Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/22/1984Ct ROLL CALL MMDOU Nt" REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PLACE: City Council Chambers x TIME: 7:30 p.m. y W DATE: March 22, 1984 w ° City of Newport Beach r! All Present.' x x x EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: James D. Hewicker, Planning Director Robert D. Gabriele, Assistant City Attorney x * x STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William R. Laycock, Current Planning Administrator Robert Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator Patricia Temple, Environmental Coordinator Donald Webb, City Engineer, Pamela Woods, Secretary x x x APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Minutes of March 8, 1984 Motion X Motion was made for approval of the Planning Commission Ayes X X IXIXIXI Minutes of March 8, 1984, as written, which MOTION Abstain CARRIED. - - x x x Staff recommended that Item No. 10 - Use Permit No. 3093, and Item No. 12 - Site Plan Review No._ 35, be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED. Motion X Motion was made to continue these items to the Planning All Ayes X X Y X X X X Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED. - x x x -I- is MINUTES II10: COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 22, 1984 - - - � x f � m m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX A. General Plan Amendment No. 83 -1(c) (Continued Public Item #1 Hearing) Request an amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan for property located adjacent to Medical Lane, so as to redesignate said property from "Multiple Family GPA 83 -1c Residential" uses to "Administrative, Professional, and APPROVED Financial Commercial" uses, and the acceptance of an environmental document. PROPONENT: Heltzer Enterprises, Los Angeles INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND . B. Amendment No'. 601 (Continued Public Hearing) AMENDMENT NO. 601 • - Request to amend portions of Districting Maps No. 22 APPROVED and 25 so as to reclassify property described as Tract No. 11018 from the R -3 (2178) District to the A -P District.- ME C. Traffic Study (Continued Public Hearing) TRAFFIC STUDY Request to consider a Traffic Study in conjunction with APPROVED the construction of a 55,400 sq. ft. medical office building.. AND D. Certification of Correction for Tract No. 11018 TRACT - - (Continued Public Heating) NO. 11018 . - - - APPROVED Request to consider a Certificate of Correction for the previously recorded map of Tract No. 11018 so as to remove all .references on said map as to being for residential condominium purposes and the removal of a secondary private drive on Superior Avenue. AND -2- 3 � a g v m M g pax °m o_ • is March 22, 1984 511 Beach E. Use Permit.No. 3081 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a three -story medical office building and related five -level parking structure that exceed the.32 foot basic height limit in the proposed 32/50 Foot Height Limitation District. The proposal also includes a request to allow a portion of the proposed on -site parking spaces to be located on the roof of the proposed parking. structure. A modification to the Zoning Code is also requested so as to allow the use of .compact parking spaces for a portion of the required off - street parking spaces. LOCATION: Tract No. 11016, located at 1455 ,Superior Avenue, on the northwesterly side of Superior Avenue, between Placentia Avenue and Hospital Road, in the West Newport Triangle area. ZONE: R -3 - (2178) APPLICANT: Heltzer Enterprises, Los Angeles OWNER: Same as applicant _ Mr. Donald Webb, City Engineer, referred to Exhibit "A" of the staff report, Condition of Approval No. 12 for Use Permit No. 3081, and recommended the following revisions: 24 feet be replaced with "at least 16 feet "; 15 feet be replaced with "16 feet "; 39 feet be replaced with "32 feet "; and, an additional sentence, "The design of the driveway is to be subject to the approval of the Public Works Department." The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. .David Neisb, representing the ,applicant, appeared before the Commission and described the proposed requests. Mr. Charles Rollins, Director of Operations for Heltzer Enterprises, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Rollins presented background information on the proposed requests. He referred .to an artist's rendering and model depicting the originally proposed development. He then referred to a current site plan of the proposed development and stated that the currently proposed project has been scaled down considerably from the originally requested project. -3- MINUTES PERMIT 3081 ITO APRIL MINUTES March 22, 1984 Mr. Neish stated that the proposed project has passed the Traffic Phasing Ordinance test. He stated that the revised project has been significantly .reduced to address the major concerns relating to overall height and bulk of the original proposal. He stated that the setbacks have been increased to provide additional landscaping. Mr. Neish reiterated their position as it relates to not . including the square footage of the parking structure in conjunction with the total floor area ratio of the project. Planning Director Hewicker discussed the proposed development and stated that the current proposal contains an intensity of 1.03 times the buildable area. He stated that there is an existing 1:0 times the • buildable area intensity limitation on industrial, office and commercial uses in the County Triangle, which was imposed at the time the area was annexed into the City. -4- x m m 5, m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. Rollins stated that the proposed project has been reduced in gross structural area from 59,000 square feet to 55,000 square feet and has been reduced from 4 stories to 3 stories. He further stated that the partial subterranean parking resulting in 2' levels of parking structure above, grade is currently proposed, instead of the 3 levels previously proposed. He referred to an exhibit which indicated the footprint of the proposed request in comparison with the footprint of the originally proposed request. He also described the landscape plan and. stated that approximately 27 percent of the proposed site will be devoted to landscaping. Mr. Rollins concluded that the current project as proposed, is appropriate for the surrounding area. Mr. Neish stated that the proposed medical office building will be in compliance with the amended General Plan and will be consistent with the overall land use • plan for the community. He stated that the proposed project will contain approximately 50 percent less density than the proposed A -P designation will allow. He stated that the . architectural design. of the building, including the fountain at the entrance and the significant amount of landscaping, will soften the impact of the building. Mr. Neish stated that the proposed project has passed the Traffic Phasing Ordinance test. He stated that the revised project has been significantly .reduced to address the major concerns relating to overall height and bulk of the original proposal. He stated that the setbacks have been increased to provide additional landscaping. Mr. Neish reiterated their position as it relates to not . including the square footage of the parking structure in conjunction with the total floor area ratio of the project. Planning Director Hewicker discussed the proposed development and stated that the current proposal contains an intensity of 1.03 times the buildable area. He stated that there is an existing 1:0 times the • buildable area intensity limitation on industrial, office and commercial uses in the County Triangle, which was imposed at the time the area was annexed into the City. -4- MINUTES March 22, 1984 • > > > m '+ w 7 of Newport Beach INDEX Planning Director Hewicker stated that this particular project should adhere, as a minimum, to the 1.0 times buildable area intensity, which will . require a reduction in the proposed square footage in order to meet the requirements of the General Plan. He recommended that the A -P designation for the property, specifically reflect A -P [1.0). Mr. Robert Gabriele, Assistant City Attorney, referred to Exhibit "A" of the staff report, and suggested an additional finding.for Use Permit No. 3081, as follows, "13) That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial and office development in the center." • Mr. Ronald Dick, property owner of 843 15th Street, appeared before the Commission.. Mr. Dick referred to his letter . attached to the staff report dated February 9, 1984, and stated that it would not be equitable to grant approval of the proposed project without considering the adjacent properties. He requested that the adjacent properties be considered for the same zone change options. He stated that his property will be located adjacent to the proposed parking structure. Planning Director Hewicker explained the City's General Plan Amendment procedure. He stated that the environmental document prepared for the proposed amendment does not address the parcels referred to by Mr. Dick. He stated that Mr. Dick's request would require initiation of a General Plan Amendment and preparation of an environmental document which would be prepared at the cost of the property owners. Mr'. Edward Paull, property owner of 827 15th Street, stated that he resides directly behind the proposed parking structure.. He requested that the surrounding land uses be included in this General Plan Amendment, rather than considering each of the parcels on a piece . meal basis. He expressed his concern with the proposed setbacks, the density and the height of the proposed development. -5- MINUTES March 22, 1984 • � � 5 m ° m City of ort Beach ROLL CALL AINDEX Mr. Paull stated that the parking structure is part of the visual impact of the proposed project and should be included in the density ratio calculations of the project. He also suggested that the parking structure be designed to be enclosed on the sides, rather than open. In response to a question posed by Mr. Paull, Planning Director 'Hewicker stated that the revised project is a result of the applicant redesigning the project to attempt to address the major concerns of staff relating to the overall height and bulk of the original proposal. Planning Director Hewicker explained how the floor area ratio of a project is calculated. He stated that the staff report indicates the floor area ratio of the project, with and without the parking structure. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Person, -Mr. Gabriele stated that the City is not in a position - • to evaluate the requests of Mr. Dick and Mr. Paull, to include their parcels as a part of the proposed General Plan Amendment, at this time. Mr. Gabriele stated that the proposed requests by Mr. Dick and Mr. Paull would be required to follow the administrative process. Mr. Barney Larks, resident of 1901 Beryl Lane, expressed his concern that the proposed request will reduce the amount of available land which could be utilized for housing. He stated that Multiple - Family Residential zoning for housing is desperately needed in this community. He stated that he represents a large group of senior citizens within the community. Mr'. Neish 'stated that the only open sides of the parking structure would be the side facing Medical Lane and the side facing the office facility, as required by the Uniform Building Code. - - In response to ,a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Planning Director Hewicker referred to Page 5 of the staff report, and described the annexation of the County Triangle by the City and the General Plan Amendment 80 -2 which was adopted concurrent with the annexation. He stated that General Plan Amendment 80 -2 • established a maximum residential density of 20 dwelling units per buildable area and a maximum commercial and industrial development intensity of 1.0 times the buildable area. ma wnn ivW0"NtK3 March 22, 1984 � x m m m City of Newport Beach Commissioner Balalis stated that at the time of the annexation of the County Triangle, the City basically assured the property owners that the established criteria would be followed. He stated that this included the assurance that any commercial property could be developed at 1.0 times the buildable area. He stated that he was a member of the Planning Commission when this commitment was established and stated that the City's past commitments should be kept in perspective. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the General Plan Amendment requests by Mr. Dick and Mr. Paull can be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the second meeting in June, at which time the Planning Commission can recommend to the City Council, as to whether or not the requests are warranted. Chairman King directed staff to bring these requests back to the • I I I I I I Planning Commission at their second meeting in June. Commissioner Person referred to the prior comments made by Mr. Larks and stated that the Superior Avenue area as a whole, would appear to be utilized more appropriately as "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial" uses, rather than. "Multiple Family Residential" uses. However, he expressed his concern with the mass of the proposed project. Commissioner Goff also questioned the appropriateness of "Multiple Family Residential" uses located on Superior Avenue. He stated that the proposed land use change would be desirable and appropriate. However, he stated that the proposed project is too intense for the area. He referred to the Hughes Aircraft Facility and stated that this development has become a monument to over intensification. He stated that the Hughes Aircraft facility has 'a floor area ratio of 1.06 times the buildable area, including the parking structure. He stated that the proposed project has a floor area ratio of 1.84 times the buildable area, including the parking structure, which constitutes a 75 percent • I I I J I I I I increase of intensification, when comparing the two developments. -7- MINUTES COMM651ONtK5 MINUTES March 22, 1984 M m ° m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Goff stated that the current residential designation approved for the property, including the covered parking, has a floor area ratio of 1.08 times the buildable area. He stated that he could support a land use change from residential to the A -P designation with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.08 times the buildable area, including the above grade parking structure. He stated that he could support such a change because the applicant has attempted to incorporate architectural amenities, site layouts and landscaping which will result in a more appealing development than that.of the Hughes Aircraft facility. Motion X Motion was made to approve General Plan Amendment No. 83-1(c), to amend the Newport Beach General Plan for property located adjacent to Medical Lane, so as to redesignate said property from "Multiple Family Residential" uses to "Administrative, Professional, and . rinancial.Commercial" uses, with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.08 times the buildable area, including the above grade portion of the parking structure. Further,. any development on the site would be subject to site plan review by the Planning Commission. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Winburn, Chairman King stated that Commissioner Goff's motion at 1.08 times the buildable area would allow for the office building to contain approximately 32,316 square feet. Commissioner Balalis stated that he can not support the motion by Commissioner Goff. He stated that including the parking structure in the buildable area square footage is setting a dangerous precedent. He stated that this concept needs to be explored further, rather than approving it on a project by project basis. He reiterated the moral obligation of the. Planning Commission and the City, relating. to the County Triangle. He stated that the proposed project should not be compared to the Hughes Aircraft facility. He stated that the proposed project includes a partial • I I I I I I I I subterranean parking structure, has utilized larger setbacks and more landscaping. no 3 � v m m cc °� °s n�pm March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach SUBSTITUTE Substitute Motion was made to approve the proposed MOTION X development. with a .8 buildable area, strictly for the building. The parking structure, square footage shall be commensurate to supply the number of required parking spaces for the building. Commissioner Goff stated that his, moral commitment is to provide good planning for the City. Therefore, he stated that he can not support the Substitute Motion. He stated that in retrospect, perhaps the promises the City made to the property owners during the annexation procedure was in poor judgement. He stated that the proposed project is still 9 feet above the permitted height limit. Further, he stated that the parking structure adds to the visual intensity of the site. I I I I I I ( Chairman King stated that he will support the Substitute Motion. He stated that the applicant has attempted to redesign the project as it relates to the • overall height and bulk. He referred to Page 10 of the staff report. and stated that six of the ten projects listed are medical related uses which would appear to be compatible with the proposed request. He stated that the proposed setbacks and landscaping plan are appropriate. Commissioner Goff pointed out that approving the project at .8 times the buildable area will allow for a 33 1/3 percent increase in intensity over the Hughes Aircraft facility. He further stated that the location of the proposed structure on the lot will add to the canyon feeling on Superior Avenue. Chairman King stated that the visual aspects of the proposed project can not be compared to the Hughes Aircraft facility. He stated that the setbacks and the landscaping plan of the proposed project address many of these concerns. Commissioner Person stated that the applicant has designed a partial subterranean parking structure which attempts to reduce the visual mass of the project, whereas, the.Hughes Aircraft facility did not address any of these concerns. He stated that he could not support the project as proposed, however, he stated that he could support the project as reduced by the Substitute Motion made by Commissioner Balalis. MINUTES s v m a v o 0= March 22, 1984 MINUTES Amended Commissioner Balalis stated that his Substitute Motion Substitute would include the following revision to Exhibit "A" of Motion X the staff report: Item No. 1 (b) of General Plan Amendment shall be revised to reflect .8 times the buildable area of the site. Further, he stated that in the event the use permit were to be approved this evening, the following revisions would be made: Finding No. 13 to be added as recommended by the Assistant City Attorney; Condition No. 12 as revised by the City Engineer; Condition No. 13 to reflect .8 times the buildable area; Condition No. 24 to reflect the revised structural area of 43,088 square feet; and, Condition No. 25 to reflect the adjusted "fair- share" contribution. I I I I I Commissioner Kurlander stated that in reducing the amount of square footage of the project, he would like to have the opportunity to review the use permit or the • I I I I ( I I site plan review to see how the reduction has affected I the location of the structure, setbacks, landscaping treatment, etc. Amended Commissioner Balalis amended his Substitute Motion to Substitute include the provision that any development on the site Motion X shall be subject to site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission. He stated that this language would be included in the General Plan Amendment. Ayes JXJX JXJJXJ Amended Substitute Motion by Commissioner Balalis for Noes X approval of the Environmental Document and General Plan Amendment No. 83 -1 (c) , was now voted on, as follows, which AMENDED SUBSTITUTE MOTION CARRIED: - A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT _ 1. Approve the Negative Declaration and supportive materials thereto; 2. Recommend that the City Council certify that the Environmental Document is complete; and • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3. Make the Findings listed below: -10- ROLL CALL MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 � v m m 1 m o 0 City of Newport Beach FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. 4. That the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study have been incorporated into the proposed project and are expressed as Conditions of Approval. • 5. That based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, Negative Declaration and supportive materials thereto that if the mitigation measures are incorporated into.the project is.will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. The Findings made in regard to the Environmental Document described above also apply to the action taken on General Plan Amendment 83 -1(c), Amendment No. 601, the Traffic Study and Certificate of Correction for Tract No. 11018. B. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 83 -1(c) Amended Amended Substitute Motion was made to adopt Resolution RESOLUTION Substitute No. 1115, recommending to the City Council approval of NO. 1115 Motion X General Plan Amendment 83 -1(c); Amendment to the Land Ayes X K X X X Use and Residential Growth Elements of the Newport Noes X X Beach General Plan incorporating the Findings listed in "A" above, which AMENDED SUBSTITUTE MOTION CARRIED, as follows: a. Changing the land use designation for lots westerly of Superior Avenue at Hospital -Road I taking access from Superior Avenue and Medical Lane to "Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial" and "Administrative, -11- CUMMI551UI�IEKS MINUTES March 22, 1984 x m 2t of New t Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Professional and Financial Commercial" with an alternate land I use of "Multiple - Family Residential" as illustrated on the attached map in the staff report. Areas are designated for an alternate land use in the event access to these lots other than Medical Lane is established. b. "Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial" use shall be limited to a maximum Floor Area Ratio of .8 times the buildable area of the site.. C. "Multiple - Family Residential" use shall be limited to 20 dwelling .units per buildable acre. d. Prior to issuance of any Building Permits authorized by the approval'. of this use, the applicant shall .deposit .with the City Finance Director the.sum proportional to the percentage of • future additional traffic related to the project in the subject ..area, to be used for the construction of a sound attenuation barrier on the southerly side of West Coast Highway in the West Newport area, and in the Irvine Terrace and Jamboree Road areas. e. Prior to the issuance of any Building and /or Grading Permit, the applicant shall pay-his "fair - share" of circulation system improvements for the ultimate circulation system. f. That any development on the site shall be subject to site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission. C. AMENDMENT NO. 601 - Motion X Motion was made- to - adopt Resolution No. 1116, RESOLUTION Ayes X X X Y X recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment NO. 1116 Noes X X No. 601, which MOTION CARRIED. i -12- MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 � F r m 9 m m ° City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX D. TRAFFIC STUDY Motion Motion was made to approve the Traffic Study, based All Ayes X x X X upon the facts, making the following Findings., which MOTION CARRIED: - FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S -1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will be less than one percent of existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of three critical intersections, but will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at the three critical intersections, which • will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of less than .9000. E. CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION FOR TRACT NO. 11018 Motion X Motion was made to approve a Certificate of Correction All Ayes N X x X X X X for Tract No. 11018 to remove reference to residential condominium use and also removing the. secondary driveway access on Superior Avenue subject to the following Findings and Conditions, which MOTION CARRIED: - - - FINDINGS: 1. There are changes in circumstances which make some of the conditions of the map no longer appropriate in that the project has been changed from a residential to a commercial use. 2 That the. modifications do not impose any additional burden on the present fee owner of the property. CONDITIONS: - - • 1. That all other conditions of Tract No. 11018 be complied with. 2. That any development on the site shall be subject to site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission. -13- COMMISSIONERS 3 X m MINUTES March 22, 1984 City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX F. USE PERMIT NO. 3081 - Mr. Neish stated that if a 12,000 square foot reduction can be made to the project, a three story building will still be necessary and that the height limit will still be exceeded. He requested that the use permit be granted to exceed the height limit and that a condition be imposed for site plan review of the final plans. Commissioner Kurlander stated that it would be appropriate for the .Planning Commission to have the opportunity to review the site plan before granting an approval to exceed the height limit. Commissioner Balalis concurred. Mr. Neish stated that the revised plans will still exceed the height limit, but may contain greater setbacks, Chairman King stated that when the building • envelope is reduced, there, may also_ be a corresponding reduction in the parking structure and the amount of required parking. Mr. Neish stated that the applicant will submit revised plans as soon as possible. Motion x Motion was made to continue Use Permit No. 3081 to the Ayes X X X X X Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 1984, in order Noes X for the applicant to submit revised plans, which MOTION CARRIED. - - - - - • * x x The Planning Commission recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9p20 p.m. * * x -14- March 22, 1984 v m a • 0ro City of ROLL CALL A. Newport Place Traffic MINUTES INDEX Plan Amendment No. 6 I Item #2 Request to approve an amendment to the Newport Place Traffic Phasing Plan to permit. the construction of additional office space at 1100 Quail Street beyond that presently permitted by the approved Traffic Phasing Plan. AND B. Amendment No. 597 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to amend the previously approved Newport Place Planned Community District Regulations so as to allow the expansion of an existing office building located in "Professional and Business Office Sites 1 and 2." The proposal also includes a request to amend the requirements for off - street parking for office uses from one parking space per 225 sq. ft. to one parking space per 300 sq. ft. subject to the approval of a use permit, and the acceptance of an environmental document. OLD C. Use Permit No. 3080 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to consider a reduction of the number of required off - street parking spaces from one parking space for each 225 sq. ft. of net floor area to one parking space for each 283 sq. ft. of net floor area. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact car spaces for a portion of the required off - street parking in conjunction with an addition to an existing office building located in "Professional and Business Office Sites No. 1 and 2 ", of the Newport Place Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 48 -11,. (Resubdivision No. 363) located at 1100 Quail Street, on the northeasterly side of Quail Street, between Westerly Place I I I I I I I I and Dove Street, in the Newport Place Planned Community. -15- PLACE TPP #6 APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY AND AMENDMENT NO. 597 APPROVED AND USE PERMIT NO. 3080 REMOVED FROM CALENDAR MINUTES March 22, 1984 Planning Director Hewicker suggested revisions to Exhibit "A ", in the event the Planning Commission approved the project adhering to the parking requirement of one parking space per each 225 square feet, which is the existing parking requirement, with a maximum of 25 percent compact spaces. He stated that this will allow for an additional 1,091 square feet to be added to the project. I I ( I I I Planning Director Hewicker suggested an additional Finding for the Traffic Phasing Plan as follows: 5) That the proposed development will generate an increase • in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial and office development in the center. He suggested that the following conditions be revised for the Traffic Phasing Plan: Condition No. 1 to be revised to reflect 21,375 square feet; Condition No. 5 to be revised to reflect $300.00; and, Condition No. 11 to be revised to reflect $3,210.00. He further suggested that Finding No. 1 for Amendment No. 597, be revised to reflect 1,091 square feet. Planning Director Hewicker further stated that the use permit request would no longer be necessary and suggested that the. use permit request be removed from the calendar. Mr. David Neish, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Neish stated that they concur with the revisions as suggested by staff. I I I I I In. response to a question posed by Chairman King, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the additional 1,091 square feet would comply with the existing I I I I development standards of the Newport Place Planned Community. -16- 3 A m city of t Beach ROLL CALL INDEX ZONE: - P -C APPLICANT: Quail Street Partners, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Planning Director Hewicker suggested revisions to Exhibit "A ", in the event the Planning Commission approved the project adhering to the parking requirement of one parking space per each 225 square feet, which is the existing parking requirement, with a maximum of 25 percent compact spaces. He stated that this will allow for an additional 1,091 square feet to be added to the project. I I ( I I I Planning Director Hewicker suggested an additional Finding for the Traffic Phasing Plan as follows: 5) That the proposed development will generate an increase • in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial and office development in the center. He suggested that the following conditions be revised for the Traffic Phasing Plan: Condition No. 1 to be revised to reflect 21,375 square feet; Condition No. 5 to be revised to reflect $300.00; and, Condition No. 11 to be revised to reflect $3,210.00. He further suggested that Finding No. 1 for Amendment No. 597, be revised to reflect 1,091 square feet. Planning Director Hewicker further stated that the use permit request would no longer be necessary and suggested that the. use permit request be removed from the calendar. Mr. David Neish, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Neish stated that they concur with the revisions as suggested by staff. I I I I I In. response to a question posed by Chairman King, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the additional 1,091 square feet would comply with the existing I I I I development standards of the Newport Place Planned Community. -16- MINUTES March 22, 1984 f � � m a 7 ° City of Newport Beach O m 0 INDEX Mr. Leon Klatzkin, owner of the building located at 1200 Quail Street, adjacent to the proposed request, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Klatzkin expressed his concern that it will be difficult to police the use of the compact parking spaces. He further expressed his concern with fire access of the project. Planning Director Hewicker referred to Condition No. 7 of the Traffic Phasing Plan and stated that the Fire Department will review the design plans to ensure adequate access and emergency access exists. Motion. Motion was .made for approval of the Environmental All Ayes X X X Y X X X Document and the Newport Place, Traffic Phasing Plan Amendment No. 6, for the addition of 1,091 square feet and allowing 25 percent compact spaces, subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ", and as revised by staff, which. MOTION CARRIED: _ • ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FINDINGS! 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in ' compliance with the California. Environmental Quality Act and. that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 2. That based upon the information contained in the environmental document, the proposed project will not have a significant environmental impact. The project incorporates sufficient mitigation measures so that any presently anticipated negative environmental effects of the project would be eliminated. TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN FINDINGS: - 1. That environmental documentation on this proposed project has been prepared in compliance with the • I I I I l California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K -3 and that its contents have been considered in decisions on this project. -17- COMMISSIONERS 3 x � � m • c w i a � 'n � o ROLL CALL • • March 22, 1984 2. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for Newport Place. 3. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information submitted therewith, there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of completion and the capacity of affected intersections. 4. That 258 of the parking spaces for compact parking space is consistent with previous actions by the City and in this case the proposal would not be detrimental to persons, property, and improvements in the neighborhood, and that the applicants' request would be consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial and office development in the center. CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with a revised plot plan with parking provided at a ratio of at least one parking space for each 225 sq.ft. of net floor area. Floor plans may also be revised. However, a maximum of 21,375 sq. ft. of net floor area shall be permitted on the subject property. 2. That a maximum of 25 percent of the parking spaces be compact size spaces. 3. All mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from public streets, or adjoining properties. Is :Q,' MINUTES � r �o • r 1 LJ March 22, 1984 of Ne"ort Beach 4. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the John Wayne Airport shall be included in all leases or sub- leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions which may be recorded against the site. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, herein, acknowledge that: a.) The John Wayne Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; b.) when an alternate air facility is *available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the John Wayne Airport; c.) The City of Newport Beach will continue to oppose additional commercial area service expansions at the John Wayne Airport; _ d.) Lessee; his heirs, successors and assigns, will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the John Wayne Airport. 5. Prior to issuance of any building permits authorized by the approval of this use permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City Finance Director the sum proportional to the percentage of future additional traffic related to the project in the subject area (i.e. $300.00), to be used for the construction of a sound attenuation barrier on the westerly side of Jamboree Road between East Bluff Drive and Ford Road, and along the southerly side of Pacific Coast Highway adjacent to Irvine Terrace and in West Newport. 6. Development of the site may be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 7. The Fire Department shall review design plans to ensure adequate access and emergency access exists. -19- MINUTES COMMSSK>IERS `MINUTES March 22; 1984 3 � � W V m S. ° w City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 8. That the on -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems and parking lot plan be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 9. Handicap and compact parking spaces shall be designated by a method approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the Planning Department. The quantity and design of such spaces shall comply with all City Codes. 10. Parking arrangements during the construction period shall be approved by the Planning Department and.the Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of any grading and /or building permits. 11. The project shall contribute a sum equal to its "fair- share" of future circulation system improvements, (i.e. $3,210.00), as shown on the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways. AMENDMENT.NO. 597 Motion X Motion was made to. adopt Resolution No. 1117, All Ayes X X X X X recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 597, subject to the Findings of Exhibit "A ", as revised by staff, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the request to add 1,091 sq.ft. to the total permitted building area is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan. - - 2. That the proposed parking standard of one parking space for each 300 sq.ft. of net floor area upon securing a Use Permit is contrary to sound planning principles and will result in a shortage of parking spaces in the Newport Place Planned Community. Chairman King noted that the use permit was removed • from the calendar, inasmuch as it was no longer necessary. -20- 1117 COM/WSSONERS.1 MINUTES March 22, 1984 i x m ®m ° m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX A. Resubdivision No. 773 (Continued Public Hearing) Item #3 Request to resubdivide an existing parcel of land into Resub =_ a single parcel for residential condominium purposes, division and the acceptance of an environmental document. No. 773` AND and B. Use Permit No. 3091 (Continued Public Hearing) Use Permit No. 3091 Request to permit the construction of a four unit residential condominium development on property located and in the R -3 District which exceeds the 24 foot basic height limit located in the 24/28 Foot Height Residential Limitation District on the front one -half of the lot. Coastal The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Development Code so as to allow the proposed ground_ floor garages Permit No. to encroach 4 feet into the required 4 foot easterly 8 side yard setback area. . - AND - ALL DENIED C. Residential Coastal Development Permit No. 8 Request to consider a Residential Coastal Development Permit for the purpose of establishing project compliance for a four unit residential condominium development pursuant to the Administrative Guidelines for the implementation of State Law relative to low - and- moderate income housing within the Coastal Zone. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 84 -1 ( Resubdivision No. 403) located at 1319 East Balboa Boulevard, on the southerly side of East Balboa Boulevard between "E" Street and "F" Street, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: R -3 APPLICANT: OWNER: • i I I I I ARCHITECT: Pulaski and Arita, Newport Beach Robert P. Warmington, Costa Mesa Same as applicant -21- MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 m m m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL iNF3FX The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Rolly Pulaski, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Pulaski stated that the proposed request would not be inconsistent or detrimental to the surrounding area. He stated that the current zoning of the property allows for eight units, whereas the proposed project is requesting only four units, which is well below the buildable area of the site. He stated that the proposed project meets all of the setback. requirements, with the exception of the easterly setback. Further, he stated that the proposed project will be providing more garages and open space than is required, including public open space. Mr. Pulaski stated that. the easterly side yard encroachments are necessary for the design of the enclosed .garage spaces. However, he stated that by widening the garage spaces to 10 feet, and permitting a 20 foot wide driveway instead of the required 24 foot • I I I I ( I I width, the encroachments would not be necessary. He stated that this alternative would be acceptable. Mr. Pulaski stated that property is unique because of the location and the size of the lot. He stated that one -half of the site is in conformance with the height restriction. He stated that the total project averages approximately 28 feet in height, which allows for a more desirable architectural treatment of the development. He then requested approval of the proposed development. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Pulaski stated that the alley adjacent to the project is a private alley and not a public right - of -way. Mr. Pulaski stated that it would be difficult to negotiate with the six property owners and reciprocal easements for the use of the private alley. Mr. Tom Pendel, resident of 1565 Ocean Boulevard, and Vice - President of Balboa Peninsula Point Association, appeared before the Commission. He stated that the Association has voted unanimously to oppose the proposed project because of the building height, setbacks and that the proposed structure would be . disproportionate and out of scale with neighboring properties. He also expressed his concern that approval of the proposed project would be precedent setting. -22- X � r v � m E • March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Pendel stated that a three unit development would be more commendable which would not exceed the height limit and create less traffic. Planning Director Hewicker submitted a letter dated March 22, 1984, from Mr. & Mrs. John Wallace, residents of 1323 E. Balboa Boulevard, requesting that the project be denied. Their letter. expressed concerns relating to the setbacks and height of the proposed project. Mr. Andrew Dossett, resident of 1305 E. Balboa Boulevard, submitted the letter from the Balboa Peninsula Point Association requesting .denial of the proposed project. He also submitted a petition containing 16 signatures of neighbors opposed to the project and two photographs of the. existing structures in the area. He stated that granting the proposed modifications would be inconsistent with the existing uses and would set a precedence for future redevelopment in the area. He also expressed his concern with the row of vehicles which will be parking in the driveway. Ms. Lillian Kamph, owner of property at 1321 E. ocean Front, stated that she resides in the adjacent structure which was constructed four feet in excess of the height limit. She stated that exceeding the height limit destroys the visual sense of the neighborhood. She stated that redevelopment in the area should contain a low profile and not be allowed to exceed the height limit. Mr. Charles Cotten, resident of 1509 East Bay Avenue, expressed his concern with the existing parking problems of the area. He stated that the residents of the proposed project will not park their vehicles in the driveway, they will park their vehicles in the street and convert their garages into playrooms. He also expressed his concern with the fire hazard which would be created with the proposed encroachments. -23- MINUTES MINUTES March 22, 1984 f . v m m City of Newport Beach Mr. Barney Larks, resident of 1901 Beryl Lane, expressed his concern that the proposed request will demolish three existing low and moderate - income rental units and be replaced with a four unit condominium development. He stated that one of the new units should be required to be affordable. He stated that the need for affordable housing must be addressed by the City. He 'stated that he represents a large group of senior citizens within the community. Ms. Barbara Pottharst, resident of 1301 E. Balboa Boulevard, stated that the landmark in the area is the ocean and the bay, not the architectural design of the buildings. she requested that the proposed modifications be denied. I I I I ( I I Mr. Pulaski stated that the design of the proposed request greatly improves the existing ingress and egress of the site and also exceeds the required • parking. He stated that the project can accommodate the height requirement with flat roofs, rather than pitched roofs and the side yard setback can be accommodated as stated previously. Commissioner Kurlander asked if the garages can be constructed, maintaining the required four foot setbacks. Mr. Pulaski concurred and stated that it is also possible to reduce the height of the proposed development. Commissioner Balalis stated that the majority of the redevelopment of the area has been occurring as single family residential development. He expressed his concern that this particular piece of property is not appropriately zoned as R -3. He stated that he objects to the bulk and the height of the proposed project. He further stated that other developments in the area are detached, whereas the proposed project will create a massive bulk development. He stated that he could possibly support a project of two separate structures, zoned as R -1 on each parcel. He recommended that the project be denied and that the applicant be directed to redesign the project to incorporate the concerns which have been expressed. Further, he stated that it may be • I'll I appropriate for the City to take action to rezone the property and to include a finding in the denial of the project that the R -3 zoning is not suitable for this area. -24- MINUTES March 22, 1984 n 7C m S • 3 m ° m N. City of . Nevv ort Beach ROLL CALL INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Person, Mr. Robert Gabriele, Assistant. City Attorney, stated that it would not be appropriate to include a finding which states that the R -3 zoning is not suitable for the area. Motion X Motion was made to deny Resubdivision No. 773, Use Ayes X FIX X X Permit No. 3091 and Residential Coastal Development Noes X Permit No.. 8; subject to the following findings of Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED: A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT . 1. Take no - action on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration; 2. Recommend that the City Council take no action on the environmental document; and • 3. Make the findings listed below: Findings: 1. That the environmental document is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the State CEQA Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered on the various decisions on this project. 3. That the Guidelines indicate that environmental documents are not required for projects that are denied. B. RESUBDIVISION NO. 773 - - - Deny Resubdivision No. ,773 with the Findings listed below: Findings: 1. That the findings regarding the environmental document also apply to Resubdivision No. 773. -25- MINUTES March 22, 1984 � r m • 3 85 City of N ort Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 2. That the approval of Resubdivision No. 713 would not, under the circumstances of this particular case, be beneficial to the health, safety, peace, comfort and .general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed project. 3. That the proposed resubdivision in conjunction with the subject development proposes problems from a planning standpoint. I I I I I I I I C. Use Permit o 09 Deny Use Permit No. 3091 with the Findings listed below: Findings: • 1. That the .findings regarding the environmental document also.apply to Use Permit No. 3091. 2. That the height and bulk of the proposed structure will create an undesirable, abrupt scale relationship with existing surrounding development inasmuch as the proposed structure is substantially larger and . taller than most development in the area. 3. That the proposed development will not result in more public visual open space and views inasmuch as the proposed project is built across the full width of the site adjacent to the public beach. 4. That the proposed 4 foot garage encroachments into the required 4 foot easterly side yard setback are inappropriate and represent a significant departure from established standards for development in the R -3 District. 5. That the approval of the proposed side yard encroachments would establish an undesirable precedent that would affect future residential • development on the Balboa Peninsula. -26- 3 x ROLL CALL r1 U 0 March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach 6. The proposed side yard encroachments will, under the circumstances of this particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use and be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood of the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification is not consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. 7. The approval of _Use Permit No. 3091 and related applications will, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or. the general welfare of the City. C. - RESIDENTIAL COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 8 Deny Residential Coastal Development Permit No. 8 with the Findings listed below: Findings: 1. That the findings regarding the environmental document also apply to Residential Coastal Permit No. 8. 2. That Residential Coastal Development Permits are not required for projects that are denied. _27_ MINUTES � r v a m c a ;K m m _ m O _ March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach MINUTES INDEX A. General Plan Amendment 83 -2(c) (Portion) (Public Item #4 Hearing) Consideration of amendment to the Land Use and GENERAL Residential Growth Elements of the Newport Beach PLAN General Plan, redesignation of the site on the AMENDMENT northeasterly corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree 83 -2 (c) Road from "Low Density Residential" to "Recreational and Marine Commercial" for the purpose of consistency and with the Certified Land Use Plan of the Newport Beach Local Coastal Program. AMENDMENT INITIATED BY. The City of Newport Beach a7 and B. Amendment No. 605 (Continued Public Hearing) STUDY Request to establish Planned Community Development and • Standards and adopt a Planned Community Development Plan for property located at the northeasterly corner TENTATI of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road, and the MAP OF acceptance of an environmental document. TRACT 1 AND I and C. Traffic Study (Continued Public Hearing) - - RESIDENTIAL COASTAL Request to consider a Traffic Study for a 154 unit DEVELOPMENT residential condominium development. PERMIT NO. 9 AND D. Tentative Map of Tract No. 11937 (Continued Public -ALL Hearing) - - APPROVED CONDI_' - Request to subdivide 11.2 acres of land into a single TIONALLY lot for residential condominium purposes so as to allow the construction of a 154 unit residential development. AND E. Residential Coastal Development Permit No. 9 . I I I I I I I Request to consider a Residential Coastal Development Permit for. the purpose of establishing project compliance for a 154 unit residential condominium -28- IN COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 x F � S m v w o m City of N t Beach > > > 01 0 + a ROLL CALL INDEX development pursuant to the administrative guidelines for the implementation of the State law relative to low- and moderate- income housing within the Coastal Zone. LOCATION: Portions of Blocks 55 and 94, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 1200 East Coast Highway, on the northeasterly corner of Jamboree Road and East Coast Highway, across from Irvine Terrace. - ZONE: - -P -C APPLICANT: Irvine Pacific, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach ENGINEER: _ Adams /Streeter, Civil Engineers, Irvine The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Dave Dmohowski, representing the applicant, appeared.before the Commission. Mr. Dmohowski referred to Page 3 of the staff report and expressed his concern with the proposed language to be added to the General Plan, as it relates to the fiscal. contribution to a shuttle system combined with public parking. He stated that it would be more appropriate to address this issue when a specific commercial development is proposed for the site. Mr. Dmohowski referred to Page 9 of the staff report, relating to the coastal residential development permit fees and requested a reduction in the fee. He also referred to a letter dated February 29, 1984, from the applicant, Irvine Pacific, which also requests a reduction in this fee, or the City's actual cost of processing the application, if the cost is less than $10,000. Ms. Patricia Temple., - Environmental Coordinator, distributed suggested revisions and additions to conditions of approval as outlined in Exhibit "A ". The proposed changes are as follows: Traffic Study, Condition No. 1, to include "(unless subsequent project I I approval requires modification thereto). The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the -29- MINUTES March 22, 1984 � r 3 m ° m City of Newport Beach approval of the City Traffic Engineer "; Tentative Map of Tract No. 11937, Condition No. 45, to include "in the Baywood expansion "; Condition No. 57, to include "necessary for this project" and "(unless subsequent project approval requires modification thereto). The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer." Additional Condition No. 59, "That development is subject to the review and approval by the City of a Development Agreement for Newport Center as required by General Plan Amendment No. 83 -1(e); and, Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 9, Condition No. 1, to include "in the Baywood expansion ". Mr. Dmohowski stated that the proposed changes would be acceptable. However, he then referred to Condition No. 41 of the Tentative Tract, relating to the waiver of AB952 for the mitigation of archaeological impacts, and stated that the condition is not appropriate. He then •referred to Condition No.- 44 of the Tentative Tract, and requested that credit also be received against future "fair- share" for the commercial portion of the overall development site, or reimbursement out of the FAU funds to complete the Coast Highway widening along the commercial.portion. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Dmohowski clarified that in consideration for the dedication of right -of -way, which amounts to several of acres of land, they are requesting that the dedication satisfy any "fair- share" requirement that may he imposed as a result of the future commercial development. Mr. Donald Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 44, and suggested that the following wording be added: "In lieu of,a monetary fair -share contribution, the City will consider the dedication of the additional right -of -way needed for the Coast Highway widening project between Jamboree Road and Bayside Drive to fulfill this condition. This dedication would include only the land owners interests in the De Anza Village area and be further defined as needed by the Public Works Department." Mr. Dmohowski stated that this II I I I I I would be acceptable. -30- MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 x f � m p� m m City of Newport Beach > > S I C ::%I In response to questions posed by Commissioner Kurlander and Chairman King, Mr. Webb explained the FAU widening project for Coast Highway from MacArthur Boulevard to Bayside Drive and the process in which the dedication will be obtained. Commissioner Person suggested that Condition No. 44, as suggested by Mr. Webb, should be revised to delete the word "consider ", and replace with the word "accept ". Mr. Webb stated that this would be acceptable. Mr. Robert Gabriele, Assistant City Attorney, suggested an additional finding for the Tentative Tract, as follows: "6) That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial, office and • multiple residential development in the center." Commissioner Kurlander referred to Condition No. 56 of the Tentative Tract and asked if a bus turn -out is being proposed at this location. Mr. Webb stated that at this time, .there has-not been a final determination from the Orange County Transportation District. Commissioner Kurlander suggested additional wording, that if additional right -of -way is needed for the bus turn -out, the dedication shall be required. Mr. Webb stated that this would be acceptable. Commissioner Kurlander stated that bus turn -outs are beneficial to the City because they do not interrupt the flow of traffic. Mr. Bruce Martin, representing Irvine Pacific, stated that such a condition would be acceptable. He stated that he has discussed this with the Public Works Department and suggested that it be placed on the residual parcel, between Back Bay Drive and Jamboree Road, as opposed to placing it immediately adjacent to the residential units. Mr. Webb stated that this would be the most appropriate location. 