Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/1990COMMISSIONERS REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES PLACE: City Council Chambers �c TIME: 7:30 P.M. DATE: December 6, 1990 * CITY * * OF NEWPORT * All Commissioners were present. BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX All Present * * * * * * * All Commissioners were present. r + + EX- OFFICIO OFFICERS PRESENT: James Hewicker, Planning Director Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager Rich Edmonston, City Traffic Engineer Dee Edwards, Secretary i i ■ • Minutes November 8. 1990: of minutes of 11 -8 -90 Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve the November 8, Ayes * * * * 1990, Planning Commission Minutes. MOTION CARRIED. - Abstain Public Comments: Public Comments No one appeared before the Planning Commission to speak on non - agenda items. Y k k Posting of the Agenda: Posting of the Agenda James Hewicker, Planning Director, stated that the Planning Commission Agenda was posted on Friday, November 30, 1990, in front of City Hall. • December 6, 1990 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX Request for Conunuances; Request Mr. Hewicker stated that staff has requested that Item No. 14, for Amendment No. 720 and Resubdivision No. 947, 1420 West Continuant Oceanfront Partnership, applicant, property located at 100 -106 15th Street, regarding a residential condominium development, be continued to the January 24, 1991, Planning Commission meeting so as to allow further consideration of the proposal. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 14 to the All Ayes January 24, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Resubdivision No. 854 (Extension )(Discussion) item No.l Request to permit a 6 month extension of a previously approved R854 (Ext) resubdivision which permitted the creation of a single parcel of land where five lots now exist. Approved LOCATION: Lots 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 3, East Newport, located at 501 West Bay Avenue, on the northwesterly corner of West Bay Avenue and Island Avenue, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: R -3 APPLICANT: Bay Island Club, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: RdM Surveying, Inc., Costa Mesa Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve a six month extension All Ayes for Resubdivision No. 854, subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any • easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. -2- December 6, 1990 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES Ao. 3 dIq s 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 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. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to final inspection of the new construction. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to record a parcel map or obtain a building permit prior to completion of the improvements. 4. That a new curb return with an 8 foot radius return be constructed at the intersection of West Bay Avenue and Island Avenue and the displaced portion of sidewalk be reconstructed along the Island Avenue frontage under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 5. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded on or before May 26, 1991. Resubdivision No. 946 (Public Hearing) item No.2 Request to resubdivide an existing lot into a single parcel of land R946 for two unit residential condominium purposes on property located in the R -2 District. Approved LOCATION: Lot 24, Block 12, Tract No. 234, located at 1201 West Balboa Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of 12th Street and West Balboa Boulevard, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: R -2 3 COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES & � ON \� \ CITY OF NEWPORT 6EACH ROLL CALL INDEX Roy Batelh ana Carla Lusvara4 balDoa OWNER: Same as applicants ENGINEER: Duca- McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar The public hearing was opened in connection with this item There being no one to appear before the Planning Commission, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion was made and voted on to approve Resubdivision No. 946, Motion All Ayes subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", with the assumption that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 2. 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. 3. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint. 4. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to occupancy. The parcel map shall be prepared so that the bearings relate to the State Plane Coordinate System. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by • Ordinance and the Public Works Department. -4- December 6, 1990 COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES ROLL CALL INDEX 0. Ilia arrangements De made wittIl Me ruMc VMr Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to record a parcel map prior to the completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit shall 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. 5. That the existing deteriorated sidewalk be reconstructed along the West Balboa Boulevard frontage and the survey tags reset; that the deteriorated sections of curb and sidewalk be reconstructed along the 12th Street frontage and that the alley and apron be reconstructed; and that the existing curb return at West Balboa Boulevard and 12th Street be reconstructed with a 15 foot radius with a curb access ramp included in the design of the return. All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by . the Public Works Department. 6. That a 10 foot radius corner cutoff at the corner of West Balboa Boulevard and 12th Street shall be dedicated to the public. 7. That walls and landscaping shall conform to STD 110 -L to provide adequate sight distance and shall be subject to further review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 8. That all vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 9. That disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. That no material and equipment storage be allowed on West Balboa Boulevard. -5- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES �4 �� A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 10. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code. 11. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 12. That a park dedication fee for one dwelling unit shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code. 13. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. A. Resubdivision No. 936 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.3 8936 Request to resubdivide three lots and a portion of a fourth lot into three parcels of land, each for two family residential purposes, on property located in the R -2 District. The proposal also includes an Approved exception to the Subdivision Code so as to allow the creation of parcels which are less than 5,000 square feet in area and less than 50 feet in width. AND B. Establishment of Grade (Discussion) Establish Grade Cont ' d to Request to establish grade for the purpose of measuring building heights on Parcels No. 2 and No. 3 of Resubdivision No. 936 in 1_10_91 accordance with Section 20.87.200 of the Municipal Code. LOCATION: Lots 3, 4, 5 and a portion of Lot 6, Block 132, Corona del Mar, located at 2612 - 2616 Ocean Boulevard, on the northeasterly side of Ocean Boulevard, between Dahlia Avenue and Fernleaf Avenue, in Corona del Mar. ZONE: R -2 -6- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES 'A \\ �0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLLCALL1 I Jill I INDEX APPLICANT: Thomas L. Kistinger, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Duca McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar James Hewicker, Planning Director, addressed the drawings that were submitted to the Planning Commission in the addendum to the staff report prior to the public hearing. Chairman Debay indicated that the request to establish grade was included in the public notice that was mailed to the property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Thomas L. Kistinger, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he requested that the subject property be resubdivided into three equal parcels. Mr. Kistinger stated that he . will retain one parcel and Mr. Roy Ward will purchase the remaining two parcels. Mr. Roy Ward, 2525 Ocean Boulevard, appeared before the Planning Commission, and he indicated that the project would be developed within the zoning requirements of the R -2 District. Mr. Ward concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" (Revised). He addressed Resubdivision No. 936, Condition No. 6, stating "That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by the City Council. ", wherein he explained that the condition poses a design problem. He stated that it creates and adds to the grade issue inasmuch as the parking would be 10 feet to 13 feet higher at the rear of the property than at the front of the property. Mr. Ward requested that if the Planning Commission does not concur with the proposal that was submitted by the applicants, that the project be approved with the condition that the development must meet the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation. Mr. Ward determined that there is a conflict in Exhibit "A' (Revised), Resubdivision No. 936, between Condition No. 1, '"That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. The parcel map shall be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. ", and Condition No. 15, "That prior to recordation of the parcel map, all structures on the -7- COMMISSIONERS .o � a� 0 o I y� in N December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROL CALL INDEX subject property shall be removed. ". Mr. Ward asked for an assurance that there will not be obstacles when the applicant is applying for a Demolition Permit and a Grading Permit to grade the lot to provide the necessary on -site improvements as stated in Exhibit "A" (Revised), Resubdivision No. 936, Condition No. 12. Mr. Ward agreed to provide a curb and sidewalk on Ocean Boulevard as requested in Condition No. 5, Resubdivision No. 936, Exhibit "A" (Revised), on the basis that the applicant will be allowed to pull the permits and pay the fees to the Public Works Department. In response to Mr. Ward's requests, Mr. Hewicker stated that there would not be a problem to issue a Demolition Permit; however, he explained there would be a problem to issue a Building Permit for the new single family dwelling prior to the time that the Parcel Map is recorded. Mr. Hewicker commented that until the Parcel Map is recorded staff would be in a situation where the City would be issuing 'a Building Permit for a new single family dwelling that crossed over existing lot lines inasmuch as the idea is to shift the lot lines and have the new lot lines recorded prior to the time the Building Permit is issued. Mr. Ward agreed with Mr. Hewicker's comments regarding the issuance of a Building Permit wherein he explained that the request is to be able to proceed in an orderly manner toward the finalization of the Parcel Map before the issuance of the Building Permit. Mr. Ward agreed with Chairman Debay that four units would be constructed on two parcels in addition to two units on the third parcel. Mr. Hewicker concurred with a statement posed by Commissioner Pomeroy that two additional parking spaces would be provided on Ocean Boulevard if the curb cut on Ocean Boulevard would be abandoned. In response to a statement posed by Mr. Hewicker regarding the approval of the 24/28 Foot Height Limitation and the approval of the Resubdivision even if the changing of grade may. not be approved, Mr. Ward stated that the foregoing would be acceptable. Mr. Ward stated that the neighbors have concerns that their views would be impacted by the project. Mr. Hewicker indicated that if 8 COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES �0 y� A A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX the Planning Commission approves the Establishment of Grade there would not be a need to apply for a discretionary permit inasmuch as the grade would be changed and the height of the building would be measured from the new grade. He explained that if the existing grade is maintained as it currently exists on the property, the proposed design of the buildings would require the approval of a use permit or a variance, depending upon the circumstances to justify the additional height of the building above the existing grade. Mr. Hewicker indicated that approval of the new grade would allow a third living level above the garage adjacent to the alley which could not be implemented with the proposed design of the buildings at existing grade. Mr. Hewicker stated that the request does not provide a site plan for the project, and once the grade is changed, then the applicant can use a new line of reference from which a building can be designed and constructed. Mr. Hewicker stated that the Establishment of Grade has been a controversial issue before the Planning Commission and there have been very few requests that have been approved. He explained that the applications that have been approved, have been approved upon the finding that without the change of grade, the building would be built in an unworkable area. Mr. Hewicker referred to previous applications that have been submitted for Establishment of Grade on Ocean Boulevard. Mr. Hewicker indicated that the existing structures on the site are older buildings that would be demolished, and he stated that the floors and grades that exist around the existing buildings are the grade that must he adhered to with respect to the construction of new dwelling units unless a new grade is established. