HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem N gala odO
May 8, 2000 ' G
,(e 0
STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Attention: Keith Till, City Manager
From: Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner, Department of Development Services
Subject: PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99-3,
LIMIT THE NUMBER OF ITEMS OF INFORMATION
THAT CAN BE PLACED ON A TEMPORARY BANNER
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
After receiving all public testimony and considering the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, the City Council has the following options:
1) Adopt the Zone Text Amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission
(the appropriate Ordinance has been prepared and is attached as Attachment A).
2) Adopt the Zone Text Amendment with modifications based on testimony received
and concerns of the City Council.
3) Refer the recommendation back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration if
new, material information is presented which was not considered by the Planning
Commission, or if additional provisions are proposed to be added to the Ordinance
which were not considered by the Commission.
4) Take no action.
DISCUSSION
Applicant: City of Seal Beach
Location: Citywide.
Agenda Item A/
Request: To consider an amendment to the Code of the City of Seal
Beach to limit the number of items of information that can
be placed on a temporary banner within the City to be
more consistent with the sign provisions of the City Code.
Currently there is no limit on the number of items of
information that can be placed on a temporary banner.
Code Sections: Chapter 28, Section 28-1801 of the Code of the City of Seal
Beach
Environmental Review: The proposed Zone Text Amendment is Categorically
Exempt pursuant to Section 15305 and Section 15061(b)(3).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Zone Text Amendment on
August 4, 1999, and determined to recommend approval to the City Council and adopted the
appropriate Resolution on a 3-1-1 vote, with Commissioner Larson dissenting and Commissioner
Cutuli absent.
The proposed zone text amendment would change Section 28-1801 of the Code of the City of
Seal Beach to limit the number of items of information which could be placed on a temporary
banner within the city. The intent of this code amendment would be to make the banner
provisions within the code to be substantially similar to the sign provisions within the code. By
placing several items of information on a banner, whose size is restricted, several, "cluttered"
banners have been placed on businesses within the City. This amendment would force
temporary banners to be used for advertisement of short term specials only, which is the intent
of the code as is written.
FISCAL IMPACT
Since this Zone Text Amendment was initiated by the City, the costs of processing and enforcement
will be borne solely by the City. No other implementation costs are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommended adoption of the proposed Zone Text Amendment 99-3
through the adoption of Resolution 99-25, adopted on August 4, 1999. This recommendation was
approved on a 3-1-1 vote of the Planning Commission.
Agenda Item
Public Hearing-Zone Text Amendment 99-3
Temporary Banners
City Council Staff Report
May 8, 2000
Staff has prepared the appropriate ordinance for City Council consideration based upon the
Commission's action on this matter (Attachment A).
044., k
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Development Services Department
NOTED AND APPROVED
il
Keith . Till I '' .:(-1.:
City Manager
Attachments: (4)
ATTACHMENT A: Proposed Ordinance No. , An Ordinance of the
City Council of the City of Seal Beach Amending
Chapter 28 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Seal Beach
Municipal Code Amending Section 28-1801,
Limiting the number of items of information that
can be placed on a temporary banner within the
city
ATTACHMENT B: Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-25, A
Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City
of Seal Beach, California, Recommending to the City
Council Approval of Zoning Text Amendment 99-3,
Amending Section 28-1801, Limiting the number
of items of information that can be placed on a
temporary banner within the city
ATTACHMENT C: Planning Commission Minutes of August 4, 1999.
3
Public Hearing-Zone Text Amendment 99-3
Temporary Banners
City Council Staff Report
May 8, 2000
ATTACHMENT D: Planning Commission Staff Report of August 4, 1999.
* * * *
4
Public Hearing-Zone Text Amendment 99-3
Temporary Banners
City Council Staff Report
May 8, 20(X)
ATTACHMENT B
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-25, A
Resolution of the Planning Commission of the
City of Seal Beach, California, Recommending
to the City Council Approval Of Zoning Text
Amendment 99-3, Amending Section 28-1800,
Limiting the number of items of information
that can be placed on a temporary banner
within the City.
