Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2005Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes October 20, 2005 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page 1 of 11 file: //F:\Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \P1nAgendas\2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, McDaniel and Henn Commissioner Henn was excused, all others present. STAFF PRESENT: Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner Gaylene Olson, Department Assistant PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Dr. Linda Orozco, a resident of Newport Beach, wanted to speak on rehab houses, not specifically in regards to Item No. 2. Dr. Orozc handed out documents regarding the following: • Highlights of concerns in Newport Beach regarding rehab houses. • Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, Residential and Outpatient Programs Compliance Branch Status Report. • Request for review. Dr. Orozco noted if treatment is being handled in rehab houses, the must have a license from Sacramento's Alcohol and Drug Program Department. She stated that currently in Newport Beach we have 12 rehab houses, rehabilitation or residential treatment centers, of which are in commercial property and 9 in residential areas. Concerns are these money making profit organizations were originally started to address local need. Currently about 88 percent of the individuals in these homes are from out of state, not addressing local need. Dr. rozco discussed briefly the items in the "Request for Review" hand -out, which covers the concerns of the City staffs plans to expand non- conforming use at residential property 1810 W. Oceanfront (Narcono Residential Treatment Business) from 27 to 49 occupancy. file: //F:\Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \P1nAgendas\2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Page 2 of 11 Joe Reese, resident of Newport Beach, wanted to know if resident would be notified why Item No. 2 was pulled and when it would be on the Benda again so they could speak on it. Chairperson Toerge answered Item No. 2 would be addressed tonight. No other public comments. Public comments closed. POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on October 14 2005. CONSENT CALENDAR OBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of September 22, 2005. ITEM NO. 1 Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner Cole to approve the minutes as Approved written. Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, and McDaniel Noes: None Absent: Henn Abstain: Toerge and Tucker HEARING ITEMS OBJECT: Carl & Barbara Mosen (PA 2005 -136) ITEM NO. 2 2811 Villa Way PA2006 -136 Use Permit to allow a "social club" for the purposes of group assembly. Continued to The application also requests a parking waiver of 55 spaces associated 11/17/05 with the existing use. Planning Director Patty Temple stated a request was received from the applicant to continue this item for 2 weeks. ames Person, representative for applicant, said applicant wanted item continued for 4 weeks not 2 weeks. Request for continuance was submitted by e-mail to staff and Commission on Tuesday afternoon. Chairperson Toerge noted his concerns with the number of public that me to the meeting to testify on these continued items and asked the tall, should the items be voted on first or open the items up to publi hearing for discussion. Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney, said to open each item to pub hearing individually. file:// F:l AppsIWEBDATA1Intemet lPlnAgendas12005\nn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Toerge opened Item No. 2 to public comment. iissioner McDaniel addressed the public and suggested that their cents would be of more value if they were presented on the date the were continued to. mes Person, representative for applicant, stated that he had advise( Weeda on October 19th that Item No. 2 was to be continued, and Weeda seems to have some contact with some of the people tha ire there to testify, so felt the applicant had made an effort to notify th( blic that this item was not to be heard tonight. James Person said thei :re not prepared to make a presentation tonight, there may be change: the site plan and are looking at a possible off street parking site. Low, resident of Newport Beach, noted the following: . He and many of the residents in the Cannery Village are with the serious parking problem. He was shocked that Item No. 2 was recommended in the report and how out of touch staff is with the parking problem. . That all parties be aware that many of the residents perceive tt is a severe parking problem at many of the business and look to Planning Commission as the governing body to be responsi protect the residents, and give them the consideration that they is necessary. Reese, resident of Newport Beach, noted the following concerns: . Disappointed that he was not notified of this hearing on Item No. 2. . Upset that since 1998 this company has been operating without use permit. 120 people showing up with only 2 drop off spots is tota unacceptable. They have 5 vans that he is aware of, 6 employee plus the doctors, psychologist, psychiatrist, and counselors, that well over 20 vehicles showing up on a regular basis. Where a they going to park without impacting the immediate and surroundii neighborhoods? 