Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem NFebruary 12, 2001 STAFF REPORT i�6'0 To: Mayor Campbell and Members of the City Council Attention: Donald F. McIntyre, Acting City Manager From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Subject: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 1442 (ZONE CHANGE 98-2) AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (AVALON HOMES — 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop Property), RECOMMENDATION Adopt Zone Change 98-2, and approve Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 subject to conditions, by the adoption of Ordinance No. 1442 (Attachment 1) and Resolution No. 4876 (Attachment 2). The City Council has previously approved General Plan Amendment 98-2 and had first reading on Zone Change 98-2, to allow residential use on the property. The Planning Commission recommended denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832. If the City Council is to concur with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, staff will prepare a resolution incorporating the Council's findings. GENERAL DESCRIPTION AVALON HOMES Owner: ELLEN G. MUSSO, ET AL Location: 321. SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD— SHORE SHOP PROPERTIES Classification of Property: RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY OUAD) ZONE (PENDING) AGENDA ITEM & C:U y Docu t\Subdivisions\TMative Tact Mao 15832 (Avalon Homes)- CCSR2.docV W M7-01 Tenlojiw Trac! Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Coancil Staff Report February 12, 2001 TO APPROVE AN S -LOT SUBDIVISION OF THE EXISTING "SHORE SHOP" PROPERTY. SEE "DISCUSSION^ SECTION BELOW FOR DETAILED LAND SUBDIVISION REQUEST Review: THE ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REQUESTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS PROTECT APPROVALS EVALUATED BY NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3, AS SUPPLEMENTED BY THE ATTACHED ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98 -3 - Sections: CHAPTER 21, ARTICLE III, CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPT ORDINANCE 1442 RE: ZONE CHANGE 98-2 AND APPROVE RESOLUTION No. 4876, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 158329 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS Requested Action: The applicant has requested approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832, one of the City approvals necessary to enable the development and sale of 8 single-family residences. In December 1998, the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment 98-2, to allow medium density residential use, and had first reading on Zone Change 98-2. Thus, the two issues before the Council is whether: (1) the Zone Change and subdivision are consistent with the General Plan; and (2) the map complies with applicable subdivision requirements. Zone Change 98-1: The Council introduced Zone Change 98-2 in December 1998, but instructed staff to defer presenting the ordinance for adoption until the applicant submitted the map. In staffs view, the ordinance is consistent with the General Plan, and should be adopted at this time. Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832: Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this request on January 17 and February 7, 2001 and recommended denial on a 4 - 1 vote, with Commissioner Sharp voting "no". An excerpt of the Planning Commission Minutes of February 7, 2001 is provided as Attachment 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-2 and the Planning Commission Staff Reports are provided as Attachments 4 and 5, respectively. Toofive Tree[ Map 15932 (Avalon Homo) -CCSR2 2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12,1001 Overview of Requested Map Approval: The Planning Commission Staff Report discussed the following areas of concern, summarized for the Council. Please refer to the Planning Commission Staff Reports of January 17 and February 7, 2001 for the complete discussion regarding the following subjects: • General Description • Discussion Overview of Tentative Map Requirements and Proposed Map: The California Subdivision Map Act vests in the City the power to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions within its boundaries (Government Code § 66411). A summary of the proposed subdivision is provided below: ❑ 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel 1— 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage The major access roadway for the proposed land subdivision is Seal Beach Boulevard Access to the garage parking for each residential home is by the existing 12 -foot wide alley westerly of Seal Beach Boulevard. The parkway area will be comprised of an 8 -foot parkway area, including landscaping and sidewalk area. Findings to Approve TTM 15832: The tentative tract map must be found in conformance with the General Plan (Government Code § 66473.5). The map as proposed is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning provisions of the City of Seal Beach (if the Council adopts Zone Change 98-2), which indicate the permitted land use to be "Residential Medium Density", in accordance with the land Use Element of the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map provisions of the City. Teauave Tm Map 15832 (Mal Homa)-CCSR2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Stafileport February 12, 2001 REcomNENDATION: 1. Adopt Ordinance No. 1442, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Seal Beach Adopting Zone Change 98-2 (Anaheim Bay Villas). Please refer to Attachment 1. 2. Find that Vesting Tentative Tract Map 15832 is in substantial compliance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and approve Tentative Tract Map 15832 through the adoption of Resolution No. 4876, with the conditions as noted (Please refer to Attachment 2). The Planning Commission recommended denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832. If the City Council concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, staff will draft a resolution incorporating the Council's findings for its consideration at the next City Council meeting. NOTED AND APPROVED Lee Whittenberg Donald F. McIntyre Director of Development Services Acting City Manager Attachments: (7) Attachment 1: Ordinance No. 1442, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Seal Beach Adopting Zone Change 98-2 (Anaheim Bay Villas) Attachment 2: City Council Resolution Number 4876, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Seal Beach Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 (321 Seal Beach Boulevard - Avalon Homes) Attachment 3: Planning Commission Minute Excerpt, February 7, 2001 (Draft) Attachment 4: Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-2, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach Recommending to the City Council Denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 Attachment 5: Planning Commission Supplemental Staff Report, dated February 7, 2001, with all Attachments Te"ive Tmd Map 15832 (Avabn Homes) -CCSR2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 Attachment 6: Addendum To Negative Declaration 98-3 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 Avalon Homes - 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop Property) Attachment 7: Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 TenWive Tree Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCSR2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaffRepon February 12, 1001 ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. 1442, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE 98-2 (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS) Trn uiveTan Map 15832(Avalon H.) -C R2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hames) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ORDINANCE NUMBER 1442 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE 98-2 (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. D. Bartlett Associates, on behalf of Ellen Musso, Et Al. ("Applicant') has submitted revised applications for a general plan amendment and zone change for the Anaheim Bay Villas project proposed for property located at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, in the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant has submitted the aforementioned revised applications to allow the construction of eight (8) single family detached residences on three parcels having twenty-six foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty foot frontages. To achieve consistency between zoning restrictions set forth in the Applicant's proposal and the General Plan, as amended, the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach is proposed to be amended. Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ II.0 and III of the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Negative Declaration, which was circulated for public review and continent from August 27, 1998 to September 17, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on September 23, 1998 in relation to the original land use proposal and again on November 18, 1998 in relation to the revised land use proposal. Negative Declaration 98-3 was reviewed and adopted by the City Council after a public hearing held on December 14, 1998 in relation to the revised land use proposal. Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on November 18, 1998 to consider the revised applications. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission invited and considered any and all testimony offered in favor or opposition to said revised applications. The Planning Commission determined to recommend approval of Zone Change 98-2, with the additional recommendation that the City Council consider minimum thirty-foot lot widths. Tmaeave Tact Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCSR2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 Section 4. On December 14, 1998, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider Zone Change 98-2. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds, inter alia: (a) Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the City Council hearings regarding the application, and in the environmental documentation prepared in conjunction with this project, and pursuant to §§ 28-2600 and 28-2602 of the City's Code, the City Council hereby finds that proposed Zone Change 98-2, as revised by the City Council, will be beneficial to the short term and long term land use goals of the City of Seal Beach. The City Council further finds that approval of the subject applications, as revised by the City Council, will promote the public health, safety and welfare. Therefore, the City Council finds that the requested zone changes, as revised by the City Council, will be in the public interest, and makes the following findings of fact: (b) The proposed Anaheim Bay Villas project, and the necessary Zone Change, will not be detrimental to the short term or long-term goals or objectives of the City of Seal Beach and are in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare. The proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment 98-2. (c) The proposed zoning change will conform land uses to those set forth within the General Plan for the subject area, and provide a comprehensive development which accomplishes the following goals of the City in achieving sustainable development on the subject property: (1) Creates a land use that is compatible and consistent with the prevailing pattern of land uses in the immediate vicinity. (2) Promotes the general integrity of the neighborhood by replacing declining and underutilized commercial land use with desirable, appropriately located residential uses (3) Creates a comprehensive development program for underutilized and potentially incompatible properties. (d) The proposed project will allow for a reasonable range of land uses on the subject property, recognizing the various site constraints discussed in the Negative Declaration, with the provision of various land uses to address the identified objectives of the City. (e) The proposed Anaheim Bay Villas Development Plan, as revised by the City Council, and the necessary zoning changes will not be detrimental to the short tern or long term goals or objectives of the City of Seal Beach and are in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare. The zone change set forth herein is consistent with the General Plan, as amended. Temative Tract M, 15832(M.I.. Homes)-CCSR2 8 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby adopts Zone Change 98-2 and amends the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach as follows: Tract No. 10, Block 217, Lots 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25 and 27 shall be zoned Residential Medium Density (RMD). Section 7. This Ordinance shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tact Map, Parcel Map, Lot Line Adjustment or an Agreement to allow the construction of eight (8) single family detached residences on three parcels having twenty-six foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty foot frontages. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of Mayor Attest: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance is an original copy of Ordinance Number on file in the office of Temative Tmet Map 15832 (AvaWn Homes) -CCSR2 Tentative Trac[ Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seol Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 the City Clerk, introduced at a meeting held on the day of , 1998, and passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Sea] Beach at a meeting held on the day of 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSENT: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councihnerrib and do hereby further certify that Ordinance Number has been published pursuant to the Seal Beach City Charter and Resolution Number 2836. Clerk Teautive batt Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCSR2 10 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hames) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NUMBER 4876, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) Tentative Tmct Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCSB 11 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Repon February 11,1001 RESOLUTION NUMBER 4876 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE: Section 1. On December 5, 2000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application') to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that `There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact." Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 is within the scope of Negative Declaration 98-3. Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on January 17 and February 7, 2001 to consider the application. At the public hearings, the Planning Commission received evidence and testimony regarding the request. The Planning Commission recommended denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832, through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-2, on a 4-1 vote, with Commissioner Sharp voting "no". Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on February 12, 2001 to consider the application. At the public hearing, the City Council received the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission, and received additional evidence and testimony regarding the request. Section 5. The record of the hearings indicates the following: TmWfive Tree Map 15832(Avbn Homes) -CCM 12 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaJfReport February 12, 2001 (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots; (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element' map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Tract Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and [hat Zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjustment, or Agreement to allow the constmction of 8 single-family residences (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: o Parcel 1 — 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage o Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage o Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB") has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana RWQCB issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots #1 through #7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor Trn five Tract Map [5832 (Avalon Home-)-CCSa2 13 Tentative Tmct Map 15832 (Avalon Nows) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaJfReport February 11,1001 contamination is restricted to Lot #8 of Tract Map 15832. The City has prepared, and the City Council has reviewed, an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" that sets forth these minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3. (g) As conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot #8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is received by the City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot 8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Section 6. Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the hearing, including the facts stated in § 5 of this resolution, and in the environmental documentation prepared in conjunction with this project, and pursuant to §§ 28-2600 and 28-2602 of the City's Code, the City Council hereby finds: 1. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the General Plan in that the map would allow the subdivision of existing property in accordance with the provisions of the General Plan for future medium density residential land uses in accordance with the present General Plan Land Use Element designation of "Medium Density Residential". 2. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element" map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 conforms with all requirements of Government Code §§ 66473, 66473.5, 66474 and 66474.6. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land subdivision, exceeding the minimum lot size standards of the City for the "Residential Medium Density" zone and future development will be consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density Zone. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the potential development of the subject area with a maximum of 9 single-family residences, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. 5. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone. 6. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCS]¢ 14 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff -Report February 12, 2001 be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Additionally, the City has prepared an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" setting forth minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3 consisting of the subsequent discovery of groundwater contamination on the subject property (originating from an adjoining property) that has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. As conditioned, the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. 7. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the project. 8. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. 9. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional water quality control board. 10. Pursuant to Section 15074 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Negative Declaration has previously been adopted by the City Council regarding the implementing General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes necessary for this land subdivision request to be considered. Additionally, the City has prepared an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" setting forth minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3 consisting of the subsequent discovery of groundwater contamination on the subject property (originating from an adjoining property) that has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. This subdivision is within the scope of Negative Declaration 98-3, as supplemented by its Addendum, which together adequately describe the general environmental setting of the project, its environmental impacts, and determine that all significant project impacts of this project are reduced to a level less than significant. Therefore, no additional environmental documentation beyond the Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3 is needed. As conditioned, the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seal Beach does hereby approve adopt the Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3, and Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to the attached conditions shown as "Exhibit A". TmtaiveTmtMV 15832(Anton Hom )-CCSR2 15 Tentative Tract Map 15831 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of 12001, by the following vote: AYES: Councihnembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSENT: Councihnembes ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } 1, Joanne M. You, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2001. City Clerk Tenuave Tact Map 15832 (Avalon Homes)- CCSR2 16 Tentattve Tmct Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StafRepon Fehmwy 12, 2001 "EXHIBIT A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 The specific conditions imposed as conditions of approval are set forth below, along with additional conditions recommended by the City Engineer and the Director of Development Services. The conditions are grouped according to the milestone to meet for completion of the condition: Prior to the Release of a Final Mao by the Citv 1. 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 Tentative Tract Map, 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, lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 2. A statement detailing the arrangements which the subdivider proposes to make for the operation and maintenance of common parcels and easements shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval, if any common parcels or easements are utilized. Tract Map 15832 shall not be released for recording by the City Engineer until said financial arrangement statement has been approved by the Director of Development Services, if applicable. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. This project necessitates the construction of public and/or private infrastructure improvements. Prior to the release of a final Tract Map by the City, the applicant shall construct, or enter into a Subdivision Agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of the following public and/or private improvements, marked with "X" and listed below, in conformance with applicable Te wm Trent Map 15832(Avalon Homes)-CCSR2 17 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StafReport February 12,1001 City standards and the City's Capital Improvement Policy. Items not required in conjunction with this project are marked "n/a." (City Engineer Condition of Approval) X a. Street improvements including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lighting, signing, and striping. n/a b. Traffic signal systems, interconnect and other traffic control and management devices (as required by Transportation Planning and or Traffic Engineering). X c. Storm drain facilities as required by the Engineering Department to serve the project. n/a d. Sub -drain facilities (as required by Building and Safety). X e. Landscaping and computerized irrigation control system (for all public streets, parks, public areas and preserved windrows). X f. Sewer, reclaimed and/or domestic water systems, as required by the appropriate sewer and water districts as well as the Orange County Fire Authority when appropriate. X g. Monumentation. n/a h. Riding, hiking and bicycle trails adjacent to or through the project site. X i. Undergrounding of existing overhead and proposed utility distribution lines. n/a j. Transit -related improvements depicted on the approved tentative tract map. Note: Many of the required conditions of approval are included in the City's `Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement from PCH to Electric Ave." project. At the discretion of the City the Subdivider shall either construct or have constructed the appropriate items or shall pay the City for the construction cost of the items included in the City's Improvement Project. If the City elects to include some or all of the items in the City's Improvement Project the City will prepare a cost estimate for those items included and the Subdivider shall deposit the estimated amount with the City to be used for the construction of those items and will either reimburse the Subdivider the remainder of the deposit if the actual cost is less than the deposit, or will bill the Subdivide for the additional amount if the actual cost is more than the deposit. 4. Prior to the release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data of the final map which is compatible with the City ARCNIEW system or Tentative Tmm Map 15832 (Avalon Homm) -CCSR2 18 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Awlon Homes) 311 Sea( Beach Boulevard City Council StafjReport February 12, 2001 DXF (Autocad) system in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission" as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities. Certain existing survey monumentation may be deemed necessary for preservation and perpetuation subsequent to final construction improvements associated with this project. All survey monuments deemed necessary for perpetuation as recommended by the design Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be identified and shown on the final map for perpetuation. Such survey monuments shall be preserved and referenced before construction and if disturbed replaced after construction pursuant to Section 5771 of the Business and Professions Code. Prior to release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer a statement noting whether any monuments will be disturbed. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. The subdivider may choose to finance the cost of the required items through a Community Facilities District. In that event the City will work with the Subdivider in the preparation and formation of the district. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 1. A Final Grading Plan shall be approved prior to perforating any work on-site. All storm water and drainage shall be captured in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to the nearest inlet. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. An inundation study shall be prepared and submitted in conjunction with the submittal of street improvement plans for the review and approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, an Erosion Control Plan will be prepared to identify specific measures for the control of siltation, sedimentation and other soil materials. The Plan will be implemented during the project construction period, consistent with sub -article 13 of the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code and Grading Manual in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 4. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide documents disclosing all recorded easements on the subject property to the City Engineer and these easements shall be referenced on applicable grading plans. The applicant shall produce evidence that all utility providers with recorded easements on the subject property, have been informed of the imminent construction activities in a format meeting the approval of the City Engineer and shall be shown on the subject grading plans. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tentative Tract Map 15932 (Avalon Homes)-CCSR2 19 Tentative Tract Map 15831 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StafReport February 12, 2001 5. Hydrology and hydraulics submitted in conjunction with the grading permit shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Please note that the County of Orange has recently amended their Local Drainage Manual and this project must be in conformance with it. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide evidence that the cable television provider has been informed of construction activities and the potential exists for the interruption of services during construction. The notice shall be provided in a format acceptable to the Director of Development Services. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 7. Prior to issuance of a grading pemdt, a lighting plan for the project site specifying the location and type of all street lights shall be prepared and submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Construction of the proposed project shall be required to be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, which shall reduce fugitive dust amounts by up to 50 percent. Dust reducing measures shall include regular watering of graded surfaces, restriction of all construction vehicles and equipment to travel along established and regularly watered roadways, and requiring operations that tend to create dust be suspended during windy conditions. The City shall ensure that the project shall also comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, to reduce potential nuisance due to odors from construction activities. Measures include the following: ❑ The project shall comply with State, County, City, and UBC dust control regulations, so as to prevent the soil from being eroded by wind, creating dust, or blowing onto a public road or roads or other public or private property. o SCAQMD Rule 403.1, as amended, shall be adhered to, ensuring the clean up on the construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site, and the application of water and/or chemical dust retardants that solidify loose soils should be implemented for construction vehicle access, as directed by the City Engineer. This shall include covering, watering or otherwise stabilizing all inactive soil piles (left more than 10 days) and inactive graded areas (left more than 10 days). ❑ Grading activity shall be suspended when local winds exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. ❑ All trucks hauling dirt, soil or other loose dirt material shall be covered. ❑ Where available or possible, permanent sources of power shall be used from the beginning of the project. Avoid internal combustion engines for generating power. ❑ Reduce or eliminate odors due to construction activity. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tmterive Tact Map 15832 (Avalon Homa)-COR2 20 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Aealon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 9. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction -related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: u Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; Li Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes; Li Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; u Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and o Schedule operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours, where feasible. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall submit a geotechnical report to the City Engineer for approval. The report shall include the information and be in a form as required by the Orange County Grading Manual, Section 5.4 and the Orange County Excavation and Grading Code, Section 7-1-819. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said geotechnical report. 11. The project applicant shall incorporate measures to mitigate expansive soil conditions, compressible/collapsible soil conditions and liquefaction soil conditions, and impacts from trenching in site-specific Tentative Tract/Parcel Map Review and Rough Grading Plan Review reports prepared by the project geotechnical consultant. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. The geotechnical consultant's site-specific reports shall be approved by a certified engineering geologist and a registered civil engineer, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said site-specific reports. 12. Prior to the initiation of project grading in any development area, all existing utilities will be located and either abandoned and removed, rerouted or protected. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 13. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or a registered professional hydrologist to protect water resources from impacts due to urban contaminants in surface water runoff. The plan shall be prepared in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County, and the City of Seal Beach to insure compliance with applicable NPDES permit requirements. The Plan shall include a combination of structural and non structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) as outlined in Countywide NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) TmW&fi T.N Map 15832 (Malo. Homme) -CCSR2 21 Tentadw Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StafRepon February 12, 2001 14. Prior to final project design, a project specific Drainage Report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with applicable requirements of the Omnge County Flood Control District and the City of Seal Beach. The report shall describe the existing drainage network, existing capacity, pre -and post -project runoff volumes, and any necessary improvements to accommodate proposed project runoff volumes. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 15. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any time during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 16. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee puking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, grading permits shall not be issued for Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 1. The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, building permits shall not be issued for a new residential structure on Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The developer shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach. All requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall be satisfied. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. No building permit shall be issued for any lot within the boundaries of Tract Map 15832 unless and until a final tract map has been recorded. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 4. Water provided to the site shall be from the City of Seal Beach Water Department. All water and sewer connections shall be made from the alley side of the subject properties as follows: ❑ Install new sewer line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. Tem w. T.d Map 15832(A.M. H.) -Mal 22 Tenmtive Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ❑ Install new water line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. ❑ Reconstruct entire alley with cement concrete structural section for full width of alley along entire subdivision alley frontage. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan for the subdivision to the Orange County Fire Authority, the Sea] Beach Police Department and the Director of Development Services. The plan shall demonstrate that emergency vehicle access is adequate. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits, improvement plans for sewer lines, connections and structures shall be the type installed in the location as specified in the "Guidelines Requiring Separation Between Water Mains and Sanitary Sewers, Orange County Health Department, 1980", in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the Director of Development Services of approval by the Orange County Fire Authority that the proposed infrastructure for fire protection services will be adequate to serve the proposed development. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the storage of combustible building materials on-site, fire hydrants or equivalent devices capable of flow in amounts approved by the Orange County Fire Authority shall be in place and operational to meet fire flow requirements. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 9. This project may be located within an assessment district. I£ the subject property is located within an assessment district the applicant shall submit, prior to the issuance of building permits, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a completed Occupancy Disclosure form that informs the prospective buyer: "This property is located within an assessment district. The Orange County Tax Assessor may include the amount of the related assessment in the computations to determine assessed value of the property for the purpose of determining property taxes." (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Department proof of payment of applicable school fees levied by the Los Alamitos Unified School District. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 11. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction -related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: Tru veT..,M,15832(Av1.Homes)-CCSR2 23 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 11, 2001 ❑ Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; ❑ Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes; ❑ Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; ❑ Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and ❑ Schedule operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours, where feasible. 12. Loose and soft alluvial soils, expansive clay soils and all existing uncertified fill materials will be removed and replaced with compacted fill during site grading in order to prevent seismic settlement, soil expansion, and differential compaction. 13. In excavations deeper than four feet but less than ten feet, a slope no steeper than 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) shall be provided. Steeper slopes or deeper excavations will be provided with shoring for stability and protection. OSHA safety requirements shall be adhered to throughout the entire duration of project earthwork. 14. Conformance with the latest Uniform Building Code and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effect of seismic groundshaking. Conformance with applicable codes and ordinances shall occur in conjunction with the issuance of building permits in order to insure that overexcavation of soft, broken rock and clayey soils within sheared zones will be required where development is planned. 15. All structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet an interior noise level of 45 CNEL. 16. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay City Traffic Impact fees. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay Park Land In -Lieu fees of $10,000 per residential unit. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 18. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any time during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 19. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee parking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage Tentncive TovA Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCM 24 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Repon February 12,1001 areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 20. In order to ensure adequate service to the project site, plans for the proposed wastewater collection system shall be submitted by the project proponent to the County Sanitation District of Orange County and the City Engineer of the City of Seal Beach for approval prior to the issuance of building permits. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) During Project Construction - Prior to the Issuance of Certificates of Use and Occuoancv 1. A copy of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&R's) proposed by the subdivider shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval. Occupancy permits shall not be approved by the Building Department until said CC&R's have been approved. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The project developer will complete half -section street improvements on Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site, excluding roadway reconstruction. Half section street improvements are the improvements from the centerline of Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site. These improvements would include curb, gutter and sidewalks, street lighting, and landscaping within the street right-of-way as set forth below: ❑ Widen the existing parkway an additional 5 feet for all lots fronting on Seal Beach Blvd. including a curb transition south of the subdivision to join the new curb alignment to the existing curb alignment by reconstructing new curb, gutter, and sidewalk. ❑ Construct one-half of a raised concrete curb street median with irrigation and landscaping on Seal Beach Blvd. along the entire subdivision frontage. ❑ Install one street tree per lot in the parkway along Seal Beach Blvd. o Install irrigation and lawn in the parkway area for each lot frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Underground the existing overhead utilities for the entire subdivision frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Install decorative streetlights along the entire subdivision frontage. Street light design and layout shall be subject to City approval. o Install City of Seal Beach entrance monument sign in street median on Seal Beach Boulevard. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. The developer shall provide mailbox facilities for each structure, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, Director of Development Services and the Postmaster. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 4. Sidewalks shall be continuous on Seal Beach Boulevard Sidewalks shall be in conformance with ADA requirements and Title 24. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Temaz Tm Map 15832 (M.1.. Home) -0CSR2 25 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 5. All utilities shall be underground. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. On-site design and work shall be in accordance with the City of Seal Beach, Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County Local Drainage Manual, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. All existing public improvements at the development site which are damaged due to construction, cracked, or otherwise below standard, shall be removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, each fire hydrant shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating its location on the street or drive per Orange County Fire Authority standards. On private property, these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 9. Graded, but undeveloped land shall be maintained weed -free and planted with interim landscaping within ninety (90) days of completion of grading, unless building permits are obtained. Planting with interim landscaping shall comply with NPDES Best Management Practices. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Exoneration of Securiri Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) duplicate Mylar of the final map and all public or private improvement plans, two (2) copies (one original and one duplicate) of 35mm microfilm of the final map, public or private improvement plans, final structure calculations, and computer analysis, if any, for all buildings, and the record drawings of grading, landscape, and improvement plans to, and in a manner acceptable to, the City Engineer. The microfilm shall be in 4"x 6" jackets with 6 frames per jacket. The computer analysis may be submitted on standard IBM compatible floppy disks. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data, which is compatible with the City ARCWO system or DXF (Autocad) system, of the record drawings of landscape and improvement plans to, and in a manner acceptable to, the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission" as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. When requested by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data of computer generated structural analysis and calculations. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities and deemed necessary for preservation by the City Engineer. If such Trnizave Tm M, 15832(Mabn Hama)-CCSR2 26 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seat Beach Boulevard City Council Staf%Report February 12, 1001 monuments were disturbed, the applicant shall have a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Registered Civil Engineer re-establish any such monumentation damaged or destroyed during construction of project and file the comer records with the County Surveyor. Prior to the exoneration of any security evidence of such filing shall be furnished to the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Miscellaneous The developer's contractor(s) shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance evidencing a comprehensive liability insurance policy with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence in connection with the work performed. Certificate shall include the City, its Council, officers, members of boards or commissions and employees as additional Named Insureds with respect to all claims, actions, damages, liabilities and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under the development executed by the Named Insured and the City, including any act or omission of employees, agents, subcontractors, or their employees. Such certificates shall have a 30 -day cancellation notice to the City of Seal Beach. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. In the event that unknown wastes or underground storage tanks are discovered during grading and/or construction which the contractor believes may involve hazardous materials, he/she shall: A. Immediately stop all grading and/or construction work in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. B. Notify the project proponent and the Orange County Fire Authority. C. Secure the area to restrict all vehicular and pedestrian access to and in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. D. Coordinate with the Orange County Fire Authority on needed testing of the substance and development of recommendations on removal and disposition of the substance. 3. Any easement that lies within or crosses rights-of-way proposed to be deeded or dedicated to the City, shall be subordinated to the City prior to City acceptance of the rights-of-way, unless otherwise exempted by the City Engineer. 4 4 4 Tentative Tact Map 15832(Avaloa Homes) -MR2 27 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12,1001 ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE EXCERPT, FEBRUARY 7, 2001 (DRAFT) Tmwive Tract Map 15832(Aaalov Hames) -CCM 28 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 Tenum Tact Map 15832(A.hm Homes)-CCSU 29 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaffBeport February 12, 2001 RESOLUTION NO.01-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1. On December 5, 2000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application") to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6@) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact'. Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2001 to consider Tentative Tract Map 15832. The public hearing was duly continued to February 7, 2001. At the public hearings, Applicant's representatives spoke in favor of the project, and several other persons spoke in favor of the request. Section 4. The record of the hearings indicates the following: (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots. (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. Ten Wive Tract Map 15832(Avalan Homes) -CCM 30 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element" map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Parcel Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and that zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjustment, or Agreement to allow the construction of 8 single-family residences. (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: u Parcel 1— 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB") has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana RWQCB issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots #1 through #7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor contamination is restricted to Lot #8 of Tract Map 15832. The City has prepared, and the Planning Commission has reviewed, an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" that sets forth these minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3. (g) As proposed to be conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot 8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is Tet &. Tre My 15832 (Avelov Homes)- MRI 31 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 received by the City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot #8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does hereby make the following findings regarding Tentative Tract Map 15832: The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is inconsistent with the Planning Commission's desire that the City Council require all of the subject lots to be a minimum of 30 -feet wide. 2. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that no residential development should occur until such time as all of the subject building sites have received the appropriate clearance from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 3. In regards to all of the other required findings to approve a subdivision map, the Commission finds the project consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, and in compliance the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend denial of Tentative Tract Map 15832. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 7" day of February , 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Brown, Cutuli, Hood, and Lyon NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners ABSTAIN: Commissioners Ta ive T.d Map 15832 (A.H.)-CCSH2 32 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hames) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Stq/j'Report February 12, 2001 /a/ David Hood, Ph.D. Chairman, Planning Commission Lee Whittenberg, Secretary Planning Commission Teamtive Tract Map 15832(Avalm 11omes)-CCSR2 33 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaffRepon February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 5 PLANNING COMNHSSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT, DATED FEBRUARY 7, 2001, WITH ALL ATTACHNIENTS Temative Tract Map 15832(Avaloa Homes) -CCSR2 34 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 6 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 AVALON HOMES - 321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD, SHORE SHOP PROPERTY) Temzfive Tm Map 15932(Av .Names) -CCM 35 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staf(Repon Fehruary 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 7 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 Temmive Tmct Map 15832 (Avalon Homa)-MIM 36 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes ofFebmary 7, 2001 Mr. Whittenberg stated that there would now be a public hearing scheduled before the City Council. He noted that he anticipated that the hearing would be scheduled for February 26, 2001. 3. Tentative Tract Map 15832 321 Seal Beach Blvd., Shore Shop Property (Continued from January 17, 2001) Applicant/Owner: Avalon Homes Request: To subdivide the subject property for the future construction of eight (8) detached single-family residences; with three parcels having twenty -six-foot frontages, three parcels having twenty -nine -foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty-foot frontages. The proposed subdivision request is consistent with General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2, approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998. Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-02. Staff Report 0901 Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He noted that a supplemental Staff Report was prepared that discusses the issues brought up at the last Planning Commission meeting. He stated that Staff is still recommending approval of the project as submitted. He said that although Staff understands the concerns of some of the Commissioners regarding the design of the project, Staff recommends that the Commission take the same action as that taken in November 1998 when by a 4-1 vote the Planning Commission recommended approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change (ZC) to allow an 8 -lot project to be built with the lot configuration as reflected on the subdivision map. He noted that that Planning Commission also made an additional recommendation to City Council to consider imposing a 30 -foot minimum lot width for the lots in the project. He stated that a copy of the City Council minutes from December 1998 when the item was heard was included with the Staff Report. Mr. Whittenberg stated that at that meeting the City Council had determined to approve the GPA and ZC, without the requirement for the 30 -foot minimum lot size. He reported that in light of the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting of January 17, 2001, Staff had prepared two resolutions for tonight's meeting: One reflecting Staffs position of recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832, and the other resolution recommending denial of the subdivision map with findings reflecting the concerns of the Commission related to the lot sizes not being a minimum width of 30 feet and allowing development on the property before all of the lots have received clearance from the Regional Water CVC Minutes@eette2-07-01 PC Minutes.doc City of Seal Beach Planning commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 Quality Control Board (RWQCB). He stated that the Commission could make a separate motion to recommend to Council that 30 -foot wide lots be required, or this recommendation could be included with either the resolution for approval or denial. He noted that Copies of the Planning Commission minutes and City Council minutes from all of the previous discussions on this matter have been included in the supplementary Staff Report. He stated that a copy of a letter from the City addressed to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) urging approval of the project as presented was also included. Commissioner Questions Chairperson Hood asked if the Planning Commission approves the item, would it then automatically go before City Council. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this would be the case. Chairperson Hood asked if the Planning Commission were to deny this item would it then automatically go before City Council. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was true. Chairperson Hood stated that no matter what the Planning Commission did, this item would still go before City Council. Mr. Whittenberg stated that on a TTM project consideration the Planning Commission serves as a recommending body to the City Council, and the subdivision map will automatically go before City Council regardless of the recommendation of the Planning Commission. �� Public Hearing pR,A Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing. Mr. Scott Redsun, President of Avalon Homes, stated that he was present to request approval of TTM 15832 subject to conditions. He said that Avalon believes the map conforms to Resolution 4671 approved by City Council on December 14, 1998, and that the map also conforms to all City ordinances. Regarding the environmental issues, Mr. Redsun stated that Kleinfelder & Associates did prepare a report on this tract, with Lots 1 through 7 deemed to have no contamination, as approved by the RWQCB. He said that Lot 8 has minimal contamination, which is being remediated. He reported that Avalon Homes has a meeting scheduled with the State to review the findings of the latest round of testing. Mr. Redsun reported that Mr. Juan Guerrero of Kleinfelder & Associates is present tonight to respond to any questions related to environmental issues. Chairperson Hood noted for the record that Ms. Seretta Fielding had contacted him regarding this issue. Ms. Seretta Fielding stated that she had also spoken to Commissioners Cutuli and Brown. She said that this project is something that has been needed in Seal Beach for many years, improvements to Seal Beach Boulevard, the gateway to the City. She stated that she wanted to remind everyone that the Commission would be voting only on the TTM of an approved project. She said that she was in agreement QAPC Minutes12001=47-01 PC Minutes.doc City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 with the Staff Report, and feels that, given the constraints of the block and the surrounding area, she believes this project to be an opportunity for the City to have a beautiful project at no expense to the City that conforms to the General Plan. She urged the Planning Commission to provide unanimous approval of this project. Ms. Lideen Lewis stated that their property backs up the former Shore Shop property at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard. She said that she and her husband had been told that there was concern for building on 25 -foot lots on this property. She noted that there were already at least 7 one and two-story buildings on this size lot in the 300 block of 17th Street, because most of the owners prefer the 25 -foot lots as opposed to large maintenance properties. As to the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission regarding creating a pleasant appearance at the City entrance, she noted that currently visitors entering Seal Beach along Seal Beach Boulevard are greeted by a liquor store, bait store, and several motels that have been converted to other purposes, including one that provides approximately 22 one -room family residences. She said that all of these "give our area a pretty shabby appearance to the City." Ms. Lewis stated that the alley to the rear of the Shore Shop has become no more than "a public toilet." She said that customers from the bait shop and liquor store stop at all hours to relieve themselves in the overgrown shrubbery, to dispose of trash, and to allow their pets to relieve themselves. With regard to the concerns of the underground pollution, she stated that an easy solution would be to require a Conditional Use Permit that would allow the developer to proceed to build only on those lots that are proven to be pollution free. She stated that the only problem the Lewis' have had was further delay to proceed on a proposal that would create an attractive, upscale residential neighborhood and allow the City to move forward with the improvements on Seal Beach Boulevard to Electric Avenue. She said that when this project is complete it would create "a very pleasant entrance to our City from one of the heaviest traveled areas to Seal Beach." Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments VW Commissioner Brown said his previous comments still stand. He said that as he reviewed the Staff Report, he can't believe that the Staff is proposing to allow someone to build on 7 lots knowing the 8"' lot has not been cleared. He stated that there is contamination of the 8"i lot, and it is determined that building on this lot should not be done, he does not see how the City can allow construction on the other 7 lots and assume that the workers will not use Lot 8 for storage, or walk on it. He questioned whether Lot 8 would be fenced off during the construction on Lots 1-7. He stated that he felt it was 'foolhardy" for the Commission to approve any part of the project to be built until the entire property is cleared. Commissioner Brown noted that aside from this issue, he has not changed his position against 25 -foot wide lots. He stated he still believes the minimum width should be 30 feet throughout the City. He said that contrary to a previous Councilperson's statements, he does not believe that 12" Street is a real gateway to the City, but Seal Beach QAPC Minutes1200110M741 PC Minutes.doe City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 Boulevard is. He stated that if the City is going to have residential in this area, it should be the best residential that the City can have. He noted that this is a prime piece of property with prime ocean views and he does not believe that the developers would have any trouble at all selling the lots if they were bigger lots. He said that he believed the net profit would be the same as the developer would be able to sell the larger lots for more money. Commissioner Brown stated that he believes it is critical that if you want to improve the feel and look of an area then you must build nice homes. He said that as he sees the project with the minimum size lots, it would look like row houses. He said that although he would support anyone wanting to change the zoning on Seal Beach Boulevard from limited commercial to residential, he had not wanted the zoning to be residential to begin with because once this is done on this keystone property, then the rest of the street must "domino" into residential, otherwise it doesn't look good. He stated that if there were to be residential at this key intersection, "let's have the best residential that we can have." He noted that he had read the City Council minutes very carefully, and he did not see a requirement for 8 lots, but rather stated "a maximum of 8 lots." He said that if the developers come back with 7 lots, they would have a better project that will sell for more money, and will look good. Commissioner Brown pointed out an item in the minutes that he had not previously noted: Although the Coastal Commission approved the project, Coastal Commission Staff had recommended against this project. He stated that he believes this says something that is helpful to know. He said he would still recommend denial of TTM 15832 and he believes that this is the best way to let City Council know that the Planning Commission believes 30 -foot wide lots are appropriate and would be consistent with the Commission's previous decision to approve residential with h3�30�K-fff1ooLwjtiedots. Commissioner Sharp stated that tiMtlISB reed with Commissioner Brown regarding the size of the lots. He said that along Pacific Coast Highway and Surfside the standard lot size is 25 feet. He said that the City is also designed with 25 -foot lots for houses built along the beach. He noted that most residents do not want a big yard to maintain. He said that as far as the Coastal Commission is concerned, with their Staff recommending one thing and the Commission voting another, he said that he could present several cases where Coastal Commission Staff had recommended approval and the Commission had denied the request and visa -versa. He noted that because Staff makes a recommendation does not indicate that this is how the Commission will vote. Commissioner Sharp said he believes the Commission would be doing an injustice to the builder and the City Council in trying to make a decision to require 30 -foot lots. He said that he felt the project was well worth doing and would make a much better appearance along Seal Beach Boulevard. Commissioner Cutuli stated that he believed the development would be nicer if the lots were 30 feet wide. He said that although there were a lot of houses in the City built on 25 -foot lots, and he lived in one in Surfside, he realizes that this is not the ideal living circumstance unless absolutely necessitated by what is already there. He stated that he would like to give a strong message to City Council by voting to QVC MinuteM20011024741 PC Minutes.doc City of seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 require 30 -foot wide lots to allow for a more attractive development with less of a "row of houses." Commissioner Lyon stated that he agreed with Commissioner Sharp. He said that the Council has already approved this project, and he believes that to require that one house be eliminated to create 30 -foot lots would be unfair. He noted that there are not that many lots in Seal Beach that are over 30 -feet wide. He said that there was only one lot that is questionable, and that lot measures approximately 26.6 feet. He stated that as long as City Council has approved this project, he believes the Planning Commission should approve it as well. DRAFT CT Chairperson Hood clarified with the Director of Development Services whether the Planning Commission could amend or redraw the boundaries of the tract map. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that the Planning Commission could not do so. He reported that the Planning Commission could make a motion to approve the map as submitted, approve it with recommendations, or deny it because it doesn't meet with the recommended n odfications. Chairperson Hood confirmed the options and added the option of simply denying TTM 15832. Mr. Whittenberg noted that the Draft Resolution for denial in the Staff Report is a denial because of the concerns the Commission expressed at the meeting of January 17, 2001. Chairperson Hood responded that this resolution is cast in a negative way and he wanted to see if the denial could be cast in a more positive way. He said he was attempting to reach "some middle ground between the two sides." He asked Commissioner Brown how he might feel about approving TTM 15832 with the recommendation that the City Council impose 30 -foot lots and denying it with the concern that it does not have 30 - foot lots. Commissioner Brown said that he believes it is a much stronger recommendation when it is a denial. He said that this would send the message "we don't think this is an adequate tract now." He stated that to say, "we think this is an adequate tract map, but by the way it should really be 30 -foot wide lots," was in his view nowhere near as strong. He said that a denial would be a stronger recommendation. He said that a Councilperson looking at this project after having received approval from the Planning Commission, he or she might not feel the need to carefully review the recommendations. He noted that if the Councilperson receives a denial that might have to be overturned, he or she would then have to justify the reasons for overturning the decision of the Planning Commission. Chairperson Hood referred to Page 31 of the Staff Report and read Item No. 1, which states: The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is inconsistent with the Planning Commission's desire that the City Council require all of the subject lots to be a minimum of 30 -feet wide. He confirmed with the Director of Development Services that this would be the "number one condition/objection" of the Planning Commission. Mr. Whittenberg WPC Mlnutes120011a2-07-a1 PC Minutes.doc City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 stated if the determination of the Planning Commission is to recommend denial, the above quoted paragraph reflects the findings based upon the discussion at the last meeting that Staff found would be most appropriate for the resolution of denial. Chairperson Hood confirmed that if the City Council wishes to approve TTM 15832, all they would have to do would be to make the findings of the Planning Commission void. Mr. Whittenberg responded that whatever the resolution of recommendation approved by the Planning Commission will go before the City Council as an item of consideration as a part of their Public Hearing. He continued by stating that City Council can then take that resolution of recommendation and do with it as they please. He said that at that point City Council may adopt a resolution either to approve or deny the map. Whether it reflects all of the concerns of the Planning Commission is up to the City Council. Commissioner Brown asked if the City Council could modify a tract map. Mr. Whittenberg responded that City Council could do so. He stated that the Planning Commission could recommend modifications to the City Council, who would then make a determination on whether or not to approve them. Commissioner Brown confirmed that the Planning Commission could state that it accepts the tract map with the condition that the lots be 30 feet wide, or state that it does not accept the tract map because the lots should be 30 feet wide. He said that he still believed that denial was a stronger way of making the point. Chairperson Hood confirmed with Commissioner Brown that he was recommending that City Council modify the tract map. He confirmed with the Director of Development Services that this was an option. Mr. Whittenberg asked if the Commission was suggesting that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval subject to the lots being 30 -foot wide lots and to also include the other conditions noted in the approval resolution. Comp issioner Brown said that this was not what he was recommending. A Commissioner Sharp interjected that within the City theerre are different requirements for lot sizes for the different districts, and he could not see how the Planning Commission could begin at this late date and change the rules on lot size. He noted that in Old Town south of Pacific Coast Highway, the requirement is 25 -foot lots unless the lots have been rezoned or subdivided to 35 or 50 feet. He said that he would also like to see 30 -foot wide lots, but in this case he did not believe that the Planning Commission had any right to require 30 -foot lots. He stated that he felt the Planning Commission was attempting to rewrite the laws at a late date. Chairperson Hood asked Staff what the percentage of lots between Pacific Coast Highway and the ocean measure 25 feet. Commissioner Brown stated that on the Shore Shop property was created by joining nine 25 -foot lots, so the underlying lots are already 25 -feet wide. He said that City Council had already changed the lot size from 25 - feet wide, so to say that the Planning Commission cannot recommend that City Council change the size of the lots is not accurate. Commissioner Sharp stated that the Planning Commission can make this recommendation, but he believes it to be "completely wrong:' In response to Chairperson Hood's question Mr. Whittenberg stated that his best guess is that between 75 and 80 percent of the properties are 25 -foot wide lots. He said the rest of the lots would be anywhere from 30-37.5 foot wide lots, with up to 50 -foot wide lots in the Gold Coast area. He noted that the Q:1PC Minutes12001102-0741 PC Minutes.doe City of Seal Beach Planning commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 37.5 -foot lots are created when someone purchases two 25 -foot lots and subdivides 12.5 feet from it. He confirmed that the underlying parcels on the Shore Shop property were originally 25 -foot lots. He said that at the time of the GPA and ZC approval of the property, the City then has discretion to impose additional requirements on the ZC, and at this point they can impose the requirements of differing lot widths in the area to attempt to address the concerns that arose at the Planning Commission level. He noted that apparently City Council did not feel that a standard of a minimum 30 -foot wide lot was appropriate when approving the ZC. He stated that a subdivision map is adjudicated and does not give a lot of discretion to a City Council or Planning Commission as long as it complies with the standard development provisions already in place for that particular zone designation of the city. He said that in this area the minimum standard is 25 wide by 100 feet deep lots. He reported that City Council approved the ZC to allow residential development on the properties, but they approved it subject to different lot widths, and that is what is before the Planning Commission tonight. Mr. Whittenberg stated that there are times when standards can be changed, but it has to be at the appropriate time under the provisions of State law, and he said that in all honesty, this would not be the time that the City has the authority to do that. Mr. Boga interjected that City Council in 1998 approved a set of legislative rules that allowed for lots that are 25 feet wide on this property. Regarding the question that arose with whether or not the Council approving this map ran require the lots to be 30 -feet, he said that it was not clear to him that the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan allow lots of 25 feet in width that as part of a subdivision map City Council or the Planning Commission could require the 30 -foot wide lots. He said that the way to do this would be to change the actual legislative rules underlying this approval, which is the Zoning Ordinance under the General Plan. He stated that the way to set the lot width would be through the legislative policy and making a decision on the tract map would mean looking at whether or not it conforms to the legislative rules that are in place. DR w CI Chairperson Hood confirmed that wPt Mr. BBoogaa was stating was that if City Council at the request of the Planning Commission were to consider larger lots and recommend that the developer reduce the number of lots, was the developer required to comply with this request. Mr. Whittenberg responded that in order to effect the zone change, the developer had to comply with the request of Council to change the lot sizes. Chairperson Hood asked if the developer had simply taken nine lots and made them into eight lots. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the developer had done so as part of a different land use being authorized by the City and it legislative prerogative. Chairperson Hood confirmed that a change in the lot sizes had already been approved. Mr. Whittenberg responded that right now the property is in a General Plan designation and is in the process of having the zoning changed from a commercial designation to residential. He said that when City Council made the policy decision to change the land use, they made this change subject to the lots of the new project being specific widths, which are the widths that have been presented tonight. Chairperson Hood clarified that these lot sizes had QAPC Minutest 001W-07-01 PC Minutes.eoc City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes or February 7, 2001 been imposed by City Council. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct. Chairperson Hood asked if they were to impose larger lot sizes on the developer, could this be in any way considered discriminatory. Mr. Boga responded that he would not use the term "discriminatory," but he believes that the City has to make certain findings in order to approve or disapprove a map, and it becomes difficult to justify those findings if the finding is "we're going to disapprove this map because the lot size doesn't meet whatever number," when in fact the lot size number is consistent with the rules on the books at the time of the decision. Commissioner Brown interjected that the lot sizes are minimums and the findings do not state that the developer can only have 25 -foot wide maximum lots. He stated that he would like to make a motion to deny. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832 and adopt Resolution 01-2 as presented. SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Lyon to approve Tentative Tract Map 15832 and adopt Resolution 01-2 as presented. DRAFT Chairperson Hood asked if Commissioner Sharp wouldDcommennd having City Council consider larger lot sizes. Commissioner Sharp stated that the Planning Commission could request that Council consider larger lots, but if not to approve the existing lot sizes as presented. Chairperson Hood asked if Commissioner Sharp left room for any flexibility on this recommendation. Commissioner Sharp stated that he would accept the motion if the recommendation were made that Council take another look at the size of the lots. Mr. Boga referred to the draft of the approval resolution on Page 15 of the Staff Report and read the clause toward the bottom of the page, which states: NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to the attached conditions shown as "Exhibit A." He recommended adding the following language at the end of this clause: ...and recommends that the City Council reconsider the imposition of a 30 -foot wide minimum lot requirement. Commissioner Brown stated that although he understood what Chairperson Hood was attempting to accomplish, he believes that basically what Chairperson Hood has done is to bury this recommendation at the bottom of the resolution where it can be conveniently ignored. Commissioner Brown stated that this certainly would not be his desire, but that if Chairperson Hood believed this to be a good plan, he could vote for it as such. Commissioner Sharp interjected that Commissioner Brown was doing exactly what he had accused Mr. Whittenberg of doing during the last meeting. Commissioner Brown stated that there was a difference as he is a Commissioner QAPC M1nutest2001W2-07-01 PC Minutes.doc 10 OR AFS City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 participating in a discussion on a resolution. Chairperson Hood interjected that he was wrestling with the problem of the Planning Commission having previously made a recommendation to the City Council. He stated that the property owner, the developer, and City Council may not have gone as far as the Planning Commission had recommended, but they did meet half way, and did move in the direction requested by the Commission. He noted that now the developer has returned with a tract map that does meet code requirements, and the Commission must have a finding that shows that the map is not acceptable. He stated that he is having difficulty finding that this tract map per se is not acceptable, and the finding in his mind is that although the map may not be most desirable, it is acceptable. Chairperson Hood stated that because the developer has already made changes to the lot configuration, it appears that the most the Commission can do is to recommend that City Council make the developer change the lot size again. He said that he was not sure that this was the developer's fault, but if City Council had recommended changing the lot size, the developer probably would have changed them. He stated that he believed Planning Commission needed to send this item to City Council in order to accomplish this. Commissioner Brown stated that Chairperson Hood was correct, that the Commission could only make recommendation to City Council. He noted that the question was how strongly the Commission wanted to make the recommendation. He stated that if Chairperson Hood feels that the developer has met the minimum requirement, he should vote to approve this, but what Commissioner Brown is saying is that the City should not have to accept the minimum for the gateway to Seal Beach. Chairperson Hood stated that if Commissioner Brown could strengthen the recommendation Mr. Boga read and sell it to the maker of the motion and the second, the Commissioners would like to accommodate him since this project is in Commissioner Brown's district. Chairperson Hood continued by stating that in this case, some of the Commissioners were having a problem accepting that this is not a negative finding. Commissioner Brown stated that he assumed that the Commissioners were accepting of Mr. Boga's wording of the recommendation. Commissioner Brown called for a vote. Commissioner Sharp asked that Mr. Boga re -state the motion. Mr. Bogs stated that the motion on the floor is the substitute motion to approve Tentative Tract Map 15832 and recommend approval to the City Council and adopt Resolution 01-2 with the modification on Page 15 of the Staff Report as follows: NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to the attached conditions shown as Exhibit A," and recommends that the City Council reconsider the imposition of a 30 -foot wide minimum lot requirement. Chairperson Hood asked if the words "strongly recommend" would be used. Commissioner Sharp stated that he did not know what the Planning Commission was going to do, unless they were going to tell City Council what to do and he did not believe that Council would appreciate this. Chairperson Hood said that he was Q:1PC Mlnutes120011024741 PC Minutes.eoc 11 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2001 less concerned with them appreciating it than with attempting to come up with something that the Commission could come closer to agreeing on. Commissioner Sharp stated the recommendation is strong enough as it reads and he noted that Commissioner Brown had Called for the vote and he would also call for the vote on the Substitute Motion. MOTION FAILS: 2-3 AYES: Hood and Sharp NOES: Brown, Cutuli, and Lyon ABSENT: None Mr. Whittenberg announced the Substitute Motion fails on a 2-3 vote. Commissioner Sharp called for a re -vote. Commissioner Brown called for a roll call vote. Mr. Whittenberg polled the Commissioners who voted as follows: AYES: Hood and Sharp ���� NOES: Brown, Cutuli, and Lyon ABSENT: None �D Chairperson Hood then called for a vote on the MAIN MOTION to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832. MOTION CARRIED: 4-1-0 AYES: Brown, Cutuli, Hood, and Lyon NOES: Sharp ABSENT: None Commissioner Lyon stated that the developer does not need the approval of the Planning Commission, as City Council has already approved this project. Mr. Whittenberg reported that a public hearing would be held at the City Council level to consider this matter. Mr. Whittenberg reported that a copy of a letter from Woody and Lisa Woodruff addressed to the Planning Commission and received by City Clerk's office today speaking in opposition to the Indefinite Extension of the Conditional Use Permit for Hennessey's. He noted that this application has been appealed to the City Council and the public hearing will be held on Monday, February 12, 2001. Chairperson Hood asked if the public hearing has been property noticed. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that it had been. Chairperson Hood stated that he was contacted by telephone by the individual who wrote the letter who stated that they had not received a notice. Q:tPC M1nutes12001102-07-01 PC MinNesAx 12 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 01- 2, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 Trn ive Tmct Map 15832(Avalm Homes) - CCSB 31 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaffRepon February 12, 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 01-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1. On December 5, 2000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application") to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2001 to consider Tentative Tract Map 15832. The public hearing was duly continued to February 7, 2001. At the public hearings, Applicant's representatives spoke in favor of the project, and several other persons spoke in favor of the request. Section 4. The record of the hearings indicates the following: (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots. (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. Ten wt Tmn Map 15832(Malon Homes)-CCSR 32 Tentative Tract Map 15831 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council &affBeport February 11, 2001 (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element' map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Parcel Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and that zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjustment, or Agreement to allow the construction of 8 single-family residences. (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel I — 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB") has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana RWQCB issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots #1 through #7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor contamination is restricted to Lot #8 of Tract Map 15832. The City has prepared, and the Planning Commission has reviewed, an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" that sets forth these minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3. (g) As proposed to be conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot 8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is Taaefive Tmt MV 15832(AvIon H=u )-CCSR 33 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff'Repon February 12,1001 received by the City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot #8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does hereby make the following findings regarding Tentative Tract Map 15832: 4. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is inconsistent with the Planning Commission's desire that the City Council require all of the subject lots to be a minimum of 30 -feet wide. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that no residential development should occur until such time as all of the subject building sites have received the appropriate clearance from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 6. In regards to all of the other required findings to approve a subdivision map, the Commission finds the project consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, and in compliance the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend denial of Tentative Tract Map 15832. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 7a' day of February , 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners grown, Cutuli, Hood, and Lyon NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners ABSTAIN: Commissioners Tentative Tmm Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - CCSR 34 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council StaffRepon February 12, 2001 David Hood, Ph.D. Chairman, Planning Commission /s/ Lee Whittenberg, Secretary Planning Commission TewIwv Trent Map 15832 (Mal. H.)