HomeMy WebLinkAbout2 - VAR 12-1; MUP 12-2 (A-95 Surfside Avenue)February 15, 2012
STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Chairwoman and Planning Commission
From: Department of Development Services
Subject VARIANCE 12 -1; MINOR USE PERMIT 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Applicant:
Owner:
Location:
Classification of
Property:
Request:
Environmental Review:
Code Sections:
Recommendation:
CYNTHIA AND WAYNE TOMLINSON
CYNTHIA AND WAYNE TOMLINSON
A -95 SURFSIDE AVENUE
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY (RLD -9 - SURFSIDE)
TO CONSTRUCT AN EXTERIOR GLASS WALL FOR AN INTERIOR
STAIRCASE THAT ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY 1' -0" INTO
THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK AREA, AS WELL AS A
GLASS AND STUCCO ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT ON THE
ROOFTOP DECK THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 35 SQUARE FEET IN
AREA AND EXCEEDS THE 35' -0" HEIGHT LIMIT BY
APPROXIMATELY 3' -6" (APPROXIMATELY 38' -6" OVERALL
HEIGHT).
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 18, §15301(E)(1), OF CEQA
GUIDELINES, THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM
CEQA.
11.2.05.015A; 11.5.20 OF THE SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL
CODE
APPROVE MINOR USE PERMIT 12 -2; DENY VARIANCE 12 -1.
APPROVAL OF MUP 12 -2 SHOULD BE THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 12 -3; DENIAL OF VARIANCE
12 -1 SHOULD BE THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION 12 -2.
FACTS
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
❑ On December 13, 2011, Cynthia and Wayne Tomlinson ( "the applicants ") submitted
an application for Variance 12 -1 and Minor Use Permit 12 -2 to the Department of
Development Services.
❑ The applicants are requesting a Variance and a Minor Use Permit to construct an
exterior glass wall for an interior staircase that encroaches approximately 1-0" into
the required side yard setback area, as well as a glass and stucco architectural
element on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35 square feet in area and
exceeds the 35' -0" height limit by approximately 3' -6" (approximately 38' -6" overall
height).
❑ The subject property is approximately 1,698 sq. ft. in area and is located at A -95
Surfside Avenue within the 'Surfside Colony'.
❑ The property contains a Single Family Dwelling that is approximately 3,418 square
feet in area.
❑ The surrounding land use and zoning are as follows:
NORTH: Single family residences in the
(RLD -9 — Surfside) zone.
SOUTH: Beach; Pacific Ocean
EAST: Single family residences in the
(RLD -9 - Surfside) zone.
WEST: Single family residences in the
(RLD -9 - Surfside) zone.
Residential Low Density
Residential Low Density
Residential Low Density
❑ As of February 9, 2012, Staff has received one letter (attached), in response to the
hearing notices that were mailed out and published for Variance 12 -1; Minor Use
Permit 12 -2.
DISCUSSION 1
The subject property, Orange County Assessor's parcel number 178 - 462 -24, is located
within the Residential Low Density (RLD -9 - Surfside) zone at A -95 Surfside Avenue.
The property currently contains a three -story, single family dwelling. The lot area is
approximately 1,698 square feet and is approximately 25' -0" by 67' -5 ".
2
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
The applicants propose to construct an exterior glass wall for an interior staircase that
encroaches approximately 1' -0" into the required side yard setback area, as well as a
glass and stucco architectural element on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35
square feet in area and exceeds the 35' -0" height limit by approximately 3' -6"
(approximately 38' -6" overall height).
Variance request
Section 11.2.05.015A of the Seal Beach Municipal Code specifies development
standards for the Surfside Colony. Cornices, eaves, or chimneys are permitted by right
to project up to one (1) foot into required side yards beginning above the first story and
in no case less than eight (8) feet above grade. The development standards do not
specify other types of permitted projections. Generally, when the code is silent with
regard to a specific requirement or allowance, that requirement or allowance, by default,
is not permitted.
Section 11.5.20.020.B of the Municipal Code states that a Variance shall only be
granted if the Planning Commission finds, based upon evidence presented at the
hearing:
1. The Variance conforms in all significant respects to the General Plan and
with any ordinances adopted by the City Council;
2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including
size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of
the Zoning Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the vicinity and under identical zoning district classification;
3. The Variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent
with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone district in
which such property is situated; and
4. Authorization of the Variance substantially meets the intent and purpose
of the zoning district in which the property is located and will not be
detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working
in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
With regard to the subject property, Staff does not believe that the property meets the
minimum criteria for a Variance because the requisite findings cannot be made. There
is nothing about size, shape, configuration, or other physical characteristics of the
subject property that deprives it of an opportunity to be used in the same manner as
similarly situated properties. Properties in the vicinity (i.e., within the Surfside Colony)
are used for single family residential purposes, as is the subject property.
