PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2016

Transcription

1 D R A F T PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 14, 2016 A regular noticed meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Laguna Beach, California, convened at 6:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers on December 14, ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Staff Present: Chairperson Sue Kempf, Chair Pro Tem Susan McLintock Whitin and Commissioners Anne Johnson, Roger McErlane and Ken Sadler None Gregory Pfost, Director of Community Development Scott Drapkin, Principal Planner Martina Caron, Senior Planner Wendy Jung, Senior Planner Anthony Viera, Assistant Planner Ann Marie McKay, Administrative Assistant Commissioner Kempf noted the revised order that the Agenda Items will be heard. Mr. Pfost introduced Jim Pechous, the new Assistant Director of Community Development. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Downtown Specific Plan Update Receive a presentation and discuss MIG s proposed amendments to Section I (Introduction) of the Downtown Specific Plan. Item #1 was the sixth Agenda item heard. Wendy Jung summarized the staff report, and noted the public correspondence received after the deadline to be included in the staff report, which included a revised letter from the Chamber of Commerce and a letter from Becky Jones. Ms. Jung advised that staff is amenable to the suggestions made in those letters. Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Whitin commented on the thoughtful input that was submitted, which was consistent and repetitive, with just differences in word choices. She agreed that all of the comments should be incorporated and that the Introduction should be brought up-to-date. Commissioner Whitin agreed that the graphics should be changed to something more appropriate and that the chart that reviews the chronology of the process should be deleted. She also agreed with updating the generic timeframes to be more specific and replacing

2 the word interact. Commissioner Whitin noted that the Chamber of Commerce s comments are consistent with the comments received from residents, and she stated that the Chamber s suggested revision of the fourth paragraph s sentences on the history of the Downtown Specific Plan is helpful. Commissioner Johnson commented that she has no issue with the use of the term interact, but she noted that the last sentence of that paragraph should use the verb are instead of is. She expressed appreciation of Commissioner Whitin s analysis and agreed with incorporating the Chamber s suggestions, and Commissioner Johnson requested suggestions for a replacement photograph. Commissioner Kempf submitted that the picture of the Lumberyard Mall may be acceptable, but not the term mall. Commissioner Johnson commented that she likes the photograph; however, Commissioner Whitin suggested that a photograph that is more representative of the downtown, taken at a low angle, showing the trees with the ocean in the background, would be more appropriate. Commissioner Whitin also suggested labeling key buildings and landmarks on the map that shows the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries. Commissioner Johnson commented that she does not object to use of the term pop-up but agreed that better photographs could be included, and she suggested that staff come back with more options of photographs that could be included in this Section. The Commission concurred with accepting the strikethrough suggested edit for the years that the Specific Plan has been amended. Commissioner Sadler agreed with all the comments and stated that more thought should be given on what has changed since Commissioner Kempf noted the Chamber s suggested revision that addresses that sentiment and Commissioner Johnson noted the Chamber s item #5 comment in the letter submitted, which Mr. Pfost advised relates to Section II and will be reflected in that Section. 2. Planning Commission Design Review to modify the exterior paint color of an existing building at 410 Broadway Street (Marshall Ininns Design Group and Nokes & Quinn). Design Review is required for modifications to a prior approval. Item #2 was the first Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Marshall Ininns, one of building owners, stated that the building has been green for years, and they want to paint it back to a lighter tone. He described the proposed palette of gray with a chocolate brown trim around the windows, and the windows an almond brown. He noted that the paint palette will be similar to the prior approval except for the trim, which pops out and gives a sharper look. DRAFT PC Minutes 2 December 14, 2016

3 Larry Nokes, the other building owner, noted building maintenance issues in the downtown, and suggested that property owners are paid to improve their buildings rather than having to pay. He hoped the Commission would approve their application. Motion SW Second AJ Action Approve Planning Commission Design Review at 410 Broadway Street. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 3. Conditional Use Permit and Planning Commission Design Review , an amendment to Conditional Use Permit and modification to previously approved Planning Commission Design Review , requesting to (1) modify the number and location of umbrellas and heaters located on the rooftop deck; (2) extend the hours of operation for the (second floor) restaurant and rooftop deck and (3) amend conditions of approval related to live entertainment at South Coast Highway (Heisler Building; Skyloft located at 422 South Coast Highway). Item #3 was the seventh Agenda item heard. Commissioner McErlane arrived during the discussion of this item. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Commissioner Whitin reported communications with the applicant, Commissioner Kempf reported communications with the architect and applicant and Commissioner Johnson reported communications with Sam Goldstein. Wendy Jung summarized the staff report and the revised Police Department recommendation, which supports an hour increase in the hours of operation for the interior restaurant use to 2:00 a.m., an increase in the number of musicians to six or more as long as the occupancy load and City noise restrictions are not exceeded, and to allow the extension of live entertainment to 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 a.m. Ms. Jung also noted the letters of concern received regarding the application. Questions of Staff: Ms. Jung advised Commissioner Whitin that 96 seats are approved for the deck, with 8 umbrellas and 12 heaters. Ms. Jung confirmed for Commissioner Sadler that the original condition of approval required fixed locations for the umbrellas and she noted that the applicant is requesting the ability to move the umbrellas as necessary. Ms. Jung responded to Commissioner Sadler that further historic analysis on the E-rated building was not required or obtained for this application. Regarding the Fire Department s requirement for 10 feet of space between the umbrellas and heaters, Ms. Jung submitted that the umbrellas and heaters would not likely be used at the same time. Ms. Jung advised that the Fire Department s recommendations are summarized on page 7 of the staff report. DRAFT PC Minutes 3 December 14, 2016