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that old structures were built with pits for gravity furnaces because that was the only type of heating system that was commonly used at the time they were constructed; therefore, an old structure that is demolished may have a large basement that is 5 feet to 8 feet deep. He used as a comparison, slabs of structures that were built at grade after 1950. Commissioner Pomeroy determined that if there would be a straight line from one end of a lot to another end of a lot, and a hole in the center, there would not be an impact on view inasmuch as the lower portion of the building would be in the center of the lot and would be blocked by the front and the rear of the structure. -9- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, referred to the foregoing drawings that were provided by staff describing the area of depression of the proposed grade. Mr. Laycock explained that Figure 2A demonstrates a straight line from the alley to the sidewalk on Ocean Boulevard depicting the area on Lots 2 and 3 of the proposed grade which is to be higher than a straight line grade. Mr. Laycock explained that Figures 1A and 1B describes the similarity of Lots 2 and 3 to the grade to the adjoining properties. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Ward concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" (Revised). Mr. Jim Corcoran, the architect's planner, appeared before the Planning Commission, and he addressed the issue of preserving the driveways on Ocean Boulevard. Mr. Corcoran expressed his concern with respect to an automobile descending 4 feet because of the fall of the grade adjacent to the alley. Mr. Corcoran, Commissioner Pomeroy, and Mr. Hewicker discussed the existing • garages adjacent to the alley at the rear of the property and what the applicants are proposing because of the level of the parcels. Commissioner Merrill suggested that the third levels of the proposed buildings be removed from the project wherein he recommended that the applicants provide plans of the development so as to review the impact the project would have on the neighborhood. Mr. Corcoran responded that the applicant has plans that could be submitted to the Planning Commission to review the project. Mr. Ward suggested that the Planning Commission condition the application so as to allow the applicant to work with staff regarding the grading plan, and then come back to the Planning Commission with a final proposal. Mr. Jim Rogers, 2240 University Drive, architect, appeared before the Planning Commission in response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards. Mr. Rogers explained that the applicants are not proposing a modification to the original request, that staff has suggested as an alternative a straight line grade adjustment and the applicants are responding that they would agree to the recommendation. -10- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES d �" N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Hewicker replied that if the applicants applied for a use permit or a variance, complete plans would be required for the Planning Commission to review. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the Planning Commission approve the Resubdivision and continue the Establishment of Grade so as to allow the applicants additional time to provide the Planning Commission with additional site plan drawings. Mr. Ward agreed with Commissioner Pers6n's recommendation. In response to a comment posed by Commissioner Pomeroy with respect to the Planning Commission giving the applicants a recommendation for the project, Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the applicant minimize the necessity to adjust the existing grade. Commissioner . Edwards concurred. Commissioner Person addressed the few Establishment of Grade applications that the Planning Commission has reviewed, and he commented that the change of grade would have to be absolutely necessary. Mr. Ward concurred with Commissioner Person's statement, and he addressed the emphasis the applicants have taken to adhere to the neighbors' concerns with respect to the impact the project would have on the area. Commissioner Merrill addressed the issue of the substandard lots that would be developed as a result of the Resubdivision. Mr. Hewicker commented that the City Council and the Planning Commission have repeatedly approved lots that are smaller than those permitted under the current Subdivision Code when the lots are at least the same size or larger than the prevailing lot sizes in the area. He indicated that there are ways that the subject property can be developed as three parcels without coming back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Dean Wickstrom, 209 Fernleaf Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission, and he distributed photographs of the various grades of lots on Ocean Boulevard. He recommended that the application to establish grade be denied, and the natural grade be retained. Mr. Wickstrom referred to the lot that is adjacent to Lot No. 3, and he commented that it would appear that the large lot that contains a small dwelling was graded so as to accommodate a considerable amount of landscaping at the rear of the property. In response to comments that Mr. Wickstrom made concerning the -11- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLT CALL INDEX grading of Lot No. 2 as it relates to Lot No. 3 east of said lot, Mr. Laycock referred to the foregoing drawings and he described the "area of depression" as outlined in red on the drawings. Mr. Hewicker explained the sections were drawn at the new lot line, which means that the new lot is being compared to the existing grade of the adjacent lot to the east. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Wickstrom replied that his objection of the project would be that it is raising the height of what the average house maintains on Ocean Boulevard. Mr. Wickstrom distributed photographs of structures on Ocean Boulevard from Carnation Avenue to Dahlia Avenue that shows the average height of two story dwellings. He drew an outline on a photograph of the impact the development. would have on the neighborhood. Mr. Wickstrom referred to Chapter 20.02 of the Municipal Code, stating that if the grade is increased it must be assured that the unique character and scale of the neighborhood is preserved. Commissioner Pomeroy emphasized that the bulk of the building and the height of the building from the alley and Ocean Boulevard does not change. Mr. Wickstrom replied that he did not understand how the applicants could construct a third story on the building without increasing the height and bulk. Mr. Wickstrom and Commissioner Pomeroy discussed the requested bulk and height of the proposed structure. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Wickstrom replied that he does not object to the Resubdivision. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay regarding the distribution of dirt on the lots, Mr. Hewicker replied that if the subject parcels would be similar to adjacent grade there would be an even slope between the front of the lot and the back of the lots. Mr. Hewicker explained that the building as designed exceeds the height limit in the middle of the lot, and if the applicants eliminated the third living level on the back of the property there would not be a need to change the grade. Mr. Hewicker addressed the neighbors' concerns regarding the view impact the proposed • project would have on the neighborhood. -12- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Mr. John Stearns, 2711 Seaview Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission, and he commented that he had recently constructed a second story on his house, including a balcony, which gives them a limited but direct view of the water. Mr. Steams stated that he contacted staff; and Mr. Ward regarding the impact the project would have on his property. He further stated that a photograph taken by Mr. Ward from his balcony of the view of the water shows that the proposed structure would not have much of an impact on his property. Mr. Stearn indicated that the proposed ridge of the new structure is going to be 7 feet higher than the existing ridge line. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the Planning Commission does not protect private views. Mr. Walter M. Drake, 2627 Seaview Avenue, appeared before the . Planning Commission, and he referred to comments made to him by the City that he would not be allowed to build above the height limit inasmuch as his house sits below the sidewalk. He indicated that he has no objection to the proposed development as long as • the natural grade is maintained. Mr. Drake addressed his concern regarding the removal of automobiles on Ocean Boulevard and the alley congestion. Mr. Craig Clark, 2615 Way Lane, appeared before the Planning Commission and he submitted a letter from an adjacent property owner wherein he requested that the project adhere to the existing zoning regulations so as to maintain the character of Old Corona del Mar. Mr. Skip Opsomer, 208 Dahlia Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he requested a clarification of the proposed project. Mr. Hewicker explained the applicant's request to raise the grade of the lots in the middle of the property midway between the sidewalk and the alley. In response to a question posed by Mr. Opsomer regarding the height of other structures on Ocean Boulevard, Commissioner Pomeroy replied that if the proposed structure would be developed at the maximum height allowed, then it could be higher than other buildings on the street but it would be completely and totally within the Zoning Code. ® Mr. Drake reappeared before the Planning Commission to request a clarification of Commissioner Pomeroy's foregoing statement. -13- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES d December 6, 1990 0 A "' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Commissioner Pomeroy described the height of the building from the sidewalk to the alley, wherein he commented that the applicant's request is only to establish grade in the depressed area. Mr. Hewicker explained that to change the grade in the middle of the lot would facilitate the construction of the third floor adjacent to the alley. Commissioner Merrill and Commissioner Pomeroy discussed the height of the third floor living area as it is proposed, and the relocation of the parking from Ocean Boulevard to the rear of the property. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Merrill, Mr. Hewicker explained that Council Policy provides when there is vehicular access to an alley that the access to the street shall be closed unless given approval by the City Council. Mr. Hewicker further explained that if the applicant had a desire to retain the existing curb cut on the street that it would be necessary to have the approval of City Council. Rich Edmonton, City Traffic Engineer, explained that in the case of a remodel, the existing curb cut could remain but inasmuch as the request is for additional units then there is a change in character. • Mr. Edmonston explained that the City would prefer access from the alley instead of from Ocean Boulevard. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Glover regarding access from the alley and Ocean Boulevard, Mr. Hewicker explained that there are several three story structures on Ocean Boulevard that take access from the alley that were built in accordance with the zoning regulation that were in effect at the time they were constructed. Mr. Ward reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein he explained that the primary issue to establish grade in the middle of the lots is to level off the garage floor and provide parking under the structure. Mr. Ward stated that there is an economic reason for trying to develop decent, livable, useful structures that is provided under the present zoning. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Ward stated that he would agree to continue the Establishment of Grade request. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. • -14- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES s90 Y, 4� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Motion * Motion was made to approve Resubdivision No. 936 subject to the findings and conditions in connection with the Resubdivision in Exhibit "A" (Revised), and that the Establishment of Grade be continued for further review to January 10, 1991. Commissioner Pers6n suggested that the applicants consider an elimination of the request for the Establishment of Grade. Substitute Substitute motion was made and voted on to approve Motion Resubdivision No. 936 subject to the findings and conditions in _ All Ayes connection with the Resubdivision In Exhibit "A' (Revised). MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Glover supported the original motion; however, she addressed her concern that the parcels may not be able to contain duplexes because of the parking issue, and she suggested that a reduction in the density of the units. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Hewicker explained that it may not be possible to design a duplex as large as requested by the • applicant; however, he commented that a duplex could be designed to fit the property. Commissioner Merrill concurred with Commissioner Glover's foregoing statement. Commissioner Pers6n commented that the Planning Commission has approved the Resubdivision which gives the applicant three lots in the R -2 District, which permits a duplex or a two unit residential condominium on each lot. pointed out that the approval did not address the height limit. Commissioner Pomeroy stated that the method of measuring grade does not adequately consider differences in construction and mechanical changes to what was, at one time, a relatively uniform grade. He determined that there needs to be some measure for an individual homeowner, if there is a basement in the center of his property or an unnatural depression that is not going to impact the bulk on the front of the house, or the bulk on the alley, to make an adjustment through action of the staff or the Modifications Committee. He emphasized that the City has been downzoned, and reduced building heights, so property owners who have expensive small lots on the beach cannot build a home that they believe is livable where people who live next door already have the • big large home because they built their structure when the building bulk was not the same at it currently exists. He continued to -15- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1996 MINUTES lb '\\' \� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX emphasize that the parking requirements have been increased, counting the garage as part of the structure, and the remodeling ordinance has been modified so a property owner no longer can remodel 90% of the building. Commissioner Pers6n pointed out that the purpose of the original motion is for the applicant to reexamine. the application for the Establishment of Grade and either bring back more information to the Planning Commission or to eliminate the request. Motion was Ayes voted on to continue the Establishment of Grade to the Planning Noes * * Commission meeting of January 10, 1991. MOTION CARRIED. RESUBDIVISION NO, 936 FINDINGS: 1. That the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any • easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 2. 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. 3. That the proposed resubdivision presents no problems from a planning standpoint so long as the existing structures on the site are removed prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 4. That there are special circumstances affecting the property since the new parcels to be created will he no smaller than parcels established by the original subdivision of the area. 5. That the proposed parcels are similar in size to other parcels in the same block of the subject property. 6. That the granting of the requested exceptions will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other • properties in the vicinity of the subject property. -16- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 7. That if the exceptions were denied, the petitioner would be deprived of a substantial property right enjoyed by others in the area. 8. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19.08.020 of the Municipal Code and Section 66415 of the Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS: 1. That a parcel map be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. The parcel map shall be prepared using the State Plane Coordinate System as a basis of bearing. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That arrangements be made with the Public Works • Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements if it. is desired to record a parcel map prior to the completion of the public improvements. 4. That each dwelling unit shall 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. 5. That curb and sidewalk shall be reconstructed along the Ocean Boulevard frontage. The existing curb cuts and drive aprons along Ocean Boulevard shall be replaced with curb and sidewalk. All work within the right -of -way shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 6. That all vehicular access to the property be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 7. That disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be • minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and -17- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 8. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code. 9. That County Sanitation District fees be paid prior to issuance of any building permits 10. That the on -site parking and .driveway access shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 11. That the Public Works plan check and inspection fee be paid. 12. That a hydrology and hydraulic study be prepared by the • applicant 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 parcel 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. 13. That park dedication fees for four dwelling units shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 19.50 of the Municipal Code prior to recordation of the parcel map. 14. That this resubdivision shall expire if the map has not been recorded within 3 years of the date of approval, unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission. 15. That prior to recordation of the parcel map, all structures on the subject property shall be removed. 16. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the recordation of the parcel map. • -18- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES N � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 17. That the maximum driveway grade shall be 15 percent with a maximum break -over angle of 11 percent and the maximum garage floor grade shall be 5 percent. 18. That on the alley, a minimum 6 inch rise shall be provided from flow line of the alley to a high point in the drive apron, approximately 5 feet behind flow line, prior to descending into the garage; that a sidewalk shall be constructed along the Ocean Boulevard frontage and the existing drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk; and that all work be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Planning Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at • 9:05 p.m. Use Permit No. 3307 (Extension)(Discussion) Item No.4 Request to permit a three year, three month extension of a UP3307 previously approved use permit which permitted the installation of 25,588± square feet of temporary modular trailers for office use on Approved property located in "Light Industrial Site No. 1" of the Koll Center Newport Planned Community. LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2, Tract No. 7953, located at 4311 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly side of Jamboree Road, between MacArthur Boulevard, and Birch Street, in the Koll Center Newport Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Rockwell International, Newport Beach • OWNER: Same as applicant -19- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A CITY OF NEWPORT 6EACH ROLL CALL INDEX James Hewicker, Planning Director, addressed Condition No. 2 in Exhibit "A", stating "That total development on -site shall not exceed 403,775 square feet. This condition will require the reduction of 6 square feet of space in the proposed temporary facilities. ", wherein he suggested that at least the second sentence be deleted to eliminate the reduction of 6 square feet inasmuch as the applicant developed approximately one -half of the approved square footage that was originally requested. Mr. Hewicker further stated that the General Plan has been amended to add square footage to the parcel. Mr. Pat Allen, Langdon & Wilson, Architects, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicants, and he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3307 Ayes (Extension) in accordance with the findings and conditions in Mo Exhibit "A" with the exception that Condition No. 2 shall be deleted. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That there will be adequate parking to serve the temporary modular trailers. 4. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3307 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 to the general welfare of the City. • -20- COMMISSIONERS December 6 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and elevation, except as noted below. 2. Deleted. 3. That handicapped parking shall be provided as required by Code, and that the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated solely for handicapped self parking and shall be identified in a manner acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. Said parking spaces shall be accessible to the handicapped at all times. A handicapped sign on a post shall be required for each handicapped parking space. 4. That any restriping or revisions to the on -site parking layout • shall meet the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 5. That this extension of Use Permit No. 3307 shall be granted until June 30, 1994, and any extension shall be approved by the Modifications Committee. 6. At such time as the applicant's use of the temporary buildings cease or the use permit expires, whichever happens first, the buildings shall be removed from the site, and the property shall be restored to its present condition. 7. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 8. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section • 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -21- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 6, 1990 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended)(Public Hearing) Item No.5 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which UP1421A permitted the expansion of the Hoag Memorial Hospital facilities Approved on property located in the A -P -H and the Unclassified Districts. The proposed amendment involves a request to permit the installation of two ground identification signs at the new West Coast Highway entry located on the lower campus of the hospital property and an as-built wall sign on the expanded parking structure located on the; upper campus of the hospital site. LOCATION: Parcel No. 1 of Record of Survey 15 -30, located at 301 Newport Boulevard, on the southwesterly corner of Hospital Road and. Newport Boulevard, and a portion of Lot 172, Block 1, Irvine's Subdivision, located at 4000 West Coast Highway, on the northerly side of West Coast Highway, between Newport Boulevard and Superior Avenue. ZONES: A -P -H and Unclassified APPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Peter Foulke, Senior Vice President, Hoag Hospital, appeared before the Planning Commission. He concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" with the exception of Finding No. 3 which states "That the proposed and existing signage is not internally illuminated and is also oriented towards West Coast Highway and will not have an adverse impact on any residential properties in the vicinity. ". Mr. Foulke explained that the intent is to have the signs at the entrance to the property on West Coast Highway to be internally lit so as to provide less light spillage then if there would be light shining on to the signs, and the internal lights would avoid shining light into the buildings on the bluff. -22- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Discussion ensued with respect to Finding No. 3. Mr. Foulke stated that the proposed plans do not show if the signs are proposed to be internally illuminated. Mr. Hewicker suggested that Finding No. 3 be modified to state "That the proposed signage will not have an adverse impact on any residential properties in the vicinity." Mr. Foulke concurred with the modification to Finding No. 3. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1421 All Ayes (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", as amended. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the band • Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding uses. 2. 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. 3. That the proposed signage will not have an adverse impact on any residential properties in the vicinity: 4. That the approval of this amendment to Use Permit No. 1421 (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 to the general welfare of the City. • _23_ COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 1421 (Amended) shall be fulfilled and remain in effect. 3. That a building permit shall be obtained for the as -built wall sign construction on the facade of the parking structure and a separate building permit for the proposed entry monument signs. 4. That the proposed entry signs shall be set back from the property line to provide sight distance for a Major Highway in conformance with City Standard 110 -L. Slopes, • landscape, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping .located within the sight line shall not exceed a height of twenty-four (24) inches above grade. The sight distance requirement may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 5. That the lighting system for the signs shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent streets. 6. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 7. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -24- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A °g 6'�NIP\ '4\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL III Jill INDEX Use Permit No. 1672 (Amended)(Public Hearing) Item No.6 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which UP1672 (A) permitted the establishment of a United Methodist Church and related facilities including a pre - school /day care center on Approved property located in the R -3 -B District. The proposed amendment involves a request to construct a new 1,050± sq.ft. building which will include an administrative office, a conference room and teacher's lab, all of which will be used in conjunction with the existing pre - school and day care facility. LOCATION: Parcel 7 of Parcel Map 7 -42, (Resubdivision No. 225), located at 1601 Marguerite Avenue, on the northwesterly corner of Marguerite Avenue and San Joaquin Hills Road, adjacent • to Harbor View Hills. ZONE: R -3 -B APPLICANT: Newport Center United Methodist Church, Corona del Mar OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Richard Fleming, Architect, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. He concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A". James Hewicker, Planning Director, referred to Finding No. 5 in Exhibit "A ", stating "That the Police Department has no objections . with the proposed development.", wherein he explained that the Assistant City Attorney has stated that unless it was specifically discussed in the body of the staff report that the issue had been referred to the Police Department, and the Police Department responded that they did not have an objection to the application, that it would not be appropriate to include the finding in Exhibit "A". He suggested that Finding No. 5 be deleted. -25- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES ON \%p \\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 1672 All Ayes (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" with the deleting of Finding No. 5. MOTION CARRIED. Fin in : 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have a significant environmental impact. 3. That the proposed structure is to be utilized in conjunction with the existing preschool, will not increase the number of • seats in the sanctuary and therefore will not increase the parking demand for the facility. 4. That adequate off - street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 5. Deleted. 6. That the approval of Use Permit No. 1672 (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 the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and elevations. 2. That all trash areas shall be shielded or screened from . public streets and adjoining properties. -26- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINl1TES ,po � q� A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the recycling storage building, unless otherwise screened from view, shall remain closed at all times and that all recycling materials shall not be allowed to accumulate outside the building or in view of adjoining properties or the public streets. 4. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 1672 and No. 1672 (Amended) as approved by the Planning Commission shall be fulfilled and remain in effect. 5. That a minimum of 78 parking spaces shall be provided on- site and that the parking lot striping shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide, and the parking lot layout shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 6. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces • shall be designated within the on -site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self - parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 7. 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. 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. • -27- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES 0\ o � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLLCALL111 Jill I INDEX Use Permit No. 3397 (Public Hearing) item No.7 Request to permit the establishment of a restaurant with on -sale UP3397 alcoholic beverages on property located in General Commercial Site No. 1 of the Newport Place Planned Community. Approved LOCATION: Lot 2, Tract No. 7694, located at 3601 Jamboree Road, on the northwesterly comer of Jamboree Road and Bristol Street North, in the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P -C APPLICANT: Glynnis Walker, Laguna Niguel OWNER: Champion /LBS Associates, Long Beach James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that Finding No. 6 in Exhibit "A", stating "That the Police Department has no objections with the proposed development." be deleted at the request of the City Attorney's Office inasmuch as staff did not discuss the findings of the Police Department in the body of the staff report. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Ms.Glynnis Walker, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein she concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". Ms. Elizabeth Hoxworth, Vice President of Leasing for Champion Development, appeared before the Planning Commission. Ms. Hoxworth referred to Condition No. 10 in Exhibit "A" stating that all restaurant employees shall be required to park on -site during the time the restaurant is operating, and she suggested that the condition be clarified to state 'for all employees that drive' inasmuch as there may be employees that arrive at the restaurant by other means of travel. Mr. Hewicker stated that the condition is not intended to require the employees to park on -site if they take a bus or ride a bicycle, etc. -28- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Ms. Hoxworth referred to Condition No. 4 in Exhibit 'W regarding the construction of an access ramp at the corner of Bristol Street North and Dove Street, reconstruction of the sidewalk along Dove Street, Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road frontages, and the replacement of the broken water meter box on Dove Street, and she responded that the property owners are currently making the requested improvements. Ms. Hoxworth referred to Condition No. 12 in Exhibit "A" requesting one parking space for each 50 square feet of "net public area ", and she concurred that said requirement is standard in the industry and the condition would be acceptable to the property owner. Ms. Hoxworth addressed future development of the property and she requested that the shopping center's parking requirement be revised. Chairman Debay responded that the Planning Commission would consider the operational characteristics of future establishments and the traffic generated by the use on a case by case basis. Commissioner Person commented that the • Planning Commission has seldom approved a request to modify parking requirements from one parking space per 40 square feet of "net public area" to one parking space per 50 square feet of "net public area ". William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, indicated that if the subject restaurant is approved at one parking space per 50 square feet of "net public area" that 16 surplus parking spaces would remain in the shopping center. Ms. Hoxworth stated that the shopping center contains 35,000 square feet of floor area, the subject restaurant has approximately 1,600 square feet of "net public area ", and the proposed uses would be service- oriented and would not require a high level of parking. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3397 subject to the Ayes findings and conditions in Exhibit 'W, deleting Finding No. 6. No Following a discussion between Commissioner Pers6n, Commissioner Edwards, and Mr. Laycock regarding the aforementioned Condition No. 12, Commissioner Pers6n amended the motion to request that Condition No. 12 state "..one parking space for each 45 square feet of "net public area "...:.. In response -29- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINOTES Ok\ S CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Laycock stated that 12 parking spaces would be available for future uses if one parking space for each 45 square feet of "net public area" were approved. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover regarding the "Specialty Food" parking requirement, Mr. Laycock explained that said use would require 4 parking spaces, and he further stated that street parking is not allowed in Newport Place. Mr. Hewicker commented that if the Planning Commission had a concern with one parking space for each 50 square feet of "net public area ", that the condition could be amended to one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area ", and if the property owner had a desire to amend the parking requirement based upon the performance of the subject restaurant, then the Planning Commission could reconsider the request. Commissioner Pers6n amended the motion to request that Condition No. 12 in Exhibit "A' be modified to state "That one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area" in the restaurant facility shall be provided on- site." Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3397 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ", including the deletion of Finding No. 6, and amending Condition No. 12 to state .. "one parking space for each 40 square feet of "net public area! ..... ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed restaurant is consistent with the General Plan and the Newport Place Planned Community Development Standards, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That the project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That the proposed restaurant use can be adequately served by existing on -site parking. 4. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large -30- COMMISSIONERS a V\ December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 5. That public improvements may be required of the developer in accordance with Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 6. Deleted. 7. That the waiver of development standards as they pertain to walls will not be. detrimental to the adjoining properties given the developed characteristics of the existing facility. 8. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3397 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 the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations. 2. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 3. That all vehicular access rights to Bristol Street North, except at the new driveway, be released and relinquished to the City of Newport Beach by the property owner. 4. That an access ramp be constructed at the corner of Bristol Street North and Dove Street and at the drive aprons on Bristol Street North and on Dove Street. That cracked and displaced sections of sidewalk be reconstructed along the Dove Street, Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road frontages, and that the broken water meter box be replaced on Dove Street. That all work be completed under an • -31- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 0 December 6, 1990 q �\ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department on Dove Street and Jamboree Road and under a Caltrans Encroachment Permit on Bristol Street North. 5. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains unless otherwise approved by the Building Department and the Public Works Department. 6. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the restaurant where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department and the Public Works Department. 7. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 8. That restaurant development standards pertaining to walls shall be waived. 9. That dancing or live entertainment shall not be permitted in conjunction with this restaurant unless an amendment to this use permit is first approved by the Planning Commission. 10. That all restaurant employees shall be required to park on- site at all times during the time which the restaurant is operating. 11. That all trash areas and mechanical equipment shall be shielded or screened from public streets and adjoining properties. 12. That one parking space for each 40 sq.ft. of "net public area" in the restaurant facility shall be provided on -site. 13. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to the 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 -32- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I INDEX use permit, causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the community. 14. That this use permit shall expire if not exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Use Permit No. 3398 (Public Hearin Item No.8 Request to permit the establishment of a commercial dry cleaning UP3398 facility on property located in the C -1 District. Approved LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 57 -4 (Resubdivision No. 397), located at 3305 Newport Boulevard, on the westerly side of Newport Boulevard • between 32nd Street and Finley Avenue, across from the Newport Beach City Hall. ZONE: C -1 APPLICANT: Peter Hacatoryan, Newport Beach OWNER: Jeff Pence, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Peter Hacatoryan, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission, and he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pers6n, Mr. Hacatoryan replied that he would have full dry cleaning facilities on the property. He further responded that he owns full dry cleaning establishments on Bayside Drive and in the Newport North Center. Mr. Pak, owner of a dry cleaning facility on 32nd Street, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Pak stated the business merchants located on the same block as the proposed business did -33- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES 0 �. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I Jill I INDEX not receive public notices regarding the subject public hearing. Mr. Hewicker explained that a public notice is posted on the property and public notices are mailed to the property owners within 300 feet of the subject property, and not the tenants. Mr. Pak further stated that the merchants are concerned with parking inasmuch as he had determined 15 parking spaces would be required for the subject establishment. He indicated that 10 employees are necessary to operate a full dry cleaning business in the manner he operates his facility, and he explained that based on his calculations, that 5 parking . spaces would ' be available to the customers. Chairman Debay responded that the applicant has stated that four employees would operate the establishment. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Pak explained that his dry cleaning business is located adjacent to Lucky Market on 32nd Street, and that he is concerned about the competition from the subject facility. iIn response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Hewicker replied that parking for the subject property would be located at the side of the building. Mr. Ted Barry, 409 Hohnwood Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Barry explained that his family owns the property located at 31st Street and Newport Boulevard, and the family owned industrial engineering business specializes in the design and operation of dry cleaning facilities. Mr. Barry commented that his concern of the proposed uses for the subject site is the parking impact that the uses would have in the area. Mr. Barry determined that the peak hours that customers use a dry cleaning facility are from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m, and from 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Barry determined that the gymnasium that was previously located at the subject site had similar parking requirements; however, he commented that the facility was used throughout the day. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Barry replied that the average time for a transaction ranges from 3 to 9 minutes. Commissioner Pomeroy determined that according • to Mr. Barry's calculations 60 customers could be accommodated -34- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX in an hour. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Hewicker replied that the proposed dry cleaning facility would be located in a building that would provide legal, non - conforming parking. In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Barry explained the difference in time that a customer would spend to drop off and pick up laundry and a full service dry cleaning facility. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Glover, Mr. Barry replied that the developer of the subject property has improved the parcel; however, he objected to the impact that the proposed uses would have on the area.. Mr. Jeff Pence, property owner of the subject site, appeared before the Planning Commission wherein he stated that he has 14 dry cleaning tenants located in other shopping centers that he owns. Mr. Pence rebuked the foregoing statements by stating that it does not take more than two minutes to transact business at a dry . cleaning establishment. Mr. Pence stated that the Great American Bank manager, adjacent to the subject property, informed him that Wells Fargo Bank has purchased the bank property and the bank building will be remodeled. He commented that the bank parking is across the alley and not adjacent to the subject property. Mr. Pence indicated that the bank manager stated that Great American Bank would not object to the proposed facilities using the bank property when the bank is closed. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Pence replied that he could not provide the foregoing agreement in writing because the new bank supervisor would have to provide the document and the supervisor is presently located in San Francisco. Mr. Pence stated that his conversation with the present Bank Manager could be verified by telephone. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Pence replied that he did not contact the merchants in the area to determine what type of businesses they would desire at the location. Mr. Pence indicated that several merchants have shown an interest in moving into his development. • In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Pence concurred that the building consists of 6,110 square feet, and -35- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I I J I I INDEX the dry cleaning facility will consist of approximately 1,900 square feet, or one -third of the building. Ms. Kelly Kelleher, Kelleher Equipment Company, appeared before the Planning Commission. She stated that she installs dry cleaning equipment and trains employees; and that a dry cleaning customer typically uses a parking space for three minutes, that the business owner will use an express bag for the clothing so as to expedite the transaction, and the operation will be run by family members who will be driving. to work together. Ms. Kelleher and Commissioner Merrill discussed the feasibility of the family members driving to work together, and the peak customer hours. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. M* Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3398 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "N'. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the subject building provides some parking, that the proposed uses are service establishments that will provide services to the local residents, that the parcel contains a legal non- conforming building, and a use permit was required for the subject use because it is a full dry cleaning establishment and not a drop off and pick up dry cleaning business. Commissioner Glover supported the motion on the basis that the development will up -grade the area, that the dry cleaning competition is good, the proposed use will enhance the shopping center, and small businesses should be encouraged. Commissioner Di Sano supported the motion, and concurred with the foregoing statements. He pointed out that the Planning Commission has the option to recall the use permit if the operation would be detrimental to the area, that the use would not generate any greater demand for parking than a typical retail use, that the intent of the use is for the people who work and reside in the area, that the location of the business will be in view of City Hall if there • would be any business infractions, and business people need to be encouraged to make a living. -36- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES � ,r o� °� � m CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX All Ayes Motion was voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3398 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A ". MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed development is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and with the Local Coastal Program and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3398 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 to the general welfare of the City. • CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved floor plan. 2. That any boilers shall be isolated in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 3. That the use of chemicals shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau of the Fire Department. 4. There shall be no outside storage of materials, supplies or other paraphernalia likely to be objectionable to the adjacent property owners or residents. 5. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be screened from view and shall be sound attenuated to be no greater than existing sound levels at the property lines. 6. That prior to the on -site cleaning and laundering, a licensed engineer practicing in acoustics, retained by the City at the applicant's expense shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the noise impact of the project • does not exceed existing sound levels at the property lines. -37- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A \CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 7. That any outdoor trash containers shall be screened from adjoining properties. 8. That the proposed dry cleaning operation shall be installed and operated in conformance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 9. That the dry cleaning facility shall not be open for business prior to 7:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. daily. 10. That all doors at the rear of the dry cleaning facility shall remain closed at all times, except for deliveries. 11. That all employees shall park on site. 12. That the parking lot layout shall be prepared and the striping shall be marked with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 13. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the issuance of the building permit for the dry cleaning facility. 14. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 15. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the . community. -38- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Use Permit No. 3399 (Public Hearing) Item No.9 Request to permit the construction of a second dwelling unit UP3399 (Granny Unit) on property located in the R -1 District. Said proposal is in accordance with Chapter 20.78 of the Municipal Approved Code which permits a second dwelling unit on lots which permit only one dwelling unit provided the second dwelling unit is intended for one or two persons who are 60 years of age or over. LOCATION: Lot 6, Block 1, Tract No. 919, located at 434 Riverside Avenue, on the southeasterly side of Riverside Avenue, between Cliff Drive and Clay Street, in Newport Heights. ZONE: R -1 APPLICANT: Patricia Steele Durgan, Newport Beach SOWNER: Same as applicant Planning Director Hewicker recommended that Condition No. 2, Exhibit "A ", "That the second dwelling unit shall be for rental purposes only and shall be limited to the use of one or two persons over the age of 60 years." be amended to state "That the occupancy of the Granny Unit shall be limited to one or two persons over the age of 60 years." so as to clarify the intent of the condition. Commissioner Pers6n stated that the Newport Heights Community Association expressed concern regarding the subject Granny Unit. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Patricia Steele Durgan, applicant, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Steele concurred with the findings and conditions in.Exhibit John Hedges, 2914 West Ocean Front, appeared before the Commission wherein he referred to the foregoing Condition No. 2. He inquired as to what would happen if one of the two Granny Unit occupants required a live -in care person. Mr. Hewicker replied that in order to adhere to the Granny Unit law, the Unit -39- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES d, d N CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX occupants and the care person would either be required to move to another facility or to move into the main unit of the house which would have no limit to the number of persons living together as a family unit. Mr. Hewicker further explained the provisions and limitations of the Granny Unit Ordinance. Commissioner Pers6n emphasized that the City had been pressured by a liberal State Legislature into adopting a Granny Unit Ordinance and that the City might better provide housing for the elderly without jeopardizing. the integrity of the single family community. Commissioner Pers6n recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council reconsider the Granny Unit Ordinance and amend the Housing Element to provide housing opportunities for elderly people without deteriorating single family areas. Mr. Hewicker indicated from personal knowledge that two City employees constructed Granny Units for their parents and said dwelling units did not affect the character of the single family residential neighborhoods. Chairman Debay concurred inasmuch • as it is difficult to provide affordable housing for senior citizens based on the cost of property in Newport Beach. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Glover concurred with Commissioner Pers6n and she also requested the Planning Commission review the Granny Unit Ordinance. Commissioner Glover stated that as a resident of Newport Heights at the time of the City's adoption of a Granny Unit Ordinance she had not been aware that the provisions might alter the zoning of an R -1 area. Commissioner Pomeroy responded to the foregoing comments and stated that the Commission had spent considerable time examining both the Affordable Housing and Granny Unit issues before making recommendations. He felt that the City had taken a strong position recognizing the need for, and encouraging the development of, affordable housing. Similarly, he stated the Granny Unit Ordinance was an appropriate way to encourage senior housing in Newport Beach where housing costs are even higher than elsewhere. Commissioner Pomeroy continued that it was unfortunate if development of these units changed the -40- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES p `e d O CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX traditional characteristics of any single family neighborhood, and pointed out that an amendment to the original Ordinance precluded any such development on the standard size lots in Old Corona del Mar. He explained that it was only allowed in areas of the City where the size of the lot would not require an unusually large structure to be constructed. Chairman Debay explained that the size of the lot to allow Granny Units was increased from 5,000 square feet to 5,450 square feet. Motion * Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3399 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A," with Condition No. 2 changed to read, "That the occupancy of the Granny Unit shall be limited to one or two persons over the age of 60 years." Commissioner Pers6n stated that he would not be supporting the motion due to his belief that the Ordinance was not appropriate. Ayes * * * * * Motion was voted on. MOTION CARRIED. * n 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 it significant environmental. impact. 