Staff does not believe that any unique condition exists, either with the property itself, or
with the existing development on the property, that necessitates a positive
3
recommendation for granting the Variance. Detailed findings of denial are contained
within the resolution.
The applicants have submitted an exhibit showing existing projections or
encroachments into required setbacks for various properties throughout the Surfside
Colony. Based upon a cursory review of these properties, staff has determined that
these existing projections were either permitted by right or were granted through
previous Variance approvals It is important to note that Variances are not precedent
setting.
Minor Use Permit request
In general the Zoning Code states that no building or structure shall exceed the height
limit for the district and zone in which it is located. However, Section 11.2.05.015.A.6
provides for non - habitable architectural features, such as spires, towers, cupolas,
belfries, monuments, parapets (not required by the Uniform Building Code), domes, and
covered access to open roof decks to exceed the height limit established pursuant to
Section 11.2.05.015.A.3 (Surfside) up to a maximum of 7 feet, if granted pursuant to a
Minor Use Permit approval.
The height limit for structures within the Surfside Colony is 35 feet. The maximum
height elevation of the proposed architectural feature (tower) is approximately 3' -6"
beyond the 35 foot height limit, for a total building height of 38' -6 "" at the roofline of the
architectural feature. The proposed height is within the 7 -foot allowance provided for a
non - habitable architectural feature under Section 11.2.05.015.A.6.
In addition to the overall height requirement previously discussed, the Planning
Commission, in reviewing an application for a Height Variation, shall consider criteria
set forth in Section 11.2.05.015.A.6.c and make findings pursuant to said review. Said
criteria stated in Section 11.2.05.015.A.6.c as follows:
"c ...In making the findings required for the approval of a Minor Use Permit
pursuant to Chapter 11.5.20: Development Permits, the following additional
issues shall also be considered.
(i) Whether such variation is appropriate for the architectural style of the
building.
(a) Whether all roofing materials of a covered stairwell to an open roof
deck are in substantial conformity with the roofing materials of the
remainder of the structure.
(b) Whether a covered stairwell to an open roof deck is located along
peripheral exterior walls of the structure.
4
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
(c) Whether a covered stairwell to an open roof deck is limited to the
minimum area, both horizontally and vertically, necessary to cover the
stairwell.
(ii) Whether such variation is appropriate for the character and integrity of
the neighborhood.
(iii) Whether such variation significantly impairs the primary view from any
property located within 300 feet.
(iv) Detailed and complete plans for the proposed work."
Architectural Style: Roofing, Location and Size
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
The Code permits what the applicant is proposing, through the Minor Use Permit
process, subject to the finding that the proposal is consistent with the integrity of the
neighborhood. If the Planning Commission were to find that this proposal was not
significantly in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, this application could be
denied.
In considering an application for such a Minor Use Permit, the Planning Commission
may take into consideration the architectural style of the non - habitable architectural
feature as it applies to the style of the overall structure. The materials used in this
construction will be in substantial conformity with the materials used in the construction
of the rest of the house.
The proposed architectural feature will have similar treatments and roofing materials as
the remodeled home. The purpose of this feature is to extend the proposed exterior
glass wall above the roofline to (presumably) act as a 'light well' into the staircase area
and provide natural lighting for this part of the home.
The proposed architectural feature has a plan view footprint of approximately 35 square
feet. The entire architectural feature exceeds the 35' -0" height limit uniformly, and
would also encroach up to 1' -0" into the side yard setback area. Based on the design
and location of the architectural feature, Staff does not believe that this feature would
significantly impair the primary view of any property located within 300 feet of the
subject property, as there is already an existing CRAS located on the roof deck and this
would be a relatively minor extension of that CRAS.
Staff believes that the architectural feature, as proposed, meets the intent of the Code
and adds a unique and functional architectural element to the existing dwelling.
