HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/18/1996i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting
July 18, 1996 - 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Thomson, Ridgeway, Kranzley, Adams, Gifford, Selich, Ashley
EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT:
Sharon Z. Wood, Assistant City Manager,
Community and Economic Development
Robin Clauson, Assistant City Attorney
Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director
Rich Edmonston, Transportation and Development Services Manager
Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Secretary
• Minutes of June 20,1996:
Motion was made by Commissioner Gifford and voted on to approve, as modified,
the June 20, 1996 Planning Commission Minutes.
Ayes:
Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Kranzley, Selich
Noes:
none
Absent:
none
Abstain:
Ridgeway, Ashley
Public Comments Dolores Offing -Spoke on the subject of availability of minutes
for the public and commented on published article on Fletcher Jones regarding
their new civic center and restaurant. She wanted to know if they had come
back to the Planning Commission for approval.
Ms. Otting was answered that the approved minutes are available upon request
and that Fletcher Jones did not come back to the Planning Commission for
approval of a new civic center and /or restaurant.
Posting of the Agenda:
Ms. Temple stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday,
July 12, 1996, outside of City Hall.
•
INDEX
Roll Call
Minutes
Public Comments
Posting of the Agenda
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
•
r 1
LJ
Introduction of New Commissioner - Mr. Thomas Ashley was. introduced to the
Commission and the public.
Election of Officers - Motion was made by Chairperson Ridgeway for the following
slate of officers:
Commissioner Garold Adams, Chairman
Commissioner Michael Kranzley, Vice Chairman
CommissionerEd Selich, Secretary
Ayes: Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Ridgeway, Ashley, Kranzley and Selich
Noes: none
Absent: none
Abstain: none
•4R
I. SUBJECT: Appointment of three Commissioners to participate in
Alcohol Policy Planning Workshop on July 25, 1996.
Chairperson Adams, Commissioners Kranzley and Thomson
will participate.
sss
IL SUBJECT: Donald Redfem - Owner
435 Via Lido Soud
Use Permit 3582
Staff reported that the applicant has requested that this item be withdrawn.
sss
III. SUBJECT. Business Properties (Carolyn White, Applicant)
MacArthur Square (1701 Corinthian Way, 1660 Dove Street,
4251 -4255 Martingale Way and 4200 -4250 Scott Drive).
• Amendment No. 849 (Continued from June 20, 1996)
Amend the Newport Place Planned Community District Regulations to redesignate
existing "Retail Commercial Site 1" (MacArthur Square) to "General Commercial
Site No. 6" and to add instructional and educational uses to the list of permitted
uses, subject to approval of a use permit.
INDEX
Introduction of
new Commissioner
Item No. 1
Appointment
Item No. 2
UP 3582
Withdrawn
Item No. 3
A No. 849
Continued to
August 22, 1996
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
n
�J
At the request of the applicant, this item was continued to the Planning
Commission on August 22nd.
IV. SUBJECT: Avant -Garde Ballroom (Andre Bonderman, applicant)
4220 Scott Drive
Use Permit 3583 (Continued from June 20, 1996)
Establish a ballroom dance studio with individual and class instruction; to allow
occasional evening special events for dance exhibition and practice facilities with
on -sale alcoholic beverage service.
At the request of the applicant, this item was continued to the Planning
Commission on August 22nd.
Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway to continue Items 3 and 4 to next
Planning Commission meeting on August 22nd.
Ayes: Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Ridgeway, Ashley, Kranzley and Selich
Noes: none
Absent: none
Abstain: none
V. SUBJECT: Aric Gless
1499 Monrovia Avenue
Use Permit No. 3588
Construct a metal warehouse building and associated asphalt parking area in an
Unclassified District.
Staff had no additional comments for Commission.
Public Hearing was opened.
Mr. Aric Gless, 6 Jefferson, Irvine, applicant - called for a clarification on page 4 of
the staff report regarding .... .. the applicant has indicated the potential for this
building to transition to a separate office or industrial occupancy in the future..:..
Chairperson Adams stated this would be explained by staff. In response to
Commission inquiry, Mr. Gless stated that he understands and agrees to the findings
and conditions of the Use Permit.
