HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC AG 2013-02-06 #6I,!
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Director of Community Development
MEETING DATE: February 6, 2013
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING
LOCATION: 1605 SEAL WAY
ITEM NUMBER
W.
0%
I *I I 1101 1 F.11 Willi 6*1 Zl A IM0114 kv� I
APPLICANTS: FRANK AND JENNY TOMICH
RECOMMENDATION: After conducting the Public Hearing, sta
recommends that the Planning Commission ado
Resolution No. 12-22, denying Conditional U �1
S
Permit
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 12-12
1605 Seal Way
February 6, 2013
1 -v a- I 1MIZI a A g 1IT: lim, I III
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
SITE DESCRIPTION:
Assessor's Parcel Number: 199-094-34
Lot Area: 2,500 sq. ft.
Gross Living Area: Approximately 2,690 sq. ft.
North: Single and Multi-family properties in the Residential High
Density (RHD-20) zone.
South: Boardwalk; Public Beach; Pacific Ocean
East: Public Right of Way; Single and Multi-family properties in the
Residential High Density (RHD-20) zone.
West: Single and Multi-family properties in the Residential High
Density (RHD-20) zone.
LEGAL NOTIFICATION:
The legal notice of this hearing was published in the 'Seal Beach Sun Newspaper on
January 24, 2013 and mailed to 124 property owners and 182 occupants within a 500'
radius of the subject property on January 23, 2013, with affidavits of publishing and
posting on file,
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and State Guidelines for the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Community Development Department
has determined that the proposed project is categorically exempt from environmental
review per Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, and
Section 13505, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations of CEQA.
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 12 -12
1605 Seal Way
February 6, 2013
LOCATION MAP:
FACTS:
On July 6, 2012, Frank and Jenny Tomich ( "the applicants ") filed an application with
the Department of Community Development for Conditional Use Permit 12 -12 to
permit the use of the property at 1605 Seal Way as a short -term "vacation rental' (i.e.,
renting the property for periods less than 30 days).
• Property owners may apply for a conditional use permit for a short -term vacation
rental provided the application was filed on or prior to October 22, 2012.
The subject application was originally discussed by the Planning Commission at the
October 3, 2012 meeting and at the request of the Planning Commission, was
continued to a subsequent meeting. Staff subsequently re- noticed the public hearing
for CUP 12 -12 for the regular Planning Commission meeting of December 19, 2012.
Prior to the December 19th meeting, information was obtained by planning staff that
required staff to change its previous recommendation for the proposed project. When
staff notified the applicant of this change, the applicant submitted a letter to planning
staff asking to continue the hearing to a later date so that the applicant could explore
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 12-12
1605 Seal Way
February 6, 2013
options available to them. Staff then re-noticed the public hearing for CUP 12-12 for
the regular Planning Commission meeting of February 6, 2013.
• The property is nonconforming due to exceeding the allowable density (three existing
dwelling units on a lot where only one would be allowed under the current zoning
code); height limitations (three story structure on a lot that would only allow a two
story structure under the current zoning code); and substandard parking (one existing
two-car garage where three two-car garages would be required under the current
zoning code).
• The property is presently developed with a three-story, duplex main dwelling towards
the front of the property (beach side), and a detached, two story structure at the rear
of the property with a two-car garage and third dwelling unit on the second floor of the
detached structure.
• Due to the nonconforming rear yard setback, there is not adequate space to park a
standard sized automobile within the area between the garage and the rear property
line.
• The property was most recently sold in May 2012 and to staff's knowledge, has never
been used as a legal, short-term vacation rental property.
• As of January 29, 2013, planning staff has received one email in opposition to the
project, in response to the hearing notices that were mailed out and published for the
original hearing on October 3, 2012, and staff has received no correspondence in
response to the hearing notices that were mailed out and published for the continued
hearings of December 19, 2012 and February 6, 2013.
BACKGROUND:
The applicants/owners bought the property with an existing, nonconforming triplex in May
2012 and online records confirm that the property was sold in May 2012. Based on a
conversation that staff had with the applicants/owners, the previous owner had apparently
insinuated to the new owners that the property was an existing vacation rental property.
There is presently no business license or Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) registration on
file with the City, but staff does have evidence that the property had been listed on the
vacation rental property website 'vrbo.com' prior to May 2012 and that the property had
most likely been used as an illegal short-term vacation rental property prior to May 2012.
When the current owners became aware that a CUP was required for such short-term
rental properties, they filed the necessary public hearing application with the City in a timely
manner.
To date, staff is unaware of any noise disturbances or any other adverse impacts that have
occurred as a result of the operation of a vacation rental at this address. There have been
no police calls for service at this address that staff believes are related or potentially related
to the operation of a short-term vacation rental and there is no record of any neighborhood
complaints or reports concerning such use at the subject property.