5
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, after considering all relevant
testimony, written and oral, presented during the public hearing, deny proposed
Variance 12 -1 to construct an exterior glass wall for an interior staircase that
encroaches approximately 1' -0" into the required side yard setback area and approve
proposed Minor Use Permit 12 -2 to construct a glass and stucco architectural element
on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35 square feet in area and exceeds the 35' -0"
height limit by approximately 3' -6" (38' -6" overall height) within the Residential Low
Density (RLD -9 — Surfside) zone at A -95 Surfside Avenue.
Staffs recommendation is based upon the following:
Variance 12 -1
• Proposed Variance 12 -1 does not conform to the General Plan or with any
ordinances adopted by the City Council, specifically, the Zoning Code, as the
proposed encroachment into the side yard setback area is not specifically
permitted by the Zoning Code.
• There are no special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, where the strict application of the
Zoning Code deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the vicinity and under identical zoning district classification, as all of
the properties within the Surfside Colony area are mostly rectangular in shape
and there are no other constraints upon the subject lot that would preclude its
redevelopment in compliance with RLD -9 zoning development standards;
• The approval of the Variance would constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone
district in which the subject property is situated. It is entirely possible that the
existing lot can be developed with a single family dwelling and comply with all of
the Zoning Code requirements; and
• Authorization of the Variance would not substantially meet the intent and
purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located, as development
standards within the RLD -9 zone were established to facilitate uniform
development patterns, adequate building setbacks, and place controls on
residential density within the zone.
6
Minor Use Permit 12 -2
• Proposed Minor Use Permit 12 -2, as conditioned, is consistent with the
provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, which provides a
"Low Density Residential" designation for the subject property and permits single
family residential uses. The use, as conditioned, is also consistent with the
remaining elements of the City's General Plan as the policies of those elements
are consistent with, and reflected in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the
proposed use, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan.
• The proposed non - habitable architectural feature, as conditioned, is
architecturally in keeping with the remainder of the structure, with the roof pitch,
roofing materials and siding architecturally compatible with that of the remainder
of the structure.
• The proposed non - habitable architectural feature, as conditioned, is appropriate
for the character and integrity of the surrounding neighborhood and permissible
by code through the issuance of a Minor Use Permit.
• No habitable living space is provided within the structure.
• The proposed non - habitable architectural feature, as conditioned, does not
significantly impair the primary view of any property located within 300 feet of the
subject property.
For: February 15, 2012
Attachments: (4)
Olivera, AICP
r Planner — Development Services
7
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution No. 12 -2 - A Resolution of the
Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach, denying
Variance No. 12 -1, to construct an exterior glass wall for an
interior staircase that encroaches approximately 1' -0" into
the required side yard setback area within the RLD -9 zone
(Surfside) at A -95 Surfside Avenue, Seal Beach
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution No. 12 -3 — A Resolution of the
Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach, approving
Minor Use Permit 12 -2, to construct a glass and stucco
architectural element on the rooftop deck that is
approximately 35 square feet in area and exceeds the 35' -0"
height limit by approximately 3' -6" (approximately 38' -6"
overall height) at A -95 Surfside Avenue, Seal Beach.
Attachment 3: Letter received from the Surfside Colony Architectural
Review Committee.
Attachment 4: Project plans.
8
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 12 -2 - A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, DENYING
VARIANCE 12 -1, TO CONSTRUCT AN EXTERIOR
GLASS WALL FOR AN INTERIOR STAIRCASE
THAT ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY 1' -O"
INTO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK
AREA WITHIN THE RLD -9 ZONE (SURFSIDE) AT
A -95 SURFSIDE AVENUE, SEAL BEACH
RESOLUTION NUMBER 12 -2
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DENYING
VARIANCE 12 -1, TO CONSTRUCT AN EXTERIOR
GLASS WALL FOR AN INTERIOR STAIRCASE THAT
ENCROACHES APPROXIMATELY 1' -0" INTO THE
REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK AREA WITHIN
THE RLD -9 ZONE (SURFSIDE) AT A -95 SURFSIDE
AVENUE, SEAL BEACH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. On December 13, 2011, Cynthia and Wayne Tomlinson
( "the applicants ") submitted an application to the City of Seal Beach Department of
Development Services for Variance 12 -1.
Section 2. The requested variance is for the construction of an exterior
glass wall for an interior staircase that encroaches approximately 1' -0" into the required
side yard setback area.
Section 3. Pursuant to Article 18, §15301(e)(1) of CEQA Guidelines,
staff has determined as follows: Variance 12 -1 for the construction of an exterior glass
wall that encroaches into the required side yard setback area, is categorically exempt
exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Existing
Structures), because the application is to permit a minor expansion of an existing
dwelling.
Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on February 15, 2012, to consider the application for Variance 12 -1. At
the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission received and considered all evidence
presented, both written and oral, regarding the subject application.
the following:
Section 5. The record of the hearing of February 15, 2012, indicates
10
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
a. On December 13, 2011, Cynthia and Wayne
Tomlinson submitted an application to the City of Seal Beach Department of
Development Services for Variance 12 -1.
b. The requested variance is for the construction of an
exterior glass wall for an interior staircase that encroaches approximately 1' -0" into the
required side yard setback area.
c. The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RHD -9 — Surfside) zone.
SOUTH: Beach; Pacific Ocean.
EAST: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RLD -9 — Surfside) zone.
WEST: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RLD -9 — Surfside) zone.
d. The subject property is approximately 1,698 square
feet in area and is located at A -95 Surfside Avenue within the `Surfside Colony'.
e. The subject property contains a single family dwelling
that is approximately 3,418 square feet in area.
f. There are no physical constraints upon the existing lot
that would preclude redevelopment of the lot in a manner consistent with the
development of surrounding Tots or that would justify the granting of a Variance.
Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including
those stated in §5 of this resolution and pursuant to §11.2.05.015.A and §11.5.20 of the
Seal Beach Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings:
a. Proposed Variance 12 -1 does not conform to the
General Plan or any ordinances adopted by the City Council, specifically, the Zoning
Code, as the proposed encroachment into the side yard setback area is not specifically
permitted by the Zoning Code;
b. There are no special circumstances applicable to the
property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, where the strict
application of the Zoning Code deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning district classification, as all of
the properties within the Surfside Colony area are mostly rectangular in shape and
11
there are no other constraints upon the subject lot that would preclude its
redevelopment in compliance with RLD -9 zoning development standards;
c. The approval of the Variance would constitute a grant
of special privileges, inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity
and zone district in which the subject property is situated. It is entirely possible that the
existing lot can be with a single family dwelling and comply with all of the zoning code
requirements; and
d. Authorization of the Variance would not substantially
meet the intent and purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located, as
development standards within the RLD -9 zone were established to facilitate uniform
development patterns, adequate building setbacks, and place controls on residential
density within the zone.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby
denies Variance 12 -1.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of
, 2012, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
Mark Persico, AICP
Secretary, Planning Commission
12
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
Sandra Massa - Lavitt
Chairperson, Planning Commission
ATTACHMENT 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 12 -3 - A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, APPROVING
MINOR USE PERMIT 12 -2, TO CONSTRUCT A
GLASS AND STUCCO ARCHITECTURAL
ELEMENT ON THE ROOFTOP DECK THAT IS
APPROXIMATELY 35 SQUARE FEET IN AREA
AND EXCEEDS THE 35' -0" HEIGHT LIMIT BY
APPROXIMATELY 3' -6" (APPROXIMATELY 38'-
6" OVERALL HEIGHT) AT A -95 SURFSIDE
AVENUE, SEAL BEACH
RESOLUTION NO. 12 -3
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
APPROVING MINOR USE PERMIT 12 -2, TO
CONSTRUCT A GLASS AND STUCCO
ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT ON THE ROOFTOP
DECK THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 35 SQUARE
FEET IN AREA AND EXCEEDS THE 35' -0"
HEIGHT LIMIT BY APPROXIMATELY 3' -6"
(APPROXIMATELY 38' -6" OVERALL HEIGHT) AT
A -95 SURFSIDE AVENUE, SEAL BEACH.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE:
Section 1. On December 13, 2011, Cynthia and Wayne Tomlinson
( "the applicants ") submitted an application for Minor Use Permit 12 -2, to construct a
glass and stucco architectural element on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35
square feet in area and exceeds the 35' -0" height limit by approximately 3' -6"
(approximately 38' -6" overall height); 7 feet is the maximum height allowed beyond the
height limit through a Minor Use Permit.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and § II.A of
the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff has determined as follows: The application for
Minor Use Permit 12 -2 is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15301(e)(1) (Existing
Structures), because the application is for the construction of a non - habitable
architectural feature in conjunction with an existing dwelling.
Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on February 15, 2012 to consider Minor Use Permit 12 -2. At the Public
Hearing, the Planning Commission received and considered all evidence presented,
both written and oral, regarding the subject application.
Section 4. The record of the hearing indicates the following:
(a) On December 13, 2011, the applicants submitted an application for
Minor Use Permit 12 -2.