4 Commissioner McErlane was advised that a shade structure would require a variance. Commissioner Whitin commented that the conditions on the umbrellas and heaters are impossible to enforce. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Marshall Ininns, project architect, stated that they tried to use the umbrellas as approved, but the patrons and the food did not get the necessary protection from the sun s heat because the sun moves. He also stated that the request for the increase in the number of heaters is so the deck is more pleasant for the patrons. Mr. Ininns acknowledged that the Fire Department does not want the umbrellas touching the heaters, but he noted that the umbrellas are made of fireproof material. He also commented that restrictions on the umbrellas were put in place because of view equity concerns for people in the Glenneyre parking structure, which he asserted is a stretch considering he has never seen anyone trying to enjoy the view from that location. Mr. Ininns noted that the restaurant has been operating for a year without one verified complaint, asserting that noise heard by hotel guests is from the surrounding area. Regarding the Police Department s and staff s recommendations, Mr. Ininns stated that the applicant could agree with an extra hour for the roof deck and 2:00 a.m. closing of the restaurant, and a compromise of 1:00 a.m. for ceasing the music, considering the restaurant is completely encapsulated. Stefan Andersen, General Manager of Hotel Laguna, acknowledged that they have not called the City every time there was a complaint; however, he passed out packets with the complaints received on noise from Skyloft, noting that one sheet represents one day. Mr. Andersen noted that the bass of the music can go through the windows, so though it may not exceed the allowed decibels, it disturbs hotel guests trying to sleep. He also noted complaints regarding foot traffic at Skyloft from patrons lined up waiting to be able to enter the restaurant. He stated that guests are up until 3:00 a.m. because of the noise from drunks coming from Skyloft, submitting that his guests will be disturbed even longer if the hours are extended. Mr. Andersen stated that Hotel Laguna represents Laguna Beach as well, and noted that the hotel is on the City s seal. Charlotte Masarik stated that she does not know what findings were made for the original approval, but asserted that it should have included an ADA-compliant elevator to access the restaurant from the street level because of the steep staircase. She stated that the elevator has never been operational, apparently from issues with the elevator from the second floor to the rooftop, and she asserted that it has taken too long to address this issue. Ms. Masarik noted that the previous restaurant had the elevator working and she submitted that the elevator should be required to be operational before any expansion will be considered; therefore, she requested that the Commission deny the request. Roberta Kansteiner read the submitted by Jahn Levitt, expressing her concerns about the noise related to the current use and the requested modifications. Ms. Kansteiner commented that on the Canyon, you can hear more on the hill, which is part of the issue in this case, and she stated that when she lived on Pearl Street she was often kept awake by restaurant employees returning to their vehicles after the neighboring restaurant closed. Morris Skenderian expressed his concerns regarding the aesthetic impacts of umbrellas and heaters on rooftops, to skyline views, ocean views and on the City as a whole. He submitted that the City needs a policy that addresses this issue, and though he appreciates the applicant s desire to improve DRAFT PC Minutes 4 December 14, 2016