-CCSR 35 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avolon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 5 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT, DATED FEBRUARY 7, 2001, WITH ALL ATTACHMENTS Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -CCSB 36 February 7, 2001 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Subject: TENTATIVE TRACT HOMES — 321 Seal Property) GENERAL DESCRIPTION Applicant: AVALON HOMES MAP NO. 15832 (AVALON Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop ELLEN G. MUSSO, ET AL 321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD — SHORE SHOP PROPERTIES of Property: RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY (RMD) ZONE TO APPROVE AN 8 -LOT SUBDIVISION OF THE EXISTING "SHORE SHOP" PROPERTY. SEE "DISCUSSION" SECTION BELOW FOR DETAILED LAND SUBDIVISION REQUEST Review: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN APPROVED THROUGH NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3. THE SUBDIVISION REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS PROJECT APPROVALS EVALUATED BY NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3, AS SUPPLEMENTED BY THE ATTACHED ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3. Sections: CHAPTER 21, ARTICLE III, CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15832, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS BY THE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 01-1 C;Wy oocumcnuNSuWivisionsQenuuve Trmt Map 15832(Avalon Homes)- Supp PC Staff RepoaaocV W1-25-01 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832 through the adoption of Resolution No. 01-1 (See Attachment 1). If the determination of the Commission is to recommend denial to the City Council, staff would recommend adoption of Resolution No. 01-1-A (See Attachment 2). Recommendation of the Department of Development Services: The Department of Development Services continues to recommend approval and the adoption of the Resolution No, 01-1 (see Attachment 1) due to conformance of the subject land subdivision request with: ❑ the previous General Plan and Zone Change approvals and determinations of the Planning Commission and City Council; and ❑ compliance with the regulations of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Planning Commission determined to recommend approval on a 4-1 vote of the project with the proposed lot sizes in November 1998, and to make an additional recommendation that the City Council consider 30 -foot wide lots. The City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and determined to approve the project with the proposed lot sizes now before the Commission rather choosing to require 30 -foot wide lots. Staff understands certain members of the Commission feel the approved project is not the most appropriate for this area of the community, and would suggest the Commission continue to make that position known to the City Council, but not through a recommendation of denial of a land subdivision map that is in accordance with the previously approved General Plan Amendments and Zone Change on the subject property. Staff can find no reasonable basis to recommend denial of the map, based on: ❑ the previous 4-1 recommendation of the Planning Commission in November 1998 to approve the project, requesting the City Council to additionally consider 30 -foot wide lots; ❑ the determination of the City Council in December 1998 to approve the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow this project to be completed without 30 -foot wide lots; ❑ compliance of the requested subdivision map with the previous approvals of the City Council; a compliance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act set forth below, and ❑ the clearance granted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Tenudve Tr=t Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Sun Repo" 2 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes —Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 Staff would urge the Commission to recommend approval, and to again separately request the City Council to consider 30 -foot wide lots as the Commission did in November of 1998, if that issue is still of importance to the Commission as a whole. In light of the Planning Commission discussion of January 17, Staff has prepared for the consideration of the Commission Resolution No. 01-1-A (See Attachment 2), recommending denial of Tentative Tract Map 15832. The resolution makes negative findings in relation to: ❑ The site not being physically suitable for the proposed density of development and being inconsistent with the previous additional request of the Planning Commission that the City Council consider requiring that all lots be a minimum of 30 -feet wide (See Attachment 2, Finding 1). ❑ The Planning Commission is of the opinion that no residential development should occur until such time as all of the subject building sites have received the appropriate clearance from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. (See Attachment 2, Finding 2). In regards to all of the other required findings to approve a subdivision map, the Commission finds the project consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, and in compliance the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3: Staff has prepared an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" (Please See Attachment 3). In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. § 15162), the City has determined that preparation of this Addendum is appropriate because no condition has occurred that requires a subsequent environmental impact report or subsequent negative declaration. Additionally, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. § 15164), this Addendum shall be attached to Negative Declaration 98-3, shall be considered prior to the making of a final decision on the subdivision map for the proposed residential project, but it shall not be circulated for public review. Overview of Planning Commission Public Hearing of January 17,2001: This public hearing matter was continued from January 17, 2001 due to the inability of the Commission to take an action, as only four members were present, and the Commission was evenly split on approval/denial of the subject request. A copy of the Planning Commission minutes are attached for the information of the Commission (Please refer to Attachment 4). The issues of concern to the Commission are provided in the minutes and not restated in the Staff Report. Tentative batt Map 15832 (Avalon Homes)- Supp PC Staff Report 3 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 Overview of Previous Planning Commission/City Council and California Coastal Commission Determinations regarding Subject Property: General Plan Amendment 98-1: Zone Change 98.1: Variance 98-5• Negative Declaration 98-3: On June 25, 1998 applications were submitted for the following land use entitlements on the subject property: ❑ General Plan Amendment 98-1: Amend Land Use designation from General Commercial to Residential Medium Density ❑ Zone Change 98-1: Amend zoning designation from General Commercial to Residential Medium Density ❑ Variance 98-5: Allow zero side yard setbacks on the north side of each of the existing nine lots, each lot being 25 feet by 103 feet in size. Negative Declaration 98-3 was prepared by City staff, circulated for the required public review and comment period and considered along with the subject applications by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on September 23, 1998. At the conclusion of the public hearing it was the determination of the Commission on a 3-2 vote to deny the Negative Declaration and subject applications (Refer to Attachment 5, Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1998). This action was not final as appropriate resolutions needed to be prepared by staff and adopted by the Commission. On October 7, 1998 the Commission considered adoption of the appropriate resolutions reflecting the detemtinations of September 23, 1998. After discussion the Commission determined on a 5-0 vote to request Staff to ask the City Council to authorize the Planning Commission to hold public hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole and to continue the Anaheim Bay Villas application for 1 month (Refer to Attachment 6, Planning Commission Minutes of October 7, 1998). On October 12, 1998 the City Council considered the request of the Planning Commission and determined on a 3-0-2 vote, with 2 councilmembers being absent, to direct the Planning Commission to notice all property owners and businesses on Seal Beach Boulevard and within 300 feet of the subject property regarding the request of the Musso family for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change (Refer to Attachment 7, City Council Minutes of October 12, 1998). Staff presented a Status Report to the Commission on November 4, 1998 indicating the action of the City Council, the subsequent determination of the applicant to revise the project proposals to respond to concerns expressed by the Commission and public, and recommended the matter be tabled until such time as a revised application had been submitted. The Commission determined Te..&e Tract Map 15832(Avalon Homes) -Supp Pcstaff RWn 4 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 to table the matter on a 5-0 vote (Refer to Attachment 8, Planning Commission Minutes of November 4, 1998). On November 18, 1998 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the revised project submission, which reduced the number of proposed homes from 9 to 8, eliminated the variance request, and proposed three 26 -foot wide lots, three 29 -foot wide lots, and two 30 -foot wide lots. After closing the public hearing, the Commission determined to recommend approval of the negative declaration and the subject requests on a 4-1 vote, with and additional recommendation that the City Council consider minimum 30 -foot wide lots (Refer to Attachment 9, Planning Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998). On December 14, 1998, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the subject applications, and determined to approve the requested General Plan Amendment and Zone Change as presented by the applicant on a 4-0 vote, with a vacancy on the Council. The Council determined to not hold second reading the implementing Zone Change ordinance until a tract map or an agreement is approved. The City Council approval allowed the project with three 26 - foot wide lots, three 29 -foot wide lots, and two 30 -foot wide lots (Refer to Attachment 10, City Council Minutes of December 14, 1998). The land use approvals were then submitted to the California Coastal Commission for consideration, and a public hearing was held on May 11, 1999. The City submitted a comment letter to the Coastal Commission urging approval of the project in accordance with the determinations of the City Council and in accordance with the provisions of the Coastal Act (Refer to Attachment 11, City of Seal Beach letter of May 4, 1999 regarding Coastal Permit Application 5-99-026). The Coastal Commission determined to approve the project and approved the revised findings and conditions on June 22, 1999. Requested Action: The applicant has requested approval of TTM 15832, a request to subdivide property at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard (the Shore Shop property) to conform to the previously approved General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes to allow for residential development on the subject property. The role of the Planning Commission with regard to this application is only to review the proposed map for conformance with the Subdivision Map Act, the General Plan, and the City's subdivision requirements. The standard of review for the Planning Commission is conformance with the General Plan and applicable subdivision requirements only, as the current General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance land use designation is `Residential Medium Density, and houses may be constructed on the property without site plan, architectural or any other discretionary review by the City if all development standards of the City are complied with. Te=as v T.t Map 15832 (M.i.. Homes) - Supp K Smfi Report 5 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 Overview of Tentative Tract Map Requirements and Proposed Map: Findings to Approve TTM 15832: The tentative tract map must be found in conformance with the General Plan (Government Code § 66473.5). The map as proposed is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning provisions of the City of Seal Beach, which indicate the permitted land use to be "Residential Medium Density", in accordance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map provisions of the City. In reviewing the proposed subdivision plan, several factors set forth below are evaluated to determine consistency with findings required by the Subdivision Map Act and the Code of the City of Seal Beach. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development, in that "medium density residential' development has been contemplated on the subject property since 1998, when the City Council approved the appropriate General Plan and Zoning amendments. The subject property is relatively flat, geologically stable, and is bounded on two sides by existing residential developments, with a light commercial use to the north and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station located across Seal Beach Boulevard. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land subdivision, exceeding the minimum lot size standards of the City for the "medium density residential" zone and future development will be consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the potential development of the subject area with a maximum of 9 residential units, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. Only 8 residential units are approved by this tract map approval. The site is a 22,885 square foot site, with appropriate access availability to Seal Beach Boulevard, and provides lots with a minimum area of 2,635 square feet. The development standards for the RMD Zone allows for lots with a minimum of 25 feet of frontage and a minimum of 2,500 square feet of land area. All of the proposed lots are larger than these minimum standards, and are in accordance with the project approvals of the City Council in December, 1998. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage as determined by the City Council in their review and adoption of NO 98-3. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the project. Standard City development Tentative Tinct Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp K Staff Repan 6 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 standards require the provision of all required public services, including domestic water, sewer and storm drains, electricity, and telephone services. In addition, standard City development standards require the provision of adequate roadway widths for fire and police protection capabilities, refuse disposal, and other required public utility and services. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. The final tract map will indicate all easements to be preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional water quality control board. Prior to final project construction approval, conditions of approval require the approval of: o a project specific drainage report; ❑ a comprehensive water quality management plan in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board that includes best management practices as outlined in the County of Orange National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Plan; ❑ construction of all water and sewer systems in compliance with City and Orange County Sanitation District standards; and ❑ payment of required sewer connection fees. Findings to Deny TTM 15832: Provided below are the applicable portions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, Government Code, relating to the necessary findings to deny a subdivision map: "66473. A local agency shall disapprove a map for failure to meet or perform any of the requirements or conditions imposed by this division or local ordinance enacted pursuant thereto; provided that a final map shall be disapproved only for failure to meet or perform requirements or conditions which were applicable to the subdivision at the time of approval of the tentative map; and provided further that such disapproval shall be accompanied by a finding identifying the requirements or conditions which have not been met or performed." "66473.5. No local agency shall approve a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, unless the legislative body finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan required by Article 5 (commencing with Section 65300) of Chapter 3 of Division 1, or any specific plan adopted pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with Section 65450) of Chapter 3 of Division 1. Tmoauve Tenet Map 15932 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Suff Report 7 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 A proposed subdivision shall be consistent with a general plan or a specific plan only if the local agency has officially adopted such a plan and the proposed subdivision or land use is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in such a plan." "66474. A legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, if it makes any of the following findings: (a) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451. (b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. (d) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (f) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. (g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." January 17 Planning Commission Staff Report: Please refer to Attachment 12 for a copy of the Planning Staff Report of January 17, 2001. This report provides additional background information regarding the project proposals. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to conditions, to the City Council through the adoption of Resolution No. 01-1 (See Attachment 1). Te.wwe T.z Map 15832(Avalon Homee) - Supp K Stan Repon 8 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 If the determination of the Commission is to recommend denial to the City Council, staff would recommend adoption of Resolution No. 01-1-A (See Attachment 2). e Whi[tenberg Duector of Development Services Attachments: (12) Attachment 1: Resolution No. 01-1, A Resolution of the Planning Conunission of the City of Seal Beach Recommending to the City Council Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 (321 Seal Beach Boulevard — Avalon Homes) Attachment 2: Resolution No. 01-1-A, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach Recommending to the City Council Denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 (321 Seal Beach Boulevard — Avalon Homes) Attachment 3: Addendum To Negative Declaration 98-3 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 Avalon Homes - 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop Property) Attachment 4: Planning Commission Minute Excerpt, January 17, 2001 Attachment 5: Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1998 Attachment 6: Planning Commission Minutes of October 7, 1998 Attachment 7: City Council Minutes of October 12, 1998 Attachment 8: Planning Commission Minutes of November 4, 1998 Attachment 9: Planning Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998 Attachment 10: City Council Minutes of December 14, 1998 Attachment 11: City of Seal Beach letter of May 4, 1999 regarding Coastal Permit Application 5-99-026 TenuGve Tract Map 15832(Avalon Homes)- Supp PC Stan Repan q Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 Attachment 12: Planning Commission Staff Report, January 17, 2001, with all attachments Tunutive Twat Map 15832 (Avo on Homes) Supp PC Suff RvWn 10 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hama) - Sapp K Staff Repan 11 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) DRAFT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1. On December 5, 2000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application") to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "I'here is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2001 to consider Tentative Tract Map 15832. The public hearing was duly continued to February 7, 2001. At the public hearings, Applicant's representatives spoke in favor of the project, and several other persons spoke in favor of and in opposition to the request. Section 4. The record of the hearings indicates the following: (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots; (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. Tentative Tinct Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Report 12 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element" map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Parcel Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and that zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjustment, or Agreement to allow the construction of 8 single-family residences (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel 1 —2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage A� ❑ Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage D ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (`Santa Ana RWQCB") has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana RWQCB issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots #1 through #7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor contamination is restricted to Lot #8 of Tract Map 15832. The City has prepared, and the Planning Commission has reviewed, an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" that sets forth these minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3. (g) As conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot #8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is received by the Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC San Report 13 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission SmffReport February 7, 2001 City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot 8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does hereby make the following findings regarding Tentative Tract Map 15832: 1. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the General Plan in that the map would allow the subdivision of existing property in accordance with the provisions of the General Plan for future medium density residential land uses in accordance with the present General Plan Land Use Element designation of "Medium Density Residential'. 2. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element' map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a mm density residential land use classification. DR ^ F 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land subdivision, exceeding the minimum lot size standards of the City for the "Residential Medium Density" zone and future development will be consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density Zone. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the potential development of the subject area with a maximum of 8 single-family residences, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone. 5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Additionally, the City has prepared an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" setting forth minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3 consisting of the subsequent discovery of groundwater contamination on the subject property (originating from an adjoining property) that has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. As conditioned, the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. Tenuu,e Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Surf Repon 14 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission StafRepon February 7, 2001 6. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the project. 7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. 8. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional water quality control board. DRAFT 9. Pursuant to Section 15074 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Negative Declaration has previously been adopted by the City Council regarding the implementing General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes necessary for this land subdivision request to be considered. Additionally, the City has prepared an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" setting forth minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3 consisting of the subsequent discovery of groundwater contamination on the subject property (originating from an adjoining property) that has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. This subdivision is within the scope of Negative Declaration 98-3, as supplemented by its Addendum, which together adequately describe the general environmental setting of the project, its environmental impacts, and determine that all significant project impacts of this project are reduced to a level less than significant. Therefore, no additional environmental documentation beyond the Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3 is needed. As conditioned, the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to the attached conditions shown as "Exhibit A". PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2001 by the following vote: Tentative Tram Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) Supp PC Stan Repon 15 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners ABSTAIN: Cotmnissioners David Hood, Ph.D. Chairman, Planning Commission Lee Whittenberg, Secretary Planning Commission Tentative Tmm Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Report 16 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission StajfReport February 7, 2001 "EXHIBIT A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15832 The specific conditions imposed as conditions of approval are set forth below, along with additional conditions recommended by the City Engineer and the Director of Development Services. The conditions are grouped according to the milestone to meet for completion of the condition: ®� Prior to the Release of a Final Mao by the City ®� r` 1. 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 Tentative Tract Map, 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, lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 2. A statement detailing the arrangements which the subdivider proposes to make for the operation and maintenance of common parcels and easements shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval, if any common parcels or easements are utilized. Tract Map 15832 shall not be released for recording by the City Engineer until said financial arrangement statement has been approved by the Director of Development Services, if applicable. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. This project necessitates the construction of public and/or private infrastructure improvements. Prior to the release of a final Tract Map by the City, the applicant shall construct, or enter into a Subdivision Agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of the following public and/or private improvements, marked with "X' and listed below, in conformance with Te.u,Ne Ttuut Mup 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Sett Report 17 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Flaming Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 applicable City standards and the City's Capital Improvement Policy. Items not required in conjunction with this project are marked Wa." (City Engineer Condition of Approval) X a. Street improvements including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lighting, signing, and striping. n/a b. Traffic signal systems, interconnect and other traffic control and management devices (as required by Transportation Planning and or Traffic Engineering). X c. Storm drain facilities as required by the Engineering Department to serve the project. DR ^ ACT n/a d. Sub -drain facilities (as required by Building and Safety). X e. Landscaping and computerized irrigation control system (for all public streets, parks, public areas and preserved windrows). X f. Sewer, reclaimed and/or domestic water systems, as required by the appropriate sewer and water districts as well as the Orange County Fire Authority when appropriate. X g. Monumentation. n/a h. Riding, hiking and bicycle trails adjacent to or through the project site. X i. Undergrounding of existing overhead and proposed utility distribution lines. n/a j. Transit -related improvements depicted on the approved tentative tract map. Note: Many of the required conditions of approval are included in the City's "Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement from PCH to Electric Ave." project. At the discretion of the City the Subdivider shall either construct or have constructed the appropriate items or shall pay the City for the construction cost of the items included in the City's Improvement Project. If the City elects to include some or all of the items in the City's Improvement Project the City will prepare a cost estimate for those items included and the Subdivider shall deposit the estimated amount with the City to be used for the construction of those items and will either reimburse the Subdivider the remainder of the deposit if the actual cost is less than the deposit, or will bill the Subdivider for the additional amount if the actual cost is more than the deposit. 4. Prior to the release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data of the final map which is compatible with the City ARCNIEW system Tentative Teach Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Report IS Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 or DXF (Autocad) system in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission' as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities. Certain existing survey monumentation may be deemed necessary for preservation and perpetuation subsequent to final construction improvements associated with this project. All survey monuments deemed necessary for perpetuation as recommended by the design Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be identified and shown on the final map for perpetuation. Such survey monuments shall be preserved and referenced before construction and if disturbed replaced after construction pursuant to Section 8771 of the Business and Professions Code. Prior to release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer a statement noting whether any monuments 'll be disturbed. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) DRAFT 6. The subdivider may choose to finance the cost of the required items through a Community Facilities District. In that event the City will work with the Subdivider in the preparation and formation of the district. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Gradin Permits 1. A Final Grading Plan shall be approved prior to performing any work on-site. All storm water and drainage shall be captured in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to the nearest inlet. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. An inundation study shall be prepared and submitted in conjunction with the submittal of street improvement plans for the review and approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, an Erosion Control Plan will be prepared to identify specific measures for the control of siltation, sedimentation and other soil materials. The Plan will be implemented during the project construction period, consistent with sub - article 13 of the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code and Grading Manual in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 4. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide documents disclosing all recorded easements on the subject property to the City Engineer and these easements shall be referenced on applicable grading plans. The applicant shall produce evidence that all utility providers with recorded easements on the subject property, have been informed of the TeWuLve Tnm Map 15832 (Avalon no=s) - Supp K Ssnff Repon 19 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 imminent construction activities in a format meeting the approval of the City Engineer and shall be shown on the subject grading plans. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. Hydrology and hydraulics submitted in conjunction with the grading permit shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Please note that the County of Orange has recently amended their Local Drainage Manual and this project must be in conformance with it. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide evidence that the cable television provider has been informed of construction activities and the potential exists for the interruption of services during construction. The notice shall be provided in a format acceptable to the Director of Development Services. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) DRAFT 7. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a ighnng plan for the project site specifying the location and type of all street lights shall be prepared and submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Construction of the proposed project shall be required to be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, which shall reduce fugitive dust amounts by up to 50 percent. Dust reducing measures shall include regular watering of graded surfaces, restriction of all construction vehicles and equipment to travel along established and regularly watered roadways, and requiring operations that tend to create dust be suspended during windy conditions. The City shall ensure that the project shall also comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, to reduce potential nuisance due to odors from construction activities. Measures include the following: ❑ The project shall comply with State, County, City, and UBC dust control regulations, so as to prevent the soil from being eroded by wind, creating dust, or blowing onto a public road or roads or other public or private property. ❑ SCAQMD Rule 403.1, as amended, shall be adhered to, ensuring the clean up on the construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site, and the application of water and/or chemical dust retardants that solidify loose soils should be implemented for construction vehicle access, as directed by the City Engineer. This shall include covering, watering or otherwise stabilizing all inactive soil piles (left more than 10 days) and inactive graded areas (left more than 10 days). ❑ Grading activity shall be suspended when local winds exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. ❑ All trucks hauling dirt, soil or other loose dirt material shall be covered. ❑ Where available or possible, permanent sources of power shall be used from the beginning of the project. Avoid internal combustion engines for generating power. ❑ Reduce or eliminate odors due to construction activity. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tentmlve Tmot Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Repos 20 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 9. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction - related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: ❑ Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; ❑ Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes; ❑ Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; a Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and ❑ Schedule operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours, where feasible. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) AFT 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the DRAFT proponent shall submit a geotechnical report to the City Engineer for approval. The report shall include the information and be in a form as required by the Orange County Grading Manual, Section 5.4 and the Orange County Excavation and Grading Code, Section 7-1-819. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said geotechnical report. 11. The project applicant shall incorporate measures to mitigate expansive soil conditions, compressible/collapsible soil conditions and liquefaction soil conditions, and impacts from trenching in site-specific Tentative Tract/Parcel Map Review and Rough Grading Plan Review reports prepared by the project geotechnical consultant. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. The geotechnical consultant's site-specific reports shall be approved by a certified engineering geologist and a registered civil engineer, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said site-specific reports. 12. Prior to the initiation of project grading in any development area, all existing utilities will be located and either abandoned and removed, rerouted or protected. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 13. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or a registered professional hydrologist to protect water resources from impacts due to urban contaminants in surface water runoff. The plan shall be prepared in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County, and the City of Seal Beach to insure compliance with applicable NPDES permit requirements. The Plan shall include a combination of structural and non structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) as Tcnmdvc batt Map 15932 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Repos 21 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 outlined in Countywide NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 14. Prior to final project design, a project specific Drainage Report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with applicable requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District and the City of Seal Beach. The report shall describe the existing drainage network, existing capacity, pre -and post -project runoff volumes, and any necessary improvements to accommodate proposed project runoff volumes. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 15. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any time during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) acvi^ ^ CI 16. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee parking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, grading permits shall not be issued for Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 1. The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, building permits shall not be issued for a new residential structure on Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The developer shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach. All requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall be satisfied. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. No building permit shall be issued for any lot within the boundaries of Tract Map 15832 unless and until a final tract map has been recorded. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Temative Tmm Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - supe Pc saff aepon 22 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Repon February 7, 2001 4. Water provided to the site shall be from the City of Seal Beach Water Department. All water and sewer connections shall be made from the alley side of the subject properties as follows: ❑ Install new sewer line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. ❑ Install new water line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. ❑ Reconstruct entire alley with cement concrete structural section for full width of alley along entire subdivision alley frontage. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan for the subdivision to the Orange County Fire Authority, the Seal Beach Police Department and the Director of Development Services. The plan shall demonstrate that emergency vehicle access is adequate. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) DR w HC1 6. Prior to the issuance of building pertiGts, improvement plans for sewer lines, connections and structures shall be the type installed in the location as specified in the "Guidelines Requiring Separation Between Water Mains and Sanitary Sewers, Orange County Health Department, 1980", in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the Director of Development Services of approval by the Orange County Fire Authority that the proposed infrastructure for fire protection services will be adequate to serve the proposed development. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the storage of combustible building materials on-site, fire hydrants or equivalent devices capable of flow in amounts approved by the Orange County Fire Authority shall be in place and operational to meet fire flow requirements. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 9. This project may be located within an assessment district. If the subject property is located within an assessment district the applicant shall submit, prior to the issuance of building permits, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a completed Occupancy Disclosure form that informs the prospective buyer: "Ibis property is located within an assessment district. The Orange County Tax Assessor may include the amount of the related assessment in the computations to determine assessed value of the property for the purpose of determining property taxes." (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Tentative T=t Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Repon 23 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Repon February 7, 2001 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Department proof of payment of applicable school fees levied by the Los Alamitos Unified School District. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 11. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction- related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: ❑ Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; ❑ Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes; ❑ Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; ❑ Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and ❑ Schedule operations affecting traffic duri� p 1s, where feasible. 12. Loose and soft alluvial soils, expansive clay sods and all existing uncertified fill materials will be removed and replaced with compacted fill during site grading in order to prevent seismic settlement, soil expansion, and differential compaction. 13. In excavations deeper than four feet but less than ten feet, a slope no steeper than 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) shall be provided. Steeper slopes or deeper excavations will be provided with shoring for stability and protection. OSHA safety requirements shall be adhered to throughout the entire duration of project earthwork. 14. Conformance with the latest Uniform Building Code and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effect of seismic groundshaking. Conformance with applicable codes and ordinances shall occur in conjunction with the issuance of building permits in order to insure that overexcavation of soft, broken rack and clayey soils within sheared zones will be required where development is planned. 15. All structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet an interior noise level of 45 CNEL. 16. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay City Traffic Impact fees. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay Park Land In-Lieu fees of $10,000 per residential unit. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Tentaive Tea[MW15832(Avyon H..e).Supp PCSwfFRCpn 24 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 18. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any time during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 19. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee parking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 20. In order to ensure adequate service to the project site, plans for the proposed wastewater collection system shall be submitted by the project proponent to the County Sanitation District of Orange County and the City Engineer of the City of Seal Beach for approval prior to the issuance of building permits. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 1. A copy of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&R's) proposed by the subdivider shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval. Occupancy permits shall not be approved by the Building Department until said CC&R's have been approved. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The project developer will complete half -section street improvements on Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site, excluding roadway reconstruction. Half section street improvements are the improvements from the centerline of Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site. These improvements would include curb, gutter and sidewalks, street lighting, and landscaping within the street right-of-way as set forth below: ❑ Widen the existing parkway an additional 5 feet for all lots fronting on Seal Beach Blvd. including a curb transition south of the subdivision to join the new curb alignment to the existing curb alignment by reconstructing new curb, gutter, and sidewalk. ❑ Construct one-half of a raised concrete curb street median with irrigation and landscaping on Seal Beach Blvd. along the entire subdivision frontage. ❑ Install one street tree per lot in the parkway along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Install irrigation and lawn in the parkway area for each lot frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Underground the existing overhead utilities for the entire subdivision frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Install decorative streetlights along the entire subdivision frontage. Street light design and layout shall be subject to City approval. ❑ Install City of Seal Beach entrance monument sign in street median on Seal Beach Boulevard. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tenmuve Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hones) -SuppB Staff Report 25 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes —Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 3. The developer shall provide mailbox facilities for each structure, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, Director of Development Services and the Postmaster. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 4. Sidewalks shall be continuous on Seal Beach Boulevard. Sidewalks shall be in conformance with ADA requirements and Tide 24. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. All utilities shall be underground. (City Engineer f�Aroval) 6. On-site design and work shall be in accordance with the City of Seal Beach, Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County Local Drainage Manual, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. All existing public improvements at the development site which are damaged due to construction, cracked, or otherwise below standard, shall be removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, each fire hydrant shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating its location on the street or drive per Orange County Fire Authority standards. On private property, these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 9. Graded, but undeveloped land shall be maintained weed -free and planted with interim landscaping within ninety (90) days of completion of grading, unless building permits are obtained. Planting with interim landscaping shall comply with NPDES Best Management Practices. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Exoneration of Security Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) duplicate Mylar of the final map and all public or private improvement plans, two (2) copies (one original and one duplicate) of 35mm microfilm of the final map, public or private improvement plans, final structure calculations, and computer analysis, if any, for all buildings, and the record drawings of grading, landscape, and improvement plans to, and in a manner acceptable to, the City Engineer. The microfilm shall be in 4"x 6' jackets with 6 frames per jacket. The computer analysis may be submitted on standard IBM compatible floppy disks. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data, which is compatible with the City ARCIINFO system or DXF (Autocad) system, of the record drawings of landscape and improvement plans to, and in a manner Temuive Tact Map 15832 (Avalon Homcs)-Supp PC Suff Report 26 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 acceptable to, the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission" as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. When requested by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data of computer generated structural analysis and calculations. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities and deemed necessary for preservation by the City Engineer. If such monuments were disturbed, the applicant shall have a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Registered Civil Engineer re-establish any such monumentation damaged or destroyed during construction of project and file the corner records with the County Surveyor. Prior to the exoneration of any security evidence of such filing shall be furnished to the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Miscellaneous DRAFT 1. The developer's contractor(s) shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance evidencing a comprehensive liability insurance policy with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence in connection with the work performed. Certificate shall include the City, its Council, officers, members of boards or commissions and employees as additional Named Insureds with respect to all claims, actions, damages, liabilities and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under the development executed by the Named Insured and the City, including any act or omission of employees, agents, subcontractors, or their employees. Such certificates shall have a 30 -day cancellation notice to the City of Seal Beach. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. In the event that unknown wastes or underground storage tanks are discovered during grading and/or construction which the contractor believes may involve hazardous materials, he/she shall: A. Immediately stop all grading and/or construction work in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. B. Notify the project proponent and the Orange County Fire Authority. C. Secure the area to restrict all vehicular and pedestrian access to and in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. D. Coordinate with the Orange County Fire Authority on needed testing of the substance and development of recommendations on removal and disposition of the substance. 3. Any easement that lies within or crosses rights-of-way proposed to be deeded or dedicated to the City, shall be subordinated to the City prior to City acceptance of the rights-of-way, unless otherwise exempted by the City Engineer. Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Hames) - Supp PC Suff Repo" 27 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1-A, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) Tenmuve Tmut Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp K Staff Report 28 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1-A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: DRAFT Section 1. On December 5, 12000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application') to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2001 to consider Tentative Tract Map 15832. The public hearing was duly continued to February 7, 2001. At the public hearings, Applicant's representatives spoke in favor of the project, and several other persons spoke in favor of and in opposition to the request. Section 4. The record of the hearings indicates the following: (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots; (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. Ten�a�ive Tmn Map 15832 (Mai.. Hovvs) - Supp Pc sl -"R It 29 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element" map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Parcel Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and that zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjusttys:u� or Agreement to allow the construction of 8 single-family residences. DR ©r (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel 1 — 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB") has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana RWQCB issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots #1 through #7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor contamination is restricted to Lot #8 of Tract Map 15832. The City has prepared, and the Planning Commission has reviewed, an "Addendum to Negative Declaration 98-3" that sets forth these minor additions to Negative Declaration 98-3. (g) As proposed to be conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot 8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp K Staff Report 30 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 received by the City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot #8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does hereby make the following findings regarding Tentative Tract Map 15832: 1. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is inconsistent with the Planning Commission's desire that the City Council require all of the subject lots to be a minimum of 30 -feet wide. 2. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that no residential development should occur until such time as all of the subject building sites have received the appropriate clearance from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. xe f• 3. In regards to all of the other required findings'Eo approve a subdivision map, the Commission finds the project consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, and in compliance the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend denial of Tentative Tract Map 15832. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2001 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners ABSTAIN: Commissioners David Hood, Ph.D. Chairman, Planning Commission Tenmuve Tran Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Su ff Repan 31 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Repon February 7, 2001 D?, AF i Lee Whittenberg, Secretary Planning Commission Tenwive Tree Map 15832 (Avalon Homea) - Supp p Staff Report 32 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 3 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 AVALON HOMES - 321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD, SHORE SHOP PROPERTY) Tentative Tmct Map 15932 (Avalon Homes) - Supp PC Staff Report 33 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15832, Avalon Homes 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop Property) On December 14, 1998, the City Council of the City of Seal Beach approved Resolution No. 4671 and thereby adopted Negative Declaration No. 98-3 relating to General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2 for the proposed construction of eight single-family residences on the property located at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard in the City of Seal Beach. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council made the following finding in Section 6(b) of Resolution No. 4671: "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". The City has prepared this Addendum in order to make certain minor additions necessary to supplement Negative Declaration 98-3. Specifically, subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, it was discovered that an adjoining property has groundwater contamination and that such contamination might have migrated to the subject property. In response to this discovery, the owner of the subject property retained a consultant to collect soil samples for review by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB"). The Santa Ana RWQCB has concluded, based on its review of the soil samples, that it will not require further investigation or remediation of lots #1 through #7 of the subject property. The Santa Ana RWQCB also has concluded that it anticipates the contamination present in Lot #8 "will be remediated by the Oxygen - Releasing Compounds (ORC) remedial method implemented by the adjacent property owner." These conclusions are set forth in a September 19, 2000 letter from the Santa Ana RWQCB to the owner of the subject property, a copy of which is on file with the City. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.Code of Regs. § 15162), the City has determined that preparation of this Addendum is appropriate because no condition has occurred that requires a subsequent environmental impact report or subsequent negative declaration. Additionally, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.Code of Regs. § 15164), this Addendum shall be attached to Negative Declaration 98-3, shall be considered prior to the making of a final decision on the subdivision map for the proposed residential project, but it shall not be circulated for public review. C:VMy Dmuments%SuWivisions\Tentative Tan Map 15832-Neg Dec 98-3 Addendum.docLL W\0IJ0-01 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE EXCERPT, JANUARY 17, 2001 Tenusive Tram Map 15932 (Avalon Homes) -Sup PC Staff Repos 34 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001 4. Tentative Tract Map 15832 321 Seal Beach Blvd., Shore Shop Property Applicant/Owner: Avalon Homes Request: To subdivide the subject property for the future construction of eight (8) detached single-family residences; with three parcels having twenty -six-foot frontages, three parcels having twenty -nine -foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty-foot frontages. The proposed subdivision request is consistent with General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2, approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998. Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-02. Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He stated that approvals for General Plan Amendments (GPA) and a Zone Change (ZC) had been received from City Council (CC) in December 1998 to convert the land use of this area from a Commercial/Retail Use to a maximum of eight (8) single-family homes on the property. He noted that as part of the approvals of this project a resolution was adopted that amended the General Plan (GP) to reflect a residential use on the property, and the second reading of the Zone Change (ZC) Ordinance was withheld until such time as a subdivision map was presented to ensure that the map complied with the conditions imposed as far as minimum lot sizes and lot width requirements are concerned. He said that Tentative Tract Map 15832 reflects this and Staff recommends approval subject to 58 conditions. He stated that the reason it has taken since 1998 to come before the Planning Commission for consideration is that in the course of completing due diligence as a part of the sale of the property, contamination under the property at the corner of Seal Beach Boulevard (SBB) and Pacific Coast Highway was discovered. Mr. Whittenberg noted that this corner site, where a liquor store is currently located, had formerly been a gas station. He stated that investigations had determined that gasoline tanks still remained underground since the 1960s and still contained residual gasoline product that had leaked into the ground. He said there has been a substantial clean-up and monitoring effort to get this site cleared by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). He reported that a letter from the RWQCB has been included in the Staff Report indicating that clearance has been given for seven of the eight lots to be created by this subdivision request. He stated that Staff has conditioned the map approvals to indicate that no grading or construction activity may take place on the northern most lot until such time as additional clearance is received from the RWQCB. Mr. Whittenberg also reported that the City is currently undertaking an improvement project for SBB from Electric Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway that will result in realignment of the street, WCULLIICARMEMPC MlnutesW001W1-17-01 PC Mlnutesew 7 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001 installation of new curb/gutters/sidewalk, a center landscaped median, bicycle paths, and other public improvements. He indicated that the curb, gutter, and sidewalk replacements for the Avalon Homes development would have to conform to the City's improvement project. He stated that there were a number of other conditions related to cost sharing of some of the public facilities improvements. The Director of Development Services stated that when the CC approved the GPA and ZC in 1998 they also approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and this project has been evaluated in light of the environmental documentation of that project. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff feels that it is in conformance with what was evaluated under that MND and that there is no additional environmental review necessary. He said that the 1998 MND actually evaluated up to 9 single-family homes on the property and found that the impacts of 9 homes were not enough to cause significant environmental impacts. He indicated that Staff had prepared Resolution 01-02 that recommends conditional approval and findings. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Sharp commented that when the property on Lyons in Long Beach was built, they investigated everything and built the project, then discovered that they still had contaminated areas. He noted that that property has now been vacant for over 2 years. He stated that he wanted to make sure that the contamination on the SBB (Shore Shop) property has, in fact, been completely cleared out. Mr. Whittenberg stated that a clearance letter from the RWQCB had been provided indicating that 7 of the 8 lots have been cleaned up so as to meet the appropriate criteria. He continued by stating that the most northerly lot of the property still requires additional remediation, and Staff has conditioned both the map and building permit approvals to prevent grading or construction activity on that lot until all remediation criteria has been met. Commissioner Sharp asked if no tanks other than the 2 indicated had been identified. Mr. Whittenberg responded that there actually had been 4 tanks removed from the liquor store property. He said that the gas station had been demolished in the 1960's, so the tanks had been in the ground for a long period of time. He stated that the assumption at this point was that there are no more tanks on the property and the clean up of the additional hydrocarbons in the soil is now taking place. Public Hearing Vice -Chairperson Cutuli opened the public hearing. Mr. Scott Redsun of Avalon Homes stated that the process of gaining approval has been a long one. He said that Avalon now believes to have total clearance for the property except for the one northerly lot. He noted that when testing was done, the findings reflected that 7 of the lots had never had contamination on them. He stated that Avalon Homes was ready to begin building on these 7 lots and would wait for final testing and clearance before beginning to build on the lot closest to the liquor store location. He said that it was his understanding that the process of remediation MCULLY%CARMEMPC Mlnutes12001\01-17-01 PC Mlnut"Aee 8 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001 had begun on the last lot and on the corner property and that within 6 months to a year and one-half the lot should be remediated. Mr. Redsun stated that the project of homes would add a lot to the beautification of this section of SBB. He stated that Avalon Homes was more than happy to contribute their share to the street improvements. Commissioner Cutuli asked if the floor plans reflected on Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832 were all the same. Mr. Redsun responded that there were 2 different floor plans and 4 different elevations. He said that the homes could be 21 or 26 feet wide, depending upon the width of the model. He said that currently there are nine 25 -foot wide lots and with this extra space Avalon has attempted to create different variations. Commissioner Sharp asked what the overall height of the homes was. Mr. Redsun reported that the maximum height was 25 feet. Mr. Whittenberg interjected that the issues before the Planning Commission tonight is to approve the land subdivision, as the building designs and elevations had already been approved by the CC when the GPAs and ZC were approved. He noted that the last item for approval is re -parceling of the lots to meet the proposals submitted by the applicant. He said that all of the exterior designs and elevations meet existing City Code requirements for lot coverage, height, setbacks, and parking. Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were anything the Planning Commission could do with regard to the positioning of the homes in a more streamlined fashion with equal setbacks. Mr. Whittenberg responded that City Code for this area of town allows for variation in setbacks, and he noted that the plans do have some offsets on the sides of the homes. Commissioner Lyon noted that the Staff Report indicates that Avalon will install one street tree per lot in the parkway along SBB, yet the plans appear to show the trees between or behind the homes. He also asked the Director of Development Services if the street area included the sidewalks. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that as part of the redesign of SBB the actual parkway width, including the sidewalk and the City -owned landscaped area, would be from 10-12 feet wide. Mr. Mario Musso, previous owner of the property, stated that with the approval for rezoning of the property the Planning Commission had suggested that the density of the project be reduced from 9 to 8 homes and had also suggested varying the architectural renderings of the homes to create variety. He said that they have attempted to do this. He said that the Musso's are looking forward to the removal of the vacant retail building and the construction of the 7 new homes, and eventually the eighth. He stated that construction would coincide with the SBB improvement project. He said that he believes that this long overdue improvement of SBB will usher in a beautiful new gateway to the City. He thanked the Planning Commission and Staff for their assistance in helping this plan come together. Mr. Vic Peterson, 303 Seal Beach Boulevard, spoke in favor of the Avalon Homes project. He said it is long overdue. He stated that approximately 10 years ago funds had been allocated for SBB improvements, but these funds were instead used to improve 121b Street. He said that he wanted to ensure that the SBB improvement project has the full support of the City. He said that if the improvements had been made 10 years ago, many of the commercial retail businesses on that property could have been saved. He expressed his support of the new homes. He noted that there OSCULOACMMEMPC Mlnutes12001\0147-01 PC Minutee.dw 9 city of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes o1 January 17, 2001 were 3 lots north of Landing Street that are zoned for commercial use. He recommended that these be re -zoned back to residential to conform to the existing use. Vice -Chairperson Cutuli closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Brown stated that he had been against this conversion from the outset and had voted against it. He said he has not changed his views, although CC did decide to approve the Zone Change. He stated that although it would reduce the density, he believes that the lots should be 30 feet wide. He said that with a 25 to 26 -foot wide lot with 6 -foot setbacks on each side, you end up with a 19 -foot wide house with an 18400t width of livable space, which does not make for a great living environment and makes the neighborhood look like "a house cemetery." He noted that the current designs were better than the previous ones, but it still looks like "a row of closely -spaced soldiers." He said that the overall look for the houses was very similar with only minor variations. He stated that because this was a critical opening to the City it should present our best face and not our worst face in terms of the narrow lots. He said he would not be in favor of approving any more 25 -foot lots anywhere within Seal Beach. He stated that he would vote against TTM 15832 and request that Avalon Homes return with 30 -foot wide lot configuration. Commissioner Brown stated that he also believed it was premature to begin construction when gasoline fumes or vapors in the soil have not been completely mitigated. He commented that he could not believe that anyone would want to live on Lot 7 right next to the vacant Lot 8 that has gasoline fumes. He noted that it would be more appropriate to clean up Lot 8 before beginning construction, or even constructing only 7 homes and leaving Lot 8 as open space. Regarding the landscaping for the SBB improvement project, Commissioner Brown stated that if the project was to be completed by the same company that did the median landscaping for the SBB improvements near the Naval Weapons Station, he hoped another company would be contracted as he had received several complaints about the small trees planted in the medians. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the project on SBB near the Naval Weapons Station was funded by grant funds provided by the State of California and the City had a limited amount of funding to complete the project. He noted that the trees planted are of varieties that grow very quickly, but it will still take time for them to reach full maturity. He said that in this area the standard requirement for planting trees is that 15 gallons tree be provided, so anytime a landscaping program is completed it will take some time for the plantings to take effect. He noted that a landscape architect designed the plans for the planting of these trees, but due to the lack of funds to hire a landscape architect, City crews completed the plantings along SBB. He said that it had not yet been determined how the final landscaping work along SBB and Electric Avenue would be undertaken. Mr. Whittenberg then reminded the Planning Commission that when the CC approved the GPA and ZC, they specified the width of the lots. He noted that TTM hSCULL=ABMEMPC MlnutesX2Wl101-17-01 PC Minutes.dw 10 City or Seal Beach Planning Commissicn Meeting Minutes 00anuary 17, 2001 15832 meets the specifications made by CC. Commissioner Brown stated that if Staff is bringing this TTM back before the Planning Commission for approval, he believes it is a bad idea. Mr. Whittenberg responded that he understood this, but he wanted to make sure that it was noted for the record that CC had specified that certain lot widths were to be provided. He again stated that TTM 15832 was within the provisions of CC, but the Commissioners at their discretion could vote as they felt appropriate. Commissioner Brown said that he believed this was why TTMs were brought back before the Commissioners: to get the opinion of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Sharp confirmed that the vote would be strictly for the tract map and had nothing to do with the street improvements or the design of the homes. Mr. Whittenberg responded that this was correct. Commissioner Sharp asked if the Coastal Commission had approved the tract map. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Coastal Commission has not approved the tract map itself, but the land development proposal that reflects the lot widths with the style of proposed homes comply with the Coastal Commission and with its previous CC determination as to how this particular piece of property should be developed. Commissioner Sharp asked if 25 feet is the normal lot width for most lots within Seal Beach. Mr. Whittenberg responded that this was the "predominant" width, but the Commission must keep in mind that the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway in Seal Beach was subdivided in the early 1900s, and a 25 -foot lot was the standard lot size at that time for land subdivision for many areas of Southern California. He stated that today you would not see 25 -foot wide lots created as it can restrict use of the interior of the property. He said that in this particular case, the property currently consists of nine 25 -foot wide lots. He stated that he did not recall the recommendation made to CC by the Commissioners when this project first came before them, but at the Council level they did deal with the issue of lot width. He stated that CC had specified that there should be a specific number of lots with specific widths. He said that CC had discussed the same concern expressed by the Planning Commission regarding a standard 25 -foot width, which is a very narrow width, but felt that to go to 30 feet would decrease the potential building sites from 9 to 7 or even 6, and this would not have been appropriate. He noted that CC had conditioned the approval of the ZC to reflect construction of 8 homes with the lot arrangement as it is presented tonight. CC had also required that they would not implement the zoning until they had approved the map, to ensure that the new lots meet with the standards. Commissioner Sharp stated that were the project to be constructed north of Pacific Coast Highway, he would have a different view on the size of the lots. He said that he was certain that most people would like to see 40 or 50 -foot wide lots, but if this were done, the houses would not be affordable. He said that since CC had put in the time to come up with the conditions, he would be in favor of approval. Commissioner Cutuli stated that he was still concerned about having the homes in a straight row, and although the designs are nicer than the ones previously submitted, he still thinks that the spacing of the homes creates a "wait like, straight line effect," with few architectural projections. He said he would like to see more variation. He said that he would like to vote to make changes to create less of a straight line, wall effect. 115CULLY%CARMEMPC Minutes12001101-17-01 PC Minutes.doc 11 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001 Commissioner Brown asked if it would be appropriate to make a motion to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832. Mr. Whittenberg suggested that if the Commissioners wished to see changes in the map, they might want to recommend denial with recommendations for modifications. MOTION by Brown to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832 with modification to create 30 -toot wide lots. Commissioner Cutuli asked if it would be appropriate for the Vice -Chairperson to second the motion. Mr. Whittenberg stated that it would be appropriate. He began to state that he understood Commissioner Cutuli's concerns on the design of the buildings when Commissioner Brown interjected that he did not feel it would be appropriate for the Director of Development Services to make a comment at this point. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the Commissioners were discussing an issue that is not a component of the subdivision itself. Commissioner Brown noted that the Director of Development Services had already made this point and he resented Mr. Whittenberg's attempts to influence the vote. Commissioner Brown continued by stating that the Director of Development Services is there as part of Staff and had had his chance to talk, and the public had its chance to talk, and when Mr. Whittenberg tries to influence a vote after this, Commissioner Brown believes him to be out of line. Commissioner Sharp asked if it would be appropriate to make a substitute motion at this time. Mr. Boga responded that it would be appropriate. SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Sharp to approve Tentative Tract Map 15832 as presented. Commissioner Lyon asked for an explanation of what a Substitute Motion was. Mr. Boga explained that if first there is a motion to deny, it can be appropriate to make a substitute motion, which if seconded, would then be voted on first and depending upon whether the substitute motion is denied, then the Commission would vote on the main motion. The Substitute Motion dies for lack of a second. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832 with modification to create 30 -foot wide lots. MOTION FAILS: 2-2-0-1 AYES: Brown and Cutuli NOES: Lyon and Sharp ABSENT: Hood Mr. Boga stated that a tie vote means that the motion fails. Commissioner Cutuli asked what the procedure would be. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the Commission could consider another motion or the public hearing could be re -opened MCULLYkCMIMEMPCMInut SWOO1W1-17.01PCMInu .dm 12 City of seal Beach Planning CenlnllsalOn Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001 and the matter continued to the next scheduled meeting of February 7, 2001. He noted that this would allow Chairperson Hood to review the videotape of the meeting and be present to participate. Commissioner Brown asked if there were another option. Mr. Boga explained that if the Planning Commission decides not to continue the public hearing, and is unable to agree on an action, a resolution could be adopted reflecting no action because of a tied vote. He continued by stating that alternatively, as a matter of law, the matter could be brought before the Council with the recommendation that there is a tie vote and the Planning Commission was unable to make a decision. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Lyon to re -open the public hearing and continue this item to the next scheduled meeting of February 7, 2001. There will be no additional public notice given. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0-1 AYES: Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp NOES: None ABSENT: Hood STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg reported that on the Agenda Forecast Staff had scheduled a study session on the Housing Element for February 7, 2001. He noted that this had been scheduled with the anticipation that there would be no other items for consideration for that meeting date. He stated that since both of the items on tonight's agenda had been continued to the meeting of February 7, he recommended re -scheduling the study session for another future meeting date. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Sharp inquired as to the status of the Starbucks application. Mr. Whittenberg responded that Staff has not heard from Starbucks in quite some time. He reported that there had been much discussion regarding what would happen to this project if Starbucks were to proceed to move the drive-thru window in accordance with City Council directions. He said that Staff had provided communications from the City Attorney's office as to what their options would be, but has had no other communications from Starbucks. ADJOURNMENT Vice -Chairperson Cutuli adjourned the meeting at 8:37 p.m. \WULLY CABMEN\PC MinWt .s 001\01-17-01 PC Minutes.Eoc 13 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Stof/Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23,1998 Taasanve Ttaot Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp IC Staff Repan 35 city of Seal Bush Plain g Commission' Mimes of Sept nba 23, 1998 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Lyon to approve Resolution No. 98-29, as amended at Condition #3: All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans approved through CUP 98-13 and restroom construction shall be inn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0-0 AYES: Hood, Lyon, Brown, Larson, Cutuli Mr. Steele advised the applicant that a ten -calendar -day appeal period is available to the City Council. This period will begin to run tomorrow morning. 3. Negative Declaration 98.3 General Plan Amendment 98.1 Zone Change 98.1 Variance 98-5 321 Seal Beach Boulevard Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department for inspection]. The applicant sought approval to review the City's General Plan designation and zoning classification of the property from General Commercial/C-2 to Residential/RMD. The proposal would involve the demolition of existing commercial structures and/or improvements to facilitate construction of nine (9) single family, two- story, zero lot line residences. ommission Questions Commissioner Cutuli referenced the Mitchell Plaza project and asked if staff had received any expressions of resentment or complaints regarding the zero lot line concept? Mr. Whittenberg said he would have to refer back to the Minutes of that application. He didn't recall if there was opposition. Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were any circumstances, which required those to be in place, or were special conditions different from the previous one, as compared to this one, or are the two conceptually the same? Mr. Whittenberg said they were conceptually exactly the same for the first residential lot After that it was a different situation. There was only one residential lot behind - City or sal Brach Planning Comnusson r Minta of September 27, 1998 commercial as part of the Mitchell Plaza proposal. Commissioner Hood asked when the Mitchell Plaza Variance was granted? Mr. Whittenberg said it was approximately 1994 —1995. Chairman Brown asked if the underlying lot sizes are 25' wide? Mr. Whittenberg said yes. He explained the lots were combined by the property owner to accommodate the Shore Shop but, underneath, they are all 25'. Public Hearina Dave Bartlett' D. Bartlett Associates Mr. Bartlett introduced himself and explained he represented the Musso family on this application. He then gave a power point presentation on this application. He discussed the following concerns: ❑ Proiect Location The project is approximately 0.53 acres located on Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard. ❑ Existing Property Conditions There are several stores on the site (Shore Shop, beauty salon and deli). He showed photos of the site and alleys. ❑ Proiect Description for Anaheim Bay Villas The existing would be demolished and nine zero -lot line houses would be built. He showed modeled photos of the proposed houses. They were Mediterranean with tile roofs. Three elevations with three floor plans. Four bedrooms, 31/2 baths and 2,550 square feet. Two -car garage with alley access. Private entry courtyards. Second -story balconies and roof decks. ❑ Planning Considerations They considered the City's General Plan and zoning, surrounding land uses, Seal Beach Boulevard traffic and the viability of Seal Beach Boulevard as a commercial district. He said Seal Beach Boulevard, as a viable commercial disMcl and mixed-use corridor, was conceptually established in 1986. For several reasons it never materialized. City or Seal Beach PW ung Comnusvon • Minora or Se.Planher 37, 1998 Justification for Approval The uses permitted in the C-2 zone are not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Lack of traffic on Seal Beach Boulevard would not allow for viable commercial opportunities. There are residential uses on three sides. Project implementation would result in an 80% decrease in traffic trips and associated vehicle emissions. It's consistent with the General Plan. There would be a significant contribution to the City's affordable housing program. The surrounding property values would increase. Mario Musso' Property Owner Mr. Musso introduced himself as the property owner. He talked about the history of the Shore Shop, which was started by his mother. He said they wish to sell the Shore Shop because there have been big changes in retailing in the 35 years the shop has operated. Their business needs approximately 3,000 square feet to operate, not the existing 10,000 square feet. The economy is more competitive and retailing approaches in 1967 don't work in 1998. Traffic on Seal Beach Boulevard is minimal. Large discount malls lure business away. The following persons spoke in favor of this application: Seretta Fielding' 233 Seal Beach Boulevard Ms. Fielding introduced herself as living in Seal Beach for 22 years and as operating the Growing Tree Pre -School on Seal Beach Boulevard. She said she feels that Seal Beach Boulevard will never be a viable commercial district as originally planned because of the residential lots. When a business goes into this area to see what can be built they are looking at a 25' x 103' residential lot. The building would be very small. They would not choose this area. This project would be much better for the area; she liked the proposed architectural style and felt it would improve the neighborhood. Cass Belinski ' 254 17"' Street. Seal Beach Mr. Belinski said he has lived in Seal Beach since 1989. He said this is a wonderful project and was very please that the Musso's decided to invest in the community in this way. The mixed-use residential plan has not been as successful as everyone had hoped it would be. This project will inspire other owners to do the same thing. Ciry of Seal Heath Planting Commission ' Mmof Scptember 27, 1998 Pete Mason ' 256 17° StreetSeal Beach Mr. Mason said he has lived in Seal Beach for 20 years and owns the property on the other side of the motel. He said this project would bring Seal Beach Boulevard up to the same standard as other areas in Seal Beach. There were no persons wishing to speak against the project. Mr. Bartlett addressed Commissioner Cutuli's comment regarding resident opposition to Mitchell Plaza. What was addressed at the time that project was built was having a buffer between the commercial buildings and the residential home. This was done. There was no objection to the zero lot line construction. The Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Commission Deliberation Chairman Brown said he was opposed to this project for several reasons: Zero Lot Line: He saw no problem with the first lot being a zero lot line but questioned why the other 8 lots had to be also. The first lot is adjacent to commercial uses. That would set a precedent that the Commission does not want to do. The Mitchell Plaza project had a different Commission rationale and it does not apply to this project. Seal Beach Boulevard: This street was designed in the General Plan as a commercial or limited commercial area. There have been efforts to revitalize this but it hasn't been very successful. This project, if approved, would kill it off completely. What type of reaction would that have on the other businesses further down? The Planning Commission didn't talk about the zoning further south on Seal Beach Boulevard. It's Limited — Commercial from Landing Avenue to almost Electric Avenue. In the City's plan, Seal Beach Boulevard is a commercial district with residential above or behind. R's still commercial and this project would completely change the character. It would reduce the traffic and that would kill off the other businesses there. It would be better to look at Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole. Then come up with a plan and execute that plan to revitalize Seal Beach Boulevard into a viable commercial district. Lot Size: He did not like the size of the lots, indicating there is a huge difference between 25' lots and 30' lots. In terms of living space it really impacts the livability of a house. "It makes it more like a train and I think it's unattractive ... what we'll have is a row of houses, one right after the other ... a house cemetery ... personally I would rather see 30' lots. And I'm not in favor of granting the zero lot line setbacks except ..."for the first house City of sal Bash Planning Commission a Mina of Srytmbm 27. 