Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0B - Planning Commission Regullar Meeting Draft Minutes May 8, 2014NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MA VI. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers — 100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, May 8, 2014 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Myers ROLL CALL PRESENT: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker ABSENT: Ameri (Excused) 5/8/14 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; Makana Nova, Assistant Planner; Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner; and Marlene Burns, Administrative Support Specialist PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Hillgren invited those interested in addressing the Planning Commission on items not on the agenda, to do so at this time. Jim Mosher commented on preserving audio recordings of meetings and the importance of maintaining a good record of proceedings. He reported the posting of the May 13, 2014, City Council agenda and noted that an item under the Consent Calendar pertains to consideration of a new records retention schedule and that under same; recommendations are for the Planning Commission's recordings to be maintained for one (1) year. He encouraged the Planning Commission to consider retaining them for a longer period. He hoped that the Commission will make their comments to Council regarding the matter. Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chair Hillgren closed public comments. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF APRIL 3, 2014 Chair Hillgren reported receiving written comments with corrections to the minutes of April 3, 2014. Chair Hillgren opened public comments. Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chair Hillgren closed public comments for this item. Motion made by Vice Chair Tucker and seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried (6 — 0) to approve the minutes of April 3, 2014, as corrected. AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer None None Ameri Lawler, Myers, and Tucker Page 1 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 NESAI RESTAURANT (PA2013 -203) Site Location: 217 Riverside Avenue Assistant Planner, Makana Nova, provided a presentation with a description of the proposed restaurant renovation and addressed location, the existing Use Permit, surrounding properties, the request to extend the hours of operation, the proposed outdoor covered patio, and the request for a parking management program. Ms. Nova presented details of on -site and off -site parking and noted that a formal agreement for parking at 2660 Avon Street will be required. Without valet service the restaurant has just enough parking. Ms. Nova recommended closure of the outdoor dining patio at 10:00 p.m. She added that the outdoor patio is generating the requirement for 16 additional parking spaces. Ms. Nova addressed the CEQA exemption and presented recommendations as stated in the report. She added that if approved, the appeal period would end on May 22, 2014, and they would move on to construction design and construction permitting. Commissioner Brown commented on the number of seats and occupancy load and asked for clarification. Ms. Nova reported that the total number of seats is 107 and that occupant load is 151 offering additional occupancy for employees. In response to Commissioner Brown's inquiry regarding the parking management program and the indefinite agreement related to the off -site parking lot, Ms. Nova reported that the City will require a formal agreement since it provides required parking. An agreement will not be required for the other parking lot as that will provide extra parking. Commissioner Brown noted that parking seems confusing and wondered how patrons will know where to park. Ms. Nova responded that Conditions of Approval are in place regarding signage for the availability of the off -site lots. If the applicant chooses to provide valet, it will be done on the property with parking on the off -site lots. Commissioner Kramer stated that the entire application centers around the parking issue and asked if the applicant will consider double- stacked elevator lifts for their parking on this project. Ms. Nova stated that staff did not believe it is necessary considering valet parking and the additional off -site lots. In response to Vice Chair Tucker's inquiry regarding requirements that food be served during specific hours, Ms. Nova stated that there is a Condition of Approval in place requiring that food service shall be available to patrons up to thirty (30) minutes before closing time. Vice Chair Tucker expressed concerns with the possibility of it becoming a nightclub. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry regarding a parking management plan and proposed parking for employees and patrons, Ms. Nova acknowledged that there is a parking management plan in place (Attachment 9). She added that employees will park in the municipal lot at 200 Tustin Avenue and that they are required to purchase annual parking passes. Chair Hillgren commented on the parking management plan noting that it was a restatement of the conditions and noted a clause that states that the property owner of the off -site parking lot may terminate the arrangement at any time. Ms. Nova acknowledged that off -site parking is difficult, particularly in this case since the applicant does not own the off -site lot. She added that the property owner of the lot has the right to terminate the agreement, in which case, the applicant would need to work with staff to develop another parking solution. Discussion followed regarding how it would be known that there is an issue. Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski reported that the required parking is being satisfied under the current configuration, with valet parking as an option. Additional parking is not being required and would be up to the discretion of the business owner to determine whether his patrons are having difficulty locating parking. Commissioner Brown commented on the Condition of Approval regarding signage and asked if the City provides the applicant guidance on where to place the signs. Ms. Nova reported that signage is required prior to the Page 2 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 issuance of building permits and that staff will review whether they are located adequately. The location of the signs would be identified on the plans. Commissioner Lawler commented on the "indefinite" off -site parking but noted that the property owner could terminate the agreement at any time so that it is really not "indefinite ". Ms. Nova responded that there is no end date to the agreement at this time but the property owner has the right to remove those spaces and the applicant would then have thirty (30) days in which to provide alternative parking. In response to Commissioner Brown's inquiry, Ms. Nova reported that valet parking is not currently required but could be if the Commission so desired. She added that staff received a valet plan for the on -site lot but that the Traffic Engineer has not reviewed it fully. Commissioner Kramer commented on the issue of extended hours and how that impacts the local area. He stated that the Police report would be helpful in determining whether the application satisfies Police requirements. Ms. Nova responded that both Planning and Police staff have reviewed the application and that approval of the proposal is recommended with the patio closing at 10:00 p.m. She noted the attendance of Detective John Thulin with the Newport Beach Police Department. Detective Thulin reported that while he does not know the applicant, he inspected the business relative to the proposed patio. He reported that there have been no calls for service related to that restaurant, that it has operated as a restaurant since 1973 and that it has had no problems since that time. Detective Thulin reported that he was impressed with the applicant and his reputation and that he considered other restaurants in which he is involved. He added that the subject building is in need of renovation and that his main concern was the outside. When he understood the proposed plans his only concern was the late hours of operation in relation to the patio. Detective Thulin addressed the design of the patio, which was meant to reduce the noise emitted and also reduce the noise from the street coming into the restaurant. He stated that a lot of detail and thought was put into the plans. He indicated that he and