5 his business, Mr. Skenderian submitted that they are effectively adding a third level, and not in an aesthetic way. Mr. Skenderian noted that through the design review process, the plans of individual homeowners are judged; however, these commercial uses can have considerable more impact. He asserted that rooftop decks need criteria that includes not impacting architecture, regardless of patrons needs for their comfort level. Lorene Auger requested particular attention to fire safety, noting the recent incident in Oakland, and questioned if the material of the umbrellas is adequate for their use with the heaters. Rebuttal: Sam Goldstein, building owner, commented that they were told during the 2014 CUP (Conditional Use Permit) approval to wait a year to see how everything goes, and then come back to request additional approvals. He noted that it is now 2016, and the umbrellas make the deck inviting to use by making it comfortable and enjoyable for people. He also noted that the heaters and umbrellas are not fixed structures, so there is no implication to the historic value of the building. Mr. Goldstein responded to Commissioner McErlane that the aesthetic impact of the umbrellas and heaters does not fall within the purview of the historic consultant. Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Sadler noted that when the original rooftop deck was proposed, he did not vote in favor of it, and he was the one that brought up the view equity issue from the parking structure because it is used for community events, though not recently. However, he stated that view equity was not his main concern. Commissioner Sadler noted his safety concerns, commenting that there is no such thing as fire proof but rather materials are fire resistant. He also noted the limited ways for people to escape the deck. Commissioner Sadler also reiterated concerns he stated at previous hearings regarding the possibility of gusts of wind taking the umbrellas, which would be a dangerous situation. However, he stated that his main concern is the historic nature of the building. Commissioner Sadler commended the very successful renovation, but questioned the nature of the design regarding the rooftop. He commented that the original proposal did not mention heaters or umbrellas and he argued that those items detract from the historic nature of the building. Commissioner Sadler submitted that the request further exacerbates the situation, morphing the deck into a large permanent structure; therefore, he was not in favor of any addition to the number of allowed umbrellas or heaters. Regarding the view equity issue, Commissioner Whitin submitted that the view from the public realm, from the sidewalk and street, should be considered, which includes the building itself and the heaters and umbrellas on top, which she stated looks like poles and sticks on top of a building. She argued that the umbrellas and heaters do not provide an elegant solution, but rather the cheapest, and suggested radiant heating from the floor and a tensile structure for shading that is solar activated and goes away when not used. She asserted that the umbrellas and heaters are visually unpleasing, not attractive on the deck, get in the way of the view and the heaters do not heat very well. Commissioner Whitin recommended site-specific solutions and noted the changes in the skyline, comparing it to putting buildings on a ridgeline, and questioned it especially on a historic building. Regarding the hours and musicians, Commissioner Whitin stated that she would support the Police Department s recommendation. Regarding the elevator, Commissioner Whitin agreed that the issue needs to be looked into. DRAFT PC Minutes 5 December 14, 2016

6 Commissioner Johnson agreed with the other Commissioners concerns, especially regarding the aesthetics. She stated that her biggest concern is with the 2:00 a.m. closing time, because she does not want to see the City morphing into a 2:00 a.m. town; therefore, she will not support that request. Commissioner Johnson also stated that she saw no reason for the rooftop deck to be open as late as 12:00 a.m. Regarding the live entertainment, Commissioner Johnson had no issue with it starting earlier, but she could not support increasing it to six musicians. Regarding the heaters and umbrellas, Commissioner Johnson recommended staying with the current approval, which was crafted after much discussion. She commented that people can sit inside if they are uncomfortable. Commissioner McErlane assured that he does not disagree with the potential of a roof deck, but he agrees with the concerns regarding the integrity of the architecture, especially its historic nature and the visual impact. He asserted that Mozambique is a disaster to look at and he would rather see another floor. Commissioner McErlane stated that adding such clutter on top of a historic building is wrong and he stated that the view from the public s sightline is important, so he could accept a compromise for additional heaters and umbrellas that cannot be seen from the street. However, if the umbrellas cannot be seen, it will not be obvious that there is a restaurant on the roof, which he surmised is part of the purpose. Commissioner McErlane agreed that the City needs a policy on this issue. Mr. Ininns provided the Commissioners with a diagram showing the sightline view from Hotel Laguna, which would require removing nine of the proposed umbrellas to ensure they are not seen from that sightline view. Regarding the elevator, Mr. Ininns explained that the issue is with the new cantilevered lift elevator, which works, but obtaining the required approvals from Cal/OSHA has been a long process because this is the first time they have dealt with this type of elevator. He said that they hope to have to have everything resolved within the next two weeks. Mr. Ininns responded to Commissioner Whitin that he did not complete a similar sightline diagram from Laguna Avenue and he did not check the heaters because they are lower than the umbrellas. Commissioner Kempf noted that the deck is approved, so the Commission must focus on the current request. Regarding Condition 23, the request to extend the hours for the restaurant, Commissioner Johnson asserted that the approved hours should remain the same. Commissioner Sadler noted that according to the Police Department, Skyloft is #2 for calls for service and Hotel Laguna provided a stack of complaints, so he questioned extending the approved hours, which would increase the impact of people leaving and disturbing hotel guests. Chief Farinella clarified for Commissioner Whitin that the table on page 1 of the Police Department memo is not directly related to seat count for those establishments. Chief Farinella explained that very successful businesses drive calls for service. Chief Farinella advised Commissioner Sadler that only two or three of the noted calls for service were complaints from Hotel Laguna. Commissioner McErlane agreed with Commissioner Sadler, and Commissioner Sadler added that his opinion would be different if Skyloft had a stellar record. Commissioner Sadler noted that those establishments that stay open until 2:00 a.m. are in the top five for calls for service. Commissioner Whitin noted that the previous Police Chief recommended studying the situation for six months and Chief Farinella responded that the recommendation was regarding the new rooftop deck. Regarding extending the hours of operation to 2:00 a.m. inside, Chief Farinella noted that currently patrons can leave and go to another venue, and complaints generally derive from people going from establishment to establishment; therefore, extending the hours may reduce those complaints. DRAFT PC Minutes 6 December 14, 2016

