regarding
street trees, traffic safety and retaining wall designs and send them along to the
Planning staff as well as to the City Manager to be.sent to the responsible
department.
Public comment was closed.
Commissioner Selich noted that the applicant's response is in accord with
accommodating what has been brought up. With regard to the split order board
situation, the applicant states that having that increases the efficiency of that lane
by 10 to 20%. My suggestion to move the building back and get at least an
additional ten feet of landscaping whether that takes a higher priority or increasing
the efficiency of the operation is the question. I think the building should be moved
back because I think it is more important to have the additional landscaping in front
of the building to give more flexibility to screen the cars as well as if there is a
dedication of land to Coast Highway, there would be no landscaping. I think there
should be a single order lane through there.
Commissioner Tucker agreed that the building should be moved back. The
applicant has a potential design solution that would accomplish both. They can do
what we ask for.
20
INDEX
7�
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5, 2002
Chairperson Kiser noted similar thoughts on the retaining wall. The building should
be moved back. There could be the split drive - through with some redesign.
Commissioner Gifford noted that with the building moved back, the trash enclosure
could be moved closer to the highway.
Don Eichler noted that there is no glass trash from the establishment.
Chairperson Kiser asked about the problem of trash dumping at 3 in the morning.
Ms. Temple noted that dealing with it through a use permit would make it an
enforceable thing. We have in the past limited the hours that the employees can
dispose of the trash. If the property owner complies with the condition, then it works.
We will have to work on some options to address the concerns expressed by the
Commission.
Don Eichler asked that this item be continued to February 6, 2003.
Motion was made by Commissioner Selich to continued this item to February 6,
2003
Ayes: Toerge, Agajanian, McDaniel, Kiser, Gifford, Selich, Tucker
Noes: None
5 CT: Initiation of an Amendment regarding the Subdivision Code
procedures
City of Newport Beach
Initiation of an endment to Title 19 and Title 20 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code to end the subdivision regulations related to Lot Line
Adjustments, Lot Mergers Certificates of Compliance.
Ms. Temple noted that she ho discussion with Commissioner McDaniel who
raised an issue on one of the comp nts of this initiation. Staff will .include a
discussion and information with regar o his concern with the lot merger
provisions within our report when this item is br ht back for hearing.
Commissioner Kiser noted that in section one of the olution no reference was
made to Title 19. Does it have a similar authorization?
Mr. Campbell answered, no, Title 19 does not require an initiatio ut there are
links between the two sections.
Commissioner Kiser asked if on the certificate of compliance, the proposal o
expand the section consistent with the Subdivision Map Act (SMA) to be orer
informative; doesn't the burden then become to keep it updated according to
21
INDEX
Item 6
PA2002 -239
Initiated
Exhibit No. 3
Drive -thru queue and parking demand
analysis prepared by LSA
C,
LSA
August 12, 2003
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
20 EXECUTIVE FARK, SUITE 200
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 -4731
Mr. Don Meter
McDonald's Corporation
11682 El Camino Real, Suite 400
San Diego CA 92130
OTHER OFFICES: FT. COLLINS
949.553•x666 TEL BERKELEY RIVERSIDE
949. 553.8076 FAX FT. RICHMOND ROCKLIN
FkecF VEPARiMEt4t
PIA�NI NGW�n�T nFAG►"1
vv V;
7 g191�01'llllal1i213141�►6
Subject: Drive- Through Queuing Study for 700 West Pacific Coast Highway, Newport Beach
Dear Mr. Ikeler:
In response to the request of the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department, LSA Associates,
Inc. (LSA) has prepared an analysis of existing queuing activity for the drive- through lane at the
existing McDonald's Restaurant at 700 West Pacific Coast Highway. McDonald's Corporation
proposes the demolition of the existing 3,141- square -foot McDonald's restaurant and replacement
with a 3,174 -square-foot McDonald's restaurant. The City has expressed concern that the proposed
site plan does not allow enough stacking area to accommodate the expected vehicle queue in the
drive - through lane. Because the on -site land use will not be significantly changed, queuing activity in
the drive - through lane is expected to be similar to the existing condition.