1999 Mr. Whittenberg said the setback at the liquor store was zero, it was built on a property line. Chairman Brown said you've got two buildings right next to each other and the Planning Commission would never approve that. Zone Chanoe: The Chairman said that while C-2 might not be the appropriate zoning for that area, L -C might. It might be more appropriate to rezone that area in that way. Parking: He wonders what the California Coastal Commission (CCC) would have to say about the elimination of parking spaces and public use near the beach. Turning public spaces into private spaces. We've seen the CCC staff be adverse to that. "I'm going to vote against this project. There are a lot of little things I don't like about it. And there are big things I don't like about it ...... Commissioner Cutuli said he liked the project proposal, liked the design of the houses and thought it looked good. He lived in Surfside on 25' lots and didn't thinking it detracts from living. The windows were arranged toward the view. He didn't think the zero lot line should be approved unless it's a citywide format. Visually it doesn't bother him that the area would become residential rather than commercial. The only thing he objected to was the continuous courtyard wall, which makes it look like condominiums. This could be overcome. Commissioner Lyon said he had looked at the site and the surrounding area and felt it was run down and not in good shape. This project would be a great improvement. It would make a nice view and would be a great improvement for that area. He didn't think business could make it in that area. We just can't let an area deteriorate. Commissioner Hood said with all due respect to the owner, who wants to develop this property, this is a property -specific plan rather than a City or district -specific plan. He said we need to look at what's good for Seal Beach and what the City's General Plan is. He said the General Plan has certain objectives for Seal Beach Boulevard, which must be addressed. He also didn't like the cookie -cutter look of all the houses looking the same, the same color. It would be granting a special privilege to approve the zero lot lines. This should not be done. Lastly, this project is in Chairman Brown's district, he knows the thoughts of the people in the area and he respects that. Commissioner Larson said that with no disrespect to the Chairman, he felt that each of the Planning Commissioners represents the entire City. He likes the plan. He was astonished to see the zoning code allowed commercial and residential zoning to abut and said that is poor zoning. He had no problem with the zero lot line concept because it provides a little more useful property on each lot. He would support the project as City of Seal B=h Plmning Cownissim • MinW of September 23, 1998 proposed. Commissioner Cutuli said that in concept he really did like the zero lot line concept and felt it would work for that site. But until the City has a formula for zero lot line zoning he couldn't vote in favor of this project. Chairman Brown said the Planning Commission has no justification to approve a Variance. Even if you could make the findings for the first lot, you couldn't make them for the remaining lots. Mr. Whittenberg said he forgot to discuss his Supplemental Staff Report. As part of the process, the City circulated an Initial Study and Negative Declaration. The City received three letters from SCAG, Caltrans and the Orange County Department of Development Services. These letters were included in the Commission's packet. He advised the Commission that they could, if so desired, approved certain aspects of the project and deny certain aspects of it. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Hood to deny Negative Declaration #3, General Plan Amendment 98-1, Zone Change 98-1 and Variance 98-5 through the adoption of Resolution No. 98-30 through 98-33. MOTION CARRIED: 3-2-0 AYES: Cutuli, Brown, Hood NOES: Larson, Lyon Mr. Whittenberg advised the Commission that staff would come back with revised resolutions. Chairman Brown advised everyone of the appeal process to the City Council. He said he strongly urged another plan. Commissioner Larson asked what that plan should be? A commercial plan? Chairman Brown said he would prefer for staff to sit down and come up with a plan for Seal Beach Boulevard. There needs to be a City consensus on what needs to be done for Seal Beach Boulevard. Instead, what we're doing is starting out small. Dave Bartlett said that after listening to the discussion among the Commissioners he was not sure of each Commissioner's position. Chairman Brown said, "I'm not going to allow you to poll the Commissioners". 10 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 7,1998 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) - Sapp K Staff Repon 36 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission — M..wtes of October 7, 1998 1 CONSENT CALENDAR 2 3 Chairman Brown had two corrections to the September 23r° Minutes: 4 5 ❑ Page 8: He saw no problem with the first lot being a zero lot line but 6 questioned why the other 8lots had to be also. He said he had said he could 7 see somebody requesting a zero lot line Variance on the first property. 8 9 ❑ Page 11: Add the word "jokingly" to "Chairman Brown jokingly said he 10 resented Mr. Stein's comment that the meeting would need mediating". 11 12 MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Hood to approve the Minutes of September 23, 13 1998 as amended. 14 15 MOTION CARRIED: 5-0-0 16 AYES: Hood, Larson, Lyon, Cutuli, Brown 17 18 19 SCHEDULED MATTERS 20 21 2. Consider request from Jim Watson for time extension on 22 Conditional Use Permit 98-2, Variance 98-2 and Height Variation 98-1. 23 24 Chairman Brown asked what the time limit was? 25 26 Mr. Steele explained discretionary permits have to be exercised within a one - 27 year period but the Commission may grant a one-year extension. 28 29 MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Hood to approve an extension request for CUP 30 98-2, Variance 98-2 and Height Variation 98-1 for one year. 31 32 MOTION CARRIED: 5-0-0 33 AYES: Larson, Brown, Hood, Cutuli, Lyon 34 .35 36 3. Consideration of Resolutions 98-30, 98-31 and 98-32 37 Anaheim Bay Villas' 321 Seal Beach Boulevard 38 39 Chairman Brown said it's unusual to have so many comments taken under oral 40 communications on a project. He felt there might be a lot of misunderstanding on 41 this project. He thought it would be appropriate it to continue or table this item. 42 43 Mr. Steele said the Commission's action would depend on what they wanted to 44 do. If they want to bring it back for further discussion and more Public Hearings 45 the Commission needs to continue it and instruct staff to re -Notice the Public 46 Hearing. Tabling it is not an option in this case because it's an application from Cny of Seal Beach Planning Commission —Minutes of October 7, 1998 1 an applicant; the Commission has to take some action. You table a matter if you 2 want to take no further action. 3 4 Chairman Brown said he had received many telephone calls on this application. 5 So in consideration of the phone calls and many comments he would like to 6 continue the matter for a month or two. And with that same Motion, request that 7 the City Council authorize the Planning Commission to hold Public Hearings on 8 Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole. 9 10 Commissioner Hood said the Planning Commission has already passed a 11 Motion. If they wish to reconsider that Motion they need a Motion by someone 12 on the prevailing side and it needs a 2/3'"` vote. He noted the Commission could 13 seek direction from the City Council. 14 15 Mr. Steele responded on the Roberts Rules of Order issue brought up by 16 Commissioner Hood. We have previously discussed that the Commission has 17 not taken a final action until it has adopted resolutions on a matter. Tonight 18 would be that final action. Therefore the reconsideration rules don't apply until 19 you actually take a final action. Your vote at the last meeting was to instruct staff 20 to prepare resolutions of denial; this was done. The reconsideration issue would 21 only arise if you actually adopted these resolutions. At this point, it would be 22 appropriate to continue the matter as long as the Public Hearing is re -Noticed 23 and all the procedural steps are adhered to. 24 25 Chairman Brown asked about the Public Hearing. 26 27 Mr. Steele explained the Commission closed the'Public Hearing at the last 28 meeting, therefore it would need to be re -Noticed. The Commission could 29 continue it pending any request the Commission thinks appropriate by the 30 Council. He said that if the Council doesn't want to give the Commission that 31 authorization for any reason, the Commission would have to take a final action 32 on this matter. Staff therefore requests the Commission continue the matter to a 33 date certain or separate the two requests. 34 35 Mr. Steele said his understanding of what the applicant wants is a continuance 36 so the applicant can go back, have discussion with the neighbors, and present to 37 the Commission a revised plan to try to address some of the concerns 38 expressed. If the Commission wants to hear that information it needs to have a 39 Public Hearing. That would have to be re -Noticed. 40 41 Chairman Brown said reopening the Public Hearing is not something he wanted 42 to do without the Council's authorization to have Public Hearings on Seal Beach 43 Boulevard as a whole from Pacific Coast Highway to Electric Avenue. If they 44 don't give that authorization, and if the applicant wants to come back with 45 different plans, what would happen? 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission — Minutes of October 7, 1998 Mr. Steele said if the Commission does not want to reopen the Public Hearing to hear revisions from the applicant, then staff would encourage the Commission to take an action on the applicant's original proposal or ask the applicant to withdraw the original proposal. The applicant would probably ask you to take a final action and then file an appeal to the City Council. Chairman Brown said he wants to have a Public Hearing in conjunction with Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole. He thought that would allow the applicant to come in with a revised plan at that hearing. And, if they come back with a revised plan, we would re -Notice and have Public Hearings. Mr. Steele said, as acting staff tonight, he could convey that request to the City Council and let you know what they decide. What happens beyond that is up to the Commission. Commissioner Hood said if the Planning Commission wishes to continue this matter, not to act on the resolutions tonight, and continue it to a time certain they may or may not have direction from the Council. Mr. Steele said if the Commission moves to continue the matter to a time certain, necessarily staff would need to re -Notice the Public Hearing to be able to meet the ten day deadline in advance of that hearing. Commissioner Hood said Mr. Steele was going to convey the Commission's wishes to the Council. By the time it gets back to the Commission, they would have told the Commission to go ahead or told us to pull out. That seems like that course would take care of what the Chairman wanted to do. Mr. Steele suggested that if that's the pleasure of the Commission that the Commission direct him to convey that to the Council at its next meeting. He would ask the question and try to get their direction back to the Commission at its next meeting on October 21". The Commission discussed its schedule. Mr. Steele said if the City Council authorizes the hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole, would the Commission then authorize staff to Notice a Public Hearing on the matter without coming back to the Commission? MOTION by Hood; SECOND by _ to continue the Public Hearing on GPA 98- 2, ZC 98-2, VAR 98-5 re Anaheim Bay Villas to November 4, 1998. MOTION FAILED due to lack of a Second. City of Seal Beach Planning Commission —Minutes of October 7, 1998 1 Before the vote, Mr. Steele said he would put the question on the Council's 2 agenda for October 12"'. If the Council authorizes the Commission to hold 3 hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole we will then agendize and Notice 4 November 4, 1998 as a Public Hearing for Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole and 5 this project additionally. 6 7 Chairman Brown said, 'Let me be Gear. I don't want to hold Public Hearings on 8 this project before we hold Public Hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole. 9 That would not make any sense to do. I want the Public Hearings on Seal Beach 10 Boulevard first.' 11 12 Commissioner Larson said the Commission should then deny this project. 13 14 Chairman Brown said no, that need not be done. He asked why couldn't the 15 Commission continue the Anaheim Bay Villas project for a month. At that point 16 we'll know which way we're headed. If we're headed in that direction, the Public 17 Hearings could be reopened then. If we're not going to have Public Hearings on 18 Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole, the Commission has already made its 19 decision on the project based on prior Public Hearings. Again, holding Public 20 Hearings would allow the applicant to return with a revised plan. 21 22 Commissioner Hood said he agreed completely because the public said tonight 23 the Commission could have been engaging in spot zoning. Rather than 24 discussing a particular project the Commission should discuss Seal Beach 25 Boulevard as a whole first. 26 27 Mr. Steele said that's a matter of opinion. He pointed out that the Commission 28 has a specific application from a specific applicant for a project. At a certain time 29 the Commission has to take an action to give that applicant his rights to a hearing 30 and a decision. 31 32 Commissioner Hood said it would be far better to come up with a project which 33 could be tailored to the area's plan. That would avoid the challenge of spot 34 zoning and it would allow the applicant a fair chance. It costs applicants money 35 to prepare new plans. 36 37 Mr. Steele said what's'fair" and what's "a good idea' are entirely up to the 38 Commission and he was not advising on that. However, he disagreed only with 39 the spot zoning issue. He said this is not a case of spot zoning as legally 40 defined. 41 42 Commissioner Cutuli asked if the applicant wants to withdraw the application at 43 this time? 44 45 Chairman Brown said he thought the Commission could delay for one month. If 46 the applicant wishes to withdraw, they can withdraw at any time. But if the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission—Minutes of October 7, 1998 Commission continues for a month, in the meantime we can ask the Council their issues. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Hood for staff to ask City Council to authorize the Planning Commission hold Public Hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole and to continue the Anaheim Bay Villas application for one month. Before the vote, Commissioner Larson asked to have the Motion repeated. He said he could vote for this Motion but indicated he had voted against denial of this project. Public Hearings are important and if the people who spoke tonight had been present at the last Public Hearings his vote would have been different. He could not vote on some other plan without the full evidence. At the first hearing there was nobody particularly opposed to this. If the Planning Commission were going to reconsider this application he would like to have a Public Hearing on it. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0-0 AYES: Brown, Larson, Hood, Cutuli, Lyon PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no Public Hearings. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Steele said that for the Record four letters were given to the Planning Commission this evening. They were (1) A letter from the Mayor of the City of Los Alamitos dated September 28, 1998 re the Bixby project. Please bring this to the October 21 °1 hearing. (2) Two letters. One is dated 10/2/98 from Ken Bornholdt, lawyer for the Bixby Ranch Company. He protests the Commission's decision to continue the matter to 10/21/98. The other is dated 10/6/98 from Mr. Steele replying to Mr. Bomholdt. This letter explains why the Commission continued the matter and the City's position on the various protests. (3) This is a memo regarding Mr. Brief and the settlement agreement. (4) A letter from Mary Marine Johnson, 206 Ocean Avenue, dated 10/6/98, in favor of the hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard. Chairman Brown said staff should have mentioned Ms. Johnson's letter at the appropriate time. COMMISSION CONCERNS Bixby Ranch Towne Center Commissioner Larson asked how long does the Commission expects the Bixby Public Hearings to last? Will we run into scheduling problems? 10 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 7 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF OCTOBER 12, 1998 Terwaive Treat Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -Suppe Staff Repo" 37 ,e Two - City Council Minutes - Oc Dec 12, 1998 Supervisors and asked that AFBC be deleted, that has not been done thus -far, in his opinion there is nowhere in this County to fit an airport, there are other alternative sites such as Ontario and March Air Force Base. Mr. Sullivan said this is merely an alert of a major potential problem for this City. There being no further comments, Mayor ProTem Campbell declared Oral Communications closed. Anaheim Bay Villas With regard to the proposed Anaheim Bay Villas, Councilman Boyd referred to the Planning Commission discussion of this item an two occasions and their request for direction from the City Council. The proposal of the applicant requests a zone change and General Plan Amendment for the property on Seal Beach Boulevard where the Shore Shop is currently located, the Commission voted against the project as they were reluctant to amend the General Plan without further input from the community with regard to that property as it relates to the entire street. Councilman Boyd moved to direct the Planning Commission to notice all property owners and businesses on Seal Beach Boulevard and within three hundred feet of the subject property regarding the request of the Musso family for a zone change and General Plan amendment. He suggested that public comments be sought from residents of the entire area relating to the street and the Musso property, as a concern of the Commission was that comments were directed only to the subject property and not the street as a whole. Councilman Doane seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. Councilman Doane questioned why the entire I street would be considered at this time, there are currently businesses that likely want to remain, he would not want a change that would require residential only in the future, his preference would be to consider proposals on a parcel by parcel basis. Councilman Boyd agreed however offered that the area as a whole needs to be looked at rather than a patchwork approach, in this case a compatible use for the Shore Shop property appears to be residential. He expressed his belief that the intent is to provide some revitalization of the street, the Musso property is zoned C-2 thus they / could put most anything on the site, however their desire is a compatible development and improvement of an entrance into j the City, his thought is to not enact a General Plan amendment that would and their proposed plan as well as impact other proposals on the street. He reiterated his desire to seek comments from the Boulevard as well as 16th f and 17th and other streets as to how this project would fit on the street. With regard to the time frame for a General Plan amendment, the Director or Development Services said if the thought is to reconsider the existing Limited Commercial ' zoning, most likely five to six months for presentation to the Flaming Commission. As to whether this would delay the Musso application, the Director said his understanding of J the motion is that the proposed project would move forward / and at some future time consider a General Plan amendment for the remainder of the street, at present the properties south of Landing to Electric are Limited Commercial, to the north there are residences and the Shore Shop. The Manager said his understanding is that the motion does not recommend any rezoning of properties south of Landing at this time. Councilman Boyd made reference again to the reluctance of the Commission to take an action that would adversely impact the remainder of the street, and expressed his opinion that the limited commercial and residential are compatible, and Page Three - City Council minutes - October 12, 1998 if other properties propose to rezone at some Point that would then be considered. Councilmeaber Campbell noted that the Muss- project is a fairly large portion of the street, if that project is constructed it may set the tone for the area, thus it may be desirable to study the issue to determine if that Ss what is wanted. Councilman Boyd noted that there are some existing businesses however the street is predominantly residential. AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane NOES: None ABSENT: Brown, Yost Motion carried SONS ENT CAi ENO P - STEM Boyd moved, second by Doane,, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except Item "C", removed for separate consideration. B. Approved the waiver of reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent to the waiver of reading shall be deemed to be given by all Councilmembers after reading of the title unless specific request Sc made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. D. Received and filed the Monthly Investment Reports for July and August, 1998. E. Received and filed the staff report relating to the receipt of California Coastal Commission status report regarding the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Plan and Draft EIS/EIR by the Federal/State Bolsa Chic& Steering Committee, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. F. Received and filed the staff report relating to the receipt of the City of Huntington Beach Report regarding the Bolas Chico Annexation Study - Questions/Comments, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. G. Received and filed the report from staff with regard to the Seal Beach Weapons Support Facility - Installation Restoration Program - Status Report regarding Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) project update, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission, Environmental Quality Control Board, and Archaeological Advisory Committee for information purposes. H. Received and filed the report from staff with regard to the receipt of the Orange County Council of Governments draft report relating to Smart Growth Strategies to Accommodate Orange County'a Future, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 4,1998 Tentative Tract Map 15832(AvOon Homes)- Supp FC Smf[ Repan 38 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission `Minutes November 4, 1998 1 2 Commission Questions 3 Commissioner Hood asked about Condition of Approval #1, limiting the roof 4 deck's extension. How much area is involved? 5 6 Mr. Whittenberg said approximately 10 feet to accommodate a 4' circular 7 stairway that goes up to the second level. This would not encroach onto the 8 sidewalk, it's encroaching up to the front property line. It will riot overhang the 9 property line. 10 11 Commissioner Cutuli asked if the stairway could be built without any overhang? 12 The stairway could let out onto the roof, facing the rear of the property. 13 14 Mr. Whittenberg said that might be possible, it would depend on the height of the 15 stairway and the orientation of the step from the balcony to the top level. 16 17 Commission Deliberation 18 19 Chairman Brown said the municipal Code pretty clearly allows this to be done. It 20 is a nonconforming structure and, as always, the Commission likes to bring 21 structures into conformance wherever possible and at least, not to exacerbate a 22 nonconforming situation. This does not do that. 23 24 MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Hood to approve Resolution No. 98-36, thus 25 approving Plan Review 98-8, subject to Conditions of Approval as set forth in the 26 staff report. 27 28 MOTION CARRIED: 4-1 29 AYES: Brown, Hood, Cutuli, Lyon 30 NOES: Larson 31 32 Appeal to City Council 33 Mr. Steele advised the Commission's decision is now final and the ten -calendar - 34 day appeal period would begin tomorrow morning. 35 36 37 4. Status Report re Anaheim Bay Villas 38 321 Seal Beach Boulevard 39 40 Staff Report 41 Mr. Whittenberg explained the Commission had considered General Plan 42 Amendment 98-1, Zone Change 98-1 and Variance 98-1 for 321 Seal Beach 43 Boulevard at a Public Hearing a few weeks ago. The Commission decided the 44 application was not appropriate for consideration of a General Plan amendment. 45 Al the time the Commission deliberated on the resolutions for denial, the City of Seal Beach Planning Commission • Minutes November 4, 1998 1 Commission opted to refer the matter to the City Council and ask for direction. 2 The Commission asked if, prior to looking again at this particular project, should 3 the review be expanded to include an evaluation of Seal Beach Boulevard from 4 Pacific Coast Highway to Electric Avenue. 5 6 The City Council considered this request. It directed the Planning Commission to 7 proceed to evaluate this project and then, once done, if the Commission feels 8 something still needs to be worked out for the remaining portions of Seal Beach 9 Boulevard, to forward that recommendation on the Council. 10 11 Since that time, the applicant has indicated they want to redesign the project to 12 try to address some of the concerns the Commission and the public expressed. 13 Therefore, staff is suggesting the Commission table this matter. Allow the 14 applicant to redesign his plan. Mr. Bartlett has indicated those plans could be 15 ready by the end of this week. 16 17 Commission Questions 18 Commissioner Larson asked if Mr. Bartlett amends the previous submittal, isn't 19 that a new application? 20 21 Mr. Whittenberg said it would be the old application, just an amended plan. Staff 22 would re -advertise and re -Notice the amended plan. It would need another 23 Public Hearing before the Commission. 24 25 Responding to a Commission comment, Mr. Whittenberg explained it needs to be 26 tabled until staff can schedule a Public Hearing, otherwise the Commission would 27 have to continue this hearing to a specific date. 28 29 Commissioner Cutuli asked about the issue of reviewing the General Plan, to be 30 studied, allowing public input. Has this idea been scrapped? 31 32 Mr. Whittenberg said there are two different aspects. The City Council instructed 33 staff that if the applicant does resubmit a plan, when staff re -Notices the Public 34 Hearing to expand the notification area beyond the 300' radius around the site. 35 The Notice must include all persons on Seal Beach Boulevard and the east side 36 of 17� Street to Electric Avenue. If the Commission recommends the Council 37 look at the rest of Seal Beach Boulevard, and if the Council concurs, there would 38 need to be another re -Notice of that Public Hearing. 39 40 MOTION by Lyon; SECOND by Hood to table consideration of the Anaheim Bay 41 Villas project proposal until revised plans are submitted. 42 43 MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 44 AYES: Lyon, Hood, Cutuli, Brown, Larson 45 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 9 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 18,1998 Temmive batt Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) . Supp PC Suff Repon 39 City of Seal Beac,. Planning Commission • Minutes of Novem,.,r 18, 1998 RECESS: 9:43 p.m. RECONVENE: 9:55 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Brown asked staff what items #4 and #5 were about? Mr. Whittenberg said these matters were scheduled for Public Hearing based on applications submitted. During Staff Concerns he will provide additional information based on City Council actions. The following two items were tabled: 4. Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Site Plan Review 98-1 Conditional Use Permits 98-16 and 98-17 Variances 98-6 and 98-7 Height Variation 98-5 Planned Sign Program 98-1 5. Conditional Use Permit 98-15 Address: Southeast Corner of Lampson Ave. & Seal Beach Blvd. 6. Anaheim Bay Villas 321 Seal Beach Boulevard Negative Declaration 98-3 General Plan Amendment 98-2 Zone Change 98-2 Staff Report The Director presented the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department for inspection]. The applicant, David Bartlett & Associates for property owner, Ellen G. Musso, et al, request approval to demolish an existing commercial structure and construct eight (8) single family, two-story residences. Mr. Whittenberg explained this matter was before the Commission on September 23, 1998 at which time the applicant requested to build nine new single family residences. The Planning Commission denied that request. The Commission then requested staff prepare the appropriate resolutions for consideration at the 18 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission' Minutes of November 18, 1998 next meeting. On October 7, 1998, the resolutions were presented to the Commission but the Commission took no action on them, instead forwarded a request to the City Council to authorize the Planning Commission to hold public hearings on Seal Beach Boulevard as a whole. On October 26" the Council instructed the Commission to finalize its deliberations on the pending application and review Seal Beach Boulevard at a future date. On November 4 , staff advised the Commission of this Council direction and requested the application be tabled until the applicant submitted a revised development proposal. The revised proposal was based on concerns expressed by the public, the Commission and the Council. The proposal now is to vary the lot sizes, create eight parcels varying in width from 26' to 30', and to build eight homes. No Variances are requested. All side setbacks will be met. Commission Questions to Staff Chairman Brown asked if this is a continued Public Hearing? Mr. Steele said this is a new Public Hearing. At the last meeting the Chair closed that Public Hearing and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council. Chairman Brown said the Brown Act prevents the Commissioners from speaking in private with parties for an application under consideration. If a Commissioner does speak with someone, he must disclose that conversation to the Commission. Mr. Steele advised the Brown Act does not prohibit conversations but if the Commissioners do have conversations outside the Record they need to disclose those conversations. Chairman Brown asked, for the Record, if any of the Commissioners have had communications with the applicant or his representatives prior to tonight's meeting? Commissioner Lyon said no, he had no communication. Commissioner Hood said he was telephoned by Mr. Bartlett who wanted to discuss the matter with him. He said he was uncomfortable doing that. Commissioner Cutuli said he was telephoned by Mr. Bartlett. This was prior to his learning that Commissioners weren't supposed to talk to applicants or their representatives. They basically discussed what the plan was going to involve. He didn't discuss any Commission decision. 19 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission • Minutes of November 18, 1998 Commissioner Larson said Mr. Bartlett had telephoned him. He told Mr. Bartlett it was not appropriate for him to discuss the matter with him. Chairman Brown said Mr. Bartlett telephoned him. He advised Mr. Bartlett that Planning Commissioners are not supposed to speak with applicants, or their representatives, prior to a Public Hearing. This would have to be disclosed. He said "What I heard was "Well that's the way it's always been done"". The Chairman indicated that as long as he's been on the Commission this is not the way things have been done. He wanted to be certain that everyone was on the same, level playing field and was abiding by the same rules. Public Hearin David Bartlett Mr. Bartlett said that in response to the Chairman's comments, neither he nor the property owner made any contacts with any of the Commissioners since they made the changes to this plan. He left a message on the Chairman's telephone answering machine that if there were any questions he could call him. The conversations he had with the Commissioners dealt with the previous plan and occurred two to three months ago. He has been busy revising the previous plan. They reviewed the videotape of the September 23r0 Commission meeting to better understand the concern of the Commission. They met with the City Manager, City Engineer and City Planning Director. They also looked at the General Plan at length as it relates to this site. They met with some of the City Council members individually and with some residents and business owners on Seal Beach Boulevard. The Musso's hosted an open house to receive input on the plan. All this information was compiled and resulted in the revised plan. He reminded the Commission of the facts regarding this site: ❑ This site contains residential uses on all sides except for one parcel. o Traffic is 1/51h the standard levels for commercial locations. ❑ The average daily trips (ADTs) are similar to other residential streets. ❑ The General Plan's Land Use Element specifically references Seal Beach Boulevard south of Landing. It does not designate the area of Seal Beach Boulevard between Landing and Pacific Coast Highway as a commercial corridor. ❑ The zoning is C-2, the most intense classification allowed. The revised application has the following changes: ❑ All Variance requests were eliminated. ❑ Project meets all Code requirements. ❑ One lot has been removed to vary the street scene. 20 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission • Minutes of November 18, 1998 o Lots are now wider than 25'. o There are three architectural motifs. Craftsman, Mediterranean and Spanish. o The front wall was eliminated in favor of an articulated half wall. Mario Musso' Property Owner Mr. Musso thanked the Commission and the community for their input on this project. They feel they have been responsive to everyone's concerns. The overwhelming comments from the community were most responsive and enthusiastic. Finally something positive will be done for this section of Seal Beach Boulevard. He presented the Commission with two letters from neighbors who are not able to attend this meeting. He explained they are attempting to down zone this site because it lacks commercial viability. Jim Goodson, Architect Mr. Goodson said the revised project, with its articulated half wall, brings a non- uniform look to the site. They have tried to more closely emulate the existing character of Old Town with its mix of architectural styles, rather than have the uniform project mode. Chairman Brown asked about the two site plans. Mr. Goodson said there were two different looks at the variable lot sizes. The plan they based all their graphics and final design on is revised option one. Grad Miller `Sandpiper Bicycle Shop Seal Beach Boulevard Mr. Miller said the City Council told the Commission to study what was best for Seal Beach Boulevard. This is a revised project and does not address what the Council wanted. The houses will kill the businesses because businesses need businesses to survive. He felt the Director slid this project by and got it on this calendar. He said he and many other merchants have not been approached or advised on the Council's direction. What's best for Seal Beach Boulevard is commercial. The City gets no money from houses. Marcia Katz ` 14 In Street, Seal Beach Ms. Katz said she was not solicited to come talk tonight but she wants to, in order to let the Commission know how she and her neighbors feel. They would like to see residential building on Seal Beach Boulevard. Increased traffic and speed would be detrimental to the area. Businesses should stay on Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. Scott Redsun' Avalon Homes Mr. Redsun introduced himself as the President of Avalon Homes and noted they are building five new residences at 12" Street and Pacific Coast Highway. He has been honored by the Musso family to develop this project if it's approved. He worked with Mr. Bartlett to revise the previous plan to meet the Commission's 21 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission • Minutes of November 18, 1998 concerns and community's concerns. There is a reason for this lot configuration. The idea was to create a minimum 20' wide house because it does a lot for the livability of a house. For example, you get a full-size, standard garage. With a 20' wide house you can get standard size bedrooms. He felt the new plan would be more aesthetically pleasing. Walter Miller' Seal Beach Boulevard Mr. Miller said this is an excellent residential project but should be in a residential area. He used the wall charts to illustrate that he views this site as a commercial area. It's more of a business street than Main Street is and it's the same width. The traffic figures are not accurate and may be of 1991 vintage. Approving this project would lake the commercial heart out of Seal Beach Boulevard. Regarding the L -C zone, nothing has happened since 1991 despite how much he wanted it to happen. Main Street, with a high parking problem, pays $100 per delinquent parking space. There is no parking problem on Seal Beach Boulevard but he was required to pay $500 per space. That's not encouraging people to come to Seal Beach Boulevard. The City wanted to put in diagonal parking but that slows people down. Main Street does not have fast traffic because they have diagonal parking and cross walks. That was supposed to happen on Seal Beach Boulevard but it never happened. "Why are we doing this whole thing without a plan?" There is no plan for Seal Beach Boulevard and businesses don't come because of it. The Commission asked Mr. Steele to restate what the Commission should do at this time as it is 10:45 p.m. Mr. Steele said the Commission needs to determine the rest of the agenda, not to hear new items and to hear Staff Concerns. The Chair indicated 5 people have asked to speak on this issue. The Chair said the Commission would take the remaining testimony until 11:30 p.m. and then finish its remaining items. Any remaining items would be carried forward to the next meeting. Seretta Fielding ' 223 Seal Beach Boulevard Seal Beach Ms. Fielding introduced herself as the owner of Growing Tree Preschool. She said that Mr. Miller's area and her area are not part of this block. What the Commission decides tonight will not change their L -C zoning. Nothing has been done on this block because it's extremely difficult to get commercial loans for that street. It is not a high enough commercial area. Banks will not look twice at it. You cannot get a residential loan for that street if you have a business on the first floor. Therefore you have to find a mixed loan, which are extremely hard to get. Therefore there is no improvement on the block. Combined with the fact that the City has not put money into the block and this has made Seal Beach Boulevard what it is today. That's not the Musso family's fault. Walt Miller also has a dream and she supported his dream as Chairman of the Seal Beach Improvement 22 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission' Minutes of November 18, 1998 Committee for four years. When the City got the money, that voted -on project was to go forward but it never happened. Mr. Miller doesn't want Mr. Musso to have this project because it would hurt his business. 