11111 In response, to a question posed by Commissioner 0 111 Balalis, Mr. Dmohowski stated that the affordable units are proposed to be provided on -site, assuming that -31- MINUTES March 22, 1984 � x f � m m City of Newport Beach mortgage revenue bond financing can be obtained for the project. He further stated that approximately 33 affordable units would be provided on -site. In addition, he stated that the total number of proposed units relies on the transfer of a pool of floating units which would be built in Newport Village, for a total of approximately 150 affordable units to be provided. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Webb stated that the street as proposed, will provide for six foot bike trails on both _sides of the street. In response to concerns expressed by Commissioner Balalis, Mr. Webb referred to Condition No. 58 of the Tentative Tract and discussed the proposed and existing entrances on'Coast Highway. . He stated that a one-way - out drive would be provided through Lot No. 2 to the • I I I I I I existing frontage road. However, he stated that this would not be provided until the nursery use is terminated. Planning Director Hewicker suggested that rather than making access on the east end of the property mandatory, he suggested that the following wording be added, "At such time as the nursery site is redeveloped, consideration will be given to closing the driveway onto Coast Highway." He stated that in this way, a slight redesign at the easterly end of the project to set one of the buildings back could accommodate a full connection, if it was deemed necessary. Chairman King expressed his concern with securing the easement. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Webb stated that it is the widening of Coast Highway which is reducing the frontage road. Commissioner. Goff suggested that the potential problem should be confronted at this time. Mr. Webb stated that there should be flexibility to design a two -way roadway, recognizing that this may not be possible. 0 11111111 -32- 3 x f r S a m a 3 p G C m- G G ? p r a m March 22, 1984 MINUTES l•, , � � 6 0 S1 Il Commissioner Person suggested the following additional language to Condition No. 58, "That if determined to be feasible and desirable by the Public Works Department, the applicant shall provide two -way ingress and egress from the Irvine Coast Country Club and eliminate the right turn access at the nursery site. Planning Director Hewicker suggested that Condition No. 58 be revised as follows, "That the driveway be designed for two -way ingress and egress if determined to be feasible by the Public Works Department and that it not be provided until the nursery use is terminated. Further, that the driveway onto Coast Highway be closed, if feasible." Chairman King concurred with the intent of the proposed language, however, he expressed his concern that there is no way of knowing the type of use which would be established on the property when the nursery use is terminated. Commissioner Balalis stated that the exit • which is being discussed should be made available, regardless of the redevelopment of the nursery use. Mr. Webb. clarified that the nursery site is a portion of the tract map. Motion X Motion was made for approval of the General Plan All Ayes Y X X X X X Amendment No. 83 -2(c) (Portion) , Amendment No. 605, Traffic Study, Tentative Map of Tract No. 11937 and Residential Coastal Development Permit No. 9, subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ", including the revisions and additions as suggested by the Environmental Coordinator; including the additional finding as suggested by the Assistant City Attorney; including the revised condition as suggested by the City Engineer;. Condition No. 56 to include, that if required, the applicant shall be responsible for the dedication and installation of a permanent bus stop along East Coast Highway; and,. Condition No. 58 be revised as suggested by the Planning Director, which .MOTION CARRIED: - A. Environmental Document I I I I 1. Approve 'the. Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Newport Beach, Villa Point Apartments, . Pacific Coast Highway Frontage, and supportive materials; -33- MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 � f m m City of Newport Beach G G? 6 9 p N B. General Plan Amendment 83 -2(c) (Portion) 1. Adopt Resolution No. 1118, recommending to the - RESOLUTION City Council the adoption of amendments to the NO. 1118 Land Use and .Residential Growth Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan for the Coast Highway/ Jamboree site. C. Amendment No. 605 1. Adopt. Resolution No. 1119, recommending to the - RESOLUTION City Council the adoption of the Villa Point NO. 1119 Planned Community District Regulations, incorporating any desired changes: D. Traffic Study I I I j I I j 1. Approve the Traffic Study and make the following I I Findings, based upon the facts and subject to the • Conditions listed below: -34- 2. Recommend that the City Council certify the Environmental Document is complete; 3. Make the Findings listed below: FINDINGS: 1. That the environmental document has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental - Quality 'Act (CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines and City Policy. 2. That the contents of this environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on the project. 3. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the . proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. B. General Plan Amendment 83 -2(c) (Portion) 1. Adopt Resolution No. 1118, recommending to the - RESOLUTION City Council the adoption of amendments to the NO. 1118 Land Use and .Residential Growth Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan for the Coast Highway/ Jamboree site. C. Amendment No. 605 1. Adopt. Resolution No. 1119, recommending to the - RESOLUTION City Council the adoption of the Villa Point NO. 1119 Planned Community District Regulations, incorporating any desired changes: D. Traffic Study I I I j I I j 1. Approve the Traffic Study and make the following I I Findings, based upon the facts and subject to the • Conditions listed below: -34- COMMISSIONERSI i z � r m a a o 3`;3mm�m `J March 22, 1964 M FINDINGS: MINUTES 0 . � INDEX 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S -1. _ 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project - generated traffic will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of six critical inter- sections; and will add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at two critical intersections, which will have an Intersection Capacity Utiliza- tion of more than .9000. 3. That the Traffic Study suggests circulation system improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. CONDITION: 1. That prior to occupancy of any portion of the project facilities, the circulation system improvements described in the Traffic Study to the intersections at Jamboree Road and Bristol Street and at Jamboree Road and Ford. Road will be in place (unless subsequent project approval requires modification thereto). The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. E. Tentative Map of Tract No. 11937 1. Recommend that the City Council approve the Tentative Map of Tract No. 11937 subject to the following Findings and Conditions of Approval: FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific • plans, and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. -35- MINUTES March 22, 1984 g x v m m m m ° m City of Newport Beach 2: That the proposed subdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 4, That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 6. That the proposed development will generate an increase in daily trips sufficient in magnitude to warrant a fair share assessment to mitigate the increased traffic congestion and traffic noise • resulting from the cumulative affect of additional traffic generated by commercial, office and multiple residential development in the center. CONDITIONS: 1. That a final map be filed. 2. That development shall be in substantial conformance. with the plans submitted except as noted below. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That a standard subdivision agreement and accompanying surety be provided to guarantee satisfactory completion of the street improve- ments, if it is desired to obtain a building permit or record the tract map prior to comple- tion of the public improvements. 5. That each dwelling unit be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems . unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. -36 MINUTES March 22, 1984 �r 9 m m a ° W I City of Newmt Beach 6. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 7. That the design of the private streets and drives conform with the City's private street policy (L -4), except as approved by the Public Works Department. The basic roadway width shall be a minimum of 32 feet. The location, width, con- figuration and concept of the private street and drive system shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer, and the Fire Department. S. That the intersection of the private streets with public streets be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 45 miles per hour. Slopes, landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight • distance line shall not exceed twenty -four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 9. That the California Vehicle Code be enforced on the private streets and drives, and that the delineation acceptable to the Police Department and Public Works Department be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and drives. 10. That no control gate at the entrance shall be allowed unless the entrance area is redesigned to allow for a turn - around to be provided prior to the gate. The design of the controlled entrance shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department and the Fire Department. 11. The easements for ingress, egress and public utility purposes on all private streets be dedicated to the City, and that all easements be shown on the tract map. 12. That asphalt or concrete access roads shall be provided to all public utilities, vaults, manholes, and junction structure locations, with • the width to be approved by the Public Works Department. -37- MINUTES March 22, 1984 v m a m City of Newport Beach 0 WLL CALL I I I I J I I I. I INDEX 13. That all vehicular access rights to East Coast Highway be released and relinquished to the City of Newport Beach except for one access point, with the location to be approved by the. Public Works Department. 14. That landscape plans shall be subject to review and ..approval of the Parks, Beaches and Recrea- tion Department and the Public Works Department. 15. That street, drainage and utility improvements be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 16. That a hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the final map. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and . sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer. 17. That prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the site, the. applicant shall demon- strate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and the Planning Department that adequate sewer facilities will be available for the project. Such demonstration shall include verification from the Orange County Sanitation District and the City's Utilities Department.- 18. That a maximum of ten feet of pedestrian easement or additional right -of -way be dedicated to the public for street and highway purposes along the East Coast Highway Frontage adjacent to Lots No..l and 2, and the residual parcel, with the exact amount to be determined by the Public Works De- partment. This right -of -way shall be dedicated to the City prior to June 1, 1984. 19. That additional right -of -way be dedicated to the public for street. and highway purposes along Back Bay Drive from Jamboree Road to East Coast Highway. The roadway shall have a minimum right -of -way width of 72 feet and a maximum width . of 82 feet. -38- March 22, 1984 0 MINUTES INDEX 20. That full improvements be constructed along Back Bay Drive from Jamboree Road to East Coast Highway. These improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk,. pavement and street lights. 21. That the developer construct a traffic signal at the intersection of East Coast Highway and Back Bay Drive. The plans for the traffic signal shall be. reviewed and approved by the Public works Department. This signal shall be installed prior to occupancy unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. A separate agreement and surety may be provided for this work. 22. That the developer be responsible for 508 of the cost of the traffic signal at the intersection of Jamboree Road with Back Bay Drive. A separate agreement and surety should be provided. . 23. That the developer contribute to the City the cost of improving East Coast Highway to major highway standards along the proposed tract frontage which runs from Back Bay Drive easterly to. the easterly boundary of the tract. This contribution shall be deposited with the City prior to recording any tract maps or issuance of any grading or building permits. 24. The Irvine Company shall provide for approximately 1,100 linear feet of an off -site storm drain, from the Jamboree Road intersection down Back Bay Drive to the existing storm drain inlet structure at the Back Bay. This storm drain shall be constructed concurrently with project construction. 25. A storm drain shall be provided as part of the project, to channel surface waters from the project site and a portion of East Coast Highway to the master - planned off site storm drains. This storm drain shall be constructed concurrently with project construction. 26. That the location of fire hydrants and water mains shall be approved by the Fire Department. • 27. That emergency access to and within the site shall be approved by the Fire Department. -39- 3 x � r 5 m c m m 0 March 22, 1984 0 MINUTES INDEX 20. That full improvements be constructed along Back Bay Drive from Jamboree Road to East Coast Highway. These improvements shall include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk,. pavement and street lights. 