To document the existing condition, LSA contracted with Southland Car Counters, a qualified data
collection firm, to observe the drive - through queue at the existing McDonald's restaurant during a
typical weekday and on a Saturday. The weekday observations were made on Thursday, August 7,
2003, from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. According to
McDonald's Corporation, the highest weekend activity takes place on Saturday between 10:00 a.m.
and 2:00 p.m. As a result, weekend surveys were conducted during this period. Additionally,
according to McDonald's Corporation, the peak sales volume at the McDonald's restaurant at 700
West Pacific Coast Highway is during June, July, and August, when the observations were taken. As
a result, the queuing surveys represent the maximum queues that would be expected to occur during
any day of the week or season of the year. The survey included observations of the maximum number
in the entire queue (from the pick -up window to the end of the queue) and the maximum number of
vehicles queued behind the order - board. The observations were made in five- minute intervals. This
methodology was discussed and agreed upon with City of Newport Beach Public Works staff.
As shown in the proposed site plan (attached), the proposed drive - through lane can accommodate
approximately 11 vehicles from the pick -up window to where the drive - through lane intersects with
the easternmost north -south drive aisle. The site plan also indicates additional queuing area for drive -
through patrons west of the easternmost north -south drive aisle. As shown in the results of the
queuing observations (attached), the maximum number of vehicles in the queue was observed to be
14 vehicles on Thursday, August 7, between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m. The next longest queue
observed during any weekday or weekend peak hour was 10 vehicles. To summarize, during, 120
observations, the queue exceeded 11 vehicles only once, or less than one percent of the time.
8/1 2103 «P:5Don2301Qmue_Analysis.wpd»
PLANNING I ..VI¢ONMENTAL SOI8NC88 I DESIGN
LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.
The proposed site plan provides stacking distance for approximately five vehicles behind the order -
board. Based on the queuing observations, the maximum number of vehicles queued behind the
order -board was five vehicles. The maximum queue of five vehicles was observed on Saturday,
August 9, between 12:15 p.m. and 12:20 p.m. As a result, the number of vehicles queued behind the
order -board is not expected to exceed the available stacking distance shown on the proposed site
plan.
Based upon the queuing observations, the maximum forecast vehicle queue in the drive - through lane
during the peak summer season is 10 vehicles or less. The forecasted queue would be expected to
exceed 10 vehicles less than one percent of the time daring the peak summer season. Furthermore,
additional stacking for drive - through patrons is provided on the proposed site plan west of the
easternmost north -south drive aisle. As a result, the forecasted queue can be accommodated on site
and would not be expected to stack onto the public street.
If you have any questions about this information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 553-
0666.
Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
1144a,V7 Vae�
Meghan Macias
Project Manager
Attachments: Project Site Plan
Queue Study
8/12/03(( P:1Don230\Queue_Malysis.wpd))
CK
>X4
OC
all
Sr
d
P4
<
V)
u
m
0
03- 1235 -001
McDonalds
700 West Pacific Coast Hwy
TIME
6:00 AM
5 AM
10 AM
15 AM
20 AM
25 AM
30 AM
35 AM
40 AM
45 AM
50 AM
55 AM
7:00 AM
5 AM
10 AM
15 AM
20 AM
25 AM
30 AM
35 AM
40 AM
45 AM
50 AM
55 AM
Thurs 8/7103
6 -gam
� Q
5dy
C m
� o
P °c
n
O a
0
0
1
7
1
1
1
2
1
2
7
2
1
1
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
3
1
5
2
5
1
3
1
3
2
4
1
3
1
3
1
2
2
2
1
3
1
7
1
2
TIME
11:00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
12:00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
McDonalds Queue Study
Prepared by: Southland Car Counters
Thum 8/7103
11 -fpm
v
v
� 3
C
5Q �
G �
v
2 o
TIME
4:00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
5:00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
Thum WNW
4 -6pm
v
d �
N Q
CY
c
3
D J
O a
1
2
1
2
1
3
2
2
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
4
1
2
2
3
2
3
2
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
1
2
2
4
1
3
0
1
2
3
1
3
a
a
2
TIME
10:00 AM
5 AM
10 AM
15 AM
20 AM
25 AM
30 AM
35 AM
40 AM
45 AM
50 AM
55 AM
11:00 AM
5 AM
10 AM
15 AM
20 AM
25 AM
30 AM
35 AM
40 AM
45 AM
50 AM
55 AM
12:00 NOOP
5 PM
10 PM
15 PM
20 PM
25 PM
30 PM
35 PM
40 PM
45 PM
50 PM
55 PM
1:00 PM
5 PM
10 PM
15 PM
20 PM
25 PM
30 PM
35 PM
40 PM
45 PM
50 PM
55 PM
Sat 8/9103
10-2PM
'm
m �
m Q
g �
B
c
n° n
Z
LSA
May 22, 2003
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OTHER OFFICES: PT. COLLINS
20 EXECUTIVE PARR, SUITS 200 949. 553.0666 TEL BERKELEY RIVERSIDE
IRVINE, CALEPOYNIA 92614-4731 949 - 5538076 PAR PT. RICHMOND ROCKLIN
Mr. Don Ikeler
McDonald's Corporation
1 ] 682 El Camino Real, Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92130
Subject: Parking Demand Analysis for 700 W. Pacific Coast Highway
Dear Mr. Ikeler:
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is pleased to submit this analysis for the proposed McDonald's
restaurant in the City of Newport Beach (City). This analysis has been prepared in accordance with
Section 20.66. 100 of the City's code in order to demonstrate that the parking demand of the proposed
McDonald's restaurant will be less than the requirement stipulated in Section 20.66.030 of the City's
code. The project proposes the demolition of the existing 3,141- square -foot McDonald's restaurant
located at 700 West Coast Highway and the replacement with a 3,174- square -foot McDonald's
restaurant. Access to the proposed project is provided through two driveways along West Coast
Highway. The project site plan is shown in Figure 1 (attached).