7 Chief Farinella advised Commissioner McErlane that the community pays for the calls for service and Commissioner McErlane submitted that the service calls should instead be paid by the businesses. Commissioner Whitin suggested not changing the hours now, but revisiting the request in six months. Regarding Condition 24, the request to extend the hours on the rooftop deck, Commissioner Johnson stated that she would not support the request and Commissioner McErlane agreed. The Commission agreed to revisit the request in six months. Regarding Condition 25, the requested changes on the entertainment restrictions, Commissioner Johnson stated that she can support the request to start the entertainment earlier, but not to extend it later. She also asserted that no limit on the number of musicians leads to the venue changing into a nightclub. Commissioner Sadler stated that he can support the Police Department recommendation for six musicians and live entertainment from 11:00 a.m. to midnight. The other Commissioners agreed with Commissioner Sadler, and Commissioner Johnson maintained her opposition to that recommendation. Regarding Conditions 34 and 36 for the requested increase in number of heaters and umbrellas, Commissioner Johnson asserted that the approval should not be changed, noting the huge discussion during the original approval about the impact when the umbrellas are opened. She also agreed that nothing is fireproof. Commissioner Whitin added her preference for a whole different solution and therefore agreed that the approval should remain the same for now. Commissioner McErlane did not disagree with the other Commissioners, but submitted that the visibility problem could possibly be solved, which would address his concerns. Commissioner Sadler noted that the historic analysis for the original project noted that the railings would be set back far enough to not affect the visual aesthetics of the building, but umbrellas and heaters were not considered, which he argued cause a greater impact. Motion KS Second AJ Action Approve Conditional Use Permit subject to amended conditions that (1) the food and alcohol service hours shall remain the same as previously approved for the second-floor restaurant and rooftop deck; (2) a maximum number of 6 musicians be allowed; (3) the hours for amplified live entertainment be allowed from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. (midnight) and (4) the Planning Commission will re-review the requests for extended hours and entertainment in six months; and deny Planning Commission Design Review , for the request to modify the allowed number and location of umbrellas and heaters. Motion carried 5-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Y Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 4. Planning Commission Design Review to modify the roofing material at the Sawdust Art & Craft Festival located at 935 Laguna Canyon Road. Item #4 was the eighth Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. DRAFT PC Minutes 7 December 14, 2016

8 Anthony Viera advised that though staff s recommendation was to table this item, staff received correspondence from the applicant late this afternoon with two roofing alternatives; therefore, the application could be continued instead. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Lorene Auger suggested using slate because it is fire resistant and long-lasting. Commissioner Johnson advised Ms. Auger to communicate her suggestion to the applicant s representative, Tom Klingenmeier. Commissioners Comments: Though the applicant was not present, Mr. Drapkin recommended that the item be continued to the January 18, 2017 Planning Commission meeting so that it does not have to be renoticed. Motion AJ Second KS Action Continue Planning Commission Design Review to the January 18, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 5. Planning Commission Design Review and Planning Commission Sign Permit to install replacement awnings and adopt a revised sign program for the multi-tenant property located at Forest Avenue (currently DeBilzan and Pacific Gallery). Item #5 was the ninth Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Anthony Viera summarized the status of the application, revising the recommendation to continue the Sign Permit to January 18, Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Whitin requested that the property owner is recognized at a City Council meeting for responding to the Commission s request regarding the awning and façade, improving the overall appearance of the building. Motion AJ Second KS Action Continue Planning Commission Sign Permit to the January 18, 2017 Planning Commission meeting and table Planning Commission Design Review Motion carried 5-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Y Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 6. Temporary Use Permit to allow a temporary construction storage yard through February 28, 2017, at Coast Highway. The site would be used to store construction equipment and materials during the initial phase of the Coast Royal undergrounding project, which will place overhead utilities underground along Brooks Street, Pedro Street, Holly Street, Ceanothus Drive, Alta Loma Drive, Ocean View Street and portions of Monterey Street. Item #6 was the second Agenda item heard. DRAFT PC Minutes 8 December 14, 2016

