HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-05-2024 - Planning CommissionPage 1 of 6
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2024 REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER – 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Commissioner Barto III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Mark Rosene, Vice Chair Tristan Harris, Secretary David Salene, Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Curtis Ellmore, Commissioner Jonathan
Langford, and Commissioner Lee Lowrey ABSENT: None
Staff Present: Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murillo, Deputy City Attorney Jose Montoya, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Police Investigator Wendy Joe,
Associate Planner Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner Melinda Whelan, Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, and Department Assistant Jasmine Leon IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 2024 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Commissioner Lowrey to approve the
meeting minutes of November 21, 2024, as amended by Mr. Mosher. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 UCHI SUSHI RESTAURANT (PA2024-0068) Site Location: 2510 and 2536 West Coast Highway Summary: A request for a conditional use permit and coastal development permit to convert 5,096-square-foot vacant suite to a new eating and drinking establishment (i.e., restaurant) with approximately 2,400 square feet of net public area (NPA) and a Type 47 (On-Sale General – Eating Place)
Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) License. The existing suite is currently vacant but was previously approved for use as a retail use (grocery store). The project also includes a request to use valet parking and locate a portion of the required 48 parking spaces off-site at 2436 West
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA
Planning Commission Minutes December 5, 2024
Page 2 of 6
Coast Highway. The proposed hours of operation are between 5:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., daily. The project does not include a request for late hours or live entertainment. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-026, approving the Conditional Use Permit and coastal development permit filed as PA2024-0068.
Vice Chair Harris recused himself due to real property interests within 500 feet of the subject property. Associate Planner Tran used a presentation to review the project location, background, and description, parking requirements, availability of on-site and off-site parking, valet service, conditions of approval, and recommended action. There were no ex parte communications among the Commissioners. Chair Rosene opened the public hearing.
Mark Moshayedi, the property owner, summarized the project background and agreed to the conditions of approval.
Chair Rosene closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Langford noted duplicate language in Conditions of Approval Nos. 44 and 48. Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Secretary Salene to approve the item and amend to correct the duplicate Conditions of Approval 44 and 48. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None RECUSE: Harris ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 FIVE CROWNS APPEAL (PA2023-0202) Site Location: 3801 East Coast Highway Summary: An appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s August 15, 2024, decision to approve a limited term
permit and coastal development permit to allow an existing temporary outdoor dining patio to remain for a limited term at Five Crowns Restaurant. The expanded 1,350-square-foot outdoor dining area including an 850-square-foot canopy was originally approved by an Emergency Temporary Use Permit (ETUP) in 2020 as a temporary addition to their existing outdoor dining.
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA
Planning Commission Minutes December 5, 2024
Page 3 of 6
Although the ETUP expired, the temporary outdoor dining area has remained in use. The outdoor dining area will include live entertainment and will close by 10:00 p.m. A sound wall will be installed along the rear property lines along with other design features to reduce noise. The limited term permit and coastal development permit would allow the temporary use to remain until June 30, 2025, with a possible extension until December 31, 2025. A CDP is required because the property is within the Coastal Zone. Recommended Actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the Environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2024-027, denying the appeal and upholding and affirming the Zoning Administrator’s Approval of a Limited Term Permit for temporary outdoor dining filed as PA2023-0202. Commissioner Barto recused himself due to the potential for the item to be appealed to the City Council where his wife has an incoming seat.
Assistant Planner Whelan utilized a presentation to review the project location, zoning map, background, emergency temporary use permit (ETUP) history, project description, zoning administrator public hearings, appeal filed by Kenneth and Kim Catanzarite, limited term permit (LTP) versus use
permit amendment, complaints, adequacy of the noise report, basis for the staff recommendation, and recommendation.
In reply to Vice Chair Harris’ question, staff utilized a slide to share the abandoned alley area and confirmed that everything is vacated. In reply to Secretary Salene’s question, Assistant Planner Whelan indicated that the outdoor area was used as a rear garden area and for private events prior to 2020. Ex parte communications from the Commissioners included Chair Rosene meeting with the applicant at the property, Secretary Salene having a conversation with the applicant’s representative, and Vice Chair Harris and Commissioners Ellmore and Langford meeting with the applicant. Chair Rosene opened the public hearing.
Ryan Wilson, the applicant, utilized a presentation to highlight the history of the Five Crowns, celebrity traffic, property purchase by the Frank and Van de Kamp families, opening of the Five Crowns, role of
Ryan Wilson at Lawry’s Restaurants Inc., limited term permit application (PA2023-0202), history of outdoor parties and dining at the Five Crowns, noise analysis, approval of the LTP application by Zoning Administrator Zdeba, correct decision of the LTP application, and neighbor outreach. Mr. Wilson asked
the Planning Commission to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s decision and asked for a full year on the LTP in Conditions of Approval 3 and clarified a 75-person load on the 1,350-square-foot patio four times per month in Condition of Approval 10.
