Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0A - Planning Commission Study Session May 8, 2014 Draft MinutesNEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers — 100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, May 8, 2014 STUDY SESSION 4:00 p.m. A. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker ABSENT: Amed (Excused), Brown (Excused, Arrived 5:10 p.m.) Staff Present: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director; Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Director, Community Development; Michael Torres, Assistant City Attorney; Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer; Brittany Ramirez, Administrative Technician; and Marlene Burns, Administrative Support Specialist B. CURRENT BUSINESS ITEM NO. 1 LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT (PA2013 -098) Site Location: City -wide Chair Hillgren introduced the item and addressed the purpose of the meeting. He reported that a public hearing will be conducted at the Planning Commission's first meeting in June. He stated that today, the Planning Commission will review policy issues and that environmental documents will be reviewed at the next meeting. He asked that staff address why the General Plan is being updated at this time, why specific properties have been identified and what that means for properties that have not been identified, the public's role, the Planning Commission's role and next steps. He requested a report from staff. Deputy Community Development Director Brenda Wisneski introduced the item and reported the amendment was introduced by Council one (1) year ago. Council appointed a Land Use Element Committee which was comprised to two (2) Council Members, Planning Commission Vice Chair Tucker and Commissioner Kramer as well as five (5) at -large members. The Committee has concluded its review and has forwarded their recommendations to the Planning Commission. She addressed the process at this time, future study sessions and the public hearing scheduled for June 5, 2014. She added that Council will consider the matter at its first meeting in July and the matter will be placed on the November ballot. She introduced Woodie Tescher, from PlaceWorks for a presentation and noted that questions previously asked by Chair Hillgren are included in his presentation. Mr. Tescher provided a presentation addressing the overall schedule for considering the item, the Planning Commission's role, background, reasons for reviewing and updating the General Plan, changes made, principles guiding the General Plan, areas considered, speck areas in which land use development capacities and designations will change, development opportunities for specific sites, the nature of the policy revisions, categories of policy revisions and recommendations. He addressed the General Plan Glossary as well as Implementation Programs and next steps. Vice Chair Tucker referenced State laws that impact the City's planning effort noting that a lot of what is being done is driven by what is required. He addressed the Housing Element and its purpose as well as Land Use Policies related to sustainability noting that they are not optional, but requirements. Commissioner Myers commented on properties that were not identified and asked regarding opportunities for greater development of same. Mr. Tescher reported that the properties that were identified by the Committee where those that had been vetted and discussed initially by the Committee where there was opportunity for change. Vice Chair Tucker commented on changes to the 2006 report that were red lined and noted it was a result of the Committee's review where it focused on the land use as well as policy. Page 1 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Chair Hillgren commented on capacity in terms of square footage as well as capacity that drives traffic and asked regarding the threshold. Mr. Tescher reported that the Committee suggested they be studied as they exceed the current limits. The numbers were then addressed through the traffic modelling process. Consideration was given to the cumulative results of the traffic and the Committee recommended including it. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry, Mr. Tescher addressed volume and reported that all the traffic modeling recognizes differences among uses. In terms of including Harbor Day, Mr. Tescher reported that it is included as the additional space could accommodate additional students. Additional square footage was translated into additional students, which was then translated into additional trips. Vice Chair Tucker reported that the Committee spent a lot of time reviewing the policies and commented on the inclusion of required legal aspects. The update is tied to a ballot timeline and the Committee took time to vet through the policy changes. He reiterated that what is before the Commission is a red lined version of the 2006 General Plan and that he read through it once again and distributed additional cleanup items. He stated that it will be reviewed page -by -page. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reported that the Commission will not take action tonight and staff is looking for the Commission's concurrence that the changes being made will be included into a document that the Commission will consider at the June 5th public hearing. Discussion followed regarding the process to be followed at this time. Chair Hillgren commented on the concept of climate change and related State mandates. He stated that the ability to effect climate change is still in question and asked regarding best practices that should be applied to development. Mr. Tescher reported that most of the policies related to climate change are already included in the 2006 General Plan. The City has already adopted practices to reduce energy and water consumption which will reduce greenhouse gasses by the adoption of the California Green Code. The terminology related to climate change is partially a statement that the City recognizes the concern as well as recognition that cities that have not done this have been sued. By adding the new policies there is no radical departure of the practices that the City is already following. Areas that help reduce greenhouse gasses are also areas that help in the healthy community and sustainability aspects. Chair Hillgren stated he believes that great development can have a great impact on the environment but stated he is concerned in terms of a practical point of view in applying the policies and standards to specific projects. Discussion followed regarding reducing greenhouse gasses through development and building in conformance with current building codes. Chair Hillgren commented on the role and character of the City as a unique and residential community and asked whether that was the consensus of the Committee as he sees the City as a balance mix of residences and businesses as well as visitor - serving and recreational. Vice Chair Tucker stated this was language out of the 2006 General Plan, slightly modified. The Committee did not feel that anything had changed significantly in this regard since 2006. Chair Hillgren reiterated that the City is a balance and stated that the goal should be maintaining the quality of the residential life in the City. Regarding page 7 relative to Banning Ranch, Chair Hillgren asked for clarification regarding the goal and action. Vice Chair Tucker reported that Banning Ranch is currently in litigation and that the general consensus was to leave that section the way it is. Upon resolution of the litigation, the language will be reviewed to see if it needs to be changed. He added that these are policies that are not covered by the Green Light Initiative which deals with development intensity. Page 2 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Discussion followed regarding clarification relative to incorporating a "whole system approach ", the possibility of adding it to the glossary, clarification of "embodied energy" and adding it as well as "heat island effect' to the glossary. Ensuing discussion pertained to implementing practices, permitting the concept of development allocation (development rights) and conditions under which allocation can be transferred. Commissioner Brown arrived at this juncture (5:10 p.m.). Vice Chair Tucker commented on multi - family building elevations and ways in which they are implemented. Regarding the Hoag Hospital Campus, Chair Hillgren assumed that Hoag has participated in conversations with the Committee and suggested changing "adequate" to "excellent' when referring to their facilities. Vice Chair Tucker stated it is sufficient to meet their needs and the statement does not comment on the quality of the facilities. Mr. Tescher suggested using the word, "sufficient'. Chair Hillgren commented on the strikeouts of public and institutional uses and districts and requested clarification. Mr. Tescher reported that the text was moved to another section in the document. Vice Chair Tucker highlighted his comment regarding gated communities. Mr. Tescher reported that the matter was discussed extensively by Council in 2006 and that Council felt it was important to include. Discussion followed regarding the visioning process from 2005, the Hoag medical facilities, sustainability, pedestrian connectivity and amenity, opportunities around Fashion Island and Newport Center and encouraging versus requiring connectivity and walkability. Chair Hillgren suggested changing the language on Policy 7.13.6 adding language that it is required, where feasible rather than "encourage ". Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski commented on a change that staff recognized that was made by the Committee relative to Policy 7.13.4 noting that the last sentence should state, "Enable distinguished and quality architectural and site design to allow increased height for development of a hotel on the eastern portion of the 100 block ". Vice Chair Tucker assumed that his changes will be implemented and referenced Policy 7.13.8 relative to development agreements and public benefit fees. He reported that a big part of the Oasis Senior Center was paid for by development agreements negotiated with the Irvine Company in relation to Newport Center. As additional entitlement comes into Newport Center, he recommends that development agreements be part of the arrangement. He suggested modifying this clause accordingly and referenced the updated anomaly table in the General Plan. Chair Hillgren commented on updating the increased capacity schedules and clarified that Vice Chair Tucker suggested that wherever there is increased capacity that development agreements apply. Chair Tucker noted it will be most of the entitlements in Newport Center. Similar language will be added for the Airport area. Discussion followed regarding Policy 7.14.5 relative to leaving the 2,200 Uptown Newport units and the concept plan. Page 3 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Mr. Tescher noted the need to clarify the meaning of new versus total development. He added the need to look at the number, based on what is going to occur in terms of land uses for that area. Community Development Director Kimberly Brandt clarified that the General Plan speaks to the maximum