Because the proposed project will replace an existing land use with the same land use, it is reasonable
to expect that the proposed project will require the same number of parking spaces per square foot, or
per seat, as the existing use. To determine the parking demand for the existing McDonald's
restaurant, a parking accumulation survey was conducted by Southland Car Counters on Saturday,
September 14, 2002, and Tuesday, September 17, 2002, between 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. The U-
hour survey period was selected to ensure that the highest parking demand was included in the study.
Table A (attached) provides the parking counts for the McDonald's parking lot for each half hour
between 5:00 a -m. and 11:00 p.m. on both days. The highest observed parking demand was 24
vehicles at 12:00 p.m. on Tuesday and 25 vehicles at 2:00 p.m. on Saturday. The existing site
provides a total of 42 parking stalls; therefore, the existing parking demand is less than the overall
parking supply.
Based on the results of the parking survey, LSA calculated the parking rate for the existing restaurant
using both square feet and seats as a variable. The existing McDonald's restaurant is 3,141 square
feet with 64 seats. Based on the peak hour volume of vehicles parked and the square footage of the
existing establishment, it was observed that the existing parking demand is 0.40 spaces per 50 square
feet. The City's code states that off -street parking for take -out service restaurants shall provide 1 stall
per 50 square feet, plus I for each employee on duty. The parking survey included both customer and
employee parking in the observed parking rate. It should be noted that the existing restaurant is
patronized heavily by drive- through customers and that the observed parking rate represents typical
weekday and weekend activity. To provide an alternate measure of the site's existing parking
generation, the observed peak demand of 25 vehicles was applied to the 64 existing seats to arrive at
a parking rate of 0.39 spaces per seat.
0521/03EP:1D0N2301Parkin9 Analysis Revised 3.doCD
PLANNING 1 EMV3RONLENTAL SCIENCE6 1 DESIGN
LEA ASSOCIATES, INC.
To determine the peak parking demand of the proposed project, LSA applied the observed parking
rates to the proposed 3,174 - square -foot, 50 -seat restaurant. Application of the observed rate of 0.40
spaces per 50 square feet results in a forecasted demand of 26 spaces. Application of the observed
rate of 0.39 spaces per seat results in a forecasted demand of 20 spaces. Therefore, the peak parking
demand of the proposed project is forecast to be 26 spaces. The site plan indicates that the site will
provide 30 parking stalls, which is more than the forecasted parking demand. Thus, the parking
supply is adequate for the proposed project.
On -Site Circulation
With the proposed project, the restaurant will be located on the east side of the site, and a drive -
through lane will be provided along the south, east, and north sides of the restaurant. In the existing
condition, two access driveways serve the parking area and drive - through lane. The project site plan
indicates that the west driveway will remain in approximately the same location, while the east
driveway will be relocated to roughly the center of the site. In the existing condition, the drive -
through lane and the parking lot are located around the perimeter of the building. Traffic backing out
of parking spaces has the potential to conflict with patrons in the drive - through area.
The preliminary site plan indicates that a new drive - through lane will be constructed separate from
the proposed parking area. The drive - through lane is designed as a counter - clockwise loop on the
south, east, and north sides of the restaurant, with the order board located at the southeast corner of
the loop. The proposed drive - through circulation is identical to the existing condition and would
provide stacking equivalent to the current operations. As shown in the project site plan (Figure 1), the
restaurant and drive -through lane will be located on the east side of the site, while the parking area is
proposed to be on the west half of the site. The east driveway will primarily serve the entrance to the
drive -through lane, while the west driveway will primarily serve patrons accessing the parking area.