20 alcoholic and drug recovery homes that this company runs called non - profit but are doing this for profit. They are abusing City of Newport Beach. With the staff's recommendation on this item, we are ignoring these individuals are violating rules. Page 3 of 11 file: //F:\ Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \P1nAgendas \2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 There are too many bars and new alcohol rehab centers. It to be changed and improved. Linda Orozco reiterated some of her previous comments in ning Public Comment section plus the following: She spoke with the State's Alcohol and Drug F Department, and they were application stating they have they offer treatment. very surprise to see the applia 20 homes in Newport Beach and One can have a sober living facility for living purposes only with( any type of treatment and we cannot intervene. If they of program treatment of any kind, they must get a state license fr( the Alcohol and Drug Programs in Sacramento. Only 4 houses Newport Beach have such a license, for a total of 37 beds. T application for Item No. 2 has a 120 beds and not operating will the law in California if they are offering and requiring treatment. . They can charge $25,000 per person for a 3 month stay, adds up to millions of dollars. mmissioner Cole asked Dr. Orozco if only 4 rehab centers have ;nse through the State, isn't that a state enforcement issue and h gone to the State to enforce this issue. Dr. Orozco said the Sta Mks at all the things that go on inside the facility, they do not care abc rking, or delivery trucks; any impacts of zoning is a local issue. SI m spoke of the City of Irvine and how aggressive they are on enforcii 4 zoning code. It is similar to Newport Beach and there are no reh; uses in Irvine. Why is the Peninsula impacted? There isn't one facil Newport Coast or in the Heights. She has met numerous times w State and their legal counsel and had a recent conversation w :m in regards to Sober Living by the Sea. The State will close dov oilities that do not have licenses, but must be notified of the homes ai :ir addresses. Person noted that these facilities are not doing treatment and a residences of 6 or less as required by state law. The purpose pplication is to continue to keep treatment counseling and ott es in a centralized location and if not at this location, it is possil will be forced to have these meetings in the resident )orhood. The only reason for this use permit application is becau group rooms. ten Andros, a resident of Newport Beach, challenged Mr. Person these facilities do impact the residential neighborhood and impa daily. The noise factor of the people going to these facilities tings, on bicycles, walking, yelling and screaming at all hours of 1 Upset about the people coming in from out of state, who are r ayers but only here to pay fees towards the facility. She asked t Page 4 of 11 file: //F:\ Apps \WEBDATA\ Intemet \PlnAgendas \2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Page 5 of 11 )mmission to pay attention to the parking issue, number of these homes and many of the businesses in the area. comment closed. was made by Commissioner Tucker to continue this item er 17, 2005. MOTION CARRIED Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, and McDaniel None Henn None SUBJECT: Riviera Magazine (PA 2005 -185) ITEM NO. 3 424 32nd Street PA2005 -185 & PA2005 -239 The Cannery Restaurant (PA2005 -239) 3010 Lafayette Street Removed from calendar Use Permit to exceed the base Floor Area Ratio (FAR) resulting from the conversion of a 2nd floor 3,071 square foot residential unit to an office se. The conversion necessitates 10 additional parking spaces, which he applicant seeks to provide at an off -site parking lot located at 520 1st Street. end the existing off -site parking agreement between The Cannery Restaurant and the City of Newport Beach. The existing off -site parking agreement requires The Cannery Restaurant to reserve the 45 space off ite parking lot located at the southwest corner of 31st Street and Lafayette Avenue for the exclusive use of its patrons and employees. The proposed amended off -site parking agreement would allow The Cannery Restaurant to lease parking spaces to others when the parking lot is available. re proceeding with this item, Commissioner Tucker recused stepped down from the dais. Temple stated the applicant, Cannery Restaurant, has request offsite parking agreement amendment be withdrawn and because the original project for Riviera Magazine no longer has the offs ing supply identified. Riviera Magazine needs to find an alternate e location. Staffs recommendation is to remove this item fn idar and to indicate the Cannery's offsite parking agreem( ndment has been withdrawn. Toerge opened Item No. 3 to public comment. n Weeda, a resident and business owner in Newport Beach, pas the same material he brought into the Planning Department file: //F:\ Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \PinAgendas \2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 19th, which was copied