number of units that are allowed in the Airport area including both replacement and added units. The Shopoff property is consistent with the General Plan maximum and Ms. Brandt stated she does not believe it is necessary to amend that policy as it relates to existing General Plan designations in the area. Chair Hillgren commented on mixed -used villages containing a minimum of ten (10) acres and wondered if that is the right minimum size in density. Vice Chair Tucker addressed the concept in 2006 and Mr. Tescher noted it is the same language used within the Housing Element. Ms. Brandt reported that the two (2) policies work together and that a minimum was established in 2006 but an exception was granted for properties that included a significant amount of affordable housing that could be reduced to a minimum of five (5) acres. Chair Hillgren asked regarding integration of Uptown Newport to the Newport Mesa School District and Vice Chair Tucker noted there is no way to include anything in the General Plan that changes their boundaries as the City has no jurisdiction. He added that the School District decides their issues within their boundaries. Vice Chair Tucker reported on the need to require development agreements for projects in the Airport area and noted that additional discussions will be had on this matter. Discussion followed regarding relationships of buildings to streets, Old Newport, Mariners Mile identified as a series of districts, opportunities to create distinct areas and the need for further studies regarding Mariners Mile. Vice Chair Tucker stated he would like to see all of the changes made by the Committee, and by him so that the red line version for the next meeting will only include changes discussed tonight. Discussion on this matter will continue on the May 22, 2014, Study Session. C. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Hillgren opened the floor for public comments Greg Sullivan expressed concerns with the Airport area where the Committee has decided to lump four (4) properties together for study purposes. He added that staff advised him that the four (4) properties that were included in the area are for mapping purposes only. He reported that his client is interested in developing the corner of Jamboree and Campus with an assisted living facility and asked that the Commission consider the properties, individually. Jim Mosher understood that the Land Use Element is supposed to be the expression of all of the other elements in the General Plan and commented on the rationale for making the proposed changes. He commented on the Citys Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as the circulation noting that if these have changed in the proposed Land Use Element, then the individual elements will need to be changed. He responded to questions by Chair Hillgren made early in the meeting. He believed the Land Use Element was not well thought out and recommended rejecting it entirely. Coralee Newman, Principle, Government Solutions, representing UAP, agreed with Mr. Sullivan's comments noting the need for an assisted living facility in the area. She reported she is representing the owner of one (1) of the four (4) properties adding that their project will be trip neutral and will be a replacement use. She hoped the Commission will consider that in their deliberations. Phil Aguirre, UAP, reiterated comments by Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Newman and requested being taken out of the grouping. Page 4 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Chair Hillgren closed public comments. D. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the Study Session was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session Meeting was posted on May 2, 2014, at 2:38 p.m., in the binder and on the City Hall Electronic Bulletin Board located in the entrance of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive. Bradley Hillgren, Chair Kory Kramer, Secretary Page 5 of 5 Changes proposed by Vice Chair Tucker NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES A. B. ROLL CALL Correspondence Item No. 1.OAa Draft Minutes 05/08/2014 May 22, 2014 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers —100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, May 8, 2014 STUDY SESSION 4:00 p.m. PRESENT: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker 5/8/14 ABSENT: Ameri (Excused), Brown (Excused, Arrived 5:10 p.m) Staff Present: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director'` Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Director, Community Development; Michael Torres, Assistant City Attorney; Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer; Brittany Ramirez, Administrative Technician; and Marten Burns, Administrative Support Specialist ITEM NO. 1 LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT (PA2013 -098) Site Location: City -wide Chair Hillgren introduced the item and addressed the purpose of the meeting. He reported that a public hearing will be conducted at the Planning Commission's first meeting in June. He stated that today, the Planning Commission will review policy issues and that environmental documents will be reviewed at the next meeting. He asked that staff address why the General Plan is being updated at this time, why specific properties have been identified and what that means for properties that have not been identified, the public's role, the Planning Commission's role and next steps. He requested a report from staff. Deputy Community Development Director Brenda Wisneski introduced the item and reported the amendment was introduced by Council one (1) year