Staff clarified that the application is for warehouse building. The site plan indicates
enough parking to sustain the building being transitioned to an office in the future.
IND]
item No. 4
UP 3583
Continued to
August 22, 1996
Item No. 5
UP 3588
Approved
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
Public Hearing was closed.
Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway for approval of UP 3588.
Ayes: Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Ridgeway, Ashley, Kranzley and Selich
Noes: none
Absent: none
Abstain: none
Findings:
1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan since a
warehouse facility is a permitted use in the General Industrial designation.
2. That this project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is
categorically exempt from the requirementsof the California Environmental
Quality Act under Class 3 (New .Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures).
3. That adequate on -site parking is available for the existing and proposed
uses since there are a surplus number of parking spaces provided on site.
• 4. That the design of 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 development.
5. The approval of Use Permit No. 3588 will not, under the circumstancesof the
case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or be
detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or
the general welfare of the City since the warehouse building will not be
located close to the residential use on the neighboring lot, but will be
located towards the rear of the subject property adjacent to the marine
repair and storage yard.
6. That the proposed structure related to the proposed use is consistent with
the legislative intent of 20.53 of the Municipal Code since the proposed
developmentis in conformancewith the M-1 -A District Regulations.
Conditions:
1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved
site plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below.
2. That a minimum of one parking space for each 225 sq.ft. of floor area shall
• be provided on -site.
INDEX
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
3. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the
Municipal Code.
4. That the proposed structure and related parking shall conform to the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
5. That the project shall comply with State Disabled Access requirements.
6. That all improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and
the Public Works Department.
7. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation
systems be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic
Engineer.
8. That the front 15 ft. of the subject property be landscaped with a
combination of ground cover and low shrubs, the existing chain link fence
shall be moved back to adhere to the 15 ff. front setback requirement, and
that the balance of the property shall be maintained in a neat and orderly
"mowed" condition as approved by the Planning and Building
• Department.
9. That a reciprocal easement for vehicular ingress and egress be recorded
unless a new curb cut that provides vehicular access to the subject
property is otherwise approved by the Public Works Department.
10. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building
permits.
11. That all employees shall park on -site.
12. That a trash area shall be provided and be screened from adjoining
properties and streets.
13. That this Use Permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the
date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
VI. SUBJECT: William A. and Patricia E. Behrens
620 Seaward Road
Use Permit No. 3589
Constructionof a granny unit on property located in the R-1 -B District.
• 5
INDEX
Item No. 6
UP 3589
Approved
. City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
Staff had no additional comments.
CommissionerKranzley voiced his concern with defacto R2 in R districts. He asked
about the compliance of questionnaires and the possibility of these granny unit
homes becoming multi - family residences.
Staff answered that the procedures used to verify occupancy are done on an
annual basis. The City sends a letter requesting verification of occupancy from
each property owner. If problems do occur, it is handled as a code enforcement
item.
Commissioner Ridgeway asked about the "reverse" granny unit with the owners
living in the new add on and a family member living in the primary residence. Is
there a standard set by state that could be affected?
Staff answered that the City code merely requires that one of the two units be
occupied by an age qualifying resident and additionally one of the units be
occupied by a property owner. There is no specification of who lives in the primary
unit. At further inquiry staff answered that there were not many granny units, in the
City, perhaps 10 or 12.
• Public Hearing was opened.
Mr. Keith Behrens, 25162 Via Terracina, Laguna Niguel applicant stated, in response
to Commission inquiry, that he understands and agrees to the findings and
conditions of Use Permit 3589. Mr. Behrens stated that his parents will move to and
live in the new unit and that he and his wife will live in the primary residence.
Public Hearing was closed.
Motion was made by CommissionerSelich to approve Use Permit 3589.
Ayes: Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Ridgeway, Ashley, Kranzley and Sellch
Noes: none
Absent none
Abstain: none
Findin s
1. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the
Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, since they specifically make provisions
for the addition of granny units in single family areas.
2. That this project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)
• and Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations).
INDEX
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
3. That the proposed granny unit is designed in such a way that it conforms to all
of the development standards and restrictions set forth in Chapter 20.78 of the
Municipal Code, and, therefore, is consistent with the legislative intent of this
chapter.