and handed out to the Commission to them. Mr. Weeda is there to be the voice for many c Village owners and business operators. Their concerns are: . These applicants' requests would provide them with benefits not enjoyed by all. Would request these permit modifications and waivers be on basis of equal application of the code's provisions. . They support the property owners and their right to be there the same code. Weeda stated he has personally supported the Cannery Restaurant welcomes the Riviera Magazine. The parking situation in Cannery ge has become increasingly intolerable, and more so with Rudy's. Newport Beach Brewing Company and Cannery Restaurant. li tional parking waivers were added in, the pressure would boil over. Cannery Restaurant's parking management needs improvement. y do not need to park in the streets until their parking lot is full. Mr. :da was glad to see the Cannery Restaurant pull their request, but Id like to see a review of their parking situation. He stated the ,ific plan has a purpose and is there to ensure basic minimal dards that applies to all. Mr. Weeda feels there may be some small dems with the specific plan in Cannery Village and is willing to help t a new plan. Until that is done, all need to play by the same rules. was made by Chairperson Toerge to remove this item from the Page 6ofII Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge and McDaniel Noes: None Absent: Henn Abstain: Tucker SUBJECT: Newport Marina LLC (PA 2005 -072) ITEM NO.4 919 Bayside Drive PA2005 -072 applications would allow the redevelopment of the Newport Marina artment complex located at 919 Bayside Drive. The existing 64 -unit irtment complex, located on approximately 4.78 acres, will be nolished and replaced with a 17 -unit, gated residential community. tentative tract map proposes to establish 17 individual residential lot: custom home construction, 1 common recreational lot with possibly a rl and shade structure, 2 landscape /open space lots and waterfront lot staining floating docks (existing). Private streets are proposed. A uest to re -zone the site from MFR (Multi - Family Residential) to PC anned Community) is sought. The rezone is accompanied with a nned Community Development Plan text that will establish Pelopment and use standards for the proposed project similar to Continued to 1113105 file: //F:\ Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \PlnAgendas\2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Page 7 of 11 standards. coastal residential development permit is required as 64 residential are proposed to be demolished within the coastal zone and the act must be reviewed for compliance with the Government Code ion 65590 (Mello Act). The project also includes the demolition of the :ing apartment building and all associated structures, grading, illation of utilities, private streets, landscaping, site lighting, site walls, it quality improvements, access easements and upgrades to the is right of way adjacent to the project site. Temple noted the applicant has requested this item be continued to ember 3, 2005. Comment was opened. Comment was closed. was made by Chairperson Toerge to continued this item to aer 3, 2005. Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge and McDaniel Noes: None Absent: Henn Abstain: Tucker SUBJECT: Continued discussion of Recreation and Open Space, and, the ITEM NO. 5 Natural Resources Elements. General Plan Update aodie Tescher presented an overview of the element and introduc -.h goal for Commission discussion. The document reviewed indical anges made by the General Plan Advisory Committee at their meet October 15, 2005. The Commission made the following changes goals and policies presented. The changes were made isensus except where a straw vote is noted. imissioner Cole asked about the wording on page 7 under Sho ass. Ms. Wood indicated a sentence may have been deleted in it would be corrected. issioner Eaton pointed out on Page 9 under Service Area 11 in of the sentence seemed to contradict the second part. indicated staff would correct that error. nmissioner Tucker suggested inserting a phrase in Policy R1. ting the standard for high rise residential. Commissioner Hawkin gested "except as to high density developments require " leavin number blank until staff reviews standards in other areas and come file: //F:1Apps1WEBDATA1 Internet lPlnAgendas12005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 with a recommendation. Wood indicated staff would recommend reinstating the priority < Policy R1.10; the first three priorities have already been set by the iuncil. The Commission agreed. mmissioner Tucker asked about the language regarding Marina Policy R1.10 and proposed changing the language to "for rr i/or recreational facilities." iairman Toerge opened the Park and Recreational Facilities the public. lip Lugar, Co -Chair GPAC, advised the Commission that GPAC did it the priority listed in Policy R1.10, they felt priorities should be left neighborhoods and Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission. Toerge recommended changing Policy R4.8 to "Maintain an Toerge opened the Recreational Programs discussion to No comments offered. comments /changes from