The proposed site layout will reduce the chance of conflict between vehicles entering and exiting the
drive -through lane, and those backing out of parking spaces.
In comparison to the existing McDonald's restaurant, the proposed project is an improvement to the
on -site circulation. The separation of the drive- through lane and the parking stalls will reduce vehicle
and pedestrian conflicts. Furthermore, the design of the drive - through lane effectively separates .
parking vehicles from drive- through patrons, increasing the efficiency of on -site circulation.
Conclusion
Based on the parking surveys conducted on Saturday, September 14, 2002, and Tuesday, September
17, 2002, the forecasted peak parking demand of the proposed McDonald's restaurant is 26 vehicles.
It has been demonstrated on both weekdays and weekends that the parking demand at the existing
McDonald's is 0.40 spaces per 50 square feet, which includes both customer and employee parking.
As a result, the 30 spaces proposed by the project will be adequate to meet the forecasted parking
demand.
In comparison to the existing McDonald's restaurant, the new drive - through lane will minimize the
possibility that drive - through patrons will conflict with parking vehicles or pedestrians. Additionally,
05f21l03(Pid0n230lParking Analysis_Revised 3-dm)
LSA ASSOCIATaS.INC.
the design of the drive - through lane provides separation of the drive - through traffic from parking
areas, which will increase the efficiency and safety of the on -site circulation.
LSA trusts you will find this information useful for your planning purposes. If you have any
questions, please call our office at (949) 553 -0666.
Sincerely,
A ASSOCI - S, INC,
Meghan Maci s
Project Manager
Attachments
0512 1 W(PAdon230Tarking Analysis_ Revised 3.dm)
' I LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Table A: Parking Accumulation Survey
September 17, 2002 1 September 14, 2002
a.m.
am.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
a.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
pm.
FM—
p.m-
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
p.m.
Shading indicates peak hour of parked vehicles.
03/26/03((F1DON230 \Parking Analysis_ Revised 2.docv
t7 ern~"
W o
b
�Q
O
S
V
x
N
F
U
f
�n a
a
5,
U
J V o � Vii
0
3
s
Exhibit .No. 4
Draft Resolution for project approval
including findings and conditions
I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -029
AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 2002 -001 FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 700 W. COAST HIGHWAY. (PA2001 -155)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS,
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was filed by McDonald's Corporation, with respect to
property located at 700 W. Coast Highway and legally described as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No.
88 -181, requesting approval of Use Permit No. 2001 -029 and Development Plan No. 2002 -001
to authorize the redevelopment of the existing McDonald's restaurant where the existing
restaurant will be demolished and a new 3,113 sq. ft. restaurant building will be constructed with
a reconfigured drive -thru. The application also requests a partial waiver of parking.
Section 2. A public hearing was held on December 5, 2002 and August 21, 2003 in
the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice
of time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given. Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site for Retail and Service
Commercial uses. Drive -thru restaurants are permitted within this category.
2. The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the
purposes of the district in which the site is located. The objectives of the Zoning Code are to
promote the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare and to protect the
character and social and economic vitality of all districts. The existing fast food use has
been operating at the project site since 1971 and has proven to be compatible with
surrounding uses. The property is zoned RSC (Retail and Service Commercial), which
permits the proposed use pursuant to obtaining a Use Permit. The proposed use as
modified is consistent with these primary objectives of the Zoning Code and the purpose
of the RSC zone as the location is designated for commercial uses.
3. The proposed location of the use and the proposed conditions under which it would be
operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the
district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the
neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements
in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city. The project site is located on a major
highway and the use has been operating at the site for many years without incident. The
project should not prove detrimental to the area under the proposed draft conditions
requiring a reduction in operating hours and strict compliance with landscape, screening,
lighting and sign standards applicable to Mariner's Mile. The site plan minimizes vehicle
conflicts associated with exiting the drive -thru lane. The time period at which the drive -thru
�O
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 2 of 8
queue might create possible vehicle maneuvering is limited based upon the queuing
analysis prepared for the project. Conditions of approval have been included requiring the
applicant direct vehicles in a safe manner to reduce vehicle conflicts and enhance safety
when the drive -thru queue affects access to the site.