9 Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Anthony Viera summarized the staff report. Questions of Staff: Mr. Viera explained to Commissioner Sadler that the City s contractor arranged a private agreement with the property owner of the lot without the City s knowledge; when the City became aware of the use of the lot, the contractor worked with the City to submit an application for a Temporary Use Permit for the remainder of the project. In reference to the correspondence received regarding the chain-link fence around the lot that is in disrepair, Mr. Viera advised Commissioner Sadler that there is no proper nexus to require replacement; therefore, Public Works will have to try to get the property owner to voluntarily replace the fence. Mr. Viera explained to Commissioner Whitin that the encroachment permit issued by Public Works did not identify this storage area and the City was unaware of any plans for the storage yard. He also advised that the contractor was originally shipping materials from Dana Point. Motion AJ Second SW Action Approve Temporary Use Permit at Coast Highway, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 7. Conditional Use Permit to allow a gourmet popcorn operator at 490 South Coast Highway, Suite 4 (previously Patti Jo Designs). Item #7 was the third Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Anthony Viera summarized the request and advised that staff is unaware of any opposition or letters of concern regarding the application. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Ken Hart, applicant, explained their proposal for a unique gourmet popcorn venue selling popcorn that is prepackaged offsite. In response to Commissioner Johnson regarding the possibility of selling other beverages besides bottled waters and teas, Mr. Hart explained that the facility is small and beverages are not their primary focus, so they have no concerns with that limitation. Mr. Hart confirmed for Commissioner Sadler his understanding of all the conditions of approval, in particular Condition 15, which prohibits sidewalk solicitation. Mr. Hart assured that samples will be available inside, but not offered to passersby. DRAFT PC Minutes 9 December 14, 2016

10 Motion KS Second AJ Action Approve Conditional Use Permit at 490 South Coast Highway, Suite 4, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 8. Planning Commission Sign Permit to install a logo wall sign at 180 North Coast Highway (currently Starbucks Coffee). Item #8 was the fourth Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Anthony Viera summarized the staff report. Questions of Staff: Mr. Viera confirmed for Commissioner Johnson that the tree near the building is a City tree. Mr. Viera responded to Commissioner Kempf that the photograph provided in the staff report accurately depicts current conditions. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: David Glassman, agent for the applicant, explained the proposal to relocate the logo sign 4 feet to the right, above the door, which Starbucks asserts is a more suitable location. He argued that the existing signage is difficult to see when driving along Coast Highway. Mr. Glassman noted that the proposed wall sign would be sandblasted and he asserted that it would have more of a village feel. He submitted that they are not intensifying the use or presence and noted the photo of the signage that existed when it was Diedrich Coffee. Mr. Glassman noted that even with the sign relocated above the door, it would still be partially blocked, but he argued that the more visible location is appropriate in the Visitor-Commercial district because it would enable visitors to see the store more quickly. He expressed appreciation of staff s opinion, but questioned denying the application because Starbucks is a formula restaurant, rather than issues with the actual signage. Mr. Glassman explained that each store operates independently, and this store is lagging in its sales. Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Johnson noted that the existing signage was approved 5-0 and she stated that she likes the current signage and wants it to stay as it is, but would also like the tree to be trimmed to improve visibility. Commissioner Sadler agreed, and noted the interesting history outlined in the staff report, which explains that Starbucks was able to go into that site, without a Conditional Use Permit, as an existing use, because it used to be Diedrich Coffee. Commissioner Sadler clarified that there is no prohibition on formula businesses, but the City does request uniqueness. He noted that the proposal would make the site more similar to the other locations and he submitted that the blade sign gives some differentiation. He also agreed that the City should trim the tree. Commissioner Whitin agreed with the other Commissioners comments. DRAFT PC Minutes 10 December 14, 2016

11 Motion SW Second AJ Action Deny Planning Commission Sign Permit at 180 North Coast Highway, with a request for Public Works to trim and/or lace the tree to enable better visibility of the existing blade sign. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 9. Planning Commission Interpretation , a request for an interpretation of Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section (D), which states that valet parking on a lot, whether proposed on-site to fulfill parking requirements, or off-site for non-required parking requirements, requires approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant is requesting that the provision be interpreted to find that an off-site valet parking program may be used to fulfill parking requirements subject to the granting of a conditional use permit and without necessitating a variance, particularly as it applies to a proposal to expand an existing 56-seat restaurant located at 2894 South Coast Highway (previously Tabu Grill). The interpretation will be considered in conjunction with a previously noticed request for Conditional Use Permit , Planning Commission Design Review , Coastal Development Permit and Variance to amend Conditional Use Permit for the restaurant expansion, extended hours of operation, addition of a piano bar and associated improvements. Item #9 was the tenth Agenda item heard. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Commissioner McErlane reported communications with Monica Tuchscher and Steve Kawartani and rest of the Commissioners reported communications with Monica Tuchscher. Anthony Viera summarized the staff report. Regarding valet parking for Royal Hawaiian, Mr. Viera noted that the Planning Commission staff report, summarizing the request that included parking program modifications, stated that offsite valet parking may not be used to satisfy parking requirements. Regarding the Dizz s As Is variance, Mr. Viera explained that the related improvement was to comply with the County Health Department related to food safety issues, and was not an intensification of use, similar to variances granted for rooftop mechanical equipment, where the justification is related to a public welfare benefit. Questions of Staff: Regarding the red curb, Mr. Viera responded to Commissioner McErlane that Caltrans likely made that section no parking because of a substandard condition. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Monica Tuchscher, applicant representative, asserted that valet parking was always allowed for required parking historically. She argued that the 2007 ordinance was written to address unauthorized valet operations, and included changes made to the valet ordinance, such as requiring all valet programs to go through the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. Ms. Tuchscher requested that the Commission find that all valet is allowable through the CUP process, and to keep that finding as a management tool in the City s repertoire to use. However, if the Commission disagrees with her assertion on the Interpretation, Ms. Tuchscher provided a handout that reiterated her suggested justifications for the four required DRAFT PC Minutes 11 December 14, 2016