10
RESOLUTION NUMBER 99-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 99-3, AMENDING
SECTION 28-1801 TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF ITEMS OF
INFORMATION THAT MAY BE PLACED ON TEMPORARY
BANNERS IN THE CITY.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
Section 1. At its meeting of August 4, 1999, the Planning Commission
considered Zoning Text Amendment 99-3. This amendment would limit the number of items of
information on banners that are located on buildings on streets with a speed limit of 35 MPH or
greater to three (3) items of information; and on streets with a speed limit of less than 35 MPH,
the limit would be two (2) items of information.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15305 and § II.B of the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff has determined as follows: The application for Zoning Text
Amendment 99-3 is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif Code of Regs. § 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations), because it consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in average slope of less
than 20% and does not result in any changes in land use or density; and, pursuant to
§ 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the approval
may have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on August 4, 1999 to consider Zone Text Amendment 99-3.
Section 4. The record of the hearing of August 4, 1999 indicates the
following:
(a) At said public hearing there was oral and written testimony and evidence
received by the Planning Commission.
(b) The proposed text amendment will revise the City's zoning ordinance and
enhance the ability of the City to ensure orderly and planned development in the City through an
amendment of the zoning requirements.
(c) The proposed text amendment will require that temporary banners be
limited in the number of items of information in the following manner: Those banners located on
buildings which face streets with speed limits of greater than 35 MPH will be limited to three(3)
items of information and those banners located on streets with speed limits less than 35 MPH be
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-3
August 4, 1999
limited to two (2) items of information.
Section 5. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated
in §4 of this resolution and pursuant to §§ 28-2600 of the City's Code, the Planning Commission
makes the following findings:
(a) Zoning Text Amendment 99-3 is consistent with the provisions of the various
elements of the City's General Plan. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General
Plan. The proposed amendment is administrative in nature and will not result in changes
inconsistent with the existing provisions of the General Plan.
(b) The proposed text amendment will revise the City's zoning ordinance and
enhance the ability of the City to ensure orderly and planned development in the City through an
amendment of the zoning requirements.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby
recommends approval of Zoning Text Amendment 99-3 to the City Council subject to the
following:
1. Article 18. Subsection (3) of Section 28-1801 of Chapter 28 of The Code of the City of
Seal Beach is hereby amended by adding a new section (e) to read as follows, and revising
existing sections (e) through (m) to sections (f) through (n):
"(e) No more than three (3) items of information shall be permitted on temporary
banners that are to be located on buildings that face streets with speed limits
greater than 35 MPH and no more than two (2) items of information shall be
permitted on temporary banners that are to be located on buildings that face streets
with speed limits less than 35 MPH. An example of one item of information would
be the name of the business, specialty item, unique service, etc."
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach
at a meeting thereof held on the 4th day of August, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Hood, and"Lyon
NOES: Commissioners Larson
ABSENT: Commissioners Cutul i
or- )(ic,
411) irOZA
Bria�. Brown, MD, airman
Plan ing Commission
Page 3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-3
August 4, 1999
Whittenberg, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 4
,
Public Hearing-Zone Text Amendment 99-3
Temporary Banners
City Council Staff Report
May 8, 2000
ATTACHMENT C
Planning Commission Minutes of August 4, 2000
11
1 CITY OF SEAL BEACH
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3
4 Minutes of August 4, 1999
5
6
7 Chairman Brown called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission to
8 order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 4, 1999. The meeting was held in the City
9 Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.'
10
11 ROLL CALL
12
13 Present: Chairman Brown
14 Commissioners Hood, Larson, and Lyon
15
16 Also
17 Present: Department of Development Services
18 Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
19 Craig Steele, City Attorney
20
21 Absent: Commissioner Cutuli
22 Lee Whittenberg, Director Development Services
23
24 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Larson to excuse Commissioner Cutuli.
25
26 MOTION CARRIED: 4 — 0
27 AYES: Brown, Hood, Larson, and Lyon
28 NOES: None
29 ABSENT: Cutuli
30
31
32 AGENDA APPROVAL
33
34 Mr. Reg Clewley requested that Items 1 and 2 be removed from the Consent Calendar.
35
36 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Larson to approve the Agenda as amended.