4. That the proposed modification to permit additions to a building which
currently encroaches into the required side yard setback is consistent with the
legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code since all new construction
maintains the required 6 foot side yard setback.
5. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3589 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, due to the fact that the new granny unit is in
the rear of the lot which will maintain the single family character of the area.
Conditions
1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the
• approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations.
2. That the second dwelling unit shall be limited to the use of one or two persons
over the age of 60 years.
3. That the applicant shall record a Covenant, the form and content of which is
acceptable to the City Attorney, binding the applicants and successors in
interest in perpetuity so as to limit the occupancy of the second dwelling unit
to one or two adults 60 years of age or over, and committing the permitted
and successors to comply with current ordinances regarding Granny Units.
Said covenant shall also contain all conditions of approval imposed by the
Planning Commission or the City Council.
4. Commencing with the final inspection of the granny unit by a City Building
Inspector and on an annual basis every year thereafter, the property owner
shall submit to the Planning Director the names and birth dates of any and all
occupants of the granny unit constructed pursuant to this approval to verify
occupancy by a person or persons 60 years of age or older. Upon any
change of tenants, the property owner shall notify the City immediately. This
information shall be submitted in writing and contain a statement signed by
the property owner certifying under penalty of perjury that all of the
information is true and correct.
5. That the primary residence or the granny unit shall be continuously occupied
by at least one person having an ownership interest in the property.
•
INDEX
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
n
lJ
E
6. That one independently accessible parking space shall be for the exclusive
use of the proposed granny unit, in addition to the two required parking
spaces for the main dwelling.
7. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to issuance of any
building permits.
8. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the
date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
VII. SUBJECT: Kumon School (Jack H. Saida, applicant)
359 San Miguel Drive, Suite 101 A
» Use Permit No. 3591
Establishment of a children's math and reading tutor facility in a portion of an
existing office building (an educational use). .
Staff indicated that this particular facility is currently occupying the space and has
been there for some time. This use was discovered through a routine city fire
inspection and the applicant was notified that a Use Permit was required.
Commissioner Ridgeway referred to a letter dated July 16th from Greenbaum and
Katz hat that was distributed to the Commission tonight.
Public Hearing was opened.
Mr. Jack H. Saida, 1988 Port Claridge Place, applicant, in response to Commission
inquiry, stated that he understands and agrees to the findings and conditions of
Use Permit 3591. He was given a copy of the above referenced letter and stated
that he will take care of the children's trash and will address the issue of window
signs with the property management company.
Public Hearing was closed.
Motion was made by Commissioner Ridgeway for approval of Use Permit No. 3591
Ayes: Thomson, Gifford, Adams, Ridgeway, Ashley, Kranzley and Selich
Noes: none
Absent: none
Abstain: none
Findinas:
INDEX
Item No. 7
Use Permit No. 3591
Approved
. City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
1. That the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan since an
educational facility is permitted in the Administrative, Professional and
Financial Commercial designation.
2. That this project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is
categorically exempt from the requirementsof the California Environmental
Quality Act under Class (Existing Facilities).
3. That the number of parking spaces provided for the subject property is
adequate to accommodate the proposed private instruction facility, since
the majority of the students are not of driving age and the facility is located
in an area of Newport Center with a large pool of parking which is
immediately accessible.
4. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use of the
property or building will not, under the circumstances of this particularcase,
be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare
of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or
be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, because the use is
• expected to operate in a manner similar to other office uses, and that no
noise problems are anticipated based upon the fact that no problems or
complaints have been received during the three years of operation.
Conditions
That the use of the facility shall be consistent with the approved plot plan
and floor plan.
2. That the activities associated with the proposed facility shall be conducted
within the subject tenant space and that no activities shall be conducted
outside.
3. That the total number of students and employees shall not exceed 16
persons in the tenant space at any one time. Any additional increase in
the number of people shall be subject to approval of the Fire Department
for exiting and fire prevention requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and
the Uniform Building Code and shall be subject to amendment of this use
permit.