75% of Seal Beach Boulevard lots are residential uses. She urged the Commission to approve this project and breathe new life into Seal Beach Boulevard. Les Metterfield ' Sacramento Mr. Metterfield introduced himself as a Musso family member by marriage. He lives in Sacramento. He responded to some of Mr. Miller's comments by asking if the City Council directed the Planning Commission to look at this as a site- specific property? Also, Greg Miller brought up the issue of sales tax. While it should not be an issue, the Shore Shop has a totally different operation than a bicycle shop, as it's more intensive in the areas of management, employment and inventory. The sales tax issue is not going to be an issue at this site because the Shore Shop will not be able to continue doing business in this location and needs to relocate. Regarding traffic, they would not come up with facetious traffic figures/counts, those come from studies. Regarding businesses assisting each other, Seal Beach Boulevard has one side of the street that must remain empty because of the Navy. The family looked into what would be best for this site. He noted Dick Mitchell had trouble getting tenants into his new, nearby buildings. If Mr. Mitchell had been quickly successful, they would have given more consideration to commercial operations around the corner. If the Mitchell property is still not leased out in two years, and the Musso property is a much inferior property, then commercial is not the way to go. They feel strongly that this will be an excellent entrance to Seal Beach. He urged approval. Joan Kim' Economic Research Associates Ms. Kim said Economic Research Associates is a real estate consulting firm. They were engaged to evaluate the potential effects of the coastal areas ability to serve the commercial facility needs of its visitors that would result in a zoning change of the subject site from a commercial use to a residential use. Their research involved a review of the site; it's attributed and adjacent areas and uses. The reviewed existing visitor -serving commercial areas in Seal Beach and surrounding areas, including a survey of major retail centers in the area, including sites for future visitor -serving developments. They also reviewed retail sales in Seal Beach and Orange County. Based on their research they found the Seal Beach site is poor as a commercial location from a market perspective. Seal Beach Boulevard west of Pacific Coast Highway functions as a residential collector, rather than a commercial corridor. This site has extremely low traffic counts that are only 1/5�` standard levels. There is no anchor tenant nearby. There is no concentration of retail uses and low pedestrian traffic. Visibility of the site is poor and the site does not satisfy the criteria for neighborhood centers or convenience -related commercial uses. Population densities are particularly low, at about 3,200 residents per square mile compared to the desired levels of 4,000 to 6,000 residents per square mile. The site is removed from established visitor - serving commercial and resident serving corridors. There are two major 23 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission . Minutes of November 18, 1998 concentrations: Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. Main Street is the primary visitor -serving commercial district. Pacific Coast Highway is the main arterial through the coastal area and serves both visitors and residents. Review of retail sales data indicates that Seal Beach is not presently under -served with respect to visitor -related facilities. Existing visitor -serving retail establishments in Seal Beach perform approximately 30% below the County average in terms of sales per outlet. And Seal Beach also performs below County averages in terms of sales per capita. These factors indicate that the retail stock is more than adequate to satisfy the area's potential near-term and future requirements. Finally, three vacant properties have been designated for hotel, restaurant, retail and related visitor -serving uses. These are the DWP property, the State Lands parcel and the Hellman property. These sites are better suited for visitor -serving uses than the subject property in terms of their location attributes. Considering these factors and specifically noting that the site does not satisfy basic retail selection criteria, this site is removed from the major concentrations of visitor - oriented businesses which are in close proximity to the beach. There are properties better suites for future development. They concluded that the change from General Commercial to residential would not negatively impact the coastal districts ability to provide for its visitors. Lehua Gonzalez * 1639 Ocean Avenue, Seal Beach Ms. Gonzalez was concerned about high-density commercial projects. She was most concerned in having this site developed as high density commercial and therefore supported this residential project. She felt it would improve the area. Vaness Joy * 321 171" Street, Seal Beach Ms. Joy spoke in favor of this project, saying the Musso's have complied with all the Commission's concerns. Seal Beach Boulevard is not a commercial area. She is a mortgage broker and agrees that it would be very difficult to get commercial loans or mixed use loans. It is unlikely that more commercial would go there. Seal Beach Boulevard is just as much an entry to Seal Beach as 12"' Street is. The City spent a lot of money on 121" Street. Her hope is that with the Commission's approval of this development it would be a catalyst for improvement of Seal Beach Boulevard. She felt it looks trashy now, nothing has been done, the Navy's property is dirt and leaves, there are abandoned cars on the other side. She said the Commission holds a fiduciary responsibility to the constituents to approve this project. Jim Jessup * 250 17"" Street, Seal Beach Mr. Jessup said Seal Beach Boulevard is a street in limbo --- it's commercial and it's residential. Serious commercial development seems like a long shot, without the City itself getting seriously involved. It hasn't happened in 15 years. He didn't see it happening anytime soon. This project is a great way to initiate appropriate change and positive change for Seal Beach Boulevard. 24 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission ' Minutes of November 18, 1998 Rebuttal: Dave Bartlett Mr. Bartlett said that as part of the Notice process, as directed by the City Council, the area was expanded, everybody was notified so they would have the opportunity to comment. Also, Seal Beach Boulevard is predominantly a residential street, notwithstanding zoning. There are 10 businesses on Seal Beach Boulevard and there are 46 residential units on Seal Beach Boulevard. The traffic counts are not there to support commercial development and the surrounding land use is not appropriate. Regarding the issue of spot zoning, the City Attorney could address this best. Regarding the businesses south of Landing Avenue not being able to function properly if this project is built, they don't feel that's the case. These are service businesses. There's a travel agency, an accountant, a pre-school. People know these businesses exist. Commissioner Cutuli asked what the date of the traffic studies was? Mr. Bartlett said the City Engineer gave the traffic counts to him and he assumed they were up to date. They reflected 5700 ADTs on 121" Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Electric and 5900 ADTs on Seal Beach Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Electric. The Chair closed the Public Hearing, Commission Deliberation Commissioner Cutuli said Mr. Bartlett quoted from the City's General Plan and asked if there were anything else that would change what Mr. Bartlett said? Mr. Whittenberg said there are two different land use designations along Seal Beach Boulevard for commercial uses. For Pacific Coast Highway to Landing Avenue the General Plan designation is General Commercial, the most intense commercial use allowed. For Landing Avenue to Electric Avenue is L -C, limited commercial. That's the language he was referring to. It was created by the City in 1991 based on concerns from many people hear this evening, that C-2 zoning didn't allow potential for expansion of retail uses in that area because of parking requirements. The City, in working with the neighborhood, came up with a blended concept — some small, professional retail office uses with the potential to put residences above. There are two different land use designations in that area. Land Use designations are not etched in concrete. Mr. Steele clarified that he did advise the Commission that all their actions tonight would be final but he wanted to add that the Commission is acting in an advisory capacity on this issue and the City Council has the final decision on a zone change. Chairman Brown asked Commissioner Hood if he was prepared to vote on this tonight as he had said he didn't have time to adequately prepare for this meeting? 25 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission -Minutes of November 18, 1998 Commissioner Hood said he was willing to go along with what the other Commissioners want. Chairman Brown noted this project is in his Councilmanic district. He indicated one of the speakers said the Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to the City and to the residents and he agreed. It is his hope that people feel the Commission votes what it feels is in the best interest of the people. This is a better residential project than the previous project but that doesn't mean it's a good residential project. He likes the fact they eliminated the Variances and setbacks. "It would still be my strong preference to see 30' wide lots in this area". This is a keystone property for Seal Beach Boulevard and it determines the nature of the street. The developer might like us to believe that we can change just this one section and the rest of Seal Beach Boulevard would not change. But, as was said at the prior hearing, it would change the nature of Seal Beach Boulevard. It changes the entrance as you drive up -- it looks like a residential street. "I fully believe, and I think Mr. Bartlett in one of his more honest moments will agree, that what this will do is domino Seal Beach Boulevard into residential". It's universally agreed that something needs to be done with Seal Beach Boulevard, as it's an eyesore. He thought there is movement in the City towards doing that. Sometimes it takes a project to get the ball rolling or somebody with vision. "But I don't feel that we should be in such a rush to change the nature of the street. There's very limited commercial sites in Seal Beach and this is one of the commercial boulevards, like it or not" The Musso's do have property rights, they have a commercially zoned property and they can do with it what they please. But when they want to change it that's when the Planning Commission comes into play. He found it impossible to look at this property as an isolated unit. It must be looked at in terms of Seal Beach Boulevard from Electric Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway. "I am still going to vote against it because I'm not convinced that it's the right thing to do for the Boulevard." He talked about Walt Miller's vision for that section of Seal Beach Boulevard and said he was not sure the City has made a good effort to do anything towards that. The impetus must come from the City; the City has to change the street for that vision to become effective for it to become a viable commercial area. "I am not willing to throw in the towel on the commercial. I think we've just seen the City Council vote last night to put a commercial development in an area where people are violently against it. I think it was ... who said that ... I pay the bills for the City and we need to have revenue ... Councilman Yost. 1 thought that was a great comment. Perhaps a brave one politically. But, you have to recognize that the City does need revenue. It does need commercial area. You cannot live on residential properties. They are a net loser for the City. If it is the will of the Commission, and I am only one vote, to have the residential then I'd still like to see 30' wide properties. And let me address that. This is a key area. It's first impressions. People are coming into Seal Beach. This is the first impression that they are going to see. If you will drive down 2 n Street, 3rtl Street or 0 Street where most people would agree, those are the best looking streets in Seal Beach. As you 26 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission' Minutes of November 18, 1998 drive down them, one of the reasons ... is they're 30', 35' wide lots. If you go to come of the other streets, that time I said this I got into trouble so I'm not going to name these streets, but where you have nominally 25' wide lots, the narrower lots, it just doesn't look as good. And 1 think if you want to change this street into a residential street then we ought to make a premiere residential street -- at least looking. Or at least, not look any worse than any other.... ". He thought the first residential concept wasn't good and this is much, much better. "I'm not in a big rush to approve its conversion into primarily residential". He received a phone message that said the Musso family was a very nice family and we ought to do them a special favor. He agreed they are a very nice family but indicated the Commission doesn't do special favors here, everyone is treated fairly. Commissioner Larson said the homeowner's say the City Council and Planning Commission defer to the commercial properties because it's income. The commercial users say they defer to the residences against the commercial uses. The fact is, we try to figure out what's best for the City. He tries to look at Seal Beach Boulevard objectively and added, "I know that's impossible". Some people see a commercial street with houses in there. "I see a residential street with a few commercial uses". At first blush, driving around Seal Beach Boulevard it said to him that it was a residentially zoned area that allowed home occupations. There were houses that were allowed to use them for commercial purposes. He agreed that his project would not "make or break the City" but noted that after 14 years he would have to believe nothing is going to be done that would enhance that area to a full commercial use. He thought it would look pretty, nice and inviting to come north on Pacific Coast Highway and see a residential area that leads into a mixed-use home occupation -type area. The City isn't all residential, and it isn't all commercial. It's a lovely city with lovely mixed uses. "I think this will enhance the City". Referencing the Chairman's comments he said, "I realize ... that you have a feeling, honestly held, that that is a strong commercial area of the City. To me, Main Street is the highlight of Seal Beach ... I think we should vote to recommend to the City Council to consider this zone change and General Plan change and let them determine if they want to go further with a ... study of Seal Beach Boulevard. I think houses won't change what the street looks like...". He planned to vote yes. Commissioner Lyon had no comments. Commissioner Hood said that because this proposal is in the Chairman's district "I'm certainly not going to be so arrogant as to try to ... second guess you". Chairman Brown said, "Please, you represent both your district and the City. appreciate the flattery but ... vote your conscience". Commissioner Cutuli said he had been giving this project a lot of thought. He felt badly for the businesses there, if they would be downgraded because of housing 7i City of Seal Beacn Planning Commission' Minutes of Novemoer 18, 1998 Instead of commercial but it seems to him that if he had that business, and it was failing, he would want to do something that was good and viable. This seems like a good plan but he would like to see the 30' wide lots. He noted some of the eight lots are 30' wide. The businesses that are there existed before the 1992 decision when they were going to try to change it into a more commercial area. 11 they haven't done it in this time, six years, it probably won't happen.. He would vote to approve. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by _ to deny General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2 at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard. MOTION FAILED for lack of a Second MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Cutuli to approve General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2 for 321 Seal Beach Boulevard. Before the vote, Chairman Brown said he was going to request that the maker of the Motion make the recommendation that they have 30' wide lots. He asked Commissioner Larson if he would do that? Commissioner Larson asked if the Chairman was now saying that it would not be a condition of the Commission's recommendation of approval? It would be saying that the Planning Commission recommends this project and suggests the City Council would consider 30' wide lots as the minimum width? Chairman Brown said he was saying that the Commission recommends approval and recommends 30' wide lots. The City Council is free to do with it was they wish. That underlines the point. Commissioner Larson said, "As I see it though, the Commission should vote for the project as it is. And I don't want it interpreted that we didn't vote for it as it is but would have voted for it if the lots were 30"'. Commissioner Hood said there is only so much space and if you have 8 lots then you have to have 240' and they don't have 240'. Chairman Brown said "That's right, that means 7 lots". Commissioner Hood said, "If you have to cut down the lot size, you have to cut down the number of lots. You're proposing changing their whole project". Chairman Brown said "That's right. I'm trying to get the best residential project for the City. That's what we do. We very rarely take the first thing that a developer comes in ... again it's your Motion". 28 City of Seal Beacn Planning Commission " Minutes of November 18, 1998 Commissioner Larson said he didn't want to get in the Chairman's thoughts [Could not hear this comment] as long as the Commission moves to recommend this project to the City Council with a further recommendation that the City Council consider and evaluate the possibility to change to 30' wide lots. That way there would be a recommendation for a zone change plus a General Plan change from the Commission and a further recommendation the Council consider 30' wide lots. Chairman Brown said, "Okay. So that's your motion". Mr. Steele advised the Commission needed to be sure the Second agreed to the amendment and explained the resolutions are as follows: 0 98-39: Negative Declaration a 98-40: General Plan Amendment 0 98-41: Zone Change MOTION AMENDED by Larson; SECOND by Cutuli that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of Negative Declaration 98—, General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2 for 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, through the adoption of Resolutions Numbered 98-39, 98110 and 98- 41. Further, adding a sentence at the end of Section 6 to Resolution No. 98-41 that the Commission recommends that the City Council consider minimum 30' wide lot widths. (Page 16 of the resolution). MOTION CARRIED: 4-1 AYES: Larson, Cutuli, Lyon, Hood NOES: Brown Mr. Whittenberg advised everyone that this matter would now go on to the City Council for their consideration at another set of Public Hearings. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg talked about the Bixby Old Ranch Towne project and summarized the City Council's changes to it. He provided the Commission a written summary. COMMISSION CONCERNS Communication with Applicants Commissioner Cutuli suggested staff institute procedures for better communication with applicants and more complete record keeping. He noted there have been conflicting stories between various applicants and staff. At his office they write things down on the patient's chart. This would be good for the 29 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental planning Commission Staff Report February 2, 2001 ATTACHMENT 10 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14,1998 Te..ive T.t MaplS832(Avalon Homes) -Supp PCS,aff Re,n 40 Page Twenty -One - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 Attorney noted that the Council had been provided a revised copy of the Ordinance reflecting the Specific Municipal Code section numbers, an additional section, 11-120, relating to Mechanical Failure of Meters, also, the penalties within the Ordinance have been combined into one section. To the question of penalty amount, the Assistant reported it is currently $14. Mayor ProTem Campbell invited members of the audience wishing to speak to thin Stem to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Kr. Stan Anderson, Balboa Drive, spoke favorably of the placement of parking meters, the revenue therefrom can be used to make improvements to Main Street, maintenance and upkeep of the lots, and inquired if any spaces have been lost in the off - Main lot in the 100 block and if meters are going to be installed on the Street itself. Councilmember Yost responded they are not at this time, these meters will he tried first, and reported that a resident of District Three, Mr. Hartwick, asked that his opposition to parking meters be reported. There being no other comments, Mayor ProTem Campbell declared the public hearing closed. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the first reading of Ordinance Number 1441 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH REGULATING THE USE, FEES AND HOURS OF OPERATION OF PARKING METERS IN DESIGNATED OFF-STREET MUNICIPAL PARKING LOTS AND THE PARKING AND CONTROL OF VEHICLES THEREON." By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinance Number 1441 was waived. AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost NOES: None VACANCY: One Motion carried VILLASPUBLIC HEARING - ANAHEIM BAY NEGATIVEBOULEVARD - ZONE CHANGE Mayor ProTem Campbell declared the public hearing open to consider the Anaheim Bay Villas project as revised. The City Clerk certified that the notice of public hearing had been advertised as required by law, reported receipt of a petition in support of the conversion from commercial to residential land use containing one hundred fifteen signatures, a communication from Dennis and Kathy Courtemarche in support of the Villas project, and a communication from Walter Miller in opposition to the project, copies of all having been provided the Council. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, noted the items under consideration are the Negative Declaration that has been prepared and circulated relating to the environmental impacts of the project, there are no significant impacts created by this proposal, the other issues are the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, changing the present land use entitlements from general commercial designation to a residential medium density designation to allow a maximum of eight building lots for single family residences on the subject property. He noted that the Planning Commission had recommended denial of the project as proposed in September, 1998, the applicant amended the application and the revised project was approved by the Commission by a four to one vote on November lath. The proposal is to change the land use from C-2 to residential medium density with a minimum lot size of two thousand five hundred square feet, the revised application proposes lots varying from 26 to 30 feet in width, 100 feet in depth. On display was a site plan of the property and Page Twenty -Two - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 elevations of what the structures Would look like once constructed in accordance with the plans submitted at this Point. Councilman Yost noted that there ware some issues brought forward with regard to uses for all of Seal Beach Boulevard to Which he inquired what that may have been. The Director said initially the Planning Commission recommendation to the Council, as part of their denial, was to request Council direction to review all of the land uses on Seal Beach Boulevard from Pacific Coast Highway to Electric Avenue, that request came to the Council, in turn the Council action Was for the Commission to conclude review of this application and then look at the remainder of Seal Beach Boulevard from this property to Landing and south to Electric all at one time, that review will be placed an the Commission forecast based upon the Council decision on this project. MrDave Bartlett, representing the applicant, presented a elide overview describing how this project got to where it is today, the process, the project location, existing conditions, the planning considerations that were taken into account in developing the project proposal, the project description, justification of Council approval, and said the applicant will address the changed retail environment. He noted that preliminary meetings were held commencing last April or May, a Planning Commission meeting in September, subsequently a community meeting at the Shore Shop, a second Commission meeting in November with an expanded notification area, as requested by Council, within three hundred feet of all of Seal Beach Boulevard, this meeting too has an expanded notification area. The existing conditions on the site were described as the Shore Shop, a beauty salon, and a deli, photographs were shown of the Boulevard as it currently szists, the alley and loading zone. Some of the planning cons Sderatlons when developing this proposal was the exist Sng zoning, the General Plan, surrounding land use, Seal Beach Boulevard traffic, as well as the Seal Beach Boulevard Concept Plan from 1986, the existing general commercial designation for the property is the most intense allowed in the City Code, includes uses such as automobile and boat sales, auto repair, mortuaries, etc., and with a conditional use permit the use could be even more intense, with car washes, lumber yards, etc., those uses not felt appropriate for this location. He pointed out that the surrounding uses are primarily residential, north and south of Landing as well, with existing commercial along Pacific Coast Highway and the adjacent corner, this project will complete the puzzle of residential uses in this neighborhood, with views of Anaheim Bay and the Pacific Ocean to the east. With regard to traffic, Mr. Bartlett stated that Seal Beach Boulevard is very low level in terms of traffic count, a count of 5,900 ADT In were obtained from the City Engineering Department, as an example, 12th Street is 5,900 ADT's and is primarily a residential street, and as heard during the Bixby hearing a typical commercial corridor is 30,000 to 40,000 ADT's. In accordance with the Concept Plan of 1986 there was to be down zoning implemented south of Landing however basically it ignored the properties north of Landing, this proposal Sc a request for that down zoning north of Landing, since 1986 to 1998 there has been no programa and it is hoped this will jump start some improvements for the area. He further described the proposed eight homes as four bedrooms, three and a half bathe, courtyards, garage will alley access, and views that will be maximized from those residential units. The project modifications are that the variance adjacent to the mini - mart has been eliminated, also eliminated the zero lot line Page Twenty -Three - City Council Minutes - December 16, 1998 development, the number of lots has been reduced from nine to eight, the lot widths are varied from 26 to l0 feet, vh ich in turn allows a standard size garage on the property, the six foot linear wall has been eliminated along gsealsetbacks Beach Boulevard, varied architectural styles, all have been met, the street scene is felt to be improved by adding soma architectural variety, additional landscaping and street scope. He too noted the neighborhood petition in favor of the project, most of the Boulevard businesses in favor ns vel 1, this proposal has attempted to respondtoall of the Planning Commission issues, the loss of g eommarcial land use is leas than ono quarter of one percent on n citywide basis and is not considered to he significant, Ue C-2 land use is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, the Boulevard is really a residential atreet with such uses on all sides, the project is consistent with all General Plan zoning policies, there is compliance with the ce no housing program alas required, and thebe a contribution n the CSty' project is already subdivided for residential lots. Mr. Marie Muaso, co-owner of the Share Shop and the property for uncil located a! 121 Seal Beach Boulevard, their can, of this redevelopment and down zoning project, the staff, Planning Commission, and Council members for their valuable input throughout the development of this proposed plan, the neighbors end community as well for their support, to this there was a comprehensive effort to respond to the needs of the community. It has bertivecandaginq that overwhelming comments have been supp enthusiastic, the most common comment is that finally 1 something is going to be done to improve Seal Beach Boulevard aesthetically, and he noted that those improvements are with private sector funds, not City. Hr. Musso explained that after being a retailer at this property location for thirty years their attempt to down zona from commercial to residential is simply because the property lack. commercial viability, that due to the existing competitive retail environment of the 9o's and the physical location of the store with a low car count and foot traffic, the Shore Shop needs to relocate to a more robust commercial atmosphere, a retail business today can no longer stand alone without complimentary stores and large anchors to attract customers, The City Drive is a classic example, and not only are anchors necessarybut also entertainment centers of some type to be a successful retailer. He said they have been very unsuccessful in attempting to lease other portions of Shore Village to credible tenants, comments are generally that it is an inferior retail location and does not warrant the capital investment of proven businesses. Mr. Muss. stated the feasibility of putting a nice, full service restaurant on the premises had also been investigated withitsiw andthelaistion tha lackds of the beach environment,negatives required parking, more importantly is the non -conformity of the existing land use, also, the close proximity to existing ly require restricted hours of residential homes would like which is known to be necessary operation and alcohol sales, to propel restaurants. He emphasized that a ten thousand square foot retail outlet no longer effectively works at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, this comes from thirty years demandenot the Doneumerretail tadaynesand Muesonrespectively the requested Council approval 01 the down zoning and alloying propertythis compatible with residential neighborhood.CouncilmanDoane e noted hieing support of the concept of this project however had been concerned with losing this business, and inquired if there Page Twenty -Four - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 will be consideration given to relocating within the City, pointing out existing vacancies in the Leisure world and sossmcar Centers. Mr. Musso responded that he is, however one of the things that need, to be done is for him to ask his customers where they would like to see the Shop locate, it is important too that the image be maintained, while the Rossmoor and Leisure World areas are appealing they may not have the vitality or image that his business requires, he would envision a location in the more immediate beach area whether that be Pacific Coast Highway, possibly on Main Street, the Lucky or Vona Center, contact has been made with a number of people. He noted that his biggest limitation with regard to relocating is from a financial standpoint until the project goes through no approval process at the City and Coastal Commission levels, yet they are earnest about locating in the City. Mayor Pro To Campbell invited members of the public wishing to speak Lo thia Stem to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Mr. Victor Grgas, 1'U 'treat, stated in 1986 he requested the City Council to endorse the concept of preparing the Seal Beach Boulevard Revitalization Plan, they did, and the better part of a year was spent working on net Plan with resident, of the neighborhood and with the assistance of Mr. Bartlett, to create a unique and special atmosphere along Seal Beach Boulevard and to foster improvements to the area. The two key components were the issue of uses and how to deal with improvements to the street, a key component was of course the Share Shop, a destination retailer that attracted business from a fairly large geographic area. Mr. Grgas i said he could not agree more with the comments of Mr. Musso as the original Plan, without the financial resources, it hoe ,.-,what gone by the wayside, although it is good to hear that the City itself is looking at some Improvements to the Boulevard, yet the retail industry and environment has since changed, and note is now a number of stores that sell merchandise that only the Shore Shop sold then, consequently to find a ten thousand square foot user location in no configuration of the existing store would be virtually impossible to do. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to continue this meeting past the 11:00 P.M. adjournment hour. AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost NOES: None VACANCY: One Motion carried Mr. Grgas continued, stating that even though it is difficult to sae the Share Shop close, for nem to stay and try to continue business could be disastrous given todays marketplace. Thoughts then go to what is best for the street, improvements, landscaping, properties well maintained, ate. and home ownership is the only way to go short of doing redevelopment of the whole street, which is not going to happen, the biggest problem with the Boulevard was the mixture of uses, half of one use, half of another, it is not believed that that is going to change, people have tried, there were problems with mixed use development funding, it is difficult. He said this is a good proposal, a definite improvement to no area, and emphasized his support of this project. Me. Seretta Fielding, fifteen year Seal Beach Boulevard resident, said she had been the chairperson of the committee to improve Seal Beach Boulevard, the nought and effort was to make the Boulevard look better aesthetically, market it as retail, Page Twenty -Five - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 unfortunately that plan never came about, the financial availability vas not there to make it happen. Ms. Fielding asked for approval of the project proposed. Mr. Scott Aedaon, President of Avalon Homes, stated his firm is building five homes in the Cove area, and he has been chosen by the Mosso family to build the proposed eight houses if the project is approved. Mr. Aedson said he became involved in the design of these homes after the first submittal to the P1aMing Commleslon, it is felt this proposal maximizes use and the best use of massing, differing lot widths, two types o[ roofing materials, four architectural styles, five ar six color schemes, and is felt will bs a beautiful at to Seal Beach. Mayor ProTem Campbell inquired as to how far away from the Naval weapons Station arc will !hese home. be, to which the Director of Development Services responded that the arc does not cross Seal Beach Boulevard, rather, believed to be to the easterly fence line. Mr. Lee Nederveld said he was a member of the Mosso family by marriage, his career primarily real estate development, because of that has be.. involved with this property for a number of years. Mr. Nederveld said he wished to touch on some of the positives of this development submittal, the entrance to the City on this street is going to become very attractive within a few months with landscape and hardscape improvements, a start of the revitalization of this street that is so badly needed, as was said, the down zoning will generate less auto traffic on a daily basis, without the down zoning the traffic would be as is or the property developed with a use generating more traffic, noted that the surrounding neighbors want this project to go forward as evidenced by the communications, this project is only a half acre yet will have a major positive impact on Nose entering the City from Pacific Coast Highway and from the 405 Freeway, the City will receive $80,000 in recreation and park fees, about $135,000 in building fees, will receive the eleven percent utility tax from those homes, additional properly taxes, the assessed value will increase from about $400,000 to an excess of $5 million after the homes are built and purchased. He mentioned the study that determined the present zoning on this property is incompatible with Surrounding uses, not a well suited zoning for this location, and if one looks at this block, minus the retail store at the corner of PCH and the Boulevard, every other use is residential, with this project every use will be residential. Mr. Nederveld requested Council approval of this project. Ms. Vanessa Joe, lith Street, said she and her neighbors, having left because of the lateness of the hour, have expressed their support for this project. She noted that Seal Beach Boulevard by virtue of its name is a major gateway into the City, it is hoped this development will be a start of improvements of the entire street, upon completion this project will make the 000 block entirely residential, the 200 block needs considerable cleanup, the businesses that are operating are doing so from residential '- buildings. As a mortgage broker she advised that there is vary little commercial money to be had, and virtually impossible to obtain money for a mixed use like the businesses with apartments on the second level. Ms. Joe noted that most all of the neighbors are for this proposal, the Musso family has worked hard to address the concerns of the Planning Commission, and requested approval of this project. Nr. Jia Goodman, architect, maid he was present to answer any questions of the Council. Mr. Greg Miller, Sandpiper Bike Shop, noted approval of this project by the Planning Commission except one member, the project in his district. This has been said is a gateway to the community, questioned who is going to lend money to put eight houses on Page Twenty -Six - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 the corner of one of the busiest intersections in town, who is going to want to live there. He mentioned the Council approval of the Bixby project, commercial rather than residential, now this is commercial use being turned into residential, he criticized developers, the process, not considering what is best for the City. Mr. Miller described the Musso plan as beautiful, but asked if it is best for the Boulevard, stating that there is not one house from Electric into Los Alamitos, there are low residential apartments, no houses, now it is proposed to put eight beautiful houses amongst run down residential apartments, people talking about these beautiful houses have no idea as to what is beet for the Boulevard. He said this was turned back to the Commission for A survey of what is beet for the whole Boulevard, Claimed no survey was done. He mentioned that the Musso'• have two tenants on their property, neither of those businesses are in favor, if the Shore Shop doesn't survive that does not mean that another business can not be there, just replace it with other commercial. Mr. Miller was again critical of passing this project at a late hour, not reviewing his father's letter, nor the problems at hand, not going out and seeking the opinion of the businesses, and the ability of the Council to vote decisions for his street. He argued that the Council needs to work together, are supposed to represent the City not a developer, claimed that Mr. Muss. does not live here, says he is going to put his business in Seal Beach but needs an anchor, where is that coming from, Main Street businesses make it without an anchor, said he has proved that by his business of eighteen V years, again, talk to .the businesses, who cares about what 17th Street thinks, they have an alley that backs the Boulevard side. Mr. Miller claimed that the tape of the meeting will go to the Coastal Commission hearing. There being no further comments, Mayor ProTem Campbell declared the public hearing closed. Mayor ProTem Campbell inquired as to how far from the lot line will the northerly most residence be, to which the Director responded six feet. Councilman Boyd noted that he has spoken with the Miller's and many people before and after being elected, made reference to the statement that Mr. Bartlett in fact was the architect of the Seal Beach Boulevard Plan in 1986 to revitalize that street, there were a number of people involved in that Plan, the Plan designed to secure an anchor tenant for the Boulevard aside from the Shore Shop, who, at that time was consider the anchor but it was known another was needed, and that has not been accomplished in the twelve years since. The Plan was designed to bring a new landscape to the street, a hardscape, theme, diagonal parking, slower traffic, all of the things that have been talked about with regard to the Musso project, the difference being that that was a commercial and limited commercial proposal, which makes an argument against "a spot zoning issue, in affect the area is spot zoned at the present time, comments have been sada as to the difficulty in obtaining financing for a limited commercial zone. He said he would think that if this street were viable commercially with possibly six thousand trips a day that some developer that knows how to develop and market commercial property would have sought this street out and developed it as commercial property during the past twelve years, there has not even been an indication of interest, that is not due to a lack of effort by the City, it is the lack of interest on the part of the private investor. Councilman Boyd pointed out that six thousand car trips a day is a residential collector street, Main Street averages three to four times that, the six thousand is twenty -Siva Page Twenty -Seven - City Council Minutes - December 14, 1998 hundred people going to and coming home from work with a thousand in between, to which he asked if that would support a significant commercial investment by anyone, obviously not, that is 'by this application. In looking at this area from 1988 until 1998 his belief is that this street is best suited as residential, there needs to be significant bardacape improvements, as discussed under the Pavement Management Plan, underground utilities, new storm drains that can accommodate more than a twenty year rainfall, sewer and water line replacements, all of those will occur on the Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Electric Avenue, this is the result of the City moving forward with a vision. Councilman Boyd said his desire is an entryway that is suitable for this community, a feature of attractive, custom homes, not just twenty -foot lots, with the deletion of one lot from the plan the widths vary, they have varied the architectural styles as well. He questioned the possibility of widening the parkways on both sides of the street, particularly in front of the Base to create a larger parkway feel as one approaches Seal Beach Boulevard, possibly a median area between PCH into the project site to create some monumentation such as 'Old Town Seal Beach$ as an attractive entryway that could be cooperatively landscaped. Mr. Bartlett explained that as part of the project there will be reconstruction of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and if there are new improvements as part of the Boulevard Improvement Plan this project can be part of that, rather than rebuilding the curbs, gutters and sidewalks in their existing location they could be rebuilt to the satisfaction of the City in a somewhat different location, as far as monumentation he agreed that something should be done to enhance the str.atscape, yet there would need to be some reasonable monetary cap. Councilman Boyd noted the reduction of homes from nine to eight thus the difference in subdivision fees, suggesting monumentation monies within the range of that $10,000. Mr. Nederveld expressed the willingness of the applicant to put the $10,000 towards monumentation, that would be something that would create additional beauty that is desired on that street. As to the sidewalk, curbs and gutters it is understood the City will be developing plans for the entire of the Boulevard, therefore a condition would be necessary to assure that will not stop development of the project, if the improvements are not yet determined as to what they will be, the existing could remain and the money could be paid or bonds obtained .0 that fund. are available for those improvements when the entire street is done, the desire would be that it not deter the project. Councilman Boyd said he felt that would be acceptable and work within the guidelines of the City, it would not be expected to interfere with the time frame for the Musso project, if