12 findings. Ms. Tuchscher reiterated her request for the Commission s support on the Interpretation, to help manage parking issues along the coast and in the downtown. Regarding the valet parking diagram, Ms. Tuchscher explained to Commissioner McErlane that the space is adequate to move vehicles in any location without having to move other vehicles. She also explained that the garage was selected in part to insulate the sound from the neighbors above. Regarding queueing, Ms. Tuchscher assured Commissioner McErlane that three to four vehicles can queue in the garage. She also stated that the valet parking program would be advertised and signs would be put up. Dr. Lindsay Desai, 2900 Terry Road, right behind one of the offsite lots, noted that many people expressed enthusiasm at the last hearing, but they have not experienced having a restaurant in their backyard. She described the plethora of issues they experienced when Tabu was open, such as people running over their shrubs while trying to park around their home, even though Tabu had valet parking in place. She explained the gravity of having their garage blocked, keeping her husband, a cardiologist, from being able to respond to calls. Dr. Desai stated that Tabu management was rude and disrespectful, and Laguna Beach Police took an hour to respond, which does not include the time it took for the tow trucks to arrive. She also described instances of people urinating on their property because the lines for the restrooms were too long, and knocking on their door requesting to use their phone because they could not get a cellular signal. She admitted that they celebrated when Tabu went out of business. Dr. Desai stated that the challenges are not unique to this site or this neighborhood, noting similar issues with Skyloft and Mozambique. She emphasized the profound effect these restaurants have on quiet residential neighborhoods and requested that the Planning Commission deny the request. Barbara Amoroso, Terry Road, one block behind the restaurant, commented that there is no such thing as free valet parking, so people will go up to Terry Road to park, leaving no place for residents and their guests to park. She asserted that it is not fair to neighbors. John Amoroso, 2890 Terry Road, noted that Terry Road is an extremely narrow street, where trucks have to back in and out. He stated that he had to sell a vehicle he cherished because there is no room to park. Mr. Amoroso asserted that people will not use valet if they can park for free in the neighborhood. Dahl Hofmeister stated that he leases a property on Terry Road and commented that the intersection is dangerous and confusing. He asserted that the location is not the right place for such a use and there are not enough spaces for vehicles, so those surplus vehicles will be on Terry Road. Mr. Hofmeister stated that he is in favor of the concept, but feels that this is the wrong location. He also asserted that comparing it to Dizz s is not a fair comparison. Mr. Hofmeister requested that the Planning Commission reject the proposal. He stated that parking is the main issue, but safety is also a concern, with people trying to get off of Coast Highway into a valet area. Jayne Berberian, continuous resident since 1967, spoke in favor of the project. She argued that the parking and traffic situations are there with or without this restaurant. She noted that there has been continuous food service at this site for a long time and submitted that the valet program is brilliant. Regarding queueing issues, Ms. Berberian surmised that all of the people will not arrive at the same time, so she believed it unlikely to be an issue. She stated that she would be thrilled to DRAFT PC Minutes 12 December 14, 2016