the Police Department felt that 10:00 p.m. was a reasonable time to close the patio and bring the patrons from the outside to the inside. In response to Commissioner Kramer's question, Detective Thulin expressed approval of the late closing on Friday and Saturday nights. He added that the report specifies that they are not to operate as a nightclub, tavern, or bar in the evening hours. If it does not maintain itself as a restaurant, it would be in violation of the Police Department's recommendations. He reported that the restaurant will also be subject to an operator's license which is governed by the Police Department. If they operate outside the guidelines, the Police have authority to take action against them. The 10:00 p.m. closing of the patio is in keeping with typical conditions placed on other restaurants especially given the proximity to residential areas. Commissioner Myers stated he does not see a material difference between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. and that the attempt to screen noise is substantial. He stated he remains open- minded to the applicant's request to close the patio at 10:30 p.m. Ms. Nova reported that the City's noise standards change at 10:00 p.m. Vice Chair Tucker expressed concerns with the late closure on Friday and Saturday nights and questioned the feasibility of serving food at such late hours. Detective Thulin reported that the applicant's intention is to cater to service providers who get off work late and would like to provide them with upscale food at a later hour. He added that many restaurants around Fashion Island are open until 1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and they are primarily restaurants. If they were to start operating as a bar, the operator's license terms would give the Police authority to take action against them. He added that the Police Department works hand -in -hand with ABC. Chair Hillgren opened the Public Hearing and asked the applicant forward. Jeffrey Hall, applicant, stated he understands the concerns regarding late hours of operation but that with the changing economy and demographics there is a need to remain open later. In relation to a restaurant they operate in downtown Santa Ana, he reported that 10 percent of their sales occur after 10:00 p.m. He reported that they pride themselves in sourcing locally grown food, hiring and community involvement having helped raise Page 3 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 over $500,000 for local charities. Mr. Hall addressed the proposed design of the interior of the restaurant, receipt of numerous awards as restaurateurs and operators and their safety and alcohol plans. Additionally, he reported that they are taking an existing use and giving it a "refresh" noting that in the Mariner's Mile Plan and in the Land Use Ordinance, if a business is being underutilized or is underperforming, it encourages development of the area and creating more foot traffic. He addressed parking and signage, engaging patrons, use of off -site parking, having backup plans for parking, parking passes for employees, valet if needed, and encouraging bicycle riders and the patio. Regarding the patio, he addressed the restaurant's need to stay open for later hours to accommodate late night diners since a large proportion of the seating is located outside. He proposed shutting off service to the patio at 10:30 p.m. and addressed efforts to mitigate sound on the patio. Mr. Hall reported that no entertainment is being proposed and noted that many in the community support their project. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiries, Mr. Hall reported on his experience and background in the restaurant industry noting that he loves what he does and he is not in the business of selling restaurants. Brion Jeannette, representing several community members, spoke in support of the proposed project and reported that parking is not an issue as he can walk to the restaurant. He expressed concerns regarding the hours of operation adding that there are sensitive residential uses nearby. He reported they are presently re- landscaping Cliff Drive Park to augment greater use of the park by families. He indicated that residents hear action from the Avon area at all hours of the morning but that it normally lasts only a few minutes. He reiterated that they are supportive of the restaurant but are concerned with extending the hours of operation until 1:00 a.m. He agreed with closing the patio area at 10:00 p.m. and reported that sound travels up the hill very quickly. Hal Woods reported that Nesai has been a good restaurant for the area and stated support for the project but expressed concerns with the extended hours of operation particularly with almost doubling the expansion of the restaurant and the outside dining. He believed that the hours of operation should be limited to the same hours of operation of the majority of restaurants in the area which is typically 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. He noted that restaurants in Fashion Island are not adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Additionally, he suggested that parking needs further study and supported closing the patio area at 10:00 p.m. He commented on sound attenuation efforts and asked if there has been an acoustical study done. He added that potted plants and an open trellis do not lower the decibels from an acoustical standpoint. He stated that residents are concerned that people will gravitate to restaurants that are open later in the evening and feared that it will become a nightclub or drinking establishment. Phil Becerra, Planning Commissioner for the City of Santa Ana, spoke in support of the proposed project and reported that Santa Ana has granted two (2) Conditional Use Permits to the applicant and his partner and is very happy with their businesses performance. He commented on their capabilities and efforts. Jade Tran spoke in support of the proposed project but expressed concerns regarding the extended hours of operation. She expressed safety concerns related to vehicles driving out of the parking lot in the late night hours possibly hitting pedestrians and bicyclists and believed there has not been enough consideration given to safety and how it will impact the neighborhood. Additionally, with the extended hours of operation, she stated there will be a higher probability of drunk driving and people not paying attention coming out of the parking lot. Ned McCune expressed concerns regarding employee parking and stated that the applicant should be required to have permits for every employee on his payroll noting that those who do not would have to park on the street. He added that if this is addressed he would support the project and that there will be more than ten (10) parking permits needed. Jim Mosher commented on the discrepancy between the occupancy load and the number of seats in the restaurant. In terms of parking, he noted that to justify off -site parking, same must be permanently available and an agreement that can be revoked does not seem to be very permanent. He addressed the Conditions of Approval relative to the hours of operation of the patio as it relates to office uses and suggested specifying the starting time at 5:00 p.m. and that although they specify that windows and doors will be closed at 10:00 p.m. to mitigate noise, they do not indicate when windows and doors can be reopened. Wyatt Mitchum acknowledged the attendance of students from Newport Harbor High School and expressed appreciation for the professionalism shown in the present proceedings. He reported that other restaurants in the area close at 10:00 p.m. and wondered if Mr. Hall is seeking the after -hours overflow. He stated that he supports Page 4 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 the restaurant as is, but expressed concerns with the extended hours of operation. He believed that patrons will be going to the restaurant during late hours to drink alcohol and not for the food. He felt that it will become a bar with increased noise. Sandra Ayres reported that her neighbors are enthusiastic about a new restaurant but are concerned regarding the late hours of operation. She noted that the Santa Ana and Orange restaurants are not adjacent to residences. She did not believe that simply because there have been no problems with the operation that the hours should be extended. She expressed concerns that while the patio area will be closed to service, it does not mean that it will necessarily be closed. She believed that people