3. That the design of the development 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 development. 4. The approval of Use Permit No. 3399 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. -41- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES .o \�\� y� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX( CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans and elevations. 2. That the occupancy of the Granny Unit shall be limited to 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 applicant 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 permittee 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 of the Granny Unit shall be continuously occupied by at least one person haying an ownership interest in the property. 6. That one independently accessible garage space shall be provided for the Granny Unit at all times. 7. 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. -42- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL III Jill I INDEX Use Permit No: 3400 (Public Hearinel Item No. 10 UP3400 Request to permit the establishment of an automobile rental facility on property located in the M -1 -A District. The proposal Approved also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow a four foot high monument sign to encroach 8 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback and to allow a second freestanding sign at the rear of the property. LOCATION: Lot 6, Tract No. 5169, located at 4341 Birch Street, on the northwesterly side of Birch Street, between Dove Street and MacArthur Boulevard across from the Sheraton Newport Hotel. ZONE: M -1 -A APPLICANT: Stephen Gracio, Newport Beach OWNER: 4341 Corporation, Newport Beach William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, requested that Finding No. 4 in Exhibit "A" be deleted at the request of the City Attorney's Office inasmuch as staff did not discuss the findings of the Police Department in the body of the staff report. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Mr. Stephen Gracio, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission and he concurred with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A." In response to questions posed by Chairman Debay and Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Gracio stated that the existing freestanding sign would be removed. He further explained that if the number of on -site parking spaces became a problem in the future, the use permit could be reviewed by the Commission. There being.no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public . hearing was closed at this time. -43- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES 0 q d � e i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3400 All Ayes subject to the finding and conditions in Exhibit "A," deleting Finding No. 4. 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. That the project will not have a significant environmental impact. 3. That adequate off- street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed project. . 4. Deleted. 5. That the establishment, maintenance of operation of the proposed automobile rental facility will not, under the circumstances of the 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 or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification to allow a second freestanding sign at the rear of the property and a new freestanding sign (replacing the existing sign) at the front of the property which encroaches into the required front yard setback, is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, and floor plans, except as noted below. 2. That no more than 11 rental vehicles shall be stored on the • subject property between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. during the -44- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES .o �O CITY OF NEWPORT 6EACH ROLL CALL INDEX week, and no more than 20 vehicles shall be stored on the premises after 5:00 p.m. during the week and on weekends. 3. That no rental vehicle shall be stored on any public street. 4. That no washing, detailing or automotive maintenance or repair shall be permitted on site unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 5. That no vehicles shall be displayed with open hoods, doors trunks, or tailgates. 6. That the site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 7. That no windshield signs shall be permitted and that all signs shall meet the requirements of Chapter 20.06 except those signs approved in conjunction with this application. 8. That the proposed sign located within the 15 foot front yard setback shall be designed and located so as to comply with minimum sight distance requirements as specified by City Sign Distance Standard 110 -L (approximately 10 feet behind the sidewalk). ' 9. That the existing freestanding sign located at the front of the property shall be removed prior to the issuance of the building permit for the proposed freestanding signs. 10. That the two freestanding signs shall not exceed a height of 4 feet, and shall each contain no more than 15 sq.ft. (3 ft. x 5 ft.) of area per face. 11. That the on -site vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation system shall be subject to further review by the Public Works Department and the City Traffic Engineer. 12. That no outdoor loudspeaker or paging system shall be permitted in conjunction with the proposed operation. -45- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A � o� December 6, 1990 A 'P CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 13. That the sale of vehicles on the property shall be incidental to the automobile rental use and shall include only the vehicles previously rented on the site. 14. That no advertising signs for the sale of automobiles shall be permitted on the site. 15. 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. 16. 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. x x s The Planning Commission recessed at 10:25 p.m. and reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Use Permit No. 3402 (Public Hearing) Item Noll Request to permit the establishment of a take -out pizza restaurant facility on property located in the C -1 District. The proposal also UP3402 includes a request to waive a portion of the required off - street Approved parking spaces. LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 57 -4 (Resubdivision No. 397), located at 3305 Newport Boulevard, on the westerly side of Newport Boulevard, between 32nd Street and Finley Avenue, across from the Newport Beach City Hall. • ZONE: C -1 -46- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES moQ\� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX APPLJCANT: Domino's Pizza, El Toro OWNER: Jeff Pence, Newport Beach The public hearing was opened in connection with this item and Mr. John Dotson, applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Dotson explained that the subject take -out pizza restaurant's business is based primarily on delivering pizzas to the customers; the hours of operation are scheduled to be 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, and the peak hours of operation are between 5:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.; the daytime hours of 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. will require three employees; and the pizza drivers spend approximately two minutes in the store between deliveries. Referring to Condition No. 5 in Exhibit "A" regarding the request to provide grease interceptors, Mr. Dotson explained that the food comes to the store prepackaged, and does not produce any type of grease. Commissioner Merrill responded to Mr. Dotson's foregoing concern regarding grease interceptors and he stated that it was a function of the Building Department and the Public Works Department to determine the need for grease interceptors. James Hewicker, Planning Director, concurred with Commissioner Merrill's statement. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Mr. Hewicker suggested that Finding No. 4 in Exhibit "A" be deleted inasmuch as staff did not discuss the findings of the Police Department in the body of the staff report. Motion Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3402 subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" including deletion of Finding No. 4. Commissioner Person commented he felt the intended use was good for the property. Chairman Debay referenced Condition No. 17 in Exhibit "A' and stated her concern regarding the effects of the eventual. loss of parking due to the widening of Newport Boulevard. Traffic Engineer Edmonton _47_ COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES ONNk d� 4 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX explained that the widening, which will occur from 32nd Street north allowing for a third traffic lane leaving the Peninsula, will eliminate the Municipal parking spaces currently in front of City Hall. Mr. Edmonton stated that although the Circulation Element of the General Plan does provide for a third access lane onto the Peninsula, eventually eliminating the parking on the west side of Newport Boulevard, there is no definite time frame for its construction; however, he estimated from five to ten years. All Ayes Motion was voted on. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed take -out restaurant is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 2. That the project has no significant environmental impact. 3. That the proposed uses on the subject property represent a decrease in the overall parking demand when compared to the previous uses. 4. Deleted. 5. That the waiver of the development standards as they pertain to walls, utilities, parking lot illumination, landscaping, and a portion of the required parking will not be detrimental to adjoining properties. 6. 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. 7. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3402 will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of • -48- COMMISSIONERS CITY OF NEWPORT December 6, 1990MINUTES BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX persons residing and working in the neighborhood, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City. CONDMONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan and floor plan, except as noted below. 2. That the development standards pertaining to traffic circulation, walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination, and a of the required parking spaces shall be waived. portion 3. That no seating shall be permitted in the subject restaurant, unless an amended use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 4. That trash receptacles for patrons shall be located in convenient locations inside and outside the building. 5. That grease interceptors shall be installed on all fixtures in the take -out restaurant where grease may be introduced into the drainage systems in accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department and the Public Works Department. 6. That kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 7. That all signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Municipal Code. 8. That no on -sale or off -sale of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted on the premises unless the Planning Commission approves an amendment to this use permit. 9. That.the hours of operation shall be limited between 11:00 • a.m. and 12:00 midnight. -49- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 10. That delivery vehicles shall park within the on -site parking lot and shall not be parked within the alley for the purpose of picking up delivery orders. 11. That the employees of the subject facility shall park their vehicles on -site at all times. 12. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from public streets and alleys and from adjoining properties. The final location of any trash enclosure shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. 13. That the door at the rear of the facility shall remain closed at all times, except for deliveries. 14. That a washout area for refuse containers be provided in such away as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains unless otherwise approved by the Building Department and the Public Works Department. 15. That the waiver of the development standards as they pertain to walls, landscaping, parking lot illumination, and a part of the required parking shall be waived. 16. That the on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 17. That the applicant shall agree that the proposed development will not increase the need for on- street parking along Newport Boulevard and that the applicant agrees not to contest the removal of parking for the restriping of Newport Boulevard on the grounds of loss of on- street parking- 18. That Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to the issuance of building permits or occupancy of the take- out restaurant facility. -50- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A \�\\o \ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL III Jill I INDEX 19. 