4. That a fire alarm system or early warning device shall be installed in
conjunction with this facility as required and approved by the Fire
Department.
5. That all students, teachers, faculty and employees shall park their vehicles
•
INDEX
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
on -site
6. That the hours of operation shall be limited between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m., daily, and that any increase in hours shall be subject to the
approval of the Planning Director.
7. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapters 20.06 of the
Municipal Code.
8. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify 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.
9. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date
of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
• VIII. SUBJECT: Zoning Code Update
A comprehensive update of the Title 20 (the Zoning Code) of the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code provide updated formatting, terminology, land use
classifications, land use and property development regulations and administrative
procedures. The proposal includes related amendments to the Districting Maps
and to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program
Land Use Plan.
Commissioner Ridgeway requested an explanation of city -wide notice procedures
by the Planning Department.
Chairperson Adams then referred to the number of letters received by citizens
regarding this issue.
Mr. Patrick Alford presented the staff report and summarized the contents. The
discussion included that the current code was adopted in the early 1950's and has
been amended many times, but never comprehensively revised. The current code
uses antiquated land use. classifications and terms, not organized in a logical
fashion and has numerous inconsistencies and conflicts. The goal is to draft code
that accurately sets forth City policy and is user friendly. Revisions will include new
terminology and land use classifications, land use and property development
regulations are presented in the form of matrices, all sections are cross - referenced
and illustrations are included to assist in explaining selected components of the
Code. Substantive changes are needed to better implement new community
• 10
INDEX
Item No. 8
GPA 96 -1 (D)
LCP A 45
A 834
A 846
Discussion
Continued to
August 8, 1996
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
initiatives such as clarifying, simplifying and streamlining zoning administration
functions; allowing certain uses to be permitted by right and granting staff more
discretionary authority. Key points include the deletion of several older zoning
districts and overlay districts, the addition of new zoning districts and overlay
districts such as Industrial Business Park District, Interim Study Overlay District and
Parking Management Overlay District. Also, there are new regulations for bed and
breakfast inns, home occupations and outdoor storage and display. There are
revamped controls on nonconforming structures and uses, FAR limits and eating
and drinking establishments.
He concluded by explaining the procedure used to notify the public. It began with
the notices of availability of the final draft of the code to all of the community
associations and business associations. Copies of the code were available at the
Planning Department, and all branches of the public library. A notification of the
hearing appeared in two local newspapers (1/4 page ads) as well as actual
notification to the individual property owners using the latest Equalized Tax
Assessment Role.
Ms. Temple continued by discussing in greater detail some on some the specific
concerns which have been raised to staff in regarding proposed zoning district
changes. Included were the Bluffs area change from the base zoning of R3 and R4
• with a PRD overlay. The R3 (Residential Multi - Family) and R4 (Multiple Residential)
are proposed to be deleted and replaced by MFR (Multi - Family Residential) with a
PRD overlay. Some of the individuals' concerns are that somehow this would
facilitate or allow units to be allowed for multiple occupancies. Ms. Temple
discussed the implications and options of the Bluffs, Marina Park area and down -
zoning of some portions of Catalina Street.
•
Ms. Temple then proposed an outline approach to this subject that would allow
individual discussion on each section.
Discussion ensued regarding means for public input and the approach to be taken
'during tonight's meeting and future meetings and the means of voting on the zone
changes. Commission then asked for and received further information on
townhomes that are similar in nature to the footprint lots in the Bluff. Staff clarified
that most areas that are similar to the Bluffs are in a PC (Planned Community)
District and there are no proposed changes as part of that zoning district.
Public Hearing was opened.
Sol Hamburger, Bluffs homeowner - spoke in favor of the RI (Single Family
Residential) zoning as most of his neighbors do too. He also asked if there were
going to be future notices, the letter should be explain the terms mentioned.
Kathleen Sangster, 403 Via Lido Soud - spoke in favor of retaining her property as R3
for various reasons.
11
INDEX
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
Chairperson Adams stated the City staff is proposing to eliminate the R3 zone
altogether. It is an issue of completely eliminating the R3 and R4 zone throughout
the City and designating a parallel zone MFR (multi family residential).