4. The proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific
condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The
Zoning Code provides no specific conditions on how the proposed fast food, take -out or
drive -thru restaurants must operate other than the restaurant development standards.
Although the project as designed requires a waiver of parking and perimeter walls,
expected parking demand indicates that adequate parking is incorporated within the
project and perimeter walls are not necessary due to the location of the property, abutting
uses and landscape hedge across the front of the property.
5. The Development Plan application is consistent with the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision
and Design Framework and applicable ordinances and policies provided the following
changes to the project are incorporated:
a. Modification of the landscape plan to comply with landscape standards of the
Zoning Code.
b. Reduction in hours of operation to promote compatibility with nearby residential
uses.
c. Strict compliance with lighting and sign standards of the Zoning Code.
6. The requested parking waiver is acceptable as the expected parking demand will fall
below that anticipated by the Zoning Code. This is based upon a parking demand survey
at the existing site, which is comparable to the proposed restaurant, indicating that
parking demand will be less than the 30 spaces to be provided. The City Traffic Engineer
has reviewed and accepts the conclusion of the parking demand study. The probable
long -tens occupancy of the building, based on its floor plan and the design and presence
of the drive -thru operation, will not generate additional parking demand. The drive -thru
restaurant is located in an automobile oriented area of Mariner's Mile along W. Coast
Highway, which takes the focus off dining within the restaurant and thereby reduces
parking demand. The lack of a children's play structure also reduces parking demand.
7. The project qualifies for a Class 2 exemption for the replacement or reconstruction of an
existing commercial structure located on the same site of substantially the same size,
purpose and capacity. The existing fast food restaurant is 3,141 sq. ft., which will be
replaced with a 3,174 sq. ft. fast food restaurant with a reconfigured drive -thru.
Section 4. Based on the findings above, the Planning Commission hereby approves
Use Permit No. 2001 -029 and Development Plan No. 2002 -001, subject to the conditions set
forth in Exhibit "A."
?;1
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 3 of 8
Section 5. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the
adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk or this
action is called for review by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20,
Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF AUGUST 2003.
f 3'�
go
Earl McDaniel, Chairman
Michael Toerge, Secretary
AYES:
NOES:
3z
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 4 of 8
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2001-029 &
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 2002-001
The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plans identified as follows
except as modified by other conditions of approval:
Sheet
Date
Sheet
Date
C1
4 -22 -02
Al
4 -25-03
C2
4 -29 -03
A2 (option #1
4 -25 -03
C3
4 -2 -03
A3 o tion #1
4 -25 -03
L -1
4 -25 -03
A4 (option #1
4-25 -03
Color Elevation
(option #1)
7 -31 -03
2. Use Permit No. 2002 -029 & Development Plan No. 2002 -001 shall expire unless exercised
within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.91.050 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted.
3. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire
Departments. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City- adopted
version of the California Building Code. The construction plans must meet all applicable
State Disabilities Access requirements. Approval from the Orange County Health
Department is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
4. Changes in operational characteristics, hours of operation, expansion in area or operation
characteristics, or other modification to the floor plan or site plan may require an
amendment to this Use Permit or the processing of a new Use Permit.
5. Should this business be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future
owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the
current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent.
6. The exterior of the restaurant shall be maintained free of litter and graffiti at all times. The
owner or operator shall provide for daily removal of trash, litter debris and graffiti from the
premises and on all abutting sidewalks within 20 feet of the premises.
7. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of
those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit.
8. This Use Permit may be modified or revoked by the City Council or Planning Commission
should they determine that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being
operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 5 of 8
property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as
to constitute a public nuisance.
9. The operator of the restaurant facility shall be responsible for the control of noise generated
by the subject facility including recorded background music. Background music, if provided,
shall be limited to the interior of the facility. The noise generated by the proposed use shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The
maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the specified time
periods unless the ambient noise level is higher:
10. Hours of operation shall be from 5:OOAM to 2:OOAM with the dining room closed between
11 :30PM and 2:OOAM daily. The parking lot must be physically secured to prohibit vehicle
entry between 11:30PM and 5:OOAM for security purposes.
11. The proposed trash enclosure shall have a decorative, solid roof for aesthetic purposes and
sound attenuation. Gates shall be self- closing. Every effort shall be made by employees of
the applicant to ensure that refuse disposal is conducted in a sensitive manner and that
excessive noise is not generated.