13 have this restaurant in her neighborhood, stating that it reminds her of San Francisco and New York. Ms. Berberian expressed her hope that the Commission will look favorably on the proposal. Gary Gauthier, owner of Arch Beach Veterinary Clinic, explained that the red curbs exist because of a safety issue. He stated that Caltrans had the City paint four parking spaces out of existence. He noted the growth around the community and submitted that the proposed solution is a good one. Dr. Gauthier submitted that what is being proposed is very viable and the applicant is trying to address neighbor concerns. He asserted that related crime is being overstated and he stated that he is for the project because it would be good for the community. Rebuttal: Alec Glasser, owner of the proposed Drake restaurant, assured that he appreciates the concerns of the neighbors. He stated that they had an open meeting and he has taken all the comments very seriously. Mr. Glasser stated that those that spoke against his proposal did not come to the meeting, but he will work with them if given the opportunity. He noted that it is a restaurant site with an existing CUP, so there will be a restaurant there, and therefore the question is what the best type for that area is. Mr. Glasser noted that they would be increasing the number of restrooms, making them ADA-compliant, increasing cellular coverage and increasing parking. He noted that their proposal requires 8 additional spaces and they would be providing 13 additional spaces. He also assured that there will be no charge for the valet, and he noted that the Planning Commission has the discretion to disagree with staff. Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Sadler noted that they are tasked to make a Planning Commission Interpretation. He then noted staff s detailed opinion and that the City Attorney agreed with staff. Though Commissioner Sadler acknowledged that the Commissioners have discretion, he stated that it is difficult to go against a careful staff analysis and City Attorney opinion. Commissioner Sadler submitted that the way the Code is written, it would not have been written that way if the intent was not to make a distinction between required and not required parking; therefore, he finds that the proposal does not comply with offsite restrictions. Commissioner Sadler also stated that he has not been swayed on the Variance findings. He asserted that denying the Variance would not deprive the applicant from using the property, they would only be denied the expansion. Regarding the reference to Dizz s, Commissioner Sadler noted that they added cold storage, which was not an intensification of use and did not require additional parking. He noted that the problem is the expansion into the adjacent space; staff is supportive of the other parts of the proposal. Commissioner Sadler also advised that financial viability cannot be part of the Commission s consideration. Commissioner Kempf agreed with Commissioner Sadler and stated that she also could not make the findings. She noted that the City Attorney supports the staff recommendation and she stated that she cannot accommodate an intensification with a variance. Commissioner McErlane argued that managed parking is better than unmanaged parking, and the proposed valet program would provide the ability to oversee the parking. He submitted that if the restaurant opens as is, then the parking will continue to be a problem. Commissioner McErlane submitted that the site s disadvantage is the lack of street parking, forcing a different solution. He stated that he is supportive of the applicant s solution to the parking situation and the goal of the restaurant, and he asserted that the neighborhood would be better off with managed parking. DRAFT PC Minutes 13 December 14, 2016

14 Commissioner Johnson stated that her position is the same as last time. She noted that they are not depriving use of the property, the applicant just cannot expand; therefore, she cannot make the findings for the Variance; and she agreed that the Code does not allow offsite valet to fulfill required parking. She stated that she wishes she could support the project because it may work. Commissioner Johnson asked if vans are able to get into the parking structure and asked about a deed restriction; Mr. Viera advised that the deed restriction issue was related to the new lot at veterinary clinic, which is no longer proposed. Commissioner Whitin agreed with Commissioners Sadler and Johnson. She stated that though she loves this kind of use and would love to see it happen, she agrees that the Code does not permit offsite valet for required parking. She stated that the City could change the Code, but Commissioner Johnson noted that any Code change would likely require a deed restriction. Commissioner Whitin acknowledged that the safety issues are real and she stated that she cannot support the expansion. Mr. Viera summarized for the Commission the parts of the proposal that staff can support, such as the extended hours of operation and physical improvements, and it was confirmed for Mr. Glasser that they can appeal a partial approval. Ms. Tuchscher clarified that they propose to replace the existing awning, which extends the length of the building, and to continue to provide the existing outdoor seating, but with no service. She also noted that they would replace the planters with a wall. It was clarified that the outdoor seating is a waiting area with bench seating, per Condition 22 of the existing CUP. Mr. Viera summarized the items for approval, including replacement of the existing awning, maintaining the existing outdoor seating with no service, extending the hours of operation and allowing the applicant the option of providing live entertainment. Motion AJ Second SW Action The Planning Commission agreed with staff s interpretation that the Municipal Code restricts off-site valet parking to non-required parking only subject to a conditional use permit, and that a variance is required to satisfy parking obligations through the provision of off-site valet; and approved Conditional Use Permit , Planning Commission Design Review and Coastal Development Permit , subject to no expansion and elimination of the related variance. Motion carried 5-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Y Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 10. Planning Commission Design Review , Coastal Development Permit , Conditional Use Permit at 1200 South Coast Highway to: (1) construct a 500-squarefoot, upper-level addition and a 464-square-foot deck to an existing office suite (suite 204); and (2) amend Conditional Use Permit to modify the previously approved historic parking reduction for the E-rated structure listed on the City s Historic Register (The Pottery Place) from 53% to 75%. Item #10 was the fifth Agenda item heard. DRAFT PC Minutes 14 December 14, 2016