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 amendment causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 20. That this use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date. of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Use Permit No. 3200 (Amended),(Public Hearing) stem No. 12 Request to amend a previously approved use permit which vr3200A • permitted the establishment of a restaurant facility with on -sale alcoholic beverages on property located in the Cannery Approved Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. Said approval also included the use of an off -site parking location for all of the required off - street parking spaces. The proposed amendment involves: a request to waive a portion of the previously required parking spaces; a request to locate the remaining portion of the required parking spaces in a new off -site parking lot located at 111 23rd Street and on an adjoining parcel; a request to reduce the "net public area" of the restaurant; and a modification to the Zoning Code so as to establish a valet parking service with tandem parking spaces in conjunction with the existing restaurant. LOCATION: Parcels 1 and 2, Parcel Map 86 -196 (Resubdivision No. 826) (restaurant site), located at 2306 West Ocean Front, and Lots 27 and 28, Block 23, Newport Beach Tract (off -site parking site), located at 111 23rd Street, in Central Newport. ZONE: SP -6 -51- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX APPLICANT: Epic Properties, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant William Laycock, Current Planning Manager, addressed the addendum to the staff report, and he explained that inasmuch as the applicant is requesting further credit of the former uses on the property, the addendum reflects a credit of seven parking spaces that were originally approved for the restaurant use alone. Mr. Laycock indicated that it is the applicant's opinion that a credit as well as the number of parking spaces that are existing on the off - site lot have an allocation of 45 parking spaces instead of 38 parking spaces as reported in the original staff report. Mr. Laycock stated that it is staffs opinion that it is inappropriate to grant further parking credit for the restaurant based on the hotel's nonconforming parking condition because separate use permits were applied for the hotel and the restaurant. iIn response to a question posed by Chairman Debay with regard to the loss of the off -site parking, Mr. Laycock explained that the parking is now being leased on an informal basis to the occupants of another restaurant, known previously as the Rex Restaurant. Commissioner Glover and Mr. Laycock discussed the applicant's request to establish a valet pick up station in the City's Municipal Parking Lot in McFadden Square. The Planning Commission and Mr. Hewicker reviewed the number of restaurants that are allowed to park in Municipal Parking Lots throughout the City. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay regarding automobiles that would pull up to the restaurant for valet parking, Rich Edmonton, City Traffic Engineer, stated that the proposal that was reviewed and approved by the Traffic Affairs Committee, and has been forwarded to the City Council for approval, is to provide three angled parking spaces to allow for a valet pick up station in front of the restaurant and hotel. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Jim Skaug, architect, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Skaug distributed • photographs of the existing building and a brochure from the hotel. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay regarding the -52- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES o �o 0 poi CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", Mr. Skaug referred to the valet parking drop -off area, whereby he explained that the new parking alignment for McFadden Square increases the total number of parking spaces by two parking spaces, and there will not be a net loss of parking spaces across the frontage of the hotel. In response to Mr. Laycock's foregoing statement regarding staff s opinion, Mr. Skaug explained that the applicant is adhering to the Municipal Code that provides for "grandfather" parking wherein he referred to 'uses and structures'. Mr. Skaug explained the Doryman's Inn existing parking requirements, Mr. Skaug addressed previous retail credits inasmuch as it has been determined that the hotel lobby is not an intensification of use and does not require extra parking. Mr. Skaug explained that up to 14 automobiles are parked in the lot that the City approved for use of 10 automobiles and 3 tandem parking spaces, and the garage has been utilized for up to 5 automobiles on a number of occasions. Mr. Skaug stated that the garage was previously approved for five employee parking spaces. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay with respect to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", Mr. Skaug referred to Condition No. 2, stating'"nat all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3200 shall be fulfilled and shall remain in effect." wherein he responded that all of said conditions would no longer be applicable. Discussion ensued regarding the aforementioned condition. Mr. Hewicker addressed Mr. Skaug's remarks concerning the Doryman's Inn parking requirements. Mr. Hewicker acknowledged that the restaurant lost the parking after it moved to Fashion Island and now the applicant is requesting another restaurant at the subject location; however, because there is no parking available, the applicant is attempting to acquire credit which was given up when the use permits were originally approved. He indicated that it does not make sense to try to solve a problem by creating another wrong. Mr. Hewicker suggested that if the applicant requires time to work out concerns with the staff, then the Planning Commission should continue the item. Chairman Debay concluded that the primary concern would appear to be the lack of an off -site parking lot. Mr. Skaug addressed a statement made by Commissioner Person during the December 8, -53- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES �O \db CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 1988 Planning Commission meeting regarding nonconforming rights. Mr. Skaug responded that the "nonconforming rights" would apply to the building or apply to the parking spaces that were in existence when the process was started. He said that the applicant did not perceive a parking crunch, and, therefore, the applicant did not attempt to recapture the parking credits. Mr. Skaug indicated that the parking lot was developed by the applicant and has subsequently become a financial liability to maintain. Mr. Hewicker stated that the parking lot is being utilized for existing uses. Mr. Skaug responded that the applicant is requesting that the parking lot be used by the restaurant and the hotel wherein he explained that after studying the parking demands for the last calendar year at the hotel, that the average demand per day is 8.3 parking spaces, giving 10 excess parking spaces and to allot said excess spaces to the restaurant parking. Mr. Skaug stated that from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. the parking lot is virtually empty based on the hotel's activity. Mr. Hewicker indicated that the applicant's proposal is to provide three additional parking spaces in the parking lot for restaurant use and although there would be 10 additional parking spaces on the parking lot available for the restaurant, the applicant would not dedicate said parking spaces to the restaurant use. Mr. Skaug stated that the proposal submitted to the Traffic Committee is that there would be a full time valet service whenever the restaurant was open, and the valets would be responsible to see that there would be space available in the parking lot or in the garage to handle the parking demands. Mr. Hewicker expressed his concern that the applicant will request future expansion on the property or adjacent property, and will request the 10 parking spaces for the expanded uses, and he indicated that it has to be recognized that the existing uses require parking and the subject spaces should be dedicated for those uses. Mr. Skaug concurred wherein he stated that the parking lot was created to accommodate the existing uses. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay, Mr. Laycock explained that the subject uses would be short 5 parking spaces, and 11 parking spaces were lost by the loss of the off -site parking lot. Mr. Skaug and Commissioner Edwards discussed the parking of the former Zeppa Restaurant that was located adjacent to the subject property. -54- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES .o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Commissioner Pers6n recommended that staff work with the applicant concerning the conditions of approval of Use Permit No. Motion * 3200 as previously discussed. Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 3200 (Amended) subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A '. He stated that the Planning Commission has the right to call back the subject use permit if it was determined that the operation is detrimental to the community. Commissioner Pomeroy supported the motion based on the property owner's ability to solve problems and the approval would allow him to continue a 'first class operation'. He explained that if there is a problem in the future concerning the subject application, that the Planning Commission may recall the subject use permit in accordance with Condition No. 12 in Exhibit "A ". In response to a request for clarification by Chairman Debay, Mr. Edmonston explained that the applicant was informed that the City would not support the use of public property for a valet pickup and drop -off area. It was recommended by the City Manager to the applicant to contact the Traffic Affairs Committee. He stated that if the Planning Commission approved the subject application, including the valet operation, then the City Council Agenda would include an action for them to approve the valet use for a trial period. He further stated that the Traffic Affairs Committee would monitor the valet operation. Mr. Edmonton referred to Condition No. 10 in Exhibit "A" stating "..the proposed valet station shall be located in the off -site parking lot unless the City Council approves a valet station on public right -of- way." Commissioner Glover supported the motion. She stated her concern that two restaurants have moved to Fashion Island, and she expressed a desire that the subject uses be successful. Commissioner Edwards stated that a reason the restaurants have moved to Fashion Island would be the parking problems that exist on the Balboa Peninsula. Commissioner Edwards stated that he would reluctantly oppose the motion on the basis that he supported . the previous suggestion that the applicant work with staff regarding -55- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTE8 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX any concerns they may have with respect to the conditions of approval in the original use permit. Commissioner Edwards and Commissioner Pers6n discussed the success of the McFadden Square restaurants based on the availability of parking m the area. Mr. Hewicker referred to Condition No. 6 in Exhibit "A", stating "That prior to reopening the restaurant or the implementation of this Use Permit, the applicant shall fully comply with all conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 897." and he addressed the length of time required to accomplish the conditions and to have the Final Map recorded. Mr. Skaug reappeared before the Planning Commission wherein he responded that the Final Map was submitted to the County of Orange on Friday, November 30, 1990. Mr. Skaug agreed that the restaurant would not open prior to the recordation of the Final Map. Ayes * * * * Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. a Findings: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The project will not have any significant environmental impact. 3. That adequate parking exists to serve the subject restaurant. 4. The off -site parking area is located so as to be useful to the subject restaurant use. 5. Parking on such off -site parldng areas will not create undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. 6. That the restaurant site and the off -site parldng areas are in the same ownership. 7. That the design of the proposed improvements will not • conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large -56- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 8. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 9. The approval of a modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit tandem parking spaces and a valet parldng service 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 and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. 10. The approval of Use Permit No. 3200 (Amended) under the circumstances of this case will not 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 the subject project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan and restaurant floor plan. 2. That all previous applicable conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3200 shall be fulfilled and shall remain in effect. 3. That all but.3 of the required 15 parking spaces for the restaurant are waived. 4. The applicant shall record a covenant, guaranteeing that the subject parcels used for off -site parldng for the restaurant shall remain in the same ownership as the property on which the restaurant is located. -57- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES '\\;' o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 5. That the on -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation system be subject to further review by the Public Works Department and the City Traffic Engineer. 6. That prior to reopening the restaurant or the implementation of this Use Permit, the applicant shall fully comply with all conditions of approval for Resubdivision No. 897. 7. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 8. That the temporary asphalt patch in the concrete alley adjacent to the hotel and the existing water meter be removed, the concrete saw -cut to provide a clean edge, and repaired with concrete eight (8) inches thick. This work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of any Building Permits. 9. That the applicant shall obtain the approval of the Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of any building permits or opening of the restaurant. 10. That the subject restaurant shall be permitted to operate a full time valet parking service in conjunction with the restaurant operation. However, the proposed valet station shall be located in the off -site parking lot unless the City Council approves a valet station on public right -of -way. 11. That all of the allowable "net public area" within the restaurant (580± sq.ft.) may be used during the approved hours of operation of 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight. 12. 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. -58- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 6 1990 0� A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 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. Use Permit No. 3387 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.12 Request to expand an existing non -profit private club associated UP3387 with substance recovery located in an existing commercial building which is nonconforming relative to the off- street parking Approved requirement. The building is located in the "Specialty Retail" area of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. The proposed use permit involves a request to waive the additional . required off - street parking in conjunction with the expansion of the facility into the ground floor portion of the building which is used for a group meeting room, a smaller private meeting room and miscellaneous storage. The existing club activities on the second floor of the building include a club room with a coffee bar, bathrooms, a small meeting room, an office and storage room. The request to expand the private club facility also represents a conversion of a portion of the building from a Base FAR to a Reduced FAR use which also requires the approval of a use permit. LOCATION: Lots 32 and 33, Block 431, Lancaster's Addition, located at 414 32nd Street, on the southerly side of 32nd Street between Newport Boulevard and Villa Way, in the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan Area. ZONE: SP -6 APPLICANT: Newport Beach Alano Club, Inc., Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant -59- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A O ON 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Chairman Debay referred to Condition No. 2, in Exhibit "A" stating that meetings would not be permitted on the ground floor portion of the building between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday wherein she suggested that the hour be modified to 8:00 p.m. inasmuch as the City Council and Planning Commission meetings start at 7:00 p.m. and 7:30 p.m., respectively. Rich Edmonton, City Traffic Engineer, explained that the restricted hours was to make the finding that there was not an intensification in the amount of traffic created by the use of the facility. Mr. Hewicker pointed out that Condition No. 3 in Exhibit "A" states that no meetings on the ground floor portion of the building shall be permitted during regularly scheduled City Council, Planning Commission, and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission meetings. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards regarding the enforcement of Condition No. 2 in Exhibit "A ", Mr. Hewicker explained that the applicant would be required to submit information showing that Condition No. 2 is being adhered to or if there is a problem, the applicant would be contacted by the City for rescheduling. Mr. Steve Dobbie, 330 Santa Ana Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Dobbie addressed Condition No. 3 in Exhibit "A ", and he stated that the applicant agreed to comply with staff's recommendation so as to deter any time conflicts that could occur between the facility and scheduled City meetings. Mr. Dobbie submitted four letters from adjacent neighbors to the Planning Commission in support of the application. In response to a question posed by Chairman Debay regarding the findings and condition in Exhibit "A ", Mr. Dobbie addressed Condition No. 5 in Exhibit "A" stating "That no dancing and live entertainment shall be permitted on the subject property or within the building. ", wherein he requested that the condition be modified to allow for dances on a limited basis upon procuring a Special Events Permit. Mr. Dobbie stated that the most recent dance did not receive any opposition from the neighbors, and the dances are • a source of revenue for the operation. In response to questions -60- COMMISSIONERS d� O3 0 \ CITY OF NEWPORT December 6, 1990MINUTES BEACH ROLL CALL 1 11 Jill INDEX posed by Commissioner Di Sano, Mr. Dobbie replied that the dances are not held more than once a month and they generally are held from 8:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight. James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that Condition No. 5 in Exhibit "A" was added inasmuch as a neighbor previously expressed a concern regarding dances on the subject property. Mr. Hewicker stated that a Special Events Permit could be issued to the applicant by the Business License Department and if there would be a problem in the future, the Special Events Permit would not be issued or the use permit could come back to the Planning Commission for review. After discussion between the Planning Commission and Mr. Hewicker it was decided to amend Condition No. 5 in Exhibit "A" to state "That no dancing and live entertainment shall be permitted on the subject property or within the building unless a Special Events Permit is approved by the City." Motion Motion was made and voted on to approve Use Permit No. 3387 * * * * * subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", including the * * aforementioned modified Condition No. 5. MOTION CARRIED. Fin in : 1. The proposed project as conditioned, has demonstrated that the peak hour traffic to be generated by the proposed uses on the ground floor of the building will not exceed that generated by the former uses in the development, as determined in accordance with City Council Policy S -1. 2. That the projections of traffic to be generated. utilize standard traffic generation rates generally applied to a use of the type proposed, per City Council Policy S -1. . 3. That the structure on the site was constructed prior to October 25, 1988 and is consistent with the policies and ordinances in effect at the time of construction. 4. That the applicant is the sole tenant of the building who will limit the use of the ground floor portion of the building in accordance with the approved use permit. i -61- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES 1%00� 1 MIN c CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 5. That the proposed use and physical improvements are such that the approved project would not readily lend itself to conversion to a higher traffic generating use. 6. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 3387 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 the proposed development shall be in substantial • compliance with the approved site plan and floor plans, except as noted below. 2. That the use of the ground floor portion of the building shall be limited so as not to permit any meetings that begin or end between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. and between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. In the same regard, the total daily attendance for meetings held during the week on the ground floor of the building shall not exceed 64 persons so as not to increase the number of average daily trips beyond the 128 trips generated by the previous hardware /paint store. 3. That no meetings within the ground floor portion of the building shall be permitted during regularly scheduled City Council, Planning Commission and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission meetings. In addition, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department on an annual basis, a list of all regularly scheduled meetings to be held on both floors of the facility, which shall include the day and time of each meeting. -62- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 4. That the applicant shall make all required alterations to the existing building which may be determined to be necessary by the Building and Fire Departments for a public assembly use of the ground floor of the building. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for all such alterations. 5. That no dancing and live entertainment shall be permitted on the subject property or within the building, unless a Special Events Permit is approved by the City. 6. That all mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from the alley and adjoining properties. 7. That all signs shall conform to the applicable provisions of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan as set forth in Chapter 20.63 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • 8. That the applicant shall obtain Coastal Commission approval of this application prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 9. 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. 10. 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. • -63- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990 MINUTES A � d� O ON �' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX A. Amendment No. 720 (Public Hearing) Item No. 14 Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 9 so as to A720 establish a 10 foot front yard setback along the West Ocean Front frontage of the subject property. R947 AND Cont' d to 1 -24 -91 B. Resubdivision No. 947 (Public Hearing) Request to resubdivide four existing lots and portions of two alleys which are proposed to be vacated, into four parcels of land for two unit residential condominium development on property located in the R -2 District. The proposal includes an exception to the Subdivision Code so as to allow the creation of three interior parcels which are less than 50 feet wide and less than 5,000 square feet in area and one corner parcel which is less than 60 feet wide and less than 6,000 square feet in area. LOCATION: Lots 10-13, Block 14, Tract No. 234, and portions of two alleys, located at 100 -106 15th Street, on the northeasterly comer of 15th Street and West Ocean Front, on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: R -2 APPLICANT: 1420 West Oceanfront Partnership, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant ENGINEER: Duca - McCoy, Inc., Corona del Mar James Hewicker, Planning Director, requested that this item be continued so as to allow additional time for further review of the application. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to continue Item No. 14 to the Ares January 24, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. MOTION CARRIED. -64- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES o ,r o \� \ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL 111 fill INDEX Amendment No. 719 (Public Hearing) Item No.15 Request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 9 so as to A719 establish a front yard setback of 19 feet on Lots 10-13, Block 114, 81239) Tract No. 234 (200 -206 15th Street). The proposal also includes a request to amend a portion of Districting Map No. 11 so as to Approved establish a front yard setback of 5 feet on the following lots: Lots 9 -12, Block 3, Balboa Tract and Parcels No. 1 and 2, Parcel Map 99 -12 (404416 East Balboa Boulevard) and Lots 10-12 and Lot 18, Block 2, Newport Bay Tract (301 and 313 -317 East Balboa Boulevard). INITIATED BY: City of Newport Beach Discussion ensued between Commissioner Pomeroy and William Laycock, Current Planning Manager regarding the 19 foot front . yard setback as approved by Use Permit No. 946. Mr. Laycock stated that the subject property consists of triangular shaped duplexes on the corner of 15th Street and West Balboa Boulevard. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item. There being no one to appear before the Planning Commission, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to adopt Resolution No. 1239, All Ayes recommending to the City Council the adoption of proposed Amendment No. 71, to amend Districting Map No. 9 and Districting Map No. 11, to establish front yard setbacks on three blocks previously rezoned from the C -1 District to the R -2 District. MOTION CARRIED. -65- COMMISSIONERS December 6, 1990MINUTES r CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Discussion Item: Discussion Item #1 Amendment No. 722 A722 PH set for Request to consider initiating an amendment to Title 20 of the 1 -10 -91 Newport Beach Municipal Code so as to require a public hearing for the Establishment of Grade. Motion Motion was made and voted on to set Amendment No. 722 for All Ayes public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting of January 10, . 1991. MOTION CARRIED. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: Add l l Business M * Motion was made and voted on to cancel the Planning Commission es meeting of December 20, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. 12/20/90 PC Mtg _ Cancelled ADJOURNMENT: 11:28 p.m. Adiournmen THOMAS EDWARDS, SECRETARY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION • -66-