who will patronize the restaurant after 10:00 p.m. will be drinking alcohol. Portia Weiss expressed concerns regarding the extended hours of operation noting that the applicant's other restaurants serve a different demographic. She reported that Newport Beach is a sleepy community and expressed concerns regarding noise, parking, and drunk driving through the Heights. She opined that no one eats after 10:00 p.m. and felt that patrons will be mostly drinking alcohol after 10:00 p.m. Tom Baker opined that the proposed project will expand the restaurant into a bar. He wondered how many Police calls are received from restaurants where the hours are extended to 1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m. He asked the Planning Commission to not expand the hours of operation and expressed concerns regarding parking. Additionally, he inquired regarding the percentage of parking that is being waived noting that every time parking requirements are waived, the neighborhood is negatively impacted as people will park on residential streets. He noted the need for firm agreements regarding parking as well as appropriate signage indicating employee and customer parking. He asked regarding the projected number of employees at the restaurant to determine how many parking spaces they will be taking up. He hoped that the Planning Commission will not approve the project but return it to staff and obtain community input. Chair Hillgren reported that the Planning Commission is not being asked to approve a parking waiver as that occurred many years ago. The Planning Commission is being asked to approve a plan to deal with needed additional parking spaces. In response to Mr. Baker's inquiry, Assistant Planner Nova reported that fifteen (15) parking spaces were previously waived. Chair Hillgren closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Lawler expressed concerns regarding parking as the owner of the off -site parking lot can terminate the agreement at any time with thirty (30) days notice. He recommended that the applicant obtain a permanent agreement from the owner of the off -site parking lot or one requiring a longer- termed notice. Chair Hillgren asked for clarification regarding whether the patio will be closed or closed -to- service. Assistant Planner Nova reported that the applicant is proposing a closed -to- service patio whereas staff is recommending full closure of the patio at 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Kramer commented on noise mitigation design and asked for clarification from the designer Eric Beneker, designer, reported that an acoustic study was done which resulted in compliance with City noise regulations and was included in the staff report. He added that it is compliant as the patio currently exists. He added that the patio faces away from neighbors and does not take into account the proposed trellis and planters. He reported there will be no speakers outside and that the restaurant is not a nightclub or a gastro pub. Chair Hillgren raised the issue of the parking lot behind the building and people getting in and out of their cars. Mr. Beneker agreed that the related noise would be an issue. Mr. Hall reported that staff required a recorded parking agreement be in place with the owner of the off -site parking lot. He added that the off -site lot at 2660 Avon Street has been family owned for generations and he does not see the owner selling the property any time soon. Additionally, he referenced emails received from Page 5 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 residents in support of the project and proposed adjusting the hours of operation to 11:00 p.m. weeknights and 12:00 midnight on weekends in order to move the project forward and not postpone it. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry regarding the parking agreement, Mr. Hall reported that the agreement will run with the land. Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski clarified that the parking arrangement is not an easement but rather, an agreement including both property owners and the City. The City would then be privy to any changes to that agreement. She added that these agreements are needed and common throughout the City. Commissioner Lawler requested clarification that the off -site parking facility will be "permanently' available. Ms. Wisneski reported that flexibility exists in terms of the operations being modified to ensure that parking requirements are satisfied. She added that situations such as this have occurred throughout the City. Mr. Hall stated that the additional parking requirements were triggered by the use of the patio and that in the worst -case scenario, if they were to lose access to the off -site parking lot, they would close the patio. Chair Hillgren stated that staff may be able to come up with a solution. He asked regarding the number of employees at any one time and Mr. Hall stated he has yet to determine same. He estimated five (5) to fifteen (15) employees at any one time. In terms of vehicle interaction with pedestrians, Ms. Nova reported that the Public Works Department reviewed the on -site parking and circulation and that the existing wall was identified as a sight/distance issue and that the applicant has agreed to reduce the height of the wall to improve sight distance and visibility. Regarding start and re -open times, Ms. Nova reported that they were not called out in the Conditions of Approval as there are varying start times for the patio but that staff can include them accordingly. Mr. Hall stated the idea is to not cut people's dinner short and noted that by fulfilling ADA requirements the restaurant lost a considerable amount of interior space so therefore, would like to have the patio opened until closing. He agreed with having food service end in the patio at 10:00 p.m. and closing it at 10:30 p.m. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried (6 — 0) to adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2013 -021 subject to the conditions of approval provided in the draft resolution and superseding Use Permit No. UP1677 with changes to reflect that the patio will end food service at 10:00 p.m. and will close at 10:30 p.m., that the interior of the restaurant will be open until 11:00 p.m. on weeknights and until 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday nights, and that the off -site parking agreement include both the business owner, off -site property owner, as well as the City. Vice Chair Tucker stated he will support the motion noting the requirements of the Operator's License and the Use Permit. Commissioner Lawler indicated he will support the motion as there is precedent throughout the City related to the parking agreement. Vice Chair Tucker commented on the parking agreement and that if the off -site parking is lost, the restaurant will lose capacity. Chair Hillgren thanked those who spoke regarding this matter and stated that he believes the applicant will be a great neighbor. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Ameri Page 6 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 ITEM NO. 3 MEDICAL OFFICE PARKING MODIFICATION APPEAL (PA2013 -228) Site Location: 441 Old Newport Boulevard Community Development Director Kimberly Brandt introduced the matter and deferred to staff for a report. Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan provided an overview of the proposed project addressing parking, existing conditions, car lifts, architectural features of the parking site, background, approval by the Zoning Administrator subject to required Conditions of Approval, an overview of the conditions, landscaping, approval of construction materials by staff and a requirement for a parking management plan. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry, Ms. Whelan addressed the accurate square footage of the structure noting that it meets Code requirements. The building will not be occupied if it does not meet the final approved plans. Additionally, she addressed the parking ratio for the use. Commissioner Kramer stated that he appealed the application because given its history; he believed that the item rose to the level of being heard by the Planning Commission. He added that the issue of how the parking works is critical. Chair Hillgren added that it is a question of aesthetics and function. He opined on the general circulation of the parking and asked for clarification. City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine stated he is unsure as to the difference it would make in terms of entering in one driveway and exiting another. He added that upon review of the plan, he did not have concerns with the circulation layout. Additionally, he noted that the number and location of handicapped parking is appropriate. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry regarding the need for a roof in the parking design, Ms. Brandt reported that staff wanted to ensure that this was a long- lasting structure with concerns with exposure of the vehicle lifts to the elements and uncertainty as to how trees would age over time in relationship to screening. Discussion followed regarding the City's experience with car lifts. Chair Hillgren opened the Public Hearing. Lyle Overby, representing Ocean View Medical Investors, provided a presentation addressing the proposed enclosed lifts; lifts in the Lido Fun Zone, a video of the operation of the proposed lifts, Conditions of Approval, the importance and expansion of Hoag Hospital and the need for additional parking, compliance with the City's Municipal Code, existing trees, landscaping, screening, surrounding properties, visibility and enclosure of the lifts, the valet as a function of utilizing the lifts and removability of the lifts. In response to Vice Chair Tuckers inquiries, he reported that each lift operates independently. He added that they are simple and reliable and that if anything would break on them it would be the hydraulics. Dave Gagliotto, The Lift Guy, reported that he maintains and operates the lifts at the Fun Zone and that he will install and maintain the subject lifts, if approved. He added that the lifts will be maintained every six (6) months which will include changing the hydraulic oil and doing a lift inspection. Vice Chair Tucker suggested including a maintenance contract in the Conditions of Approval In response to Chair Hillgren's questions, Mr. Gagliotto reported that the lifts at the Fun Zone are operated by three people and work in conjunction with valet parking. Parking could be overnight or short-term. Mr. Overby noted that information regarding the operation of the lifts is included in the report and that the lifts will be managed by their staff. The valet will be primarily attending the lifts and self - parking will not be encouraged. Mr. Gagliotto reported that it takes approximately 60 seconds from the time the keys are handed to the attendant to the time the car is placed on the lift. Page 7 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Mr. Overby reported that generally, employees will be parked in the top section of the structure along with long- term users. It was noted that this was a compliant medical building parking structure prior to 2005 when the Code changed. Ms. Brandt reported that the structure could have accommodated all uses prior to the Code change in 2005. Brion Jeannette opined that this is almost like granting a variance noting that the proposed increase in parking is allowing the building to get bigger by adding lifts. He expressed concerns that this could set precedence as well as with aesthetics. He did not believe that this is in keeping with the aesthetics of Old Newport Boulevard. He addressed the trees on the northern side of the property and felt that they will likely die as a result of installing a foundation nearby. Richard Haskell, M.D. expressed concerns with setting precedence with lifts on Old Newport Boulevard and opined that people will park on the street instead of using the lifts or park on his property. He added there are many small lots on Old Newport Boulevard that cannot be built for medical since they do not have adequate parking. He expressed concerns with the aesthetics and decreases in property values. Aldan Raney, M.D. addressed the parking requirements for the Ocean View Medical Building as it pertains to the square footage of the building and agreed that parking is a problem in the area. He commented on the aesthetics and functionality of lifts and reported that the Fun Zone lifts are managed by employees who are there around the clock and are responsible for parking the cars. He expressed concerns that the parking area will be unmanned and encouraged the Planning Commission to consider the matter carefully. Dr. Levin agreed that parking is an issue and expressed concerns with access to emergency vehicles. He added that space is tight in all of the office buildings in the area and questioned the logistics and aesthetics of the parking structure and lifts. Jim Mosher agreed that this is a matter that merits being weighed and decided by a citizen's panel and not left to the sensibility of a single staff person. He expressed concerns with the project in terms of setting precedence noting there are many businesses in the City that have parking problems. Additionally, he suggested there may be other alternatives for solving the problem including using the building in a way that could satisfy parking requirements. He noted that building a parking structure would be more expensive, that the lifts would be cheaper and that residents do not want "cheaper ". He reported that one of the Council Members was skeptical and did not think of lifts as parking spaces. Sandy Haskell spoke in opposition to the project and noted that the lifts used at the Fun Zone are not there to fulfill a parking requirement. She added that it is a business and is completely enclosed inside a structure and is not the only option for parking. She quoted from the Land Use Plan for the area and questioned the justification for allowing the proposed parking style. She did not believe people will be amenable for parking on the lifts and stated they will require a parking attendant, an uninterrupted power source and maintenance. Additionally, she stated that the applicant is asking for special treatment and is seeking a way around the rules. Discussion followed regarding the ownership of the property and their experience with lifts of this kind. John Bral reported he owns various medical buildings in different cities and have not had to use lifts for parking. He stressed that the lifts will not be used by the public but will be for long -term parking and staff. Two (2) valet parking attendants will be on site at all times and that the lifts will be maintained properly. He added that most of the building has already been committed to in terms of tenants, but nothing has yet been executed pending the Planning Commission's ruling. The building will be mostly medical and office uses. He addressed traffic to the building and reported that they will be under long -term leases. Mr. Overby reported that the doctors that will lease the building will understand what they are leasing. He addressed the square footage of the building and stated that building a parking structure on the property is not feasible. Cars will not drip as they will sit on a pan. He reported that the applicant acquired the building in 2005 and that it was occupied by the owner of the building and was an office building. Chair Hillgren closed the Public Hearing. Page 8 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Commissioner Brown asked whether it conceivable to require employees to park on the lifts and Ms. Whelan confirmed that will be one of the items to be included in the final parking management plan and it could be required under the lease agreement. Vice Chair Tucker reported this is a use permit which will run with the property and noted the need for tight conditions. He added that this is a matter of first impression and that it is a policy question. He felt that is something that should be viewed on a policy level and does not establish precedence. He added that approving the application does not mean that it has been decided to never regulate lifts in the City. He stated wanting the Commission to revisit this matter thoroughly, in a more theoretical basis, in the near future. Chair Hillgren stated that the design will work, aesthetically and the existing trees will survive. He commented on the functionality and scale of the project, noting that currently, it has not been maintained and that the economics does not make sense. He added that he is not compelled to support the project without knowing who the users /occupants will be. Commissioner Lawler noted that this is a matter of Code and not of policy; that this was a creative solution that works elsewhere in the City and that it does not establish precedence. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry regarding whether the Code speaks of this situation, Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres reported that the Code does not speak to lifts and that this may be a situation where technology is advancing faster than the Code. Staff has reviewed the matter and has decided that the lifts satisfy the parking requirements and qualify as a parking space within the Code. Commissioner Myers stated that the economics of the project is not the Planning Commission's concern and that the project does not establish precedence. He noted this is a new and workable solution and stated he will support it. Commissioner Brown expressed his support as well, but with tightening of the Conditions of Approval in terms of the maintenance agreement, that there must be an attendant on -site to operate the lifts and requiring that tenants and employees use the lifts by building same in the leases. Ms. Brandt highlighted Condition of Approval No. 12 and stated that language can be included that all leases include the requirement that employees and staff will be required to park within the twenty -two (22) lift spaces and requiring a twelve (12) hour attendant. She noted that Condition of Approval No. 14 addresses maintenance and reported it could be expanded to include that maintenance shall occur on a regular basis at least every six (6) months at a minimum standard. Commissioner Kramer noted technical corrections to the report. He commented on the improvements made from the Zoning Administrator's approval and noted the success of the appeal process. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler and carried (5 — 1) to adopt the draft resolution for approval to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision and approve Modification Permit No. MD2013 -023 with the modifications proposed by Commissioner Brown and recorded by staff to amend Conditions of Approval No. 12 and 14 as stated above. Vice Chair Tucker suggested an amendment to the motion adding to the conditions that if any of the existing ficus trees die, they will be replaced and also suggested adding a reference to a professional valet service to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the Statement of Facts in the Resolutions have duplicative language and made additional grammatical corrections. Vice Chair Tucker added that he would like to see the Conditions of Approval recorded through the City Attorney's office. Commissioner Kramer and Commissioner Lawler agreed with adding language that existing trees will be replaced if they die and that a professional valet service will be used. Regarding recording the Conditions of Approval, Ms. Brandt suggested recording a land use restriction at the County of Orange on the property which would refer to the Planning Commission Resolution and associated Page 9 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Conditions of Approval available at the City to notify anyone obtaining title records including the information in Land Use Restrictions and recording same with the City Attorney's office. Commissioners Kramer and Lawler agreed. Chair Hillgren called for a vote and the amended motion carried (5 — 1). AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: Brown, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker Hillgren None Ameri VIII. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None ITEM NO. 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S RI Committee Updates: 1. Land Use Element Amendment Advisory Committee Ms. Brandt referenced the earlier Study Session where the aforementioned item was considered. 2. General Plan /Local Coastal Program Implementation Committee Ms. Brandt reported that the Committee has been meeting on a monthly basis and provided an update of recent discussions. Staff is trying to maintain and have a good working relationship with Coastal Commission staff going through the process. ITEM NO. 6 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT Vice Chair Tucker commented on the matter of parking lifts and the need to bring it to City Council's attention so that they may determine whether they would like to regulate them or not. He asked that staff return to the Planning Commission with suggestions as to how to advise Council on this matter as there is no guidance regarding the subject in the Code. Chair Hillgren inquired regarding the Post Office matter and the appeal of the case and Ms. Brandt reported that Council considered the proposed General Plan Amendment to the property as well as the Local Coastal Plan and initially denied the project and directed staff to return with a resolution. When staff returned with a resolution for denial, Council considered the possibility of looking at the project again with conceptual plans for development. The applicant requested continuance to develop a concept plan as well as plans for the Post Office. Once staff receives that information, it will be rescheduled for Council consideration. ITEM NO.7 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Brown reported he will be travelling June 5th and requested an excused absence. Chair Hillgren reported he will be travelling May 22nd and requested an excused absence. Commissioner Myers indicated he will need to leave by 9:00 p.m. on May 22nd. Commissioner Lawler reported he will not be available June 5th. Page 10 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES IX. ADJOURNMENT 5/8/14 There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. The agenda for the Regular 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 y Page 11 of 11' Correction noted by Secretary Kramer. NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Correspondence Item No. 1.OBa Draft Minutes 05/08/2014 May 22, 2014 5/8/14 Commissioner Brown asked whether it conceivable to require employees to park on the lifts and Ms. Whelan confirmed that will be one of the items to be included in the final parking management plan and it could be required under the lease agreement. Vice Chair Tucker reported this is a use permit which will run with the property and noted the need for tight conditions. He added that this is a matter of first impression and that it is a policy question. He felt that is something that should be viewed on a policy level and does not establish precedence. He added that approving the application does not mean that it has been decided to never regulate lifts in the City. He stated wanting the Commission to revisit this matter thoroughly, in a mom theoretical basis, in the near future. Chair Hillgren stated that the design will work, aesthetically and the existing trees will survive. He commented on the functionality and scale of the project, noting that currently, it has not been maintained and that the economics does not make sense. He added that he is not compelled to support the project without knowing who the users/occupants will be. Commissioner Lawler noted that this is a matter of Code and not of policy; that this was a creative solution that works elsewhere in the City and that it does not establish precedence. In response to Commissioner Kramer's inquiry regarding whether the Code speaks of this situation, Assistant_ Deleted: Myers's City Attorney Michael Torres reported that the Code does not speak to lifts and that this may be a situation where technology is advancing faster than the Code. Staff has reviewed the matter and has decided that the lifts satisfy the parking requirements and qualify as a parking space within the Code. Commissioner Myers stated that the economics of the project is not the Planning Commission's concern and that the project does not establish precedence. He noted this is a new and workable solution and stated he will support it. Commissioner Brown expressed his support as well, but with tightening of the Conditions of Approval in terms of the maintenance agreement, that there must be an attendant on -site to operate the lifts and requiring that tenants and employees use the lifts by building same in the leases. , Ms. Brandt highlighted Condition of Approval No. 12 and stated that language can be included that all leases include the requirement that employees and staff will be required to park within the twenty -two (22) lift spaces and requiring a twelve (12) hour attendant. She noted that Condition of Approval No. 14 addresses maintenance and reported it could be expanded to include that maintenance shall occur on a regular basis at least every six (6) months at a minimum standard. Commissioner Kramer noted technical corrections to the report. He commented on the improvements made from the Zoning Administrator's approval and noted the success of the appeal process. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler and carried (5 — 1) to adopt the draft resolution for approval to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision and approve Modification Permit No. MD2013 -023 with the modifications proposed by Commissioner Brown and recorded by staff to amend Conditions of Approval No. 12 and 14 as stated above. Vice Chair Tucker suggested an amendment to the motion adding to the conditions that if any of the existing ficus trees die, they will be replaced and also suggested adding a reference to a professional valet service to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the Statement of Facts in the Resolutions have duplicative language and made additional grammatical corrections. Vice Chair Tucker added that he would like to see the Conditions of Approval recorded through the City Attorney's office. Commissioner Kramer and Commissioner Lawler agreed with adding language that existing trees will be replaced if they die and that a professional valet service will be used. Regarding recording the Conditions of Approval, Ms. Brandt suggested recording a land use restriction at the County of Orange on the property which would refer to the Planning Commission Resolution and associated Page 9 of 11 VII. Changes proposed by Vice Chair NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ITEM NO. 2 NESAI RESTAURANT (PA2013 -203) Site Location: 217 Riverside Avenue Correspondence Item No. 1.OBb Draft Minutes 05/08/2014 May 22, 2014 5/8/14 Assistant Planner, Makana Nova, provided a presentation with a description of the proposed restaurant renovation and addressed location, the existing Use Permit, surrounding properties, the request to extend the hours of operation, the proposed outdoor covered patio, and the request for a parking management program. Ms. Nova presented details of on -site and off -site parking and noted that a formal agreement for parking at 2660 Avon Street will be required. Without valet service the restaurant has just enough parking. Ms. Nova recommended closure of the outdoor dining patio at 10:00 p.m. She added that the outdoor patio is generating the requirement for 16 additional parking spaces. Ms. Nova addressed the CEQA exemption and presented recommendations as stated in the report. She added that if approved, the appeal period would end on May 22, 2014, and they would move on to construction design and construction permitting. Commissioner Brown commented on the number of seats and occupancy load and asked for clarification. Ms. Nova reported that the total number of seats is 107 and that occupant load is 151 offering additional occupancy for employees. In response to Commissioner Brown's inquiry regarding the parking management program and the indefinite agreement related to the off -site parking lot, Ms. Nova reported that the City will require a formal agreement since it provides required parking. An agreement will not be required for the other parking lot as that will provide extra parking. Commissioner Brown noted that parking seems confusing and wondered how patrons will know where to park. Ms. Nova responded that Conditions of Approval are in place regarding signage for the availability of the off -site lots. If the applicant chooses to provide valet, it will be done on the property with parking on the off -site lots. Commissioner Kramer stated that the entire application centers around the parking issue and asked if the applicant will consider double- stacked elevator lifts for their parking on this project. Ms. Nova stated that staff did not believe it is necessary considering valet parking and the additional off -site lots. In response to Vice Chair Tucker's inquiry regarding requirements that food be served during specific hours, Ms. Nova stated that there is a Condition of Approval in place requiring that food service shall be available to patrons up to thirty (30) minutes before closing time. Vice Chair Tucker expressed concerns with the possibility of it becoming a bar later at night. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry regarding a parking management plan and proposed parking for employees and patrons, Ms. Nova acknowledged that there is a parking management plan in place (Attachment 9). She added that employees will parkin the municipal lot at 200 Tustin Avenue and that they are required to purchase annual parking passes. Chair Hillgren commented on the parking management plan noting that it was a restatement of the conditions and noted a clause that states that the property owner of the off -site parking lot may terminate the arrangement at any time. Ms. Nova acknowledged that off -site parking is difficult, particularly in this case since the applicant does not own the off -site lot. She added that the property owner of the lot has the right to terminate the agreement, in Which case, the applicant would need to work with staff to develop another parking solution. Discussion followed regarding how it would be known that there is an issue. Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski reported that the required parking is being satisfied under the current configuration, with valet parking as an option. Additional parking is not being required and would be up to the discretion of the business owner to determine whether his patrons are having difficulty locating parking. Commissioner Brown commented on the Condition of Approval regarding signage and asked if the City provides the applicant guidance on where to place the signs. Ms. Nova reported that signage is required prior to the Page 2 of 11 Deleted: nightclub NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 residents in support of the project and proposed adjusting the hours of operation to 11:00 p.m. weeknights and 12:00 midnight on weekends in order to move the project forward and not postpone it. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry regarding the parking agreement, Mr. Hall reported that the agreement will mn with the land. Community Development Deputy Director Wisneski clariied that the parking arrangement is not an easement but rather, an agreement including both property owners and the City. The City would then be privy to any changes to that agreement. She added that these agreements are needed and common throughout the City. Commissioner Lawler requested clarification that the off -site packing facility will be "permanently" available. Ms. Wisneski reported that flexibility exists in terms of the operations being modified to ensure that parking requirements are satisfied. She added that situations such as this have occurred throughout the City. Mr. Hall stated that the additional parking requirements were triggered by the use of the patio and that in the worstcase scenario, if they were to lose access to the off -site parking lot, they would close the patio. Chair Hillgren stated that staff may be able to come up with a solution. He asked regarding the number of employees at any one time and Mr. Hall stated he has yet to determine same. He estimated five (5) to fifteen (15) employees at any one time. In terms of vehicle interaction with pedestrians, Ms. Nova reported that the Public Works Department reviewed the on -site parking and circulation and that the existing wall was identified as a sight/distance issue and that the applicant has agreed to reduce the height of the wall to improve sight distance and visibility. Regarding start and re-open times, Ms. Nova reported that they were not called out in the Conditions of Approval as there are varying start times for the patio but that staff can include them accordingly. Mr. Hall stated the idea is to not cut people's dinner short and noted that by fulfilling ADA requirements the restaurant lost a considerable amount of interior space so therefore, would like to have the patio opened until closing. He agreed with having food service end in the patio at 10:00 p.m. and closing it at 10:30 p.m. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried (6 — 0) to adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. UP2013 -021 subject to the conditions of approval provided in the draft resolution and superseding Use Permit No. UP1677 with changes to reflect that the patio will end food service: at. 10:00 p.m. and will close at 10:30 p.m., that the interior of the restaurant will be open until 11:00 p.m. on weeknights and until 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday nights, and that the off -site parking agreement include both the business owner, off -site property owner, as well as the City. Vice Chair Tucker stated he will support the motion noting the requirements of the Operators License and the Use Permit are acceptable with the earlier hours. Commissioner Lawler indicated he will support the motion as there is precedent throughout the City related to the parking agreement. Vice Chair Tucker commented on the parking agreement and that if the off -site parking is lost, the restaurant will lose capacity which will address the real parking issue. Chair Hillgren thanked those who spoke regarding this matter and stated that he believes the applicant will be a great neighbor. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Lawler, Myers, and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Ameri Page 6 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 ITEM NO. 3 MEDICAL OFFICE PARKING MODIFICATION APPEAL (PA2013 -228) Site Location: 441 Old Newport Boulevard Community Development Director Kimberly Brandt introduced the matter and deferred to staff for a report. Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan provided an overview of the proposed project addressing parking, existing conditions, car lifts, architectural features of the parking site, background, approval by the Zoning Administrator subject to required Conditions of Approval, an overview of the conditions, landscaping, approval of construction materials by staff and a requirement for a parking management plan. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry, Ms. Whelan addressed the accurate square footage of the structure noting that it meets Code requirements. The building will not be occupied if it does not meet the final approved plans. Additionally, she addressed the parking ratio for the use. Commissioner Kramer stated that he appealed the application because given its history; he believed that the item mse to the level of being heard by the Planning Commission. He added that the issue of how the parking works is critical. Chair Hillgren added that it is a question of aesthetics and function. He opined on the general circulation of the parking and asked for clarification. City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine stated he is unsure as to the difference it would make in terms of entering in one driveway and exiting another. He added that upon review of the plan, he did not have concerns with the circulation layout. Additionally, he noted that the number and location of handicapped parking is appropriate. In response to Chair Hillgren's inquiry regarding the need for a roof in the packing design, Ms. Brandt reported that staff wanted to ensure that this was a long- lasting structure with concerns wwdh exposure of the vehicle lifts to the elements and uncertainty as to how trees would age over time in relationship to screening. Discussion followed regarding the City's experience with car lifts Chair Hillgren opened the Public Hearing. Lyle Overby, repmsenting Ocean View Medical Investors, provided a presentation addressing the proposed enclosed lifts; lifts in the Lido Fun Zone, a video of the operation of the proposed lifts, Conditions of Approval, the importance and expansion. of Hoag Hospital and the need for additional parking, compliance with the City's Municipal. Code, existing trees, landscaping, screening, surrounding properties, visibility and enclosure of the lifts, the valet as a function of utilizing the lifts and removability of the lifts. In response to Vice Chair Tucker's inquiries, Mr_ Overby reported that each lift operates independently. He added that they are simple and reliable and that if anything would break on them it would be the hydraulics. Dave Gagliotto, The Lift Guy, reported that he maintains and operates the lifts at the Fun Zone and that he will install and maintain the subject lifts, if approved. He added that the lifts will be maintained every six (6) months which will include changing the hydraulic oil and doing a lift inspection. Deleted: he Vice Chair Tucker suggested including a requirement for a maintenance contract for each lift be included in any. i Deleted: the Conditions of Approval. In response to Chair Hillgren's questions, Mr. Gagliotto reported that the lifts at the Fun Zone are operated by three people and work in conjunction with valet parking. Parking could be overnight or short-tern. Mr. Overby noted that information regarding the operation of the lifts is included in the report and that the lifts will be managed by their staff. The valet will be primarily attending the lifts and self - parking will not be encouraged. Mr. Gagliotto reported that it takes approximately 60 seconds from the time the keys are handed to the attendant to the time the car is placed on the lift. Page 7 of 11 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5/8/14 Commissioner Brown asked whether it conceivable to require employees to park on the lifts and Ms. Whelan confirmed that will be one of the items to be included in the final parking management plan and it mould be required under the lease agreement. Vice Chair Tucker noted that the application is for use permit which will run with the property and further noted the need for tight condifions. He added that this is a matter of first impression _ but the code gives no guidance. He felt that is something that should be viewed on a policy level S does not believe the actions of the Commission will establish a binding precedence. He added that approving the application does not mean that it has been decided to never regulate lifts in the City. He stated wanting the Commission to revisit this matter thoroughly, in a more theoretical basis, in the near future. Chair Hillgren stated that the design will work, aesthetically and the exisfing trees will survive. He commented on the functionality and scale of the project, noting that currently, it has not been maintained and that the economics does not make sense. He added that he is not compelled to support the project without knowing who the users /occupants will be. Commissioner Lawler noted that this is a matter of Code and not of policy; that this was a creative solution that works elsewhere in the City and that it does not establish precedence. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry regarding whether the Code speaks of this situation, Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres reported that the Code does not speak to lifts and that this may be a situation where technology is advancing faster than the Code. Staff has reviewed the matter and has decided that the lifts satisfy the parking requirements and qualify as a parking space within the Code. Commissioner Myers stated that the economics of the project is not the Planning Commission's concem and that the project does not establish precedence. He noted . this is a new and workable solution and stated he will support it. Commissioner Brown expressed his support as well, but with tightening of the Conditions of Approval in terms of the maintenance agreement, that there must be an attendant on -site to operate the lifts and requiring that tenants and employees use the lifts by building same in the leases.` Ms. Brandt highlighted Condition of Approval No. 12 and stated that language can be included that all leases include the requirement that employees and staff will be required to park within the twenty -two (22) It spaces and requiring a twelve (12) hour attendant. She noted that Condition of Approval No. 14 addresses maintenance and reported it could be expanded to include that maintenance shall occur on a regular basis at least every six (6) months at a minimum standard. Commissioner Kramer noted technical corrections to the report. He commented on the improvements made from the Zoning Administrators approvafafid noted the success of the appeal process. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler and carried (5 — 1) to adopt the draft resolution for approval to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision and approve Modification Permit No. MD2013 -023 with the modifications proposed by Commissioner Brown and recorded by staff to amend Conditions of Approval No. 12 and 14 as stated above. Vice Chair Tucker suggested an amendment to the motion adding to the conditions that if any of the existing ficus trees die, they will be replaced and also suggested adding a reference to a professional valet service to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the Statement of Facts in the Resolutions have duplicative language and made additional grammatical corrections. Vice Chair Tucker added that he would like to see the Conditions of Approval recorded through the City Attorney's office so future buyers of the property see the restrictions pertaining to the use of the lifts up front in the purchase process. Commissioner Kramer and Commissioner Lawler agreed with adding language that existing trees will be replaced if they die and that a professional valet service will be used. Page 9 of 11 Deleted: reported this is 1 Deleted: and that it is a policy question Deleted: and Correspondence Item No. 1.0Bc 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 ( iimmosherto")yahoo.