12. The landscape plan shall be revised to be in compliance with all applicable requirements of
the Zoning Code including but not limited to the hedge and palm row and bluff landscaping
as required pursuant to the Mariners Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework. The
applicant shall revise the conceptual plan to include the use of Washingtonia robusta palms
as required by the Zoning Code. The applicant shall re -use and or relocate existing queen
palms to the maximum extent.
13.The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed
landscape architect. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water
efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Director and
the General Services Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. All planting
areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation
system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected.
The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an
on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by
a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so
as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer.
5�
Between the hours of 7:OOAM
and 10:OOPM
Between the hours of
10:OOPM and 7:OOAM
Location
Interior
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Residential Property
45dBA
55dBA
4OdBA
5OdBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial ro rt
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
5OdBA
Mixed Use Property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
5OdBA
Commercial Property
N/A
65dBA
N/A
60dBA
10. Hours of operation shall be from 5:OOAM to 2:OOAM with the dining room closed between
11 :30PM and 2:OOAM daily. The parking lot must be physically secured to prohibit vehicle
entry between 11:30PM and 5:OOAM for security purposes.
11. The proposed trash enclosure shall have a decorative, solid roof for aesthetic purposes and
sound attenuation. Gates shall be self- closing. Every effort shall be made by employees of
the applicant to ensure that refuse disposal is conducted in a sensitive manner and that
excessive noise is not generated.
12. The landscape plan shall be revised to be in compliance with all applicable requirements of
the Zoning Code including but not limited to the hedge and palm row and bluff landscaping
as required pursuant to the Mariners Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework. The
applicant shall revise the conceptual plan to include the use of Washingtonia robusta palms
as required by the Zoning Code. The applicant shall re -use and or relocate existing queen
palms to the maximum extent.
13.The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed
landscape architect. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water
efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Director and
the General Services Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. All planting
areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation
system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected.
The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an
on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by
a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so
as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer.
5�
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 6 of 8
14.AII landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained in
accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in
a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and
trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation
systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning
as part of regular maintenance.
15. The project shall incorporate a nautical flag pole design similar to that used by Newport
Beach City Hall.
16. Signs shall be in compliance with the Zoning Code, including but not limited to those
applicable standards of the Mariner's Mile Overlay zone.
17. Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code. Exterior on-
site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare
are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance.
"Walpak" type fixtures are not permitted. Parking area lighting shall have zero cut -off
fixtures and light standards shall not exceed 20 feet in height.
18.The site shall not be excessively. illuminated based on the luminance recommendations of
the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the Planning
Director, the illumination creates an unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land
uses or environmental resources. The applicant shall prepare photometric study in
conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning Director prior to the
issuance of a building permit. The Planning Director may order the dimming of light
sources or other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively illuminated.
19.The applicant shall replace the existing sewer main that crosses the subject property.
Said replacement shall be done in accordance with the requirements of the Utilities and
Public Works Departments.
20.The applicant shall provide a new sewer lateral to the restaurant if deemed necessary by
the Utilities Department based upon the condition and location of the existing sewer
lateral. Sewer cleanouts shall be provided in accordance with Utilities Department
standards. A grease interceptor of adequate size shall be provided and it shall be
maintained throughout the operation of the use.
21.AII cooking equipment that has the potential to produce grease laden vapors shall be
provided with a fire protection hood and fire suppression system to be reviewed and
approved by the Fire Department.
22.All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department, and shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
23.The intersection of the driveways with West Coast Highway shall be designed to provide
sight distance for a primary roadway per City of Newport Beach Standard Drawing STD -
110 -L. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs, and other obstructions shall be considered in
�Y�
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Paqe 7 of 8
the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lines (sight cone) shall not
exceed 24- inches in height and the monument identification sign must be located outside
the line of sight cone. The sight distance may be modified at non - critical locations,
subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer.
24.The noses of the curbed landscaped islands at four locations (at the ends of the double -
loaded aisle way) shall be pulled back two feet from the rear of the parking spaces.
25.The drive -thru aisle at the rear of the proposed building (easterly side of property) shall
have a minimum width of 12 -feet rather than 11 -feet.
26.The onsite parking and vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to
further review by the City Traffic Engineer.
27. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or
other applicable section or chapter, additional street trees shall be provided and existing
street trees shall be protected in place during construction of the subject project, unless
otherwise approved by the General Services Department and the Public Works
Department.
28.The applicant shall agree that the proposed development will not increase the need for
on- street parking along West Coast Highway and that the applicant agrees not to contest
the removal of parking for the re- striping or widening of West Coast Highway on the
grounds of loss of on- street parking.