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA
Planning Commission Minutes December 5, 2024
Page 4 of 6
In reply to Vice Chair Harris’ question, Mr. Wilson stated that a recent analysis indicated that the business has been growing consistently and robust private parties have been part of the business model for at least 20 years. In reply to Commissioner Langford’s inquiry about raising young children next door to the restaurant, Mr. Wilson thought the noise from Coast Highway is more obtrusive than the party and revelry atmosphere from the restaurant next door to appellant’s property.
In reply to Commissioner Ellmore’s inquiry regarding the neighbor’s concern for noise, Mr. Wilson utilized the map to demonstrate the noise projections towards Hazel Drive and complaints from the
Catanzarite property and noted the soundproof enhancements planned for the property. Ken Catanzarite, the appellant, noted that 354, 352, and 344 Hazel Drive are adversely impacted and
joining in the appeal for amplified sound reaching 75 decibels at the ground level and third floor of houses within 40 – 100 feet of the source. He stated that this is not allowable per the municipal code without a sound permit, highlighted the origins and terms of the original 1977 permit for outdoor patio use, noted the parking requirements, and questioned the negligible expansion criteria for the exemption under CEQA. In reply to Vice Chair Harris’ question, Mr. Catanzarite stated that he has spent occasional time at his property since 1996 and lived there since July 2013 and noted less noise disturbances before 2020 and a ramp up post COVID. In reply to Commissioner Ellmore’s question, Mr. Catanzarite clarified that the grounds for the appeal
include the parking ratio and amplified sound, noted the amplified sound coming from bands and disc jockeys at approximately 200 weddings per year, and thought the sound mitigation efforts proposed by the applicant will not mitigate the impact to the appellant.
Mr. Wilson stated that the noise from his operation has not changed in decades, improvements have been made with plans and a permit, and he is looking to continue the longstanding and continuous
operation of the space and is prepared for a major investment into the facility to enhance neighborhood compatibility. In reply to Secretary Salene’s inquiry regarding noise concerns, Bryan Estrada from RK Engineering Group stated he prepared the noise study for the subject property and reviewed the study and analysis. He noted that the mitigation measures are commensurate with the municipal code and result in ambient noise levels reduced to below the City’s limit at any adjacent residential property. Mr. Catanzarite stated that the ambient noise levels in this area do not run 50 decibels and a measurement of ambient noise by a code enforcement representative measured 70 plus decibels at the ground level at the building front. He thought crowd noise was not included in the RK Engineering’s
analysis, and an independent sound measurement and accountability structure is needed. Jim Leimkuhler read a letter he submitted in writing that expressed his support for the project.
Dwight Manley expressed support for the project.
Deputy Community Development Director Murillo relayed that Municipal Code Section 10.32.090 includes an exception for activities regulated by a use permit or land use control under the provisions of Title 20 from obtaining a sound amplification permit, the LTP allows for land use flexibility and AB 1217 provides temporary parking relief for the continued use of the temporary outdoor patio, and Condition
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA
Planning Commission Minutes December 5, 2024
Page 5 of 6
of Approval 10 is intended to apply to the expanded patio use four times per month. Staff recommended providing the clarification of the conditions. Deputy City Attorney Montoya stated that there was not a response to every allegation from the December 4, 2024, letter from the appellant which does not mean there is any concession or omission by silence.
Chair Rosene closed the public hearing. In reply to Commissioner Lowrey’s question, Deputy Community Development Director Murillo clarified
the process if the mitigation efforts do not meet the decibel requirements. Commissioner Langford thought the fair route would be to use the noise contours line to override and
act as the threshold. In reply, Deputy Community Development Director Murillo stated that the City municipal code establishes an exterior noise standard unless the ambient noise is higher, in which case the ambient becomes the standard for measurement. Commissioner Ellmore supported the applicant, opposed the appellant, and made a motion that included allowing a one-yeare-extension in Condition of Approval 3 and clarifying Condition No. 10 allowing no more than four private events with attendance greater than 75 persons per month applies within the expanded outdoor patio area. Commissioner Langford amended the motion to allow a 10 p.m. closing time for New Year’s Eve in Condition of Approval 8.
In reply to Secretary Salene’s concern about an inadequate amount of extended time in Condition of Approval 3, Deputy Community Development Director Murillo confirmed that the conditions could allow
for one year extension with an allowance for an additional extension of one year by the Director. Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Secretary Salene to approve the item with
amendments to Condition of Approval 3, 10, and 8. AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None RECUSE: Barto ABSENT: None VIII. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None ITEM NO. 5 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA
Deputy Community Development Director Murillo announced that this meeting will be the last one of the year and thanked the Commissioners for their service. He stated that the next meeting will be on
January 9, 2025. ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES - None
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA
Planning Commission Minutes December 5, 2024
Page 6 of 6
IX. ADJOURNMENT – With no further business, Chair Rosene adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. The agenda for the December 5, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Tuesday, November 26, 2024, at 4:02 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City’s website on Tuesday, November 26, 2024, at 4:07 p.m.
_______________________________ Mark Rosene, Chair
_______________________________ David Salene, Secretary
Docusign Envelope ID: ACE6A240-8C1D-410E-B547-A3960D263EFA