21. That the developer construct a traffic signal at the intersection of East Coast Highway and Back Bay Drive. The plans for the traffic signal shall be. reviewed and approved by the Public works Department. This signal shall be installed prior to occupancy unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. A separate agreement and surety may be provided for this work. 22. That the developer be responsible for 508 of the cost of the traffic signal at the intersection of Jamboree Road with Back Bay Drive. A separate agreement and surety should be provided. . 23. That the developer contribute to the City the cost of improving East Coast Highway to major highway standards along the proposed tract frontage which runs from Back Bay Drive easterly to. the easterly boundary of the tract. This contribution shall be deposited with the City prior to recording any tract maps or issuance of any grading or building permits. 24. The Irvine Company shall provide for approximately 1,100 linear feet of an off -site storm drain, from the Jamboree Road intersection down Back Bay Drive to the existing storm drain inlet structure at the Back Bay. This storm drain shall be constructed concurrently with project construction. 25. A storm drain shall be provided as part of the project, to channel surface waters from the project site and a portion of East Coast Highway to the master - planned off site storm drains. This storm drain shall be constructed concurrently with project construction. 26. That the location of fire hydrants and water mains shall be approved by the Fire Department. • 27. That emergency access to and within the site shall be approved by the Fire Department. -39- MINUTES March 22, 1984 � x i r $ 9 � 1110 City of Newport Beach 28. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 29. That a grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 30. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping programs designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 31. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department, and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. • ( I I ( I I 32. The velocity of concentrated _runoff from the project shall be evaluated,.and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. 33. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engineer, and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Depart- ment. 34. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the design engineer shall review and state that the discharge of surface runoff from the project will be performed in a manner to assure that increased peak flows from the project will not increase erosion immediately downstream of the system. This report shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building Departments. 35. That erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engineer. -40- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 22, 1984 ity of N ort Beach CL;=AZLL I INDEX 36. All proposed development shall provide for vacuum sweeping of parking areas. 37. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade meetings to inform the developer and grading contractors of the results of the study. In addition, an archaeologist shall be present during grading activities to inspect the under- lying soil for cultural resources. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeolo- gist shall have the authority to stop or tempor- arily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds. 38. In the event . that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation and /or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the subject property until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. I I I I I I The cost of such a program shall be the respon- sibility of the landowner and /or developer. 39. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner and /or developer to attend pregrade meetings .and perform inspections during develop- ment. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials. 40. Should fossils be discovered during grading operations, the landowner shall donate the fossils collected,to a non - profit institution. 41.. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions of AB952 related to City of Newport Beach respon- sibilities for the mitigation of archaeological impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. 42. That prior to the occupancy of any unit, a qualified acoustical engineer, retained by the City at the applicant's expense, shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the noise impact from East Coast Highway and Back Bay Drive on the project does not exceed 65 db CNEL for outside living areas and the require- ments of law for interior spaces. -41- mn�a »rc�Ka March 22, 1984 v m � c° n ° ro City Newport Beach VI 43. Prior to issuance.of any building permits .author- ized by the approval of this . tentative. map, the applicant shall deposit with the City's Finance Director the sum proportional to the percentage of future additional traffic related to the project in the subject area, to be used for the construc- tion of a sound = attenuation barrier on the southerly side of West Coast Highway in the west Newport Area and -in the .Irvine Terrace and Jamboree Road areas. This contribution is estimated to be $21,600, based on 1,080 daily trips at $20 per.trip. MINUTES 44. Prior to the issuance of any building and /or grading permit, the applicant shall pay its "fair- share" of circulation systems improvements . for the ultimate circulation system. This contribution is estimated to be $231,120, based on 1,080 .daily trips at $214 per trip. In lieu of a monetary . fair -share contribution, the.City will accept the • dedication of the additional right -of -way needed for the Coast Highway widening project between Jamboree Road and Bayside Drive to fulfill this condition. This dedication would include only the land owners interests in the De Anza Village area and be ,further defined as needed by the Public Works Department. 45. That prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City, approved by the City Attorney and the Planning Director, which guarantees the provision of four "affordable" units on site or off site in the Baywood expansion. 46. Of the "affordable" units provided, three shall be affordable to a .County median income family and one shall be affordable to a County moderate income family. 47. The affordability of the units shall be guaranteed for a period of at least ten years. 48. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall satisfy the require- ments of the Park Dedication Ordinance to the • satisfaction of the Planning Director. 11 '111111 -42- INDEX MINUTES March 22,.1984 It n x v � w City of Newport Beach 49. Signage and exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department and the Public Works Department. 50. All mechanical equipment, vents, and other service equipment shall be shielded or screened from view by architectural features. 51. Upstairs patio areas will be glassed in for all areas within the 65 CNEL contour. Units within these buildings. will also be provided with aluminum sliding windows of normal 1/8 inch thickness. Downstairs units within the 65 CNEL contour will be shielded from the noise source by a barrier approved by the Planning Director. 52. Parking areas .shall,be paved early during construction. 53. Openable windows shall be used to allow cooling by • normal breezes. 54. A lighting plan which describes how _energy conser- vation has been incorporated into the lighting scheme shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Department. 55. A solar hot water system will be installed for the community pool and spa. 56. Prior to approval of the final subdivision map, the applicant shall consult with the Public works Department and the Orange County Transit District regarding the provision of a bus stop and related amenities (i.e., shelter, bench) along East Coast Highway adjacent to.the project site. The applicant shall be responsible for.the instal- lation of a permanent bus stop along East Coast Highway subsequent to widening of the highway in 1985 -86. An interim bus stop with access to the project site may be provided until that time. if required, the applicant shall be responsible for the dedication and installation of a permanent bus, stop along East Coast Highway. in MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 z a m W City of Nevi mt Beach INDEX 57. The City of Newport Beach requires each project to provide for all necessary roadway improvements. Several improvements necessary for this project have been required of previously - approved - projects but are not yet constructed. The project will be required to contribute to or provide full improvements to intersections identified in the Traffic Study (unless subsequent project approval requires modification thereto). The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 58. That the driveway be designed for two -way ingress and egress if determined to be feasible by the Public Works Department and that it not be provided until the nursery use is terminated. Further, that the driveway onto,Coast Highway be closed, if feasible. I I I ( I I 59. That development is subject to the review and . approval by the City of a Development Agreement for Newport Center as required by General Plan Amendment No. 83 -1(e). F. Coastal Residential Develooment Permit No. 9 1. Approve Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 9, make the following Findings, based upon the facts and subject to the Conditions listed below: FINDINGS• - - 1. That there are no social, technical, environmental or related problems associated with the provision of four affordable housing units. 2. That four 'affordable housing units could be provided and still allow a reasonable return on investment. 3. That development of the site is not exempt from the provisions of State law relative to low- and moderate- income housing in the Coastal Zone. • IIIIIIII -44- March 22, 1984 3 x v m m City of Newpor 4. That 121 of the proposed 154 units will be matched on a one - for -one basis with affordable housing units on the Newport Village, Fifth Avenue and MacArthur Boulevard or Baywood Expansion sites. CONDITIONS: 1. That prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City, approved by the City Attorney and Planning Director, which guarantees the provision of four "affordable" units on site or off site in the Baywood expansion. 2. Of the "affordable" units provided, three shall be affordable to a County median income family and one shall be affordable to a County moderate income family. • 3. The affordability of the units shall be guaranteed for a period o£ at least ten years. 4. That development is subject to the review and approval of a Development Agreement for Newport Center as required. by General Plan Amendment 83 -1(e) (Portion). • The Planning Commission recessed at 11:00 p.m. and reconvened at 11:10 p.m. Commissioner Balalis suggested that Items No. 5 and 6 be heard as the last items on the Agenda. The applicants for these items stated that this would be acceptable: -45- MINUTES INDEX March 22,1984 3 � � m m m m City of Newport Beach Use Permit No. 1933 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Request to amend a previously approved use permit which allowed the remodel and conversion of an existing full service automobile service station into a self- service facility in the C -1 District. The proposed amendment is a request to amend an existing condition of approval so as to allow the facility to be open from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight whereas the existing use permit limits the hours of operation from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily. LOCATION: A portion of Section 28, Township South, Range 10 West, San Bernardino Meridian, located at 3531 Newport Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of Newport Boulevard and Short Street, in Central Newport. • ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Chevron USA, Inc., La Habra OWNER: Raymond V. Daniger, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Ben Teschner, operator of the service station, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Teschner requested that the station be allowed to remain open between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10 :00 p.m. on Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday. He stated that the requested hours would be compatible with the current uses in the area. He stated that there is a need for a service station in this area and submitted a petition containing 112 signatures of customers in favor of the extended hours. In response to a question posed by Conunissioner Goff, Mr. Teschner stated that automobile repairs do not take place on the premises. He further stated that the dumpster located adjacent to the alley belongs to 31 Flavors Ice Cream Shop and not the service station. I( I I I I I I -46- MINUTES INDEX #7 1933 MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 x v m m 9 10 3 a 0 ° m I City of Newport Beach Commissioner Balalis referred to Condition No. 3 in Exhibit "B" of the staff report, which allows the Planning Commission to add /or modify conditions of approval to the use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of the use permit, in the event the extended hours of operation becomes a nuisance to the adjacent residential uses. Motion X Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 1933 All Ayes X X X X X 11 1 (Amended) , subject to the following findings and conditions of Exhibit "B ", with the revision to Condition No. 2 that the hours of operation shall be limited between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sunday through: Thursday, and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday, which MOTION CARRIED:- FINDINGS: 1. The proposed operation is consistent with the General Plan, and the adopted .Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. 2. The.proposed project will not have.any significant environmental impact. 