29. Public Works Department plan check and inspections fees shall be paid.
30. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction
vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagpersons.
Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in
accordance with state and local requirements.
31. Overhead utilities serving the site shall be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole
in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code.
32. New curb and gutter, sidewalk and driveway approaches shall be constructed along the
entire West Coast Highway frontage of the property in accordance with an encroachment
permit issued by the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans). Street
improvements as well as drainage and utility improvements within Caltrans right -of -way
shall be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer.
33.Catch basins are to be constructed at all locations where drainage from surface runoff is
proposed to be discharged through curb outlets. Each catch basin shall be bottomless
and constructed over permeable material, as well as having a fossil filter system. The
objective is to improve the quality and decrease the quantity of water runoff by providing
for on -site percolation to the maximum extent possible.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 8 of 8
34.An alternate site plan shall be prepared demonstrating that on -site parking, vehicular
circulation, and pedestrian circulation systems can be modified and still function
satisfactorily if West Coast Highway is widened into the full 12 -foot width of additional
right -of -way dedicated to the City in 1988 with the recordation of Parcel Map 88 -181.
35. An Encroachment Agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of a building permit
for new construction covering the rights and obligations associated with the use of the 12-
foot strip of additional street right -of -way for on -site improvements in accordance with the
approved site plans for the proposed project.
36.A hydrology and hydraulic study for the project shall be prepared by the developer's
licensed civil engineer, along with a master plan of water, sewer, and storm drain facilities
for the on -site improvements prior to issuance of a grading permit. Any modifications or
extension to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems that the study shows to be
required shall be the responsibility of the developer.
37.The site plan shall be revised to include painted markings on the pavement in the on -site
drive isle leading from the eastern driveway for the drive -thru lane indicating "Keep Clear
at all times." These markings shall be painted on the pavement in a contrasting color
(white or yellow) and shall be repainted as necessary.
38.The drive -thru facility shall be operated in such a manner that vehicles will not be allowed
to block driveways or impact Coast Highway. Drive -thru operations shall be monitored at
all times by the applicants' representatives on -site. To prevent vehicle queuing in the
eastern driveway, incoming customers shall be directed to queue along the on -site
parking aisle parallel to Coast Highway while maintaining the "keep clear" zone specified
above open at all times. Traffic congestion problems occurring on West Coast Highway
related to the drive -thru facility shall be immediately corrected. Should traffic congestion
problems not be eliminated or it is determined that traffic management is not effective in
the elimination of vehicle conflicts, the Public Works and Planning Department may
require the implementation of operational or physical corrective measures.
3T
Exhibit No. 5
Findings for denial
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2001-029 &
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 2002-001
1. The proposed restaurant has seating for 50 people and 10 employees are
expected. Anticipated parking demand may to exceed 30 spaces, and
therefore, a parking shortfall is expected. This parking shortfall will occur
during the mealtime periods and will impact street parking to the detriment of
the area.
2. The project site is too small for the proposed development. The parking
shortfall and insufficient vehicle queuing for the drive -thru both have the
potential for creating vehicle conflicts both on -site and off -site. Additionally,
the proposed hours of operation (24 hours a day) will introduce commercial
activity during hours that are not customary, which will be detrimental to
nearby residential uses. Therefore, project approval will be detrimental to the
health, safety and general welfare of the City, and as such, the required
findings for the approval of a Use Permit cannot be made.
3. The proposed project is inconsistent with the Zoning Code. Specifically, the
project does not provide landscaping in accordance with Section 20.57.040.
Additionally, the proposed project is not consistent with the Mariner's Mile
Strategic Vision and Design Framework as it relates to landscaping and
therefore the findings for approval of a Development Plan pursuant to Section
20.57.050 cannot be made.
t4O
Exhibit No. 6
Revised project plans
L+a-
L11�
-- �1
l
r
HillF
lgi
..�
x
i
v
E a aaig d
$ 6 l�aa;1
El i$ i
till
w/
�
,5111 �g��g� is
�
� Ell
.
� � � I�� ��
(d
�
I
is6�gi$AFFa 19
_
°
111 11 11 all1:$
1,
SFS 1 FF
I
Y�
I
Y
AAA ��° ii Ea 3tf ••ev
>
'a
i
r
a
55
t i ___ ;
$ yggs$
s
gg
47
f?