Commission. sirman Toerge opened the Shared Facilities discussion to the comments offered. comments /changes from Commission. Toerge opened the Coastal Recreation and Support to the public. No comments offered. Toerge suggested adding "pump -out stations" to Policy UiWll airman Toerge opened the Marine Recreation discussion to the comments offered. Page 8 of I 1 file: //F:1Apps1WEBDATA1 Internet lPhiAgendas120051mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 comments /changes from Commission. Toerge opened the Public Access discussion to the public. offered. imissioner Hawkins asked staff if this element had been reviewed I Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission. Ms. Wood indicated not gone to the Commission because their meeting for October w :gilled; it is scheduled for the November 10th meeting. Mr. Lug sd that there is a Subcommittee assigned to review the element pric BUSINESS: City Council Follow -up - Ms. Temple noted 3 items on the last Council agenda. Cc did the second reading and approved the 2 code amendm in relations to Condominium Conversion Parking Standards Basic Parking Standard for Two Family Residential Units are not in Corona del Mar or the coastal zone. Both ordinal to be effective 180 days from date of adoption. The other item on agenda was a City Council appeal of Planni Director's Use Permit No. 2005 -041, which was a use permit allow an independent massage establishment as part of existing beauty salon operation at 2721 E. Coast Hwy. T reason this was appealed was due to a concern by one of t council members that the locational restriction, as it relates the proximity of new use to other existing independent massa establishments, was an important thing that should be careft considered by Council. Council did discuss, at a modes length of time, and voted unanimously to uphold the Planni Director's approval. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Development Committee - none. Report from Planning Commission's representatives to the Plan Update Committee - Commissioner Eaton reported the General Plan UpdE Committee did meet. The meeting was called for the purpose looking at the format of the Land Use Element. An 85 pa document was handed out at the meeting. There are a lot items in the document and has be reformatted to feature t airport area and covers other areas in between. GPUC got it how to carry over some of the statistics from the existing La Use Element, since some have been incorporated into c Page 9 of 11 BUSINESS file: //F:\ Apps \WEBDATA\ Internet \PlnAgendas \2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Charter. First attempt by the consultant was to put a 1 line item foi each statistical area, which in some cases includes manj parcels, several traffic analysis zones and different land uses. It was determined that the consultants and staff need to wort out administrative problems. GPUC will have an additiona meeting next month. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Coastal Plan Certification Committee - Ms. Temple reported on the meeting of October 13, 2005 wi the Coastal Commission. There were two issue areas identifi4 where the City was not entirely happy with the final position the Coastal Staff. After talking with our Coastal Commissii consultant and our Biological Resources consultant and lookii at other policies which were left unchanged in our Land U: Plan, it was concluded this wasn't the best solution availat from the City's perspective, but the City still agreed to tl modifications. Council Member Ridgeway presented a pow point on our City and Patrick Alford made a few summit comments. We accepted the Coastal Commissior recommendation as finished in their addendum. We received unanimous vote of the Commission of 11 to zero. Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Committee - Commissioner Eaton stated the Zoning Committee had not met. Ms. Temple noted that Patrick Afford will now be handling thf Zoning Code project. Matters which a Planning Commissioner would like staff to report at a subsequent meeting - Commissioner Eaton had one item he would like addressed noted some of materials presented early on the Can Restaurant suggested they were operating beyond limitations of their CUP and would like staff have C Enforcement look at this. Ms. Temple stated it has been lot into and the Cannery is entirely consistent with their condil of approval. Commissioner Cole and Chairperson Toerge requested that issue on the public comments made tonight regarding property at 1810 Oceanfront, Narconon Residential Treatrr Center, be heard at a future meeting. Chairperson Toerge asked about the report on Chevron at Bayside. Ms. Temple stated Gregg Ramirez is still i on report. Page 10 of 11 file: //F:\ Apps\ WEBDATA\ Intemet \P1nAgendas \2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2005 Matters which a Planning Commissioner may wish to place on future agenda for action and staff report - None. Project status - None. Requests for excused absences - None. Page 11 of 11 IADJOURNMENT: 8:10 D.m. IADJOURNMENTI BARRY EATON, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION file: //F:\Apps\WEBDATA\ Internet \PlnAgendas\2005\mn10- 20- 05.htm 6/26/2008