37
38 MOTION CARRIED: 4 — 0
39 AYES: Brown, Hood, Larson, and Lyon
40 NOES: None
41 ABSENT: Cutuli
42
43
44
These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
1
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
2
3 Chairperson Brown opened oral communications.
4
5 Mr. Reg Clewley inquired whether Chairperson Brown and the Commissioners had
6 received a copy of a letter written by Dr. Michelle A. Brendel and also a copy of a letter
7 addressed to the Planning Commission from Ms. Sue Corbin.
8
9 Ms. Sue Corbin inquired regarding the system used to deliver mail to the members of
10 the Planning Commission. She claimed she brought in an item today to be given to the
11 Commissioners, and had previously delivered a withdrawal of an appeal that was not
12 delivered to the Planning Commissioners. She stated that this was happening
13 frequently. Ms. Corbin said that she was told that in the absence of Mr. Lee
14 Whittenberg, the City Attorney would be consulted regarding this issue. She said she
15 did not believe the City Attorney should determine how the Commissioners' mail is
16 delivered. Ms. Corbin indicated that a standardized system for delivery of mail to the
17 Planning Commission should be established, and mail should not be diverted, as
18 timeliness was critical to the decision making of the Commission.
19
20 Chairperson Brown stated that Mr. Whittenberg was not present tonight, and that this
21 item would be placed on the agenda. He stated that mail should be addressed to the
22 Planning Commission do the City of Seal Beach and a copy of the items would then be
23 distributed to each of the Commissioners. Mr. Steele commented that on many
24 occasions items for inclusion on the agenda arrive on the day of the scheduled meeting
25 making it difficult to have them copied and distributed in a timely manner. He
26 recommended that these items be mailed a week in advance of the meeting in order to
27 include them with the Agenda packet when it is delivered to the Commissioners.
28 Chairperson Brown indicated the e-mail addresses for the Commissioners appear on
29 the City website, and that items for consideration for the Agenda can be forwarded via
30 e-mail, either directly to the Commissioners or do the City.
31
32
33 CONSENT CALENDAR
34
35 1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 7, 1999.
36
37
38 Mr. Reg Clewley stated that the minutes made a fairly good representation of his
39 statements, but that the word "uh" had been inserted in several instances where the
40 word "ahh" would be appropriate. He requested that the minutes reflect this change.
41
42 Chairperson Brown referring to Page 14, Line 7 of the Planning Commission minutes of
43 July 7, 1999, indicated that he did not recall making this statement and did not know
44 where it came from. He stated that the statement from Dr. Brendel's letter, "including
45 the result of the straw vote," did not make sense either. He requested that this line be
46 stricken from the minutes.
47
2
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Larson to approve the Minutes of July 7, 1999 as
2 amended.
3
4 MOTION CARRIED: 4 — 0
5 AYES: Brown, Hood, Larson, and Lyon
6 NOES: None
7 ABSENT: Cutuli
8
9
10 2. Site Plan Review 98-1
11
12 To revise and reduce a previously approved site plan from a maximum 286,957
13 square foot commercial shopping center plus a 28,100 square foot outdoor
14 garden center to a maximum of 286,967 square feet, including a 10,000 square
15 foot outdoor garden center on a 26-acre parcel located on property at the
16 northeast corner of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud.
17
18 Recommendation: Approve, subject to conditions, by adoption of Resolution 99-26.
19
20 Reg Clewley stated that from the way the item was worded, it appeared that the square
21 footage was increasing rather than decreasing. He stated that he did not understand
22 how items related to this commercial business development could continue to be
23 approved or disapproved while this project was under litigation. Mr. Steele noted that
24 the Staff Report clearly states 286,967 square feet throughout. Mr. Clewley stated that
25 the report was terribly written and suggested that this item be continued to the next
26 meeting after it had been "properly worded," and it could then be approved. Mr. Steel
27 explained that in the Agenda description the first reference to the size of the center
28 (286,957) is a typographical error. The square footage should be 286,967 as noted in
29 the second reference. This square footage would include the 10,000 square foot
30 outdoor garden center.
31
32 Ms. Sue Corbin stated that apparently the City Attorney believed that the Commission
33 was going to "rubber stamp" this item. She said that changes on this development
34 should not be made until after the EIR is approved.