3
"�
Ii
_
F.
i
1ua�44wY1
iI
•i9
I
p
OOa13i�RM1E
aaa
Op
pp
JAIL
lal3
3
t
ops
qg
if
till
9
cve mwwl awee
' �
r cva. c.urna,�ox
L11�
8�
11111.1
6a
4¢
8
R
! xxd
l6n{ IN
a
AIN
a
t
a bp6E gg
°- EA "yRP 34 gaaap
u
S �C
'
L
1! 01
6x6 dF i1
I
j
IXR
i€ ci
a
b
((
I
a
-4Y4W-
� e
I •
E
a> A
e� e 6 e
in
Jill is
RUIZ-
FDg
B e Abp
p =.P= a
F6q
R
Ri
gg
I
'PJ
B
®O® ® ® ®OOO O ®O 90®O ®® ®000® ®O n
O s�
UPx �
4gY VVVYY fiqfiq q � q n
USE
11§ � 4A91 k5 55
s is iPPM.
S 3s g
p 'sA x l6
� as
55q
digg ��gL�LpSmFya
a —
£ 9
3F 3n ®3R
d 9d 7 A
k�
aai I I g'gg� $$�yQI pgI � jg9 � � ggF pg ScEa maaa �
I 1 g 8
s�
------- J__l-
lj
it
9
e
3
s
I
i.
ise(.
x
m
W
'n
.'L
w
i.�l
,-P,
tim`o�A
2
O
9�8(�9
�
m�5°OVO�
pAmbm
1
c
T1
z
A>0
A
pj np >
Ci
OR
x3
a
@• z
j2�1
i � z
y
�jl�
K
@p5
Z
n
aai I I g'gg� $$�yQI pgI � jg9 � � ggF pg ScEa maaa �
I 1 g 8
s�
------- J__l-
lj
it
9
e
3
s
I
i.
ise(.
x
m
W
'n
.'L
w
i.�l
�l
p
11
?8?
45
>
o1 e
ol
€ .I!
It
fill
� C
NI.MMPYU.d)
H 7 P+Pw«xr.�.s
m
rn
p5ti
N
ti
2
2
a
O Ili € 14111; a1 a$€ € i � _ j �taqH
s j$[pk
91,121, S •�� 6 1�181 � 101�42, €�! i 111,
ill 1 ssill
7 It l
is 4 a � g °f� i = @I lot €� .41$p,111
\.4 -I
z
v
a
�
�
8 R g
>
o1 e
ol
€ .I!
It
fill
� C
NI.MMPYU.d)
H 7 P+Pw«xr.�.s
m
rn
p5ti
N
ti
2
2
a
O Ili € 14111; a1 a$€ € i � _ j �taqH
s j$[pk
91,121, S •�� 6 1�181 � 101�42, €�! i 111,
ill 1 ssill
7 It l
is 4 a � g °f� i = @I lot €� .41$p,111
\.4 -I
(D
O
WI M
OZ
- - - - - ... IE
. . .. .. .. .. ....
----------
1
L
OZ
ruTWIA 170
a MR
,
fl
all
ISO
rr
- - - - - - - - - - - -
MCDONAL.D'S CORPORATION
J
O
. 21
Arid
------------
ONALD'S CORPORATION
3
n
.
§
- -��
�
q
m
>«
d
r.
--
e
�
�
f
Ill
e
A
-
�
q �
�
/
F nGm ®
!
, A k
I
§
{�
■
�
,
BMW
ONAL-D'S cRP-oRATIa
�W
a _
�-
3
\�
»$�
@
!.
@
!�
2
±
mill
Jill
.
i
.
�
) \
]
!
;$
}
}
\ §U
m
@
\§
lit
t-
f�
!
\,
■
|;
aNALD'S
\�
§
&
!;
4§
,
'fig
g m ±±±±±±±•
f � 4)
m, /
§)
I
I
I
1�
m
&m
Q
i
s s O
O O
U a lip H!
a sa E'E
41-
.1
Exhibit No. 7
Colored elevations
i
z
O
w
x
0
z
z
0
d
w
F
w
z
O
a
w
x
0
z
0
d
w
F
w
1
0
�p
a�4
zip
0
F
o0
y
Zw
0U
U
=w
Oz
a
U a
�rJ
z
0
W
a
z°
z
0
a
H
3
z
0
W
z
0
a
H
w
0
UEILP`a
.y
R
O
v
N
7�
L"
I
CA
0
Q
a
w
a
E
z
x
U
°o
n
.1
t
Exhibit No. 8
All previous Panning Commission
staff reports (recycled)
b2-