HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment D - Appeal of PC Resolution 17-16 denying CUP 16-7CITY OF SEAL BEACH
APPEAL APPLICATION TO CITY COUNCIL
Planning Commission Date: _
Planning Commission Action:
Date Appeal Fled:
Notice Date:
City Council Action:
1. Property Address:
2. Applicant's Name
Address: 1,'
For Office Use Only
Planning Comm. Resolution No.:
Approval Denial _
City Council Date:
Resolution No.:
121t11 Seat 6tach 6'ulevara
mart? P#t4'3 , J1.L
Other
Work Phone: ( ) R't9' - 216 • 36gtZ Mobile:( ) 9rt4 • b87.3039
Home Phone: ( ) FAX: ( )
3. Property Owners
Address: ' /n �Cj
Home Phone: (11)
4. The undersigned hereby appeals the following described action of the Seal Beach
Planning Commission concerning Public Hearing No. 2 on Duty t7, 2917
Attach a statement that explains in detail why the decision of the Planning
Commission is being appealed, the specific conditions of approval being appealed,
and includ your statements Indicating where the Planning Commission may be in
error. 7
(Signal -df-�licant) (Signature of Owner)
(nlir +y P6 s
(Print Name)
712 -7117
(Date)
Z-dif Kao
(Print N me)
h-)
(Date)
Statement of Appeal
The applicant, Marty Potts, hereby appeals the Planning Commission's July 17, 2017 adoption of
Resolution No. 17 -16 denying Conditional Use Permit ( "CUP ") 16 -7 to construct a 37,000 square foot
health club at 12411 Seal Beach Boulevard within the Shops at Rossmoor in the General Commercial
(GC) Zoning Area.
As set forth in Resolution No. 17 -16, the Planning Commission concluded that the proposed health club
project met only three of the five required CUP findings under Seal Beach Municipal Code Section
11.5.20.020.A. Resolution No. 17 -16 states that the proposed health club "will not be compatible with
and will adversely affect uses and properties in the surrounding neighborhood" (Finding 4). It also finds
that the "establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed use will be detrimental to the
health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity" (Finding 5).
The conclusions regarding Finding 4 and 5 in Resolution No. 17 -16 are at odds with the Final
Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") for the LA Fitness Health Club (SCH No. 2017011033), which the
Planning Commission certified on June 27, 2017. That certified EIR provides substantial evidence to
support the CUP Findings 4 and 5.
With respect to Finding 4, the certified EIR concluded, in part, that the project would be compatible with
adjacent residential uses (p. 3.0 -5). In support of that conclusion, the EIR noted that "The health club is
not a 24 -hour club.... The only noise associated with the club during operating hours would be traffic
coming and going to the facility, including limited truck traffic making deliveries. Health and fitness clubs
are not noise - generating land uses" (p. 3.0 -5).
In support of Finding 5, the certified EIR concluded, in part, that the project, including the proposed
Rossmoor Way widening, "would improve existing queuing conditions and avoid any new queuing
conditions and the improvement would not increase safety hazards' (p. 4.4 -26). Speaking specifically to
safety, the EIR also compared how alternative permitted and conditionally permitted uses on the site
might compare to the proposed project in terms of daily trip generation (Table 5 -1). As shown the EIR,
most other permitted and conditionally permitted uses would result in increased traffic at the site.
For these and other reasons which will be presented to the City Council, the applicant hereby appeals
the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. 17 -16 denying the CUP.