ago. Council appointed a Land Use Element Committee which was comprised to two (2) Council Members, Planning Commission Vice Chair Tucker and Commissioner Kramer as well as five (5) at -large members. The Committee has concluded its review and has forwarded their recommendations to the Planning Commission. She addressed the process at this time, future study sessions and the public hearing scheduled for June 5, 2014. She added that Council will consider the matter at its first meeting in July and the matter will be placed on the November ballot. She introduced Woodie Teacher, from PlaceWorks for a presentation and noted that questions previously asked by Chair Hillgren are included in his presentation. Mr. Tescher provided a presentation addressing the overall schedule for considering the item, the Planning Commission's role, background, reasons for reviewing and updating the General Plan, changes made, principles guiding the General Plan, areas oonited, specific areas in which land use development capacities and designations will change, development( opportunities for specific sites, the nature of the policy revisions, categories of policy revisions and recommendations. He addressed the General Plan Glossary as well as Implementation Programs and next steps. Vice Chair Tucker referenced State laws that impact the City's planning effort noting that a lot of what is being done is driven by what is required. He addressed the Housing Element and its purpose as well as more recently enacted Land Use Policies related to sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions noting that they are not optional, but requirements. Vice Chair Tucker explained that under Housing Law. the City is required to accept Commissioner Myers commented on properties that were not identified and asked regarding opportunities for greater development of same. Page 1 of 5 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Mr. Tescher reported that the properties that were identified by the Committee where those that had been vetted and discussed initially by the Committee where there was opportunity for change. Vice Chair Tucker commented on changes to the 2006 land use elementthat were red lined and noted it was a result of the Committee's review where it focused on the land use element text as well as policies Chair Hillgren commented on capacity in terns of square footage as well as capacity that drives traffic and asked regarding the threshold. Mr. Tescher reported that the Committee suggested they be studied as they exceed the current limits. The numbers were then addressed through the traffic modegng process. Consideration was given to the cumulative results of the traffic and the Committee recommended including it. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry, Mr. Tescher addressed volume and reported that all the traffic modeling recognizes differences among uses. In terms of including Harbor Day, Mr. Tescher reported that it is included as the additional space could accommodate additional students. Additional square footage was translated into additional students, which was then translated into additional trips. Vice Chair Tucker reported that the Committee spent a lot of time reviewing the policies and commented on the inclusion of required legal aspects. The update is tied to a ballot timeline and the Committee took time to vet through the policy changes. He reiterated that what is before the Commission is a red lined version of the pro- posed changes fro the 2006 General Plan and that he had re -read through the Land Use Efemer+f_ once again and distributed additional cleanup items he noted. He stated that the Land Use Element will be reviewed page - by -page tonight. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reported that the Commission will not take action tonight and staff is looking for the Commission's concurrence that the changes being made will be included into a document that the Commission will consider at the June 5th public hearing. Discussion followed regarding the process to be followed at this time Chair Hillgren commented on the concept of climate change and related State mandates. He stated that the ability to effect climate change is still in question and asked regarding best practices that should be applied to development. Mr. Tescher reported that most of the policies related to climate change are already included in the 2006 General Plan. The City has already adopted practices to reduce energy and water consumption which will reduce greenhouse gasses by the adoption of the California Green Code. The terminology related to climate change is partially a:statement that the City recognizes the concern as well as recognition that cities that have not done this have been sued. By adding the new policies there is no radical departure of the practices that the City is already following. Areas that help reduce . greenhouse gasses are also areas that help in the healthy community and sustainability aspects. Chair Hillgren stated he believes that great development can have a great impact on the environment but stated he is concerned in terms of a practical point of view in applying the policies and standards to specific projects. Discussion followed regarding reducing greenhouse gasses through development and building in conformance with current building codes. Chair Hillgren commented on the role and character of the City as a unique and residential community and asked whether that was the consensus of the Committee as he sees the City as a balance mix of residences and businesses as well as visitor - serving and recreational. Vice Chair Tucker stated this was language