approved, at this point rehabilitation of the Boulevard is anticipated to commence in the first quarter of fiscal year 2000. What in envisioned is knolls on the corners with canopy type trees and a small entry median to create an environment that feels residential rather than the vast openness that currently exists, and it is quite certain the speed limit will be likewise be reduced. Councilman Boyd said with the private investment he sees this as an opportunity to begin significant revitalisation of Seal Beach Boulevard, the existing businesses will be encouraged to remain, the street in self- limiting, to create an environment that is all commercial and not residential poses the same problems that there are on Main Street with traffic, parking, noise, congestion, all of the issues that residents have battled with the businesses for years, to create that same environment on Seal Beach Boulevard would not be healthy, the opportunity Page Twenty -Eight - City Council Minutyes - December 14, 1998 to reshape that area of the town should not be allowed to go by, this is down zoning, the highest and beat economic use of the property, it has been heard that commercial can not sustain itself there, there has not been private investment in that street for many years, in 1986 there was a Plan but no private investment, this applicant is willing to make the private investment. Councilman Yost deemed this to be a complicated issue, he has had some involvement and discussion with Mr. Bartlett, initially he was not pleased with the proposal however was looking at it from the standpoint of nine homes and zero lot linea and sharing a wall with the liquor store and bate shop, since then the project has been revised and is more reasonable. He expressed his feeling that there is no good answer with regard to this particular area, he understands the rights of the owner that wants to do something they desire with their property, there are in fact nine lots, he understands the residential proposal as well as that is most profitable, understand. too the concern of Mr. Miller that by developing residential that may negatively impact the existing business&:, which is not what is desired, as this will increase values of the existing properties. The argument can be made that the City has not done enough to make it a viable commercial street, on the other hand it has been said that no one hoc been willing to invest in net area, said also that there is no commercial money available for that street, it is a down zoning, noted that no one ever raze. residential for commercial, once commercial is gone it is gone, this City ranks thirtieth out of thirty-one cities in terms of commercial, that is something that brings revenue to the City, it is difficult to balance all of these issues with regard to this particular property. Councilman Yost said even if he were to vote for this project he may not be too pleased, while the designation is commercial it is still in the public domain, whether it be a business or a restaurant there are view. that are available for enjoyment of the public, once it is turned into residential homes that is gone forever, yet he also agrees to some degree with the rights of the person(s) who own the property, it is felt they have made a good faith effort to bring the project into reason, they have removed his major objection of zero lot lines, of some disadvantage to the property owner is the liquor and bait stores built to the property line. Councilman Yost said he would like to find some way to amours that the existing businesses stay and that they are supported, he would not like to see this project be their demise. Councilman Boyd offered that if this project is moved forward and a significant reinvestment is seen as a residential street and it is seen that business want to move, inquired if there is some type of assistance program that the City could do to help with their relocation within the City, possibly through efforts of staff or a limited commitment of dollars. The City Attorney confirmed that staff may provide help to businesses and there are certain economic incentives. Councilman Boyd said he would make the commitment of staff assistance to businesses to identify retail locations. etc. Councilman Doane moved to approve Negative Declaration 98-3, General Plan Amendment 98-2, and Zone Change 98-2 for 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, the Anaheim Bay Villas. Councilman Yost seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. To Mayor ProTem Campbell the City Attorney advised that the motion could include all three actions however the Negative Declaration should be the first acted upon. The City Attorney directed attention to the staff recommendation that Page Twenty -Nine - City Council minutes - December 14, 1998 no second reading be held on the Ordinance approving the zone change until such time an the tract map is approved, however BY. Bartlett has said that in -lieu of a tract map they may consider application for a lot adjustment, in that case staff would recommend that there be some type of agreement with respect to the issues that the applicant has agreed to, explaining that typically the conditions for in - lieu fees, park fees, the $10,000, etc. would be applied to a tract map, again, if there is no tract map the recommendation to Council would be to not approve second reading of the Ordinance unless there is an agreement signed by the property owner to provide the benefits to the City as agreed to at this meeting. Mayor ProTem Campbell agreed with the prior concern of removing revenue generating commercial and replacing it with residential that does not generate revenue, however it can not be looked at as what was but as what is, the marketing realities of today. She noted too the complaints about the blighted conditions of the street, now there is an opportunity to improve it, not everyone will be happy, yet there are rights of the owners, in evaluating every situation that comes along each must be considered on its own merit, and the fact is that given the marketing realities of today one is not going to see a use such as the Shore Shop or any other retail being a viable business on that corner, the other businesses there do not draw the type of customer as does the Shore Shop. Mayor ProTem Campbell concluded that there in really no other choice, although there may be other land uses, this is the land use proposed by the property owner for consideration. The motion of Doane, seconded by Yost, was restated to adopt Resolution Number 4671 entitled •A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 98-1, RELATING TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 998-2 AND ZONE CHANGE 98-2, IN THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS)." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4671 was waived. AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost NOES: None VACANCY: One Notion carried The motion of Doane, second by Yost, was restated to adopt Resolution Number 4672 entitled •A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-2 (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS)• and approve the introduction and first reading of Ordinance Number 1442 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE 98-2 (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS).• By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4672 and Ordinance Number 1442 was waived. AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost NOES: None VACANCY: One Motion carried The City Attorney reminded that Ordinance Number 1442 would not receive second reading until there is either a tract map filed or an agreement. CITY MANAGER REPORTS The City Manager noted that a few years ago the City changed the hours of City Hall being open to the public to provide for closure on Fridays, this the result of reduction of staff, difficulty handling the workload and still be available to the public five days a week, another reason was Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 11 CITY OF SEAL BEACH LETTER OF MAY 4, 1999 REGARDING COASTAL PERMIT APPLICATION 5-99-026 Tentative Tran Map 15832 (M.].. Homes) - Supp PC Sa""d 41 S May 4, 1999 Sara Wan, Chairperson ralifornia Coastal Commission 45 Fremont Strut, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94105-2219 Dear Chairperson Wan and Commissioners: SUBJECT: Application No. 5-99-026 The City of Seal Beach requests the Commission approve this application as in conformance with the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. In reviewing the Commission Staff Report, the City believes the analysis and conclusions of staff are incomplete. As your staff has indicated, Section 30213 states: "Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected encouraged and where feasihle. provided" (Emphasis added) Commission staff take the position that since commercial uses have existed for many years, that they can continue to exist into the future. This attitude and position is unrealistic in the face of changing retail marketing practices. As your staff has correctly pointed out, a profitable and successful business, the Shore Shop, had operated for many years at this location. However, marketing changes and retail competition has forced this business to close. The natural forces of a free market economy have determined it is n loneer feasible for the business to operate. This arca of the City was initially zoned for commercial use in 1951, and that zoning has been determined by the retail business community and the City to no longer be feasible. The City is very concerned about the loss of visitor -serving and sales tax generating businesses. This issue was a primary concern of the City in considering the General plan Amendment and Zone Change requests necessary for the project, and the City requested the preparation of the Economics Research Associates (ERA) "Visitor -Serving Commercial Development Analysis — Seal Beach Coastal District" to fully understand the impacts of the project. Our City Council reached a different conclusion from your cvty t>�� smr �„n,a i.a..aaawnsys City of Sed Beach Comment Leaer re: Application No. 5-99-076 321 Seal Beach Boulevard May 4, 1999 staff, and determined the retention of commercial uses in this area was no loneer easible. This determination was based on the following concerns: a Lack of Trac on Seal Beach Boulevard Your staff compares this site to commercial areas along Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street. The areas are not comparable! Pacific Coast Highway is a State Highway and a major coastal access route and commuter highway. More than 38,000 vehicles use Pacific Coast Highway on a daily basis: 6times as much traffic as occurs along Seal Beach Boulevard seaward Of Pacific Coast Highway. In addition, the Pacific Coast Highway corridor includes 3 community retail centers, having in excess of 156,000 square feet of building area, in addition to the other free-standing visitor commercial uses along Pacific Coast Highway, Main Street is the visitor -serving center of Seal Beach in addition to being a primary resident-seMng area for "Old Town". Main Street contains more than 125 businesses with over 80,000 square feet of commercial uses and has 50% more daily vehicle trips as does Seal Beach Boulevard. The City carefully considered the ERA report and, based on our local knowledge of the land use, traffic and other site restraints, fully agreed with the ERA report conclusions. The City recognizes that commercial development priorities and commercial marketing strategies change over time; your staff seems to be resistant to recognizing those changing realities. The City strongly requests this commission to recognize those changes, as you have just recently done in Huntington Beach in approval of Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 3-98. a Sarronndine Land Uses: Again, your staff equates this area as a "keystone commercial location". The City does not agree with that conclusion, nor does a nationally and internationally recognized economic land use consulting firm. Seal Beach Boulevard is not a "keystone" visitor -serving area. Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway serve those functions in the immediate coastal vicinity of Seal Beach. The only remaining "visitor -serving" use on Seal Beach Boulevard located seaward of Landing Avenue is a 1,200 square foot bicycle rental and sales shop; other existing commercial uses include a child-care facility, a copy machine rental and repair business, and a medical office. The remaining uses along Seal Beach Boulevard are residential uses, primarily small apartment developments. snore shop cmveam i,ma City of Sea/ Beach Comment Letter re: Application No. 5-99-026 321 Seal Beach Boulevard May I, 1999 This reality has to be faced by the Commission also; to do otherwise will result in a continuing underutilization of land resources, further building obsolescence and deterioration, and a continuing disincentive to invest in this area of the City. The most recently constructed commercial building on Seal Beach Boulevard seaward of Pacific Coast Highway was built in 1974, indicating no free market incentive to develop new visitor -serving or resident - serving commercial uses in over 25 years. This area has been determined by the market place to be not feasible for new commercial development of any nature for over 25 years. Your staff is recommending denial based on a determination that visitor - serving commercial areas need to be preserved to service future demands from increased population growth and increased demand for recreation in coastal areas. Our City is very much concerned with these issues also. However, it is the position of the City that Pacific Coast Highway and Main Street now, and in the future, will adequately serve those needs. You cannot continually expand visitor -serving areas based on an undefined "perception" of what the future will require. Seal Beach has adopted a vision statement, and it does not include becoming a downtown Santa Monica or Long Beach; it is a vision of retaining a small town, more relaxed atmosphere and because of this, visitors will continue to come to our community. The ultimate outcome of your staffs position would result in: commercial expansion and intensification far in excess of the desires of our community; commercial expansion and intensification encroaching into the remaining residential areas of the City; and commercial expansion and intensification incompatible with the existing community development "fabric' within the coastal area of the City. As this Commission has recently determined in the above -referenced Huntington Beach LCP amendment, this requested project is bounded by residential development, comports with the desires of the residents of Seal Beach and provides sufficient remaining visitor -serving land use areas within the City. In Huntington Beach it was determined to allow a land use change to residential on property fronting on Pacific Coast Highway and Goldenwest that experiences total daily traffic volumes in excess of 70,000 vehicles a day. A similar change is even more appropriate in this instance, where the site is not on a major street, having no frontage on Pacific Coast Highway; and experiences approximately 6,200 daily vehicle trips. • AbAW to Serve Future Visitor -Serving Commercial Needs Commission staff recommends denial because "future needs" cannot be met. However, Commission staff provides no analysis of future market needs within Seal Beach or the surrounding market area to substantiate this unsupported determination. The ERA report documents that the average sales per outlet for apparel and other retail stores, other than eating and drinking 6 sbwcoowedI— City of Sea/ Beach Comment Lener re.' Application No. 5-99-026 321 Seal Beach Boulevard May 4.1999 places, is approximately 50% less than for like establishments within Orange County as a whole. This "under market" performance serves as a de -facto vacancy factor for visitor -serving commercial uses. Until existing visitor -serving uses can perform at a higher level of sales, there is no incentive for new rental uses to come into the area. Current and future visitors to the coastal area would need to substantially increase their spending at local businesses for retailers to be attracted into the area. To summarize, the City is of the opinion the analysis by your staff is incomplete and ignores the recent determination by the Commission regarding Huntington Beach LCP Amendment No. 98-3. It is our opinion that this project is consistent with the Section 3 policies of the Coastal Act in that it is "not feasible' to provide visitor -serving commercial uses on the subject property for the following reasons: • Location cannot support viable commercial uses, adjacent to the 5,000 acre Weapons Support Facility • Location not located on a main street • Location experiences very low traffic volumes, not sufficient for viable commercial uses • Site constraints — 12 -foot alley width separation from existing residential uses, parking and site visibility • Retail marketing performance standards do not exist • Fits with the desires of the community • Existing underperformance of retail establishments in sales acts as a de -facto vacancy rate; resulting in no demand by the private sector for new retail uses along Seal Beach Boulevard for the past 25 years • Site constraint — compatible with adjoining residential uses. If you have any questions regarding this letter and the information provided, Mr. Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services, will be in attendance at the time this matter is considered by the Commission, and will be most willing to provide additional information or respond to questions from the Commission. Sin y, 1 �-P Keith R. Till, City Manager City of Seal Beach ss. sbo Cumvsm t—_ City of Sea/ Beach Comment Letter re: Application No. 5-99-026 321 Seal Beach Boulevard May 4. 1999 Distribution: Seal Beach City Council Seal Beach Planning Commission Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Director of Development Services sem shoo comm I.ma Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Supplemental Planning Commission Staff Report February 7, 2001 ATTACHMENT 12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, JANUARY 17, 2001, WITH ALL ATTACHMENTS Tentative Tract Map 13832 (Avalon Homes) - Supp K Staff Report 42 January 17, 2001 STAFF REPORT To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Subject. TENTATIVE TRACT HOMES — 321 Seal Property) GENERAL DESCRIPTION AVALON HOMES MAP NO. 15832 (AVALON Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop ELLEN G. MUSSO, ET AL 321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD — SHORE SHOP PROPERTIES of Property: RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY (RHD) ZONE TO APPROVE AN 8 -LOT SUBDIVISION OF THE EXISTING "SHORE SHOP' PROPERTY. SEE "DISCUSSION" SECTION BELOW FOR DETAILED LAND SUBDIVISION REQUEST Review: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN APPROVED THROUGH NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3. THE SUBDIVISION REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS PROJECT APPROVALS EVALUATED BY NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98.3. Sections: CHAPTER 21, ARTICLE Hl, CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH nmendation: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15832, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS BY THE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 01-1 CMfyD umaU\SuWmsioasUenmave Tract Map 15382(Avalon Homa)-PC Smff RCNM.A Q WI -11-0I Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 15832 through the adoption of Resolution No. 01-1. Requested Action: The applicant has requested approval of TTM 15832, a request to subdivide property at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard (the Shore Shop property) to conform to the previously approved General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes to allow for residential development on the subject property. The role of the Planning Commission with regard to this application is only to review the proposed map for conformance with the Subdivision Map Act, the General Plan, and the City's subdivision requirements. The standard of review for the Planning Commission is conformance with the General Plan and applicable subdivision requirements only, as the current General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance land use designation is "Residential High Density", and those types of permitted land uses may be constructed on the property without any discretionary review by the City if all development standards of the City are complied with. General Description: The Site The subject property is comprised of nine (9) parcels, on the northerly side of Seal Beach Boulevard, approximately 100 south of Pacific Coast Highway. The property is currently developed with the "Shore Shop" commercial buildings, which have been vacant since late 1998. Road access and utilities are available to the subject property. The Project The proposed subdivision request is consistent with General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2, approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject property for the future construction of eight (8) detached single family residences; with three parcels having twenty-six foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty foot frontages. Implementation of the project will require demolition of the existing commercial structures, site grading, and construction of the approved residential buildings and supporting utilities on the site. Although the site is relatively level, some grading will be required to provide for building foundations and appropriate lot drainage. Tenmuve TractMp15382(Avaon Homes)-KSuBaepon 2 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 Project demolition, grading and construction is expected to commence as early as mid- to late - 2001, with building occupancy occurring in early 2002. Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows: NORTH: Mini Mart/Bait Shop, at the southwest comer of Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Reach Boulevard, C-2 Zoning designation, General Commercial Land Use Element designation. SOUTH: Single Family Residence on lot of approximately 2,587 sq. ft., C-2 Zoning designation, General Commercial Land Use Element designation. WEST: Single Family Residential, Residential Medium Density Zoning designation, Medium Density Residential Land Use Element designation. EAST: Anaheim Bay and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station in the Public Land Use/Recreation (PLU/R) Zoning designation and Land Use Element designation. Negative Declaration 98-3: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 4671, adopting Negative Declaration (ND) 98-3 on December 14, 1998, finding no adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. The subject tract map is in conformance with the land use approvals evaluated by ND 98-3, and no further environmental evaluation is necessary. Regional Water Quality Control Board Status: Staff has been providing copies of "Status Report" Memorandums to the City Council and the Planning Commission regarding the status of groundwater contamination from 1760-1780 Pacific Coast Highway, which also has impacted the subject property. The contamination is the result of leaking underground storage tanks from previous gasoline sales businesses located at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) required an extensive investigation program on both properties to establish the extent and nature of the identified contamination. Initial investigations indicated at least two underground tanks that were ultimately removed and found to be still containing gasoline product and by-products, even though there has Tenuaive Tract Map 15382 (Avalon H..) - K Staff Report Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes —Seat Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 been no service station facilities on the property since the mid -1960's. Additional investigation work was required by the RWQCB and the results of that work has identified potentially two additional underground tanks on the comer property. In the late -September through mid-October, 2000 the following actions have taken place on the subject property: ❑ Monitoring well 8 was abandoned with the concurrence of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. ❑ The fast round of groundwater monitoring was conducted, preliminary results indicate a reduction in the contamination levels due to previous underground tank removals and the use of oxygen -releasing compound (ORC) ❑ Removed 2 additional underground, 550 -gallon fuel tanks, both containing fuel product and sludge. Placed additional ORC into the tank removal holes. ❑ Installed a new groundwater monitoring well closed to the boundary between the Jeong and Musso properties, with the concurrence of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The results of this additional field work have reduced the levels of contamination to the extent that the RWQCB has issued a partial clearance letter for the subject property. Lot 1 through 7 have been cleared by the RWQCB. A copy of that letter is provided as Attachment 4 for the information of the Commission. "Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement From PCH to Electric Avenue" Project Status: The City is in the final design phase of an improvement project along Seal Beach Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Electric Avenue, that has been in the planning phases for many years. This project will entail the complete reconstruction of Seal Beach Boulevard, including new utility services, reconstruction of curb, cutter and sidewalks, street reconstruction, and the provision of a landscaped median area at Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard. A conceptual plan of the proposed improvements is provided as Attachment 5 for the information of the Planning Commission. The subject project is located within the impacted area of the roadway improvement project, and is being conditioned by the Public Works Department to provide the appropriate improvements for the area subject to this subdivision request in conformance with the design improvement plans for the roadway improvement project. Several financing alternatives are available to the project proponent for the completion of the required improvements and are included within the recommended conditions of approval. Overview of Tentative Tract Map Requirements and Proposed Map: T...we T.t Map 15382 (Avalon H..) - PC Scan Repon 4 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 The California Subdivision Map Act vests in the City the power to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions within its boundaries (Government Code § 66411). The application before the Planning. Commission for consideration is for a "tentative tract map". The approval of this map will expressly confer a right to proceed with the subdivision of the proposed lots, including the public roadway improvements, in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the time the application was deemed complete. The action requested is of a more technical nature, necessary to facilitate the eventual sale of the previously approved residential homes to future owners. A summary of the proposed subdivision is provided below: a 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel 1 — 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage a Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage The major access roadway for the proposed land subdivision is Seal Beach Boulevard. Access to the garage parking for each residential home is by the existing 12 -foot wide alley westerly of Seal Beach Boulevard. The parkway area will be comprised of an 8 -foot parkway area, including landscaping and sidewalk area. Findings to Approve TTM 15832 The tentative tract map must be found in conformance with the General Plan (Government Code § 66473.5). The map as proposed is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning provisions of the City of Seal Beach, which indicate the permitted land use to be "Residential Medium Density", in accordance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map provisions of the City. In reviewing a request for approval of a tentative parcel map, the final decision-making body is required to provide findings in conformance with the court tests set forth in Topanga Assn for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles. The City is required to explain the legal "footprint' which the City followed as it progressed from the facts presented through established policies to the decision in granting or denying the requested parcel map approval. Based upon the City of Seal Tentuive hat Map 15382 (Avalon Heava) - PC Sian Repn q Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes —Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 Beach General Plan and zoning land use designations for the subject property, the Commission should determine the requested tentative parcel map is in the public interest and recommend approval of the requests as proposed, or recommend approval of the requests with modifications. When considering to recommend the approval or approval with modification of the requested subdivision, the determinations of the Planning Commission must not be arbitrary, capricious, or without evidentiary support. Further, the Planning Commission's decision must be consistent with the City's approved General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map provisions relating to the subject property. In reviewing the proposed subdivision plan, several factors set forth below are evaluated to determine consistency with findings required by the Subdivision Map Act and the Code of the City of Seal Beach. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development, in that "high density residential" development has been contemplated on the subject property since 1998, when the City Council approved the appropriate General Plan and Zoning amendments. The subject property is relatively flat, geologically stable, and is bounded on two sides by existing residential developments, with a light commercial use to the north and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station located across Seal Beach Boulevard. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land subdivision, exceeding the minimum lot size standards of the City for the "medium density residential" zone and future development will be consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the potential development of the subject area with a maximum of 9 residential units, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. Only 8 residential units are approved by this tract map approval. The site is a 22,885 square foot site, with appropriate access availability to Seal Beach Boulevard, and provides lots with a minimum area of 2,635 square feet. The development standards for the RMD Zone allows for lots with a minimum of 25 feet of frontage and a minimum of 2,500 square feet of land area. All of the proposed lots are larger than these minimum standards. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage as determined by the City Council in their review and adoption of ND 98-3. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the project. Standard City development standards require the provision of all required public services, including domestic water, sewer and storm drains, electricity, and telephone services. In addition, standard City development Tensa ve T=L p p 15382 (Avalon Homes) - P Staff Report 6 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 standards require the provision of adequate roadway widths for fire and police protection capabilities, refuse disposal, and other required public utility and services. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. The final tract map will indicate all easements to be preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional water quality control board. Prior to final project construction approval, conditions of approval require the approval of: ❑ a project spec drainage report; ❑ a comprehensive water quality management plan in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board that includes best management practices as outlined in the County of Orange National Pollution Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Plan; ❑ construction of all water and sewer systems in compliance with City and Orange County Sanitation District standards; and ❑ payment of required sewer connection fees. Additional Conditions of Approval The Department of Development Services and the City Engineer have reviewed the proposed subdivision plan and recommend the following conditions be applied to TTM 15832, in addition to several standard conditions of approval: Department of Development Services: Upon review of TTM 15832, it is recommended the following conditions be imposed: o The developer shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach. All requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall be satisfied. ❑ A copy of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&R's), if proposed by the sub -divider, shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval. Tract Map 15832 shall not be released for recording by the City Engineer until said CC&R's have been approved by the City Attorney. ❑ A statement detailing the arrangements which the subdivider proposes to make for the operation and maintenance of common parcels and easements shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval, if any common parcels or easements are utilized. Tract Map 15832 shall not be released for recording by the City Tenutive Tmct Map 15382(Awbn Homes) - PC Star Re n 7 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 Engineer until said financial arrangement statement has been approved by the Director of Development Services, if applicable. No building permit shall be issued for any lot within the boundaries of Tract Map 15832 unless and until a final tract map has been recorded. The developer's contractor shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance evidencing a comprehensive liability insurance policy with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence in connection with the work performed. Certificate shall include the City, its Council, officers, members of boards or commissions and employees as additional Named Insureds with respect to all claims, actions, damages, liabilities and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under the development executed by the Named Insured and the City, including any act or omission of employees, agents, subcontractors, or their employees. Such certificates shall have a 30 -day cancellation notice to the City of Seal Beach. City Engineer. o Water provided to the site shall be from the City of Seal Beach Water Department. Connection to the system shall be at the owner's expense. All water and sewer connections shall be made from the alley_side of the subject properties. ❑ Sidewalks shall be continuous along Seal Beach Boulevard. Sidewalks shall be in conformance with ADA requirements and Tide 24. ❑ All utilities shall be underground. a A Final Grading Plan shall be approved prior to performing any work on-site. ❑ On-site design and work shall be in accordance with the City of Seal Beach, Orange County Flood Control Distric4 Orange County Local Drainage Manual, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. ❑ All existing public improvements at the development site which are damaged due to construction, cracked, or otherwise below standard, shall be removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. a Many of the required conditions of approval are included in the City's "Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement from PCH to Electric Ave." Project At the discretion of the City the Subdivider shall either construct or have constructed the appropriate items or shall pay the City for the construction cost of the items included in the City's Improvement Project. If the City elects to include some or all of the items in the City's Improvement Project the City will prepare a cost estimate for those items included and the Subdivider shall deposit the estimated amount with the City to be used for the construction of those items and will either reimburse the Subdivider the remainder of the deposit if the actual cost is less than the deposit, or will bill the Subdivider for the additional amount if the actual cost is more than the deposit. ❑ Prior to recording the Final Tract Map the Subdivider shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the City including providing a 100% Performance Bond, a 50% Labor and Tentative Tree Map 15382 (Avalon Honea) - PC Staff Repoa Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 Materials Bond, and insurance per City requirements (or in lieu thereof a final formed Community Facilities District) to guarantee the construction of the required improvements. ❑ The subdivider may choose to finance the cost of the required items through a Community Facilities District. In that event the City will work with the Subdivider in the preparation and formation of the district. Recommendation: Recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to conditions, to the City Council through the adoption of Resolution No. 01-1. e Whittenberg Director of Development Services Attachments: (5) 4p .Barium Cit ngineer Attachment 1: Resolution No. 01-1, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach Recommending to the City Council Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 (321 Seal Beach Boulevard — Avalon Homes) Attachment 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 Attachment 3: City Council Resolution 4671, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Seal Beach Adopting Negative Declaration No. 98-3, Relating to General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2, in the City of Seal Beach, California (Anaheim Bay Villas), adopted December 14, 1998 Attachment 4: Regional Water Quality Board Letter re: "Musso Property (Adjacent to Jeong Site, 1760/1780 Pacific Coast Highway, Seal Beach, UST No. 083003666T', dated September 19, 2000 Attachment 5: "Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement from PCH to Electric Ave." Project" Concept Plan, W G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., no date (two sheets) Tenmove Tmct Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Staff Report Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) Tcnwovc Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homcs) - K Stiff Report 10 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 RESOLUTION NO. 01-1 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 (321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - AVALON HOMES) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1. On December 5, 2000, Avalon Homes ("Applicant") submitted Tentative Tract Map No. 15832 ("application") to the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant seeks approval to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 17, 2001 to consider Tentative Tract Map 15832. At the public hearing, Applicanfs representatives spoke in favor of the project, and several other persons spoke in favor of and in opposition to the request. Section 4. The record of the hearings indicates the following: (a) Applicant seeks to subdivide an existing 22,885 square foot parcel into 8 lots; (b) Applicant is proposing to subdivide the property in accordance with the current provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Seal Beach General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach. Tenizfive Tact Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Suff Raton 11 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 (c) The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element" map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. (d) Said Tentative Parcel Map is also consistent with the Zoning Map of the City of Seal Beach, which indicates the subject property is zoned Residential Medium Density, RMD, and is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The approved "Zoning" map was revised by City Council Ordinance No. 1442 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification, and that zoning shall not be effective unless and until the City Council approves a Final Tract Map, Lot Line Adjustment, or Agreement to allow the construction of 8 single-family residences (e) Tentative Tract Map 15832 will create the requested land subdivision. A summary of the proposed land subdivision is provided below: 8 lots, with a minimum lot size of 2,635 square feet, and a maximum lot size of 3,029 square feet (minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet permitted in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone), with the following parcel breakdown: ❑ Parcel 1— 2,749 square feet, 27.18 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 2 — 2,961 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage a Parcel 3 — 2,956 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage o Parcel 4 — 2,645 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 5 — 2,945 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 6 — 2,635 square feet, 26.00 feet of frontage ❑ Parcel 7 — 2,934 square feet, 29.00 feet of frontage o Parcel 8 - 3,029 square feet, 30.00 feet of frontage (f) Subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, groundwater contamination originating from an adjoining property has caused groundwater contamination on the subject property. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has been supervising and monitoring the appropriate on-site and off-site remediation activities and plans. (g) On September 19, 2000, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a letter indicating no further investigation or remediation is required for Lots 1 through 7 of Tract Map 15832, and that minor contamination is restricted to Lot 8 of Tract Map 15832. (h) As conditioned, new construction activities cannot occur on Lot 8 of the subject tentative tract map, including grading, until an additional clearance letter is received by the Tentative T=t Map 15382(Avelan Romvo-K Sun Repon 12 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 City of Seal Beach pertaining to Lot 8, still under the review and authority of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does hereby make the following findings regarding Tentative Tract Map 15832: 1. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the General Plan in that the map would allow the subdivision of existing property in accordance with the provisions of the General Plan for future medium density residential land uses in accordance with the present General Plan Land Use Element designation of "Medium Density Residential'. 2. Tentative Tract Map 15832 is consistent with the Land Use Element of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. The adopted "Land Use Element' map was revised by City Council Resolution No. 4672 on December 14, 1998 relative to the subject project. This map indicates the subject property to be located in a medium density residential land use classification. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land subdivision, exceeding the minimum lot size standards of the City for the "Residential Medium Density" zone and future development will be consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density Zone. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the potential development of the subject area with a maximum of 8 single-family residences, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Zone. 5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage. The City Council adopted Negative Declaration 98-3 on December 14, 1998. Negative Declaration 98-3 evaluated the environmental impacts of the necessary General Plan Amendments and Zone Change to allow construction of 8 single family homes that would be constructed upon approval of the requested Tract Map. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council found in Section 6(b) of City Council Resolution No. 4671 that "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact". Further, subsequent groundwater contamination that was discovered on the subject property has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and as conditioned, the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. Tenmtive Tmt Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) -PC Stiff Report 13 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 6. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the project. 7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained and/or abandoned with new easements created. 8. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional water quality control board. 9. Pursuant to Section 15074 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Negative Declaration has previously been adopted by the City Council regarding the implementing General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes necessary for this land subdivision request to be considered. This subdivision is within the scope of Negative Declaration 98-3, which adequately describes the general environmental setting of the project, its environmental impacts, and determined that all significant project impacts of this project were reduced to a level less than significant. Therefore, no additional environmental documentation is needed. Further, subsequent groundwater contamination that was discovered on the subject property has been remediated to the satisfaction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and as conditioned the project approval will have no substantial adverse impacts upon groundwater. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 15832, subject to the attached conditions shown as "Exhibit A". PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2001 by the following vote: Temaliva T ncl Map 15382 (Avalon Homes)- PC Sun Report 14 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission SrafjReport January 17, 2001 AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners ABSENT: Comnrissioners ABSTAIN: Commissioners David Hood, Ph.D. Chaimlan, Planning Commission Lee Whittenberg, Secretary Planning Commission TenG4Ve Trent Map 15382(Avalon Homes)- MSan Report 15 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 "EXHIBIT A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15832 The specific conditions imposed as conditions of approval are set forth below, along with additional conditions recommended by the City Engineer and the Director of Development Services. The conditions are grouped according to the milestone to meet for completion of the condition: Prior to the Release of a Final Mao by the City 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 Tentative Tract Map, 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, lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 2. A statement detailing the arrangements which the subdivider proposes to make for the operation and maintenance of common parcels and easements shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval, if any common parcels or easements are utilized. Tract Map 15832 shall not be released for recording by the City Engineer until said financial arrangement statement has been approved by the Director of Development Services, if applicable. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. This project necessitates the construction of public and/or private infrastructure improvements. Prior to the release of a final Tract Map by the City, the applicant shall construct, or enter into a Subdivision Agreement and post security, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of the following public and/or private improvements, marked with "X' and listed below, in conformance with Teamtive Tint Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Smff Report 16 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 applicable City standards and the City's Capital Improvement Policy. Items not required in conjunction with this project are marked "n/a." (City Engineer Condition of Approval) X a. Street improvements including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lighting, signing, and striping. n/a b. Traffic signal systems, interconnect and other traffic control and management devices (as required by Transportation Planning and or Traffic Engineering). X c. Storm drain facilities as required by the Engineering Department to serve the project. n/a d. Sub-drain facilities (as required by Building and Safety). X e. Landscaping and computerized irrigation control system (for all public streets, parks, public areas and preserved windrows). X f. Sewer, reclaimed and/or domestic water systems, as required by the appropriate sewer and water districts as well as the Orange County Fire Authority when appropriate. X g. Monumentation. n/a h. Riding, hiking and bicycle trails adjacent to or through the project site. X i. Undergrounding of existing overhead and proposed utility distribution lines. n/a j. Transit-related improvements depicted on the approved tentative tract map. Note: Many of the required conditions of approval are included in the City's `Seal Beach Blvd. Improvement from PCH to Electric Ave." project. At the discretion of the City the Subdivider shall either construct or have constructed the appropriate items or shall pay the City for the construction cost of the items included in the City's Improvement Project. If the City elects to include some or all of the items in the City's Improvement Project the City will prepare a cost estimate for those items included and the Subdivider shall deposit the estimated amount with the City to be used for the construction of those items and will either reimburse the Subdivider the remainder of the deposit if the actual cost is less than the deposit, or will bill the Subdivider for the additional amount if the actual cast is more than the deposit. 4. Prior to the release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit one (I) set of computerized data of the final map which is compatible with the City ARCNIEW system Tenwive Trxt Map 15382 (AV0QR Homos) -PC Suiff Repon 17 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 or DXF (Autocad) system in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission" as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities. Certain existing survey monumentation may be deemed necessary for preservation and perpetuation subsequent to final construction improvements associated with this project. All survey monuments deemed necessary for perpetuation as recommended by the design Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be identified and shown on the final map for perpetuation. Such survey monuments shall be preserved and referenced before construction and if disturbed replaced after construction pursuant to Section 8771 of the Business and Professions Code. Prior to release of a final map by the City, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer a statement noting whether any monuments will be disturbed. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. The subdivider may choose to finance the cost of the required items through a Community Facilities District. In that event the City will work with the Subdivider in the preparation and formation of the district. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 1. A Final Grading Plan shall be approved prior to performing any work on-site. All storm water and drainage shall be captured in catch basins and conveyed through pipes to the nearest inlet. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. An inundation study shall be prepared and submitted in conjunction with the submittal of street improvement plans for the review and approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, an Erosion Control Plan will be prepared to identify specific measures for the control of siltation, sedimentation and other soil materials. The Plan will be implemented during the project construction period, consistent with sub- article 13 of the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code and Grading Manual in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 4. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide documents disclosing all recorded easements on the subject property to the City Engineer and these easements shall be referenced on applicable grading plans. The applicant shall produce evidence that all utility providers with recorded easements on the subject property, have been informed of the Tentative Tact Map 15382 (Avalon Honma) - K Suff Repan 18 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard)' Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 imminent construction activities in a format meeting the approval of the City Engineer and shall be shown on the subject grading plans. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. Hydrology and hydraulics submitted in conjunction with the grading permit shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Please note that the County of Orange has recently amended their Local Drainage Manual and this project must be in conformance with it. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide evidence that the cable television provider has been informed of construction activities and the potential exists for the interruption of services during construction. The notice shall be provided in a format acceptable to the Director of Development Services. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 7. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a lighting plan for the project site specifying the location and type of all street lights shall be prepared and submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Construction of the proposed project shall be required to be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, which shall reduce fugitive dust amounts by up to 50 percent. Dust reducing measures shall include regular watering of graded surfaces, restriction of all construction vehicles and equipment to travel along established and regularly watered roadways, and requiring operations that tend to create dust be suspended during windy conditions. The City shall ensure that the project shall also comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, to reduce potential nuisance due to odors from construction activities. Measures include the following: ❑ The project shall comply with State, County, City, and UBC dust control regulations, so as to prevent the soil from being eroded by wind, creating dust, or blowing onto a public road or roads or other public or private property. ❑ SCAQMD Rule 403.1, as amended, shall be adhered to, ensuring the clean up on the construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site, and the application of water and/or chemical dust retardants that solidify loose soils should be implemented for construction vehicle access, as directed by the City Engineer. This shall include covering, watering or otherwise stabilizing all inactive soil piles (left more than 10 days) and inactive graded areas (left more than 10 days). ❑ Grading activity shall be suspended when local winds exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. ❑ All trucks hauling dirt, soil or other loose dirt material shall be covered. ❑ Where available or possible, permanent sources of power shall be used from the beginning of the project. Avoid internal combustion engines for generating power. ❑ Reduce or eliminate odors due to construction activity. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tenni T., Map 15382 (Avalon Hones) - PC Suff Report 19 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 9. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction - related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: ❑ Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; o Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes; ❑ Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; ❑ Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and ❑ Schedule operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours, where feasible. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall submit a geotechnical report to the City Engineer for approval. The report shall include the information and be in a form as required by the Orange County Grading Manual, Section 5.4 and the Orange County Excavation and Grading Code, Section 7-1-519. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said geotechnical report. 11. The project applicant shall incorporate measures to mitigate expansive soil conditions, compressible/collapsible soil conditions and liquefaction soil conditions, and impacts from trenching in site-specific Tentative Tract/Parcel Map Review and Rough Grading Plan Review reports prepared by the project geotechnical consultant. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. The geotechnical consultant's site-specific reports shall be approved by a certified engineering geologist and a registered civil engineer, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Project proponent shall reimburse City costs of independent third -party peer review of said site-specific reports. 12. Prior to the initiation of project grading in any development area, all existing utilities will be located and either abandoned and removed, rerouted or protected. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 13. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or a registered professional hydrologist to protect water resources from impacts due to urban contaminants in surface water runoff. The plan shall be prepared in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Orange County, and the City of Seal Beach to insure compliance with applicable NPDES permit requirements. The Plan shall include a combination of structural and non structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) as Tena. Tree Map 15382 (Avalon Homo) - K Stiff Repos 20 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 outlined in Countywide NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 14. Prior to final project design, a project specific Drainage Report shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with applicable requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District and the City of Seal Beach. The report shall describe the existing drainage network, existing capacity, pre -and post -project runoff volumes, and any necessary improvements to accommodate proposed project runoff volumes. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 15. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any time during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 16. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee parking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, grading permits shall not be issued for Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Prior to the Issuance of Buildine Permits The developer shall provide a clearance letter from the Santa Ana Regional Quality Board for all lots created by this subdivision that have not been previously cleared by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board letter of September 19, 2000. Until such additional clearance letter is received, building permits shall not be issued for a new residential structure on Lot 8. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The developer shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach. All requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance shall be satisfied. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 3. No building permit shall be issued for any lot within the boundaries of Tract Map 15832 unless and until a final tract map has been recorded. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) T.muve Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Hames) - K Sniff Report 21 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 4. Water provided to the site shall be from the City of Seal Beach Water Department. All water and sewer connections shall be made from the alley side of the subject properties as follows: ❑ Install new sewer line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. ❑ Install new water line in rear alley for entire subdivision alley frontage. ❑ Reconstruct entire alley with cement concrete structural section for full width of alley along entire subdivision alley frontage. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan for the subdivision to the Orange County Fire Authority, the Seal Beach Police Department and the Director of Development Services. The plan shall demonstrate that emergency vehicle access is adequate. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits, improvement plans for sewer lines, connections and structures shall be the type installed in the location as specified in the "Guidelines Requiting Separation Between Water Mains and Sanitary Sewers, Orange County Health Department, 1980", in a manner meeting the approval of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the Director of Development Services of approval by the Orange County Fire Authority that the proposed infrastructure for fire protection services will be adequate to serve the proposed development. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the storage of combustible building materials on-site, fire hydrants or equivalent devices capable of flow in amounts approved by the Orange County Fire Authority shall be in place and operational to meet fire flow requirements. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 9. This project may be located within an assessment district. If the subject property is located within an assessment district the applicant shall submit, prior to the issuance of building permits, and the Director of Community Development shall have approved, a completed Occupancy Disclosure form that informs the prospective buyer: `"This property is located within an assessment district. The Orange County Tax Assessor may include the amount of the related assessment in the computations to determine assessed value of the property for the purpose of determining property taxes." (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Tenut.ve Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Suff Report 22 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17. 2001 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Department proof of payment of applicable school fees levied by the Los Alamitos Unified School District. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 11. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce emissions from construction - related traffic congestion, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer: ❑ Configure construction parking to minimize construction traffic interference with roadway traffic; ❑ Minimize obstruction of through -traffic lanes; ❑ Provide a flag person as appropriate to guide traffic properly and to ensure safety at construction sites; ❑ Develop a traffic handling plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of planned construction activities; and ❑ Schedule operations affecting traffic during off-peak hours, where feasible. 12. Loose and soft alluvial soils, expansive clay soils and all existing uncertified fill materials will be removed and replaced with compacted fill during site grading in order to prevent seismic settlement, soil expansion, and differential compaction. 13. In excavations deeper than four feet but less than ten feet, a slope no steeper than 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) shall be provided. Steeper slopes or deeper excavations will be provided with shoring for stability and protection. OSHA safety requirements shall be adhered to throughout the entire duration of project earthwork. 14. Conformance with the latest Uniform Building Code and City Ordinances can be expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effect of seismic groundshaking. Conformance with applicable codes and ordinances shall occur in conjunction with the issuance of building permits in order to insure that overexcavation of soft, broken rock and clayey soils within sheared zones will be required where development is planned. 15. All structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet an interior noise level of 45 CNEL. 16. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay City Traffic Impact fees. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 17. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay Park Land In -Lieu fees of $10,000 per residential unit. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) Tmu ive Tun Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Staff Repon 23 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 18. The construction contractor will ensure that equipment and/or materials are not stored in road travel lanes at any bme during project construction activities. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 19. Prior to the start of project construction activities, the construction contractor will submit parking plans showing employee parking locations and work staging areas for review and approval by the City Engineer. Necessary project construction parking and equipment storage areas may be on the project site or in an off site staging area as approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 20. In order to ensure adequate service to the project site, plans for the proposed wastewater collection system shall be submitted by the project proponent to the County Sanitation District of Orange County and the City Engineer of the City of Seal Beach for approval prior to the issuance of building permits. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Dunne Project Construction - Prior to the Issuance of Certificates of Use and Occupancy 1. A copy of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&R's) proposed by the subdivider shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for review and approval. Occupancy permits shall not be approved by the Building Department until said CC&R's have been approved. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. The project developer will complete half -section street improvements on Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site, excluding roadway reconstruction. Half section street improvements are the improvements from the centerline of Seal Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site. These improvements would include curb, gutter and sidewalks, street fighting, and landscaping within the street right-of-way as set forth below: ❑ Widen the existing parkway an additional 5 feet for all lots fronting on Seal Beach Blvd. including a curb transition south of the subdivision to join the new curb alignment to the existing curb alignment by reconstructing new curb, gutter, and sidewalk. ❑ Construct one-half of a raised concrete curb street median with irrigation and landscaping on Seal Beach Blvd. along the entire subdivision frontage. ❑ Install one street nee per lot in the parkway along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Install irrigation and lawn in the parkway area for each lot frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Underground the existing overhead utilities for the entire subdivision frontage along Seal Beach Blvd. ❑ Install decorative streetlights along the entire subdivision frontage. Street light design and layout shall be subject to City approval. ❑ Install City of Seal Beach entrance monument sign in street median on Seal Beach Boulevard. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Tentative T=t Map 15382 (Avalon Homes). PC Staff aepon 24 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes - Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission StafRepon January 17, 2001 3. The developer shall provide mailbox facilities for each structure, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, Director of Development Services and the Postmaster. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 4. Sidewalks shall be continuous on Seal Beach Boulevard. Sidewalks shall be in conformance with ADA requirements and Title 24. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 5. All utilities shall be underground. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 6. On-site design and work shall be in accordance with the City of Seal Beach, Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County Local Drainage Manual, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 7. All existing public improvements at the development site which are damaged due to construction, cracked, or otherwise below standard, shall be removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 8. Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, each fire hydrant shall have a blue reflective pavement [Harker indicating its location on the street or drive per Orange County Fire Authority standards. On private property, these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 9. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained weed -free and planted with interim landscaping within ninety (90) days of completion of grading, unless building permits are obtained. Planting with interim landscaping shall comply with NPDES Best Management Practices. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Prior to the Exoneration of Security 1. Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) duplicate Mylar of the final map and all public or private improvement plans, two (2) copies (one original and one duplicate) of 35mm microfilm of the final map, public or private improvement plans, final structure calculations, and computer analysis, if any, for all buildings, and the record drawings of grading, landscape, and improvement plans to, and in a manner acceptable to, the City Engineer. The microfilm shall be in 4'k 6' jackets with 6 frames per jacket. The computer analysis may be submitted on standard IBM compatible floppy disks. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 2. Prior to the exoneration of any security, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data, which is compatible with the City ARC/INFO system or DXF (Autocad) system, of the record drawings of landscape and improvement plans to, and in a manner Tentative T=t Map 15382 (Avalon Hones) - K Sian' Report 25 L Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 acceptable to, the City Engineer. Maps should be tied to County of Orange control points (latest revision). Refer to "Specifications for Digital Submission" as maintained by the Surveyor's Office of the County of Orange for specific requirements of individual submittal. When requested by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit one (1) set of computerized data of computer generated structural analysis and calculations. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) 3. This subdivision may include existing survey monuments, which may be disturbed through construction activities and deemed necessary for preservation by the City Engineer. If such monuments were disturbed, the applicant shall have a licensed Land Surveyor or qualified Registered Civil Engineer reestablish any such monumentation damaged or destroyed during construction of project and file the comer records with the County Surveyor. Prior to the exoneration of any security evidence of such filing shall be furnished to the City Engineer. (City Engineer Condition of Approval) Miscellaneous The developer's contractor(s) shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance evidencing a comprehensive liability insurance policy with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence in connection with the work performed. Certificate shall include the City, its Council, officers, members of boards or commissions and employees as additional Named Insureds with respect to all claims, actions, damages, liabilities and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under the development executed by the Named Insured and the City, including any act or omission of employees, agents, subcontractors, or their employees. Such certificates shall have a 30 -day cancellation notice to the City of Seal Beach. (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval) 2. In the event that unknown wastes or underground storage tanks are discovered during grading and/or construction which the contractor believes may involve hazardous materials, he/she shall: A. Immediately stop all grading and/or construction work in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. B. Notify the project proponent and the Orange County Fire Authority. C. Secure the area to restrict all vehicular and pedestrian access to and in the vicinity of the suspected contamination. D. Coordinate with the Orange County Fire Authority on needed testing of the substance and development of recommendations on removal and disposition of the substance. 3. Any easement that lies within or crosses rights-of-way proposed to be deeded or dedicated to the City, shall be subordinated to the City prior to City acceptance of the rights-of-way, unless otherwise exempted by the City Engineer. Tem.,Ne T., Map 15382 (Malo. Homes) - PC Ston Repan 26 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes—Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15832 Tenmtive Tmct Map 15382(Avlan Homo) - I Smff Repott 27 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Sta(jRepon January 17, 2001 ATTACHMENT 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 4671, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 98-3, RELATING TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-2 AND ZONE CHANGE 98-2, IN THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS), ADOPTED DECEMBER 14,1998 Tenmtive Tres Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - P Staff Report 28 RESOLUTION NUMBER A71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 98-3, RELATING TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-2 AND ZONE CHANGE 98- 2, IN THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA (ANAHEIM BAY VILLAS) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: e;tioc L D. Bartlett Associates, on behalf of Ellen Musso, Et AI. ("Applicant") has saomitted revised aplications for a general plan amendment and zone change for the Anaheim Bay Villas �roject proposed for property located at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, the City of Seal Beach. The Applicant has submitted the aforementioned revised applications to allow the construction of eight (8) single family detached residences on three parcels having twenty-six foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty foot frontages. Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ iI.0 and IB of the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Negative Declaration, which was circulated for public review and comment from August 27, 1998 to September 17, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on September 23, 1998 in relation to the original land use proposal and again on November 18, 1998 in relation to the revised land use proposal. the Negative Declaration was reviewed by the City Council at a public hearing held on December 14, 1998 in relation to the revised land use proposal. Section 3: A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on November 18, 1998 to consider the revised applications. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission invited and considered any and all testimony offered in favor or opposition to said revised applications. Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on December 14, 1998 to consider the revised applications. At the public hearing, the City Council invited and considered any and all testimony offered in favor or opposition to said revised applications.. Section 5. The record of the hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council indicates the following: �(a) On June 25, 1998, D. Bartlett Associates, on behalf of Ellen Musso, et al, submitted general plan and zone change applications for 0.53 acres located generally at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard. (b) The subject property is comprised of nine (9) parcels, upon which the applicant is proposing to construct eight (8) detached single family residences, requiring a future subdivision of the subject property, on three parcels having twenty-six foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine foot frontages, and two parcels having thirty foot frontages. (c) The subject property is legally described as Lots 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, and 27 in Block 217 of Tract No. 10 as shown on a map thereof recorded in Book 9 Page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps and Records of Orange County, California (d) The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows: NORTH: Mini Mart/Bait Shop, at the southwest comer of Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Reach Boulevard, C-2, General Commercial. SOUTH: Single Family Residence on lot of approximately 2,587 sq. ft., C-2, General Commercial. WEST: - Single Family Residential, RMD, Medium Density Residential EAST: Anaheim Bay and the Naval Weapons Center in the Public Land Use/Recreation (PLU/R) zone. (e) Staff has prepared an Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff has received three comment letters, with the County of Orange requesting the preparation of a "Water Quality Management Plan". City staff is recommending inclusion of the preparation of this plan as a condition of approval ofany future subdivision requests filed for the subject property. The other commenting agencies, the Southern California Association of Governments and Caltrans District 12, expressed no concern with the proposal. (t) No new information was brought forward at the public hearing with regard to potential environmental impacts from the revised project that was not addressed in the Initial Study, or addressed by the additional condition of approval regarding the preparation of a "Water Quality Management Plan". Section 6. The City Council affirms that it independently reviewed Negative Declaration No. 98-3 prior to acting on the applications and hereby finds as follows: (a) Negative Declaration No. 98-3 was prepared by staff and therefore reflects the independent judgement of the City of Seal Beach; and (b) There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact. Section 7 Based on the foregoing Sections 1 through 6, the City Council hereby adopts Negative Declaration 98-3 in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, PASSED, APPROVED ARID ADOPTEDbhe City Counci to City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of 1998, by the following vote: q 2— AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSENT: Councilmembers VACANCY: Councilmesber Patricia E. Campbell Mayor Pro -Tem ATTEST: O Ci erk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH l I, Joanne M. Yed, City Clerk of Seal Beach, Califomia, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number ;f! fV on file in the office of the City Cle passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council oft ity of Sea! Beach, at a lar etrye ing thereof held on the �. day of / F � 1998. !/ / / Ci Ierk Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes —Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 ATTACHMENT 4 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY BOARD LETTER RE: "MUSSO PROPERTY (ADJACENT TO JEONG SITE, 1760/1780 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SEAL BEACH, UST NO. 083003666T", DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 Temative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Hames) - PC Staff Report 29 uamorma t<Pgtonai water Vuat,ty % Ullt/ ut "Vatu Santa Ana Region Winst9p H. Hickox Inmma gJArtss: hnp://...,wiwcb.cigovlw9cb8 Gny Douis Seanpryjoe 3731 Mom Snca. Surzc 500. Riverside. Caliramn 92501-3348 En.ironm<mpl phone (909) 7824130 - FAX (909) 781.62SE Prol.,.n September 19, 2000 Mrs. Ellen Musso 301 Ocean Avenue Seal Beach, CA 90740 SUBJECT: MUSSO PROPERTY (ADJACENT TO JEONG SITE) 176011780 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SEAL BEACH UST NO. 083003666T Dear Mrs. Musso: We have reviewed the September 7, 2000, information and data submitted by your consultant, Kleinfelder. This data was also discussed during our September 12, 2000, teleconference meeting. In order to further determine and define the potential contamination plume possibly migrating on to your property (also known as Shore Village), your consultant conducted an additional investigation. This investiga!'ron.included the drilling of six soil borings (GP -1 through GP -6) at various locations on the northern parcel of your property. Both soil and groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH for gasoline, kerosene, and diesel) by EPA Methods 8260 and modified 8015, respectively. The soil samples were collected at approximately 3 feet below the ground surface (bgs). All of the water , samples were collected between 4-8 feet bgs except for sample GP -4. This sample was collected between 4-12 feet bgs. Soil results revealed minor levels of gasoline, kerosene, diesel, or VOC contamination in soil samples collected from GP -1, GP -3, GP -5, and GP -6. No contamination was detected in the soil samples collected from GP -2 and GP -4. The soil contamination concentrations are summarized below: California Environmental Protection Agency r Roe deR Pope ❑Pr_=—DMOP 11:11 eno vc� nn n v Mrs. Musso -3- September 19, 2000 Therefore, this office will not require any further investigation or remediation south of GP -1, GP -2, GP -4, and MW -8 (Lots #1 through 7). It is anticipated that the contamination present in the vicinity of GP -3, GP -5, and GP -6 (Lot #8) will be remediated by the Oxygen -Releasing Compounds (ORC) remedial method implemented by the adjacent property owner, Mr. and Mrs. Jeong. If you have any questions, please call Nancy Olson -Martin or me at (909) 782-4497 or 4496, respectively. Sincere!y, t I (� Kenneth R. Williams ...� Senior Engineering Geologist 44 Pollutant Investigation Section cc: Steve Speer - OCHCA ....Diane. R. Smith — - Les Nederveld Mario Musso Juan Guerrero - Kleinfelder Richman — Epport & Richman, LLP NOMlmmso California Environmental Protection Agency T ' - TOTAL P.04 Tentative Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes — Seal Beach Boulevard) Planning Commission Staff Report January 17, 2001 ATTACHMENT 5 "SEAL BEACH BLVD. IMPROVEMENT FROM PCH TO ELECTRIC AVE." PROJECT" CONCEPT PLAN, W G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC., NO DATE (TWO SHEETS) Temmive Tract Map 15382 (Avalon Homes) - PC Steffi Report 30 EY'A ya: Kpan a � � S m 58 1 •I - � I tlruaiY`�`.m. V 9 6 �f y L,.I.3.. ra Fig @ �S g��=@55§3� g °-��g§fie •��a�_3 eei4 � ` G9s�$���,p�S�C�G�� �a5���'gglylig sTjea:aa5��95u_ 3A9noo;3§0_3 9'.�§s�'gut y' JIM 1 Ing 1 1 ®® a CEO= �� aawe eaurss iv Nn �r� �L Erin e Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Amon Homes) 311 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staj%Report February 11, 2001 ATTACHMENT 6 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 AVALON HOMES - 321 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD, SHORE SHOP PROPERTY) Tcnlntive Tact Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) -MR 37 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 98-3 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15832, Avalon Homes 321 Seal Beach Boulevard, Shore Shop Property) On December 14, 1998, the City Council of the City of Seal Beach approved Resolution No. 4671 and thereby adopted Negative Declaration No. 98-3 relating to General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2 for the proposed construction of eight single-family residences on the property located at 321 Seal Beach Boulevard in the City of Seal Beach. In adopting Negative Declaration 98-3, the City Council made the following finding in Section 6(b) of Resolution No. 4671: "There is no substantial evidence in the record, which would support a fair argument that approval of the applications, with required mitigation measures, might have a significant environmental impact'. The City has prepared this Addendum in order to make certain minor additions necessary to supplement Negative Declaration 98-3. Specifically, subsequent to the adoption of Negative Declaration 98-3, it was discovered that an adjoining property has groundwater contamination and that such contamination might have migrated to the subject property. In response to this discovery, the owner of the subject property retained a consultant to collect soil samples for review by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Santa Ana RWQCB"). The Santa Ana RWQCB has concluded, based on its review of the soil samples, that it will not require further investigation or remediation of lots #1 through #7 of the subject property. The Santa Ana RWQCB also has concluded that it anticipates the contamination present in Lot #8 "will be remediated by the Oxygen - Releasing Compounds (ORC) remedial method implemented by the adjacent property owner." These conclusions are set forth in a September 19, 2000 letter from the Santa Ana RWQCB to the owner of the subject property, a copy of which is on file with the City. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CaLCode of Regs. § 15162), the City has determined that preparation of this Addendum is appropriate because no condition has occurred that requires a subsequent environmental impact report or subsequent negative declaration. Additionally, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CaLCode of Rep. § 15164), this Addendum shall be attached to Negative Declaration 98-3, shall be considered prior to the making of a final decision on the subdivision map for the proposed residential project, but it shall not be circulated for public review. C:\My nocumenu\SuM,visions\Tenuuve Tmca Map 15831Neg Ikc 98-3 Addendum.doclW C1-30-01 Tentative Tract Map 15832 (Avalon Homes) 321 Seal Beach Boulevard City Council Staff Report February 12, 2001 ATTACHMENT 7 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15832 T--Wtive Tree Map 15832 (AW. Ho..)-CCSR 38