14
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
(b) The applicants are requesting to construct a glass and stucco
architectural element on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35 square feet in area
and exceeds the 35' -0" height limit by approximately 3' -6" (approximately 38' -6" overall
height); 7 feet is the maximum height variation permitted.
(c) The subject property is approximately 1,698 square feet in area
and is located at A -95 Surfside Avenue within the `Surfside Colony'.
(d) The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RHD -9 — Surfside) zone.
SOUTH: Beach; Pacific Ocean.
EAST: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RLD -9 — Surfside) zone.
WEST: Single family residences in the Residential Low
Density (RLD -9 — Surfside) zone.
(e) The proposed architectural element will have roof lines, roofing
material, and siding that is architecturally compatible with the remodeled dwelling.
(f) No habitable living space is proposed within the architectural
element structure
Section 5. Based upon the evidence in the record, including the facts
stated in Section 4 of this resolution and pursuant to Section 11.2.05.015.A.3 Seal
Beach Municipal Code, the Planning Commission hereby finds as follows:
(a) Minor Use Permit 12 -2, as conditioned, is consistent with the
provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, which provides a "Low
Density Residential" designation for the subject property and permits single family
residential uses. The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City's
General Plan as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected in, the
Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
(b) The proposed architectural element, as conditioned, is
architecturally in keeping with the existing structure, with the roof pitch, roofing materials
and siding architecturally compatible with that of the remainder of the structure.
(c) The proposed architectural element, as conditioned, is
appropriate for the character and integrity of the surrounding neighborhood.
15
element.
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
(d) No habitable living space is provided within the architectural
(e) The proposed architectural element, as conditioned, does
not significantly impair the primary view of any property located within 300 feet of the
subject property.
Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby
approves Minor Use Permit 12 -2, subject to the following conditions:
1. Minor Use Permit 12 -2 is approved for the construction of a glass and stucco
architectural element on the rooftop deck that is approximately 35 square feet in
area and exceeds the 35' -0" height limit by approximately 3' -6" (approximately
38' -6" overall height) at A -95 Surfside Avenue, Seal Beach.
2. All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans approved
through Minor Use Permit 12 -2, with the exception of the exterior glass wall
encroachment into the required side yard setback area along the west side of the
structure. All new construction shall comply with all applicable sections of the
City's Zoning Code.
3. There shall be no habitable space permitted within the architectural element.
4. Roof pitches and exterior finishes of the Covered Roof Access Structure shall be
compatible with existing roof pitches and exterior finishes.
5. Building permits shall be obtained for all new construction requiring such permits.
6. This Minor Use Permit shall not become effective for any purpose unless an
"Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the
presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to
the Planning Department; and until the ten (10) day appeal period has elapsed.
7. The applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, agents
and employees (collectively "the City" hereinafter) from any and all claims and
losses whatsoever occurring or resulting to any and all persons, firms, or
corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in
connection with the performance of the use permitted hereby or the exercise of
the rights granted herein, and any and all claims, lawsuits or actions arising from
the granting of or the exercise of the rights permitted by this Height Variation,
and from any and all claims and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm,
corporation or property for damage, injury or death arising out of or connected
with the performance of the use permitted hereby. Applicant's obligation to
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City as stated herein shall include, but
not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's
choice in representing the City in connection with any such claims, losses,
16
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, and any award of damages, judgments,
verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2012
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
Mark Persico, AICP
Secretary - Planning Commission
17
Sandra Massa - Lavitt, Chairwoman
Planning Commission
ATTACHMENT 3
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012
LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE SURFSIDE COLONY
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
January 31, 2012
Jerry Olivera
Senior Planner - Development Services
211 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
/Z - Z-
Re: A95 Minor Use Permit 3,
Dear Jerry,
We have reviewed the plans for the above reference property and approve of the
variance request. We feel it meets the standards for a variance for roof top access per
the building code for Surfside Colony.
Sincerely,
Surfside Architect Committee
Sle,/ ge 6 ' , Y‘, d
P.O. BOX 235 • SURFSIDE, CALIFORNIA 90743
OFFICE (562) 592 -2352 • FAX (562) 592 -2687
E -mail: surfside90743 @aoi.com
ATTACHMENT 4
PROJECT PLANS
Planning Commission Staff Report
Variance 12 -1; Minor Use Permit 12 -2
A -95 Surfside Avenue
February 15, 2012