15 Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Commissioner Johnson reported communications with Joe Hanauer; Commissioner Whitin reported communications with Morris Skenderian; Commissioner Kempf reported communications with Mr. Hanauer s staff. Martina Caron summarized the staff report. Questions of Staff: Ms. Caron explained to Commissioner Whitin that the previous renovation was extensive and included historic construction monitoring. Commissioner Whitin commented that the level of detail appears above and beyond anything else that has been done in the City and Ms. Caron confirmed that the building has an E rating and is therefore eligible to receive up to a 75% parking reduction. Ms. Caron explained to Commissioner Sadler that a 53% was originally approved, rather than the full 75%, because the applicant would have banked the excess parking spaces, and the City did not want to set a precedent for banking parking spaces. Ms. Caron confirmed for Commissioner Sadler that the Heritage Committee recommended up to a 75% parking reduction is approved. Public Testimony Regarding the Project: Morris Skenderian, project architect, advised that the 53% was derived by taking the 41 spaces that were onsite before the parking structure was constructed, which equated to 53% of what would have been needed to meet parking requirements at that time. He stated that the direction received was that after the renovation was completed to see the level of detail, they could come back and ask for more of a parking reduction, but until now, there has been no appropriate event to trigger the request. He explained that the request is to obtain the parking reduction to address the loss of parking credits that resulted from a change in the Code. Mr. Skenderian noted that the building in back is not historic, and was a complete demolition reconstruction. He explained that the rear building had approval for a 221-square-foot addition, and they had to go to the Heritage Committee for a 500-square-foot addition for Mr. Hanauer s office, which doubles the space by filling in the void area of the building. Mr. Skenderian noted that the reconstructed building is more contemporary in order to not distract from the historic character of the historic building on the site. He noted that the Heritage Committee supported the 75% parking reduction, and he asserted that the reward is justified because the historic building is one of the most exemplary examples of an E-rated building. Mr. Skenderian noted that Jan Ostashay, historic consultant, was onsite during the construction, and supported the application. He explained that the additional detail the Commissioners noticed are added artifacts, that were hand-painted, after the renovation was completed. He asserted that Mr. Hanuaer took what was required and doubled that by having details like the hand-painted work added. Commissioners Comments: Commissioner Johnson supported the applicant s proposal and agreed that the City should ameliorate the 17 spaces lost with the change in the Code; therefore, she supported recommending that the full 75% parking reduction be granted. Commissioner Sadler noted that a typical addition should blend in and be harmonious with the surrounding structures, but with historic properties, new additions are differentiated. He submitted that the addition architecturally fits with the structure and noted no detrimental view impacts. He DRAFT PC Minutes 15 December 14, 2016

16 commented on the parking reduction, noting the applicant s request versus staff s recommendation, and stated that he is willing to support the full 75% parking reduction for this site. Commissioner Whitin concurred with the other Commissioners comments. Commissioner Kempf commented on the excellent reconstruction, which she asserted shows that the applicant did more than the required due diligence; therefore, she also was willing to support the applicant s request. Motion SW Second KS Action Recommend that the City Council approve Planning Commission Design Review , Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit at 1200 South Coast Highway, subject to findings and conditions, with the full 75% parking reduction. Motion carried 4-0. Vote: Johnson Y McErlane Absent Sadler Y Whitin Y Kempf Y 11. Planning Commission Design Review , Conditional Use Permit , Coastal Development Permit and Variance to remodel an existing 24-room hotel at 1401 South Coast Highway (The Coast Inn), and a convenience store and retail cottage at 1391 South Coast Highway (The Coast Liquor Store and an Olympic Cottage). The proposed project includes a 24-room hotel, with three restaurants, a pool deck with bar area, covered parking garage, conference room, spa/gym, a deli/liquor store, and a retail cottage. Design review is required for elevated decks, upper-level additions, pool/spa, air conditioning, modifications to a historic structure, Art in Public Places and landscaping. A Conditional Use Permit is requested for the proposed hotel, outdoor dining, valet services, event uses, the service of alcohol and to allow a historic parking reduction for the E-rated properties listed on the Historic Register. A variance is requested to exceed the maximum height above the curb and the lowest finished floor [LBMC D)(1)&(2)], to not provide the required groundto-sky open space [LBMC (B)] and to encroach into the blufftop setback (deck area) [LBMC (4)]. Communication Disclosures: All Commissioners have visited the site unless otherwise noted in the public hearing. Commissioners Johnson, Kempf, McErlane and Whitin reported that they each met with the applicant and Marshall Ininns. Martina Caron summarized the staff report with a PowerPoint presentation. She advised that a letter from Caltrans was received yesterday, questioning one of the ways the signal warrant analysis was calculated, which may require the applicant to revise or update the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to address the issue, and recirculate the revised MND. Ms. Caron also noted the multiple letters of concern and letters of support that have been received regarding the project. She summarized that the concerns noted were in regards to parking, view impacts, the height of the proposed structure and the rooftop deck design. Ms. Caron also advised that the Police Department had three recommendations, for a review of the project six months after the start of operations, a security plan and for the loading zone not to be used for any other purpose. Questions of Staff: Ms. Caron clarified for Commissioner McErlane that offsite valet parking is not proposed and Commissioner McErlane submitted that parking will occur offsite. DRAFT PC Minutes 16 December 14, 2016