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 12 -12
1605 Seal Way
February 6, 2013
ANALYSIS:
Commencing with the adoption of Title 11 in 2010, the City has adopted a series of
regulations and requirements for vacation rentals designed to mitigate and eliminate any
adverse impacts upon neighboring properties and the City at large that might arise from the
use. Those regulations include check -in and check -out times as well as requirements that
renters provide valid government identification, that occupants may be cited or fined by the
City for any violation of any provision of the Municipal Code, that trash be stored within
proper trash containers, and that certain terms be included in each short term lease. In
addition, to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses, the Commission may impose
reasonable conditions in connection with the issuance of a CUP.
During recent CLIP hearings for other short-term vacation rental property requests, both the
Planning Commission and members of the public have expressed concern for certain
properties wishing to obtain such permits, where there was a lack of adequate on -site
parking, an over - concentration of vacation rental properties within a certain geographic
area, a unit density issue within an individual lot, or where those properties did not have an
on -site or nearby owner or property manager. While the subject property does have an on-
site owner (upstairs in the rear unit above the garage), the property also contains three,
dwelling units on a lot size of 2,500 square feet and does not provide the minimum code
required off - street parking for the three units.
There is a two -car garage at the rear of the property that provides off - street parking for up
to two vehicles. While there is also a small concrete pad adjacent to the garage that has
historically been used for off - street parking for up to two additional cars, the dimensions of
this concrete pad do not meet the minimum dimensions of a required parking stall, per the
Zoning code. Moreover, when cars utilize this concrete pad for off - street parking, to exit
the vehicle once a car is parked in this space, a car door generally would have to swing
over the property line of the adjacent property. Since there is presently no fence, wall, or
other obstruction between the two properties, individuals are generally able to exit a vehicle
in this location without difficulty. However, if the adjacent property owner were to ever
construct a fence along the side property line in this location- which would be perfectly
legal- it would be nearly impossible to park a vehicle in this location and be able to easily
exit that vehicle.
While this parking issue would affect long -term as well as short-term residents of the
property, staff believes that long -term residents would, over time, find acceptable
alternatives for this parking impact whereas a short-term resident who is unfamiliar with the
neighborhood may not be able to easily find alternative arrangements.
Staff, therefore, does not believe that the physical layout and dwelling unit concentration of
the site is adequate for a vacation rental property, since, due to the lot density and
inadequate off - street parking, there exists a potential for adverse impacts to the
surrounding neighborhood through such use of the property.
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 12-12
1605 Seal Way
February 6, 2013
XOVI IQ ILI'M101 Z
After conducting the public hearing and receiving testimony, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution recommending denial of CUP 12-12
to allow a short-term vacation rental property within the RHD-20 zone at 1605 Seal Way.
FV M- Te M-, I M#
I - '1011
a,
e ver AICP
iv
r r_ Community S io lanner - Cmmunity Development
Attachments (3):
ted by:
Basham
ctor of Community Development
1. Resolution No. 12-22 —A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach, denying Conditional Use Permit 12-12, to allow a short-term vacation rental
property within the Residential High Density (RHD-20) zone at 1605 Seal Way.
2. Email received in opposition of CUP 12-12
3. Project plans
i 1 i i i
• i i i • •
1 1 i • ► • • i • • v /
• � a � � 1 •
` •� is
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH DENYING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 12-12 FOR A SHORT TERM
VACATION RENTAL AT 1605 SEAL WAY,
SEAL BEACH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
DOES HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. On July 6, 2012, Frank and Jenny Tomich ("the applicants")
submitted an application to the City of Seal Beach Department of Community
Development for Conditional Use Permit (CLIP) 12-12 to allow a short term
vacation rental at 1605 Seal Way (the "subject property").
Section 2. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on October 3, 2012 to consider the application for Conditional Use
Permit 12-12. At the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission received and
considered all evidence presented, both written and oral, regarding the subject
application and at the request of the Commission, the public hearing was
continued to a future hearing. Staff subsequently re-noticed the public hearing for
CUP 12-12 for the regular Planning Commission meeting of December 19, 2012.
Prior to that hearing, the applicant submitted a request to continue the hearing to
a future date. Staff then re-noticed the public hearing for CUP 12-12 for the
regular meeting of February 6, 2013. The record of 'the hearing includes the
following facts, which the Planning Commission finds to be true and correct:
a. The subject property is located in the Residential High Density
(RHD-20) zone area of Old Town Seal Beach, which is characterized by narrow
residential lots with narrow setbacks, which means that homes are very close
together. Additionally, Seal Way is a single lane, one-way street, with no on-
street parking and functions more as an alley than a residential street. This
makes the parking and circulation problems in the neighborhood of the subject
property particularly acute.
b. The subject property is a 2,500 square-foot lot approximately 25' by
100', and is presently developed with a three-story residential duplex, as well as
a detached two-story structure with a single two-car garage and third dwelling
unit above the garage, at the rear of the property. The property is nonconforming
on the a basis of: (1) density, because the Zoning Code permits only one
dwelling unit on the subject property; (2) height limitations, because the Zoning
Code only permits a maximum two-story structure on the subject property; and
(3) off-street parking, because the Zoning Code requires an enclosed two-car
garage for each dwelling unit on the premises.