Staff discussed in detail the density allowed and parking requirements of the R3
and MFR zones.
Mark Abrams, 174 Broadway, Costa Mesa - property owner of 254 and 256 Catalina
Drive - spoke on the map as shown on page 5 of the districting map section of the
staff report. He spoke in opposition of this change from R 3 to R 2 (Two Family
Residential).
Discussion ensued by staff and Commission regarding Zoning General Plan
consistency action and the 1988 General Plan Amendment that redesignated the
propertyfrom Multi- familyto Two Family Residential..
Doug Hackett, 401 Old Newport Blvd., representing the Orange Coast Associations
of Realtors - spoke in favor of simplifying the language and making it a useable
content. His group, however, is concerned about the staff discretionary authority.
There should be a balance of rights between the City and the property owners. His
• group is requesting a continuance until there is some sort of public workshop as
opposed to a public hearing.
Staff stated that letters had been sent to homeowners and business associations
indicating that this project was in progress and also volunteering staff to attend
group meetings or meetings of boards of directors to explain and present the
code. There are no planned city wide workshops. Meeting in smaller groups as
suggested in the correspondencewas considered to be more useful.
Commissioner Ridgeway stated that he, as well as the advisory committee
representatives, would be happy to attend any meeting, to explain the zone code
changes. The work session for the code change is starting tonight and will likely
continue for at least another meeting.
Staff proceeded to briefly discuss the proposed new section on abatement
procedures and time periods.
Audrey Knopf, 303 Vista Trucia - asked the Commission how the new zoning code
would affect a sale of Eastbluff Elementary School land to a developer,what could
be built?
Staff answered that with this proposal, all school district properties are being
rezoned to the GEIF.District (Governmental, Education, and Institutional Facilities).
In order for school property to be sold for private development, that developer
would have to go through a General Plan Amendment and a zone change to
• 12
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
• Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
establish that entitlement.
Chairperson Adams assured Mrs. Knopf that she would have several means of
expressing her concerns if such a sale would happen.
Public Hearing was closed.
Commissioner Ridgeway stated that of the concerns voiced tonight, Catalina
Street does create a unique situation that needs to be reviewed before action is
taken. We do not have an adequate feel for what Catalina Street is. He asks that
Commission be given a copy of the old districting maps to compare with the new
districting maps.
Staff then referred to the exhibits on the wall showing the section of Catalina Street
that has MFR surrounded by R1 and R2 zoned properties with the predominant
development on the block being R2. In order to keep the community character
somewhat the same, reduction of MFR to R2 is necessitated. During the process of
these proposed changes, discussion was quite general. We are in a hearing mode
now to consider the consistency zone change. There is the ability within this
process to change the zone to R2 or to change the General Plan to rezone to MFR.
Further research can be done by staff to give more detailed information for the
• next meeting.
Staff then discussed the issues of the Newport Dunes property and Marina Park.
•
Chairperson Adams then asked the Commission if they have any further
information needs from staff with regards to the District Map Amendments.
Commissioner Ridgeway stated he supports going to R1 in the Bluffs, and requests
information on Catalina Street.
Chairperson Adams asked for a type of straw vote matrix for the next meeting for
the items under the Districting Maps with additional information requested. He
noted that he is a member of a subcommittee of the Balboa Peninsula Planning
Advisory Board that is dealing with McFadden Square. The issue of Marina Park
came up with regard to a future opportunity for opening the peninsula up to the
bay. This property is city owned and has an open space designation.
Staff answered that they would like to come back to discuss the issues of Marina
Park and the Dunes property to address the city's long term use of this property.
Commissioner Gifford asked that in the staff report an explanation of a
consideration analysis on the Dunes and Marina Park be expanded.
Staff discussed the possibility of a matrix being composed and part of the Appendix
that could be used to show the comparisons between the zoning code
13
11,101:1
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
classifications. The matrix would show use of the PC District to provide the City and
property owners the ability to customize the zone to a particular project within the
General Plan. Discussion continued.
Public Hearing was re- opened.