out of the 2006 General Plan, slightly modified. The Committee did not feel that anything had changed significantly in this regard since 2006. Chair Hillgren reiterated that the City is a balance and stated that the goal should be maintaining the quality of the residential life in the City. Regarding page 7 relative to Banning Ranch, Chair Hillgren asked for clarification regarding the goal and action. Page 2 of 5 Deleted: report Deleted: v Deleted: I Deleted: of Deleted: it Deleted: It NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Vice Chair Tucker reported that Banning Ranch is currently in litigation and that the general consensus was to leave that section the way it is. Upon resolution of the litigation, the language will be reviewed to see if it needs to be changed. He added that these are policies that are not covered by the Green Light Initiative which deals with development intensity rather than general plan policies. Discussion followed regarding clarification relative to incorporating a 'Whole system approach ", the possibility of adding it to the glossary, clarification of "embodied energy" and adding it as well as "heat island effect" to the glossary. Ensuing discussion pertained to implementing practices, the concept of transfer of development allocation (development rights) and conditions under which allocation can be transferred. Commissioner Brown arrived at this juncture (5:10 p.m.). Vice Chair Tucker asked about multi- family building elevations and ways in which they are implemented. Regarding the Hoag Hospital Campus, Chair Hillgren assumed that Hoag has participated in conversations with the Committee and suggested changing "adequate' to "excellent' when referring to their facilities. Vice Chair Tucker stated it is sufficient to meet their needs and the statement does not comment on the quality of the facilities. Mr. Teacher suggested using the word, "sufficient' in place of'adeouate''. Chair Hillgren commented on the strikeouts of public and institutional uses and districts and requested clarifcation. Mr. Tescher reported that the text was moved to another section in the document. Vice Chair Tucker highlighted his comment regarding gated communities. Mr. Tescher reported that the matter was discussed extensively by Council in 2006 and that Council felt it was important to include. Discussion followed regarding the visioning process from 2005, the Hoag medical facilities, sustainability, pedestrian connectivity and amenity, opportunities around Fashion Island and Newport Center and encouraging versus requiring connectivity and walkability. Chair Hillgren suggested changing the .language on Policy 7.13.6 adding language that it is required, where feasible rather than "encourage ". Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski commented on a change that staff recognized that was made by the Committee relative to Policy 7.13.4 noting that the last sentence should state, 'Enable distinguished and quality architectural and site design to allow increased height for development of a hotel on the eastern portion of the 100 block'. I Deleted: permitting l I Deleted: commented on Vice Chair Tucker assumed that his changes will be implemented and referenced Policy 7.13.8 relative to development agreements and public benefit fees. He brought to the public's afentiorl that a big part of the Oasis Deleted: reported Senior Center ($10.000.000 or sot was paid for by development agreements negotiated with the Irvine Company in relation to Newport Center. As additional entitlement comes into Newport Center, he recommends that development agreements be part of the arrangement. He suggested modifying this clause accordingly and referenced the updated anomaly table in the General Plan which the Commission has not seen vet. Chair Hillgmn commented on updating the increased rapacity schedules and clarified that Vice Chair Tucker suggested that wherever there is increased capacity that development agreements apply. Page 3 of 5 C. NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Chair Tucker noted it will be most of the entitlements in Newport Center. Similar language will be added for the Airport area. Discussion followed regarding Policy 7.14.5 relative to leaving the 2,200 Uptown Newport units and the concept Mr. Teacher noted the need to clarify the meaning of new versus total development. He added the need to look at the number, based on what is going to occur in terms of land uses for that area. Community Development Director Kimberly Brandt clarified that the General Plan speaks to the maximum number of units that are allowed in the Airport area including both replacement and added units. The Shopoff property is consistent with the General Plan maximum and Ms. Brandt stated she does not believe it is necessary to amend that policy as it relates to existing General Plan designations in the area. Chair Hillgren commented on mixed -used villages containing a minimum of ten (10) acres and wondered if that is the right minimum size in density. Vice Chair Tucker addressed the concept in 2006 and Mr. Tescher noted it is the same language used within the Housing Element. Ms. Brandt reported that the two (2) policies work together and that a minimum was established in 2006 but an exception was granted for properties that included a significant amount of affordable housing that could be reduced to a minimum of five (5) acres. Chair Hillgren asked regarding integration of Uptown Newport into the Newport Mesa School District and Vice Chair Tucker noted there is no way to include anything in the General Plan that changes ttre, boundaries of the Santa Ana School District in the airport area as the City has no jurisdiction. He added thaCSchool Districts alone decide schooljssues within their boundaries. Vice Chair Tucker reported on the need to require development agreements for projects in the Airport area and noted that additional discussions will be had on this matter. Discussion followed regarding relationships of buildings to streets, Old Newport, Mariners Mile identified as a series of districts, opportunities to create distinct areas and the need for further studies regarding Mariners Mile. Vice Chair Tucker stated he would like to see all of the changes made by the Committee, and by him so that the red line version for the next meeting will only include changes discussed tonight. Discussion on this matter will continue on the May 22, 2014, Study Session. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Hillgren opened the floor for public comments. Greg Sullivan expressed concerns with the Airport area where the Committee has decided to lump four (4) properties together for study purposes. He added that staff advised him that the four (4) properties that were included in the area are for mapping purposes only. He reported that his client is interested in developing the comer of Jamboree and Campus with an assisted living facility and asked that the Commission consider the properties, individually. Jim Mosher understood that the Land Use Element is supposed to be the expression of all of the other elements in the General Plan and commented on the rationale for making the proposed changes. He commented on the City's Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as the circulation noting that if these have changed in the proposed Land Use Element, then the individual elements will need to be changed. He responded to questions by Chair Hillgren made early in the meeting. He believed the Land Use Element was not well thought out and recommended rejecting it entirely. Page 4 of 5 I Deleted: it Deleted: the Deleted: s their Correspondence Item No. 1.0Ab Draft Minutes 05/08/2014 May 22, 2014 May 22, 2014, Planning Commission Item 1 Comments Comments on Newport Beach Planning Commission regular meeting agenda item by: Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(o),vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 - 6229). Item No. 1: Minutes Changes to the draft minutes passages shown in italics are suggested in stfikeeut underline format. A. STUDY SESSION MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 8, 2014 Page 2, paragraph 10: "Chair Hillgren commented on the role and character of the City as a unique and residential community and asked whether that was the consensus of the Committee as he sees the City as a balance balanced mix of residences and businesses as well as visitor - serving and recreational." 2. Page 2, last sentence: "He added that these are policies that are not covered by the GFeen Light Greenlight Initiative which deals with development intensity." 3. Page 3, paragraph 2: "Ensuing discussion pertained to implementing practices, peFmhting the change of "development rights" to "development allocations" and conditions under which allocation can be transferred." 4. Page 3, paragraph 4 from end: "He reported that a big part of the Oasis OASIS Senior Center was paid for by development agreements negotiated with the The Irvine Company in relation to Newport Center." 5. Page 3, paragraph 3 from end: "He believed the Land Use Element amendment was not well thought out and recommended rejecting it entirely." 6. Page 3, paragraph 2 from end: "Coralee Newman, Pr4nciple Principal, Government Solutions, ..." EGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 8, 2014 1. Page m IV, paragraph 2, last sentence: "He hoped that the Commission individual Commission will make their comments to Council regarding the matter." 2. Page 1, Item IV, paragr .Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chair Hillgren closed public comments." 3. Page 6, paragraph 3 from end: "Commis ' e, Lawler indicated he will support the motion as there is pFeGed .^^^^ precedent throughoullh City related to the parking agreement." 4. Page 8, paragraph 5: "Richard Haskell, M.D. expressed erns with setting p- .sense precedent with lifts on Old Newport Boulevard..." 5. Page 8, paragraph 8, sentence 2: "He expressed concerns with the projec ' terms of setting p�^. en ^ ^^^ precedent ..." May 22, 2014, PC agenda item 1 comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2 6. a 8, paragraph 8, last sentence: "He reported that one of the Council Members was skep . and did no He also was not sure everyone would think of lifts as parking spaces." 7. Page 8, paragrap from end, sentence 3: "Two (2) valet parking attendants will be on site at all times and that t Ws will be maintained properly." 8. Page 9, paragraph 2, line 3: .. precedence precedent." 9. Page 9, paragraph 4, line 2: "... precedent." 10. Page 9, paragraph 6, line 2: "... recedent." 11. Page 9, paragraph 4 from end: "Motion made by missioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler andGaraed (5 I) to adopt the ft resolution ..." [saying the motion stated in this paragraph carried 5 -1 is both confusing (because wh ultimately carried was an amended version) and unnecessary (because the final vote is recorde the end)] 12. Page 9/10, last/first paragraph: "Regarding recording the Conditions o royal, Ms. Brandt suggested recording a land use restriction at the County of Orange on the p erty which would refer to the Planning Commission Resolution and associated Conditions o proval available at the City to notify anyone obtaining title records that the permit exists