C. The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH: Single and multi-family residences in the Residential
High Density (RHD-20) zone.
SOUTH: Boardwalk; public beach; Pacific Ocean.
EAST: Single and multi-family residences in the Residential
High Density (RHD-20) zone.
WEST: Single and multi-family residences in the Residential
High Density (RHD-20) zone.
d. The subject property has been previously used for short-term
vacation rentals by the previous owners, as well as the current owners, which
has resulted in a regular turnover in short term residents and a more intense
level of use than that which typically occurs in residential properties.
e. Neighboring residents have complained that the short term
residents of the subject property can exacerbate noise and existing parking
impacts within the neighborhood during their vacation stays without regard to the
concerns of neighboring long term residents, and that the operation of multiple
vacation units on the subject property negatively impacts an already dense
residential neighborhood and traffic circulation environment; especially in light of
the nonconforming status of the subject property.
Section 3. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including but not
limited to those stated in the preceding Section of this Resolution, and pursuant
to Chapter 11.5.20 of the Seal Beach Municipal Code, the Planning Commission
makes the following findings:
a. Use of the subject property as a short term vacation rental is
inconsistent with the General Plan because the adverse parking impacts, lot
density, and other impacts from the use of the subject property as a short term
vacation rental are incompatible with the residential designation of the
neighborhood.
b. The subject property is not physically adequate for the type, density
and intensity of use proposed because the neighboring residences are so close
that there can be no effective buffer for the sort of noise and other use impacts
created by short term Occupancy of a nonconforming triplex and the street is so
narrow that the addition of additional vehicle traffic for vacation renters at a
property that is already nonconforming will negatively impact an already deficient
situation.
C. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the
proposed use would not be compatible with and would adversely affect uses and
properties in the surrounding neighborhood because allowing vacation renters
2
increases the number and frequency of visitors and guests and therefore
exacerbates noise, traffic and other land use impacts.
d. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of a short term
vacation rental at the subject property is detrimental to the health, safety, or
welfare of persons residing in the vicinity because the addition vacation renters
increases the number and frequency of visitors and guests and therefore
exacerbates noise, traffic and other land use impacts.
Section 4. Based on the findings made in the preceding Section of this
Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby denies Conditional Use Permit 12-
12, and further finds and declares it would have denied the application based on
any one of the four findings made in the preceding Section, each of which is
considered by the Planning Commission to be sufficient alternative grounds for
denying the CUP.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of
the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 6th day of February,
2013, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
Jim Basham
Planning Commission Secretary
Sandra Massa-Lavitt
Planning Commission Chairwoman
l
EMAIL RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION TO CUP 12 -12
Jerry Olivera
From: Jerry Olivera
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:25 AM
To: Jerry Olivera
Subject: FW: 1605 Seal Way and 1606 112 Ocean
Dear Ellery,
As we discussed this afternoon, my wife and I believe very strongly that there needs to be
strict regulations (that will be enforced) on vacation rentals in Seal Beach.
We live in the 1600 block of Seal Way where there are many of these rentals. Our experience
has been very good with the vacation rental across the alley from our house (the Pineapple
Cottage) at 1620 Ocean Avenue. However, there are other vacation rentals where our
experience has been quite the opposite. The problems we have encountered are:
• Parking of cars in Seal Way alley where the car's are parked behind garages and jut out
into the alley causing a driving hazard
• People leave their cars in the alley while they run in to their rental to retrieve something,
thereby blocking the alley completely
These people seem to ignore that Seal Way is actually a street; they frequently get angry with
us and other residents if we ask them to move their car, completely disregarding the fact that
we live here.
0 Noise and partying issues.
Some vacation renters are here to party and have a good time, their noise carries throughout
the neighborhood.
We are not against vacation rentals per se, but there needs to be strict controls placed on them
and the number allowed in Seal Beach. There should not be more than one such rental in any
given block of Seal Beach, such as the Pineapple Cottage which does an excellent job of
screening and managing their rental. That is simply not true for the vacation rentals at 1605
Seal Way and 1616 112 Ocean Avenue.
Yours very truly,
Tom and Josi Greeley
1629 Seal Way
1
ATTACHMENT 3
PA K K f fQ
T-W o
AX A 6C-'
PA
F�C'Jrotl'
&t A ra r,)*l
6edreO)vi
(L b
It"A
-SEIP ORY
jl
I--
4%(J'Jici!
all jac'I ".4.-
1
CA �Icllr
P L 6
So.( OW CA BYO
3fj fjooY-
Uvi, 4-
be� r 0 0 M
[tN+ f �l
b4 woo hA
k" I r ke PN
be4l
ca
Frorv, Tom, 0\
CA qdOr
f t?,ea e A CA
i
m6ksi'{er
R0,441 f C* m Pa
0 "'o
Frorv, Tom, 0\
CA qdOr
f t?,ea e A CA
i