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. STUDY SESSION MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 8, 2014 Pa 2, paragraph 10: "Chair Hillgren commented on the role and character of the City as a unique d residential community and asked whether that was the consensus of the Committee a sees the City as a ,balance balanced mix of residences and businesses as well as visitor - rvinq and recreational." 2. Page 2, last sentence: added that these are policies that are not covered by the Green L4ght Greenlight Initiative h deals with development intensity." 3. Page 3, paragraph 2: "Ensuing dis slon pertained to implementing practices, {sermittinyt the change of "development rights" to "development a ations" and conditions under which allocation can be transferred." 4. Page 3, paragraph 4 from end: "He reported that a big p of the 9asis OASIS Senior Center was paid for by development agreements negotiate . h the The Irvine Company in relation to Newport Center." 5. Page 3, paragraph 3 from end: "He believed the Land Use Element am ment was not well thought out and recommended rejecting it entirely." 6. Page 3, paragraph 2 from end: "Coralee Newman, Rr- inciple Principal, Governme Solutions, ..." B. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 8, 2014 Page 1, Item IV, paragraph 2, last sentence: "He hoped that the Commission individual Commissioners will make their comments to Council regarding the matter." 2. Page 1, Item IV, paragraph 3: "Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chair Hillgren closed public comments." 3. Page 6, paragraph 3 from end: "Commissioner Lawler indicated he will support the motion as there is preGed .^^^° precedent throughout the City related to the parking agreement." 4. Page 8, paragraph 5: "Richard Haskell, M.D. expressed concerns with setting pF^Gede ^^^ precedent with lifts on Old Newport Boulevard..." 5. Page 8, paragraph 8, sentence 2: "He expressed concerns with the project in terms of setting pr^,�ae den ^ ^^^ precedent ..." May 22, 2014, PC agenda item 1 comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2 6. Page 8, paragraph 8, last sentence: "He reported that one of the Council Members was skeptical and did wet He also was not sure everyone would think of lifts as parking spaces." Page 8, paragraph 3 from end, sentence 3: "Two (2) valet parking attendants will be on site at all times and 4W the lifts will be maintained properly." 8. Page 9, paragraph 2, line 3: "... preeedenee precedent." 9. Page 9, paragraph 4, line 2: "... precedence precedent." 10. Page 9, paragraph 6, line 2: "... PF9Gede ^n^° precedent." 11. Page 9, paragraph 4 from end: "Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler and Gaffied ri to adopt the draft resolution..." [saying the motion stated in this paragraph carried 5 -1 is both confusing (because what ultimately carried was an amended version) and unnecessary (because the final vote is recorded at the end)] 12. Page 9/10, last/first paragraph: "Regarding recording the Conditions of Approval, Ms. Brandt suggested recording a land use restriction at the County of Orange on the property which would refer to the Planning Commission Resolution and associated Conditions of Approval available at the City to notify anyone obtaining title records that the permit exists iweludiny the infa.rmatin.n in I ;;.Rd I I&P Rp'd.r.irtinng and.rena" g same with the City After-ney!s effi6e." Changes proposed by Chair Hillgren NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Correspondence Item No. 1.OBd Draft Minutes 05/08/2014 May 22, 2014 5/8/14 Commissioner Brown asked whether it conceivable to require employees to park on the lifts and Ms. Whelan confirmed that will be one of the items to be included in the final parking management plan and it could be required under the lease agreement. Vice Chair Tucker reported this is a use permit which will run with the property and noted the need for tight conditions. He added that this is a matter of first impression and that it is a policy question. He felt that is something that should be viewed on a policy level and does not establish precedence . He added that approving the application does not mean that it has been decided to never regulate lifts in the City. He stated wanting the Commission to revisit this matter thoroughly, in a more theoretical basis, in the near future. Chair Hillgren stated that the use of lifts may be a reasonable strategy as part of an overall parking management plan provided the design, functionality and sponsorship are fully understood. In this case, the design ,works _ aesthetically and the existing trees will survive and provide adequate shielding from the neighboring properties. anticipated effort and related economic burden . to implement the plan does not appear to be .. supportable without knowledge of the actual tenants. As a result, he is not compelled to approve the project without knowing who the users/occupants will be. Commissioner Lawler noted that this is a matter of Code and not of policy; that this was a creative solution that works elsewhere in the City and that it does not establish precedence. In response to Commissioner Myers's inquiry regarding whether the Code speaks of this situation, Assistant City Attorney Michael Torres reported that the Code does not speak to lifts and that this may be a situation where technology is advancing faster than the Code. Staff has reviewed the matter and has decided that the lifts satisfy the parking requirements and qualify as a parking space within the Code. Commissioner Myers stated that the economics of the project is not the Planning Commission's concern and that the project does not establish precedence. He noted this is a new and workable solution and stated he will support it. Commissioner Brown expressed his support as well, but with tightening of the Conditions of Approval in terms of the maintenance agreement, that there must be an attendant on -site to operate the lifts and requiring that tenants and employees use the lifts by building same in the leases. Ms. Brandt highlighted Condition of Approval No. 12 and stated that language can be included that all leases include the requirement that employees and staff will be required to park within the twenty-two (22) lift spaces and requiring a twelve (12) hour attendant. She noted that Condition of Approval No. 14 addresses maintenance and reported it could be expanded to include that maintenance shall occur on a regular basis at least every six (6) months at a minimum standard. Commissioner Kramer noted technical corrections to the report. He commented on the improvements made from the Zoning Administrators approval and noted the success of the appeal process. Motion made by Commissioner Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Lawler and carried (5 — 1) to adopt the draft resolution for approval to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision and approve Modification Permit No. MD2013 -023 with the modifications proposed by Commissioner Brown and recorded by staff to amend Conditions of Approval No. 12 and 14 as stated above. Vice Chair Tucker suggested an amendment to the motion adding to the conditions that if any of the existing fcus trees die, they will be replaced and also suggested adding a reference to a professional valet service to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the Statement of Facts in the Resolutions have duplicative language and made additional grammatical corrections. Vice Chair Tucker added that he would like to see the Conditions of Approval recorded through the City Attorney's office . Commissioner Kramer and Commissioner Lawler agreed with adding language that existing trees will be replaced if they die and that a professional valet service will be used. Page 9 of 11 Deleted: that Deleted: will Deleted: Deleted: He commented on the Deleted:. noting mat Deleted: t has Deleted: been Deleted: and that Deleted: s Deleted: make sense Deleted: He added that Deleted: support