35
36 Commissioner Lyon noted that Page 3 of the Staff Report reflected the Building
37 Footprint as 286,967 square feet. Mr. Steele explained that the difference was that
38 previous approval had been given for a 286,967 square foot commercial center that did
39 not include in its total area a 28,100 square foot outdoor garden center. He noted that
40 the item for approval at tonight's meeting was for a 286,967 square foot commercial
41 center which now includes the outdoor garden center, which has been reduced to
42 10,000 square feet. Commissioner Larson asked if with the current litigation, whether
43 the Commission is legally authorized to proceed with the recommendation by Staff. Mr.
44 Steele said that Staff and the City Attorney's office were attempting to process this
45 application in compliance with what the court had requested at the last hearing on the
46 matter. With regard to the commercial center, the judge stated that he wanted to be
47 sure that what was approved on this site is only 286,967 square feet of total commercial
3
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 development. The judge stated that if this were the case, there would be no need to
2 revise and re-circulate the EIR. Mr. Steele said that issues remain regarding the
3 residential development, and that City Council has directed the City Attorney to revise
4 the EIR accordingly.
5
6 Mr. Clewley stated that this proposal was eliminating over 10,000 square feet where
7 plants could bloom. He began to discuss the loss of the eucalyptus trees when
8 Chairperson Brown interrupted to ask Mr. Clewley to restrict himself to the City
9 Attorney's comments on this issue. Mr. Clewley stated that it would have been better to
10 stick with the original plan for the larger, outdoor garden center, which would now
11 become part of the parking lot, and instead of breathing more oxygen we would now be
12 breathing exhaust fumes from cars.
13
14 Ms. Corbin said that this was a "sneaky way of pushing something through that doesn't
15 allow for public comment." She stated that she had no idea there had been changes in
16 the EIR. She said that the public did not receive full disclosure and that this was "rotten,
17 dirty, and it is indicative of the way our law firm operates."
18
19 Commissioner Hood stated that he had not understood why this Site Plan Review was
20 necessary until the City Attorney had explained it. He asked if this information
21 appeared in the Staff Report. Mr. Steele responded that it did not.
22
23 MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Lyon to approve Site Plan Review 98-1 and adopt
24 Resolution 99-11.
25
26 MOTION CARRIED: 3 — 0 — 1 — 1
27 AYES: Brown, Larson, and Lyon
28 NOES: None
29 ABSTAIN: Hood
30 ABSENT: Cutuli
31
32
33 SCHEDULED MATTERS
34
35 None.
36
37
38 PUBLIC HEARINGS
39
40 3. Zoning Text Amendment 99-2
41 Citywide
42
43 Applicant/Owner: City of Seal Beach
44 Request: To consider an amendment to the Code of the City of Seal
45 Beach to reduce the required side yard setbacks in
46 residential housing zones that abut streets. The setback
4
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 requirement is currently 15% in all housing zones (RLD,
2 RMD, and RHD) and is proposed to be reduced to 10% in
3 the RLD, RMD, AND RHD zones.
4
5 Recommendation: Recommend approval to the City Council.
6
7 Staff Report
8
9 Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
10 Planning Department.) He stated this request was to change the side yard setbacks for
11 Residential Low Density (RLD), Residential Medium Density (RMD), and Residential
12 High Density (RHD) housing zones that abut streets. The current requirement is 15%
13 and Staff is petitioning to reduce this to 10%. When the Planning Commission
14 considered Variance 98-2 the Commission requested that a Zoning Text Amendment be
15 drafted to deal with side yard setbacks. He stated that the Commission had granted 3
16 Variances identical to this request. Reduction of setbacks would allow for greater usage
17 of residential property. Staff determined that there would be no line of sight problems
18 and little or no fiscal impact to the City. Recommendation is to approve Zoning Text
19 Amendment 99-2.
20
21 Chairperson Brown stated that in making this recommendation he was not
22 recommending it citywide, but was referring specifically to the beach stub-alleys to allow
23 residents to beautify this area. He asked if the Zoning Text Amendment could be re-
24 written to reflect this. He also asked if Staff had misunderstood his recommendation or
25 if Staff was in fact proposing to make this a citywide change. Mr. Cummins stated that
26 Staff understood this to be implemented citywide. He again emphasized that it would
27 not create any building separation or fire issues and would allow residents