3. The operation of the existing self- service gasoline station with the expanded hours of operation is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses. 4. The Police Department does not anticipate any problems due to the extended hours of operation. 5. The approval of Use Permit No. 1933 (Amended) will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general: welfare of.persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the.City. CONDITIONS: 1. That this approval shall. be subject to all previous applicable conditions of approval for Use Permit No. 1933, except as noted in Condition No. 2. -47- MINUTES March 22, 1984 v m m m w City of Newport Beach 2. That the hours of operation shall be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sunday through Thursday; and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday. 3. That the Planning Commission may add /or modify LOCATION: - Lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Tract No. 27, . located at 3262 Broad Street, on the southeasterly corner of Broad Street and Bolsa Avenue, in Newport Heights. APPROVED CONDI- ZONE: R -2 - TIONALLY APPLICANT: - Plymouth Congregational Church, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Balalis stated that due to a possible conflict of interest, he would not be participating or voting on this item., • 1 1 11 111.1 -48- conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the.subject of this use permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace; morals, comfort, or general welfare of.the community. Use Permit No..2055 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item #8 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which . allowed the use of a temporary building for classrooms and meetings, in conjunction with an existing church facility located in the R -2 District. The proposed amendment is .a request to delete a condition of USE PERMIT NO. 2055 approval in conjunction with required public (Amended) improvements and a request for a five year extension of the subject use permit. LOCATION: - Lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Tract No. 27, . located at 3262 Broad Street, on the southeasterly corner of Broad Street and Bolsa Avenue, in Newport Heights. APPROVED CONDI- ZONE: R -2 - TIONALLY APPLICANT: - Plymouth Congregational Church, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Commissioner Balalis stated that due to a possible conflict of interest, he would not be participating or voting on this item., • 1 1 11 111.1 -48- MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 � � r v m m City of Newport Beach m� INDEX The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Tony Curto, Pastor of the Plymouth Congregational Church, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Curto requested that the temporary building be permitted to remain for an additional period of five years. He stated that this will benefit the growth of the church membership. He further requested that the installation of the public improvements be waived because of the limited parking for the church. He distributed photographs which depicted the existing facilities. In response to a question posed by Chairman King, Mr. Curto stated that the temporary building will help to facilitate the growth of the church, while the membership can continue to accumulate a building fund. He further stated that the temporary building is utilized for classrooms and meetings by the church membership on the weekends, on Wednesday evenings and with little usage during the week. • Commissioner Goff expressed his concern that the current use of the temporary building may increase during the next two years to the extent which it could create a hardship on the surrounding neighborhood. He suggested that a condition be imposed which would limit the temporary building to its current use. He stated that this would give the Planning Commission the opportunity to address an increased use of the temporary building. Mr. Curto stated that he does not anticipate the use of the temporary building to increase to such an extent and stated that such a condition would be acceptable. Ms. Diana Springer, resident of 3300 Clay Street, submitted a petition containing eight signatures of surrounding residents, which expressed their concerns with granting a five year extension. She stated that a two year extension would be acceptable to the surrounding residents and would also allow the church to meet their original goals. Motion I I I JxJ I Motion was made for approval of Use Permit No. 2055 (Amended), subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ", with the revision to Condition No. 3 to allow for a 2 year extension and an additional • ( I I I I I condition which would state that there would be no increase in the daytime activities in conjunction with the temporary building, over current uses. A March 22,1984 v m ID Me m ° City of Newport Beach Chairman King stated that he could support a two year extension of the use permit. He stated that during the two year period, he would like to have the opportunity to assess the changes which may occur during this period. However, he stated that the church activities should not be constrained during the weekday or weeknight hours to the extent that church related groups are negatively affected. He stated that a significant intensification of the temporary building should not occur. Substitute Substitute Motion was made for approval of Use Permit Motion X No. 2055 (Amended), subject to the findings and Ayes X IXIXI* conditions of Exhibit "A ", which would allow for a five Noes X X year extension of the use permit because the church has Abstain X not created a problem for the neighborhood, which SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED. nded Commissioner Goff amended his original motion for ion X approval of Use Permit No. 2055 (Amended) , for a two Ayes X X X X X year extension of the use permit, including the Abstain X concerns expressed by Chairman King as' an added condition, which MOTION CARRIED, as follows: - U FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan, and is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. The Police Department has indicated that they do not contemplate any problems. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 2055 (Amended) will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -50- MINUTES INDEX March 22, 1964 M CONDITIONS: MINUTES 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations. 2. That the temporary structure shall be removed from the site and the premises shall be restored to its former conditions upon the termination of the proposed use on the site. 3. That the approval of this use permit shall be for a period of two years. Any extension of time shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 4. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 5. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner • of Broad Street and Bolsa Avenue and at the corner of Clay Street and Bolsa Avenue be dedicated to the public. • 6. That the public improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavements) be constructed along the Broad Street, Bolsa Avenue and Clay Street frontages of the site if the temporary use extends beyond two years from the approval of this extension, and that the public improvements be designed by the Public Works Department. 7. That the current use of the temporary building shall not be significantly intensified. -51- INDEX i ;K r p m m - 3� 3 m S w March 22, 1964 M CONDITIONS: MINUTES 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations. 2. That the temporary structure shall be removed from the site and the premises shall be restored to its former conditions upon the termination of the proposed use on the site. 3. That the approval of this use permit shall be for a period of two years. Any extension of time shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 4. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 5. That a 15 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner • of Broad Street and Bolsa Avenue and at the corner of Clay Street and Bolsa Avenue be dedicated to the public. • 6. That the public improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavements) be constructed along the Broad Street, Bolsa Avenue and Clay Street frontages of the site if the temporary use extends beyond two years from the approval of this extension, and that the public improvements be designed by the Public Works Department. 7. That the current use of the temporary building shall not be significantly intensified. -51- INDEX 17J Motion All Ayes March 22, 1984 3 x s m m ° City of Newport Beach Use Permit No. 3092 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the installation of outdoor lights on 20 foot high standards on a proposed tennis court (under construction) on property located in Area 5 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. LOCATION: Lot 5, Tract No:_ 11450, located at 47 Belcourt Drive North, on the easterly side of Belcourt Drive .North between Belcourt Drive South and Huntington Court,. in Area 5 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Rhackseun Yoon, Irvine OWNER: same as applicant The public hearing opened in connection with this item and .Mr. .Greg Caledonia, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and requested approval of the tennis court lighting. Commissioner Kurlander referred to Condition No. 3 of Exhibit "A ", and stated that because there is only one tennis court involved, the wording should be revised to indicate that the lights shall be turned off by 11:00 p.m. daily on the court. JxJJJJ Motion was. made for approval of Use Permit No. 3092, X X X X X X subject to the following findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ", with the revision to Condition No. 3, which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impacts. -52- MINUTES INDEX Item CONDl- TTf7NAT.T.V MINUTES March 22, 1984 � x r c V m m St a m ° m City of Newport Beach 3. That the proposed illumination will be installed in such a 'manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjoining residential properties and streets. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 3092 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan. • 2. That the lighting system shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential uses and to adjoining streets. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a Licensed Electrical Engineer; with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his opinion , this requirement has been met. 3. That the lights shall be turned off by 11:00 p.m. daily on the court. 4. That the light fixtures shall not exceed 20 feet above the tennis court surface. • I I I! IlII -53- MINUTES March 22, 1984 : r c 9 m m xat 01 a = N. i City of Newport Beach 0 MLL CALL 1 .I 1 I Jill (INDEX ■ Use Permit No. 3093 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a retail commercial building containing a 7- Eleven convenience store and small space for a retail, shop. and related off - street parking spaces on property located in the Unclassified, District, and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION:- - Lot 717 of the First Addition of the Newport Mesa Tract, located at 1495 Superior Avenue, being the triangular island bounded by Superior Avenue, Placentia Avenue, and 15th Street, within the West Newport Triangle. ZONE: - Unclassified APPLICANT: The Southland Corporation, dba 7- Eleven, • Garden Grove OWNER: Shell Oil Company, Anaheim Staff advised that the applicant has requested that this item be continued to the Planning .Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, so as to allow additional time to address the concerns, of the Public. Works Department regarding the location of the proposed driveways. Staff stated that they have no objections to this request. Motion X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning All Ayes X X X X X X Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED. x � • 11111111 -54- Item #10 USE PERMIT NO. 3093 Continued to April 5, 1984 CALL E Motion All Ayes � s � r v m m j O - � March 22, 1984 'tv VI M11 Resubdivision No. 774 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide three existing lots and eliminate interior property lines so as to create two parcels for single family residential purposes. MINUTES Item #11 LOCATION: Lots 2,3 and 4 of Tract No. 1.1449, located at 3, 5 and 7 Huntington Court, RESUB- on the southwesterly side of Huntington DIVISION Court, southeasterly of Belcourt Drive No. 774 North, in Area 2 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community. ZONE: - P -C - APPLICANT: J. M. Peters Company, Inc., Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Chairman King noted that the applicant or a representative was not present. There being no one present to discuss the item, the following motion was made: Motion was made for approval of Resubdivision No. 774, subject to the following findings and conditions of Exhibit "A ", which MOTION CARRIED: FINDINGS: 1. That the map meets the requirements of Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal .Code, all ordinances of the City, all applicable general or specific plans and the Planning Commission is satisfied with the plan of subdivision. 2. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. I I I I I ( 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access • I I I I ' through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -55- f■ APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY CALL • X F a m m March 22, 1984 M CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That each unit be served with individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 4. That the unused water service be removed back to the water main prior to recordation of the parcel map. 5. That a sidewalk be constructed and the unused drive depressions be removed along the Huntington Court frontage. MINUTES x a Site Plan Review No. 35 (Discussion) item #12 Request to permit the construction of a commercial building containing marine related retail sales and a marine repair shop in an :existing marine repair facility located in the "Recreational Marine Commercial" area of Mariner's Mile Specific Plan area. SITE PLAN REVIEW N0 3535 , LOCATION: A portion of Lot H, Tract No. 919, located at 2439 West Coast Highway, on, the southerly side of West Coast Highway, easterly of Tustin Avenue, in Mariner's Mile. Continued to April ZONE: SP -5 5, 1984 APPLICANT: Turnstone Corporation, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant • -56- MINUTES March 22, 1984 v m m m m ° City of Newport Beach Staff stated that during the review process of this application, it was determined that a modification to the Zoning Code would be required for the required size of parking spaces and aisle width in conjunction with the proposed development. Public notices will therefore have to be mailed to all property owners within 100 feet of the subject property as required by Code. Staff then recommended that this item be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984. Motion X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning All Ayes X x K X X X X Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, which MOTION CARRIED.. - Use Permit No. 1778 (Amended) (Planning Commission Item #6 Review) Public hearing and 6 month Planning Commission review of the issues permitting a lunch time operation in Hemingway's Restaurant during the week, . and the acceptance of an off -site parking agreement for the USE PERM additional required daytime restaurant parking. NO. 1778 LOCATION: Lots No..5 and 6, Block B, Tract No. - 470; Lots No. 7 and 9, Block 730, Corona del Mar located at 2441 East Coast Highway, on the southwesterly corner of -East Coast Highway and Carnation Avenue - Continu (i.e., restaurant site); and the to Apri northerly side of East Coast Highway, 5; 1984 between MacArthur Boulevard and Newport Center Drive (i.e., off -site parking site), in Corona del Mar. ZONE: - C -1 APPLICANT: Randall H. Johnson, dba Hemingway's Corona del Mar 111 11111 OWNER: James B. Wood, Corona del Mar -57- March 22, 1984 X C6 m City of Newport Beach Due to the lateness of the hour, Mr. Randall Johnson, the applicant, requested that this item be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984. Motion X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning Ayes X X X X K Commission Meeting of April 5, 1984, which MOTION Abstain X X CARRIED. .. A. Traffic Study (Continued Public Hearing) Request to consider a traffic study in conjunction with the construction of a multiple use development containing 51,463 sq. ft. t of gross floor area. • AND B. Use Permit No. 3086 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a multiple use development on property located in the "Recreation Marine Commercial" area of the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan area. The proposal includes: a request to construct a building which exceeds the 26 foot basic height limit in the 26/35 Foot Height Limitation District and exceeds .5 times the buildable area of the site; a request to establish a restaurant.with on -sale alcoholic beverages and live entertainment; a request to permit non - marine related professional and business office type uses; a modification to the Zoning Code as to allow the use of compact and tandem parking spaces for a. portion of the required off- street parking requirement; a request to allow the use of an off -site parking location for a portion of the required off - street parking; and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION: Portions of Lots G and H, Tract No. 919, located at 2901 West Coast Highway, on the southerly side of West Coast Highway, between Riverside Avenue and Newport Boulevard in Mariner's Mile M MINUTES INDEX item, #5 . TRAFFIC STUDY. AND USE PERMIT NO. 3086 Both Continued to April 19, 1984 MINUTES March 22, 1984 (Development Site), Lots abandoned alley in Tract southeasterly corner of Street, in Mariner's Mile ZONE: SP -5 7 -9 and a portion of an No.- 1133, located on the Riverside Avenue and Avon (off -site parking location). APPLICANT: Senator D.G. Anderson, Honolulu OWNER: .Same as applicant The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Joseph Lancor, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and presented a slide presentation depicting the proposed site plan and the characteristics of the proposed restaurant use. Mr. Lancor then distributed to the Planning Commission • a document dated March 22, 1984, expressing their concerns and responses as they relate to Conditions of Approval.No. 23, 24, 25, 26, 40, 42, 60, 68,- 83 and 91. He stated that they are confident that all of the concerns expressed in the staff report can be resolved. Mr. Lancor referred to a model of the proposed project and 'stated that they have attempted to design a project with a courtyard affect, incorporating the creation of a view corridor. He recommended that the minimum clear setback could be 50 feet from the easterly property line, which would substantially reduce the mass and bulk of the ramp structure. Further, he stated that an open railing design would substantially lighten the visual appearance of the structure from West Coast Highway, as well as from the water. He also stated that the requested cantilever over the public access easement is vital in providing the maximum "water experience" for the restaurant customer, as well as providing a sheltered public right -of -way. In response to a question posed by Mr. Lancor, Mr. Donald Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 42 and stated that it is not the intent for the applicant to pay for the entire cost of the • 11111111 _59- e z r c w a m 0 m City of moo (Development Site), Lots abandoned alley in Tract southeasterly corner of Street, in Mariner's Mile ZONE: SP -5 7 -9 and a portion of an No.- 1133, located on the Riverside Avenue and Avon (off -site parking location). APPLICANT: Senator D.G. Anderson, Honolulu OWNER: .Same as applicant The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Joseph Lancor, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission and presented a slide presentation depicting the proposed site plan and the characteristics of the proposed restaurant use. Mr. Lancor then distributed to the Planning Commission • a document dated March 22, 1984, expressing their concerns and responses as they relate to Conditions of Approval.No. 23, 24, 25, 26, 40, 42, 60, 68,- 83 and 91. He stated that they are confident that all of the concerns expressed in the staff report can be resolved. Mr. Lancor referred to a model of the proposed project and 'stated that they have attempted to design a project with a courtyard affect, incorporating the creation of a view corridor. He recommended that the minimum clear setback could be 50 feet from the easterly property line, which would substantially reduce the mass and bulk of the ramp structure. Further, he stated that an open railing design would substantially lighten the visual appearance of the structure from West Coast Highway, as well as from the water. He also stated that the requested cantilever over the public access easement is vital in providing the maximum "water experience" for the restaurant customer, as well as providing a sheltered public right -of -way. In response to a question posed by Mr. Lancor, Mr. Donald Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 42 and stated that it is not the intent for the applicant to pay for the entire cost of the • 11111111 _59- CALL r c 'O m m c a x 0 m March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach installation of the storm drain, in addition to dedicating the easement. He suggested an additional sentence to Condition No. 42 as follows, "That the applicant fund the difference in cost between a normal storm drain installation and the facility installed in the structure, as well as the modification of the curb easement mentioned in the previous condition." In response to a question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Webb stated that the construction activities of the proposed project will certainly affect the pedestrian and bicycle flow in the area. He recommended that a temporary sidewalk be provided during the time in which the sidewalk is being reconstructed. He stated that an alternate route does not currently exist. I I I I I I I I Mr. Steve Dobbie, resident of 330 Santa Ana Avenue, and President of the Newport Heights Community Association, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Dobbie thanked the • applicant for, the opportunity to review the proposed project during the past two months. He expressed his concern that the proposed project does not meet the criteria necessary to .exceed the height limit. He suggested.that.the item be continued so as to allow the applicant time to redesign the project to meet the required criteria. • Mr. Gordon Sarienbrock, owner of the property located immediately adjacent to the proposed project, at 2801 West Coast Highway, appeared before the Commission. He stated that the location of the proposed view corridor is desirable as it enhances the view of the bay from the park located on Cliff Drive. He expressed his approval with the current design of the project. Mr. Lancor referred to an exhibit which depicted the existing Rosan building and the proposed project. He stated that the proposed use will only be six feet higher than the existing building. However, he stated that the proposed use will be creating a 50 foot view corridor which does not currently exist, in exchange for the added height. Further, he stated that the ramp structure is being reduced in diameter and will include an open rail, which will add to the view corridor. MINUTES COMMISSIONERS MINUTES March 22, 1984 3 x v m W 5 0, m °. City of Newport Beach LL CALL 1 1 1771 I INDEX Planning Director Hewicker asked the applicant if the Fire Department has had the opportunity to comment on the reduced ramp diameter. Mr. Lancor stated that his indication from the Fire Department is that this would be acceptable because the ramp does not access any other portion of the garage. He stated that the ramp will only be utilized for a drive to the front door of the restaurant, and would not be utilized for fire access. In addition, he stated that the proposed building will be fully sprinklered. Senator Anderson, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. He requested that the Planning Commission condition the project with a 50 foot corridor. He stated that this was the original. design of the driveway, however, the driveway was expanded to accommodate a large fire truck. He stated that these concerns have been addressed with a sprinkler system and the necessary access at the perimeter of the project. He stated that the reduced ramp will • I I I I I I I I substantially reduce the mass and bulk of the ramp structure. Commissioner Balalis referred to Page 12 of the staff report, which 'addresses the intensity of the projects adjacent to the proposed development. He stated that the project is proposed at a 1.01 intensity, which is why Site BAs recommended to be restricted as a parking facility only. He stated that this will re- establish the overall intensity for both sites at .75 times the buildable area which is more in keeping with current projects in the area. Senator Anderson stated that in the future, there may be the possibility of consolidating Site B with the property immediately adjacent to it. He stated that he would like the flexibility to consolidate the two properties for a small development, or to place a second deck on the property. He further stated that this would not disrupt the parking for Site A. - Commissioner' Balalis stated that the proposed architectural treatment of the building is attractive. However, he expressed his concern with the tall landscaping on the site, as it may interfere with the view corridor. • I 1 11.1111 -61- COMMISSIONERS 3 � f r' m m ;K oA m' > > > m m u r1 U March 22, 1984 of Newport Beach Commissioner Balalis also expressed his concern with the roof overhang over the water and the coverage , of the pedestrian walkway. He stated that if this project is allowed to cover the public walkway, it may set a precedent for other projects in the area to do the same. He stated that he would like to see how this proposal relates to other projects in the area. Senator. Anderson stated that he has no argument in providing the public access easement, but requested consideration to utilize the space. He stated that the land value alone in providing the public easement is in excess of $260,000.00. He stated that the request to cantilever over the easement does not jeopardize the public right -of -way and provides a sheltered area in inclement weather. Chairman King recommended that this item be continued and that corrected plans be submitted by the applicant, so that the staff will have the opportunity to address the revisions. Senator Anderson stated that this would be acceptable. Commissioner Goff stated that he is basically pleased with the proposed project. However, he expressed his concern that the intensity of the proposed project is 25 percent higher than other recently approved projects in the area. He also expressed his concern with the distance of the off -site parking lot, in relationship to the proposed site, which somehow reduces the intensity of the overall project. Commissioner Person addressed the possibility of future development on the parking lot located across the street and the possibility of constructing a parking structure. He stated that if this were to occur by the implementation of. future commercial uses in conjunction with the parking structure, the flexibility should be made available to the City as well as the applicant. He stated that this is a critical area in terms of parking. He stated that the overhang portion of the proposed project is not a major concern. -62- MINUTES INDEX March 22, 1984 � x r v m m 2a5l City of Newport . Beach 0m Motion X Motion was made to continue this item to the Planning All Ayes X x x X X X X Commission Meeting of April 19, 1984, so that the applicant may submit revised plans for staff to review, which MOTION CARRIED. - - Commissioner winburn stated that she would not present at the Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 1984. in * x There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 12:50 a.m. • c James Person, Secretary City of Newport Beach. Planning Commission -63- MINUTES