Mr. Jerry King of J. A. King and Associates addressed the Commission on the issues
of the Dunes as OS -A (Open Space - Active) now and for the Newport Beach
Country Club and Newport Beach Tennis Club there is discussion with the city for a
development of a new club house for the country and tennis clubs which
incorporate some additional residential uses. The revenue from these uses would
go to pay for the new structures. He would like the zoning to be PC. Regarding the
Dunes property there has been discussion both with the City and the County of
Orange on fulfilling the original proposal to develop those properties in
conformance with the County and to amend it to include additional development
and requests the change from OSA to PC also.
Staff answered that these concerns will also be part of the matrix for the next
meeting. Also included in the staff report will be a discussion on the use of the IS
overlay which would be a zoning that would be an overlay in addition to perhaps
a PC district and how staff recommends that this tool could be used by the City in
• certain areas. Permitted uses within the recreational facilitieswill also be addressed
at the request of Commissioner Gifford.
Chairperson Adams stated that the next step would be to ask for a presentation of
the Land Use regulations for residential and non - residential uses. He suggests that
the outline provided by the Planning Director be included in the staff report.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kranzley to continue this item until August 8,
1996.
Ayes: Thomson, Ridgeway, Kranzley, Adams, Gifford, Selich and Ashley
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
aaa
IX. Subject: Use of Community Development Block Grant Funds for
Economic Development Activities
On June 24, 1996, the City Council received a report from the Planning Department
regarding the potential use of Community Development Block Grant funds for
community and economic development activities. The report was prepared at the
request of Councilmember Edwards. Upon receiving the report, the City Council
directed that it be forwarded to the Planning Commission and Economic
Development Committee for discussion a nd comment.
• 14
INDEX
Item No 9
CDBG Funds
for Economic Develoom
Activities
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
Staff had no additional comments.
Discussion ensued with regarding how to have input, acquiring information on the
amount of money that is available, is it available for land acquisition to mitigate
blight, what is the process of pursuing to see if this is feasible and the amount of
$520,000 for this fiscal year and how it was appropriated.
Commissioner Kranzley noted that a portion of low and moderate income block
groups is on the peninsula. This area will be under the auspices of BPPAC.
sww
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS:
a.) City Council Follow -up - A verbal report by the Assistant City Manager
regarding City Council actions related to planning - Mrs. Wood reported
that on June 24th, the Airport Area Re- Zoning Study was initiated and
meetings have occurred; Council approved the Bay Club option
agreement and ground lease; and, adopted an Urgency Ordinance
Prohibiting Condominium Conversions on Balboa Island for 45 days with a
planning study being initiated. At the July 8th meeting, a change in zoning
• for development regulations on Balboa Island was initiated, approved an
application for a grant to take part in the "Quick Charge Program" for
electric vehicles within the community; and also approved in concept was
the McFadden Place Farmer's Market.
b.) Verbal report by the Planning Director regarding Outdoor Dining Permits,
Specialty Food Permits, Modification Permits and Temporary Use Permit
approvals - Outdoor Dining Permits were approved for El Ranchito
Restaurant and Niki's Tandoori Express; Specialty Food Permit was approved
for Niki's Tandoori Express; Modification Permits were approved for 1209
North Bay Front, 1911 East Bay Avenue, 2216 Pacific Drive, 210 Iris Avenue,
1706 Port Sheffield, 2500 Baypointe Drive, and 9 Bay Island. Disapproved
was 2500 Baypointe Drive. Copies of the findings and actions taken by the
Modifications Committee on June 27, July 3, July 5, July 11 and July 18 were
distributed in the packets. No call -ups by the Planning Commission were
requested.
c.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic
Development Committee- none.
d.) Verbal report from Planning Commission's representative to the Balboa
Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee - BPPAC is still engaged in the
workshop process.
e.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report on at a
• subsequent meeting - The Commission requested a report from the
15
INDEX
Additional
Business
• City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Minutes
June 20, 1996
r 1
u
Assistant City Attorney regarding the use of e-mail as it would be affected
by the Brown Act.
f.) Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on a future
agenda for action and staff report - Change start time to 7:00 p.m.
g.) Requests for excused absences -none
ADJOURNMENT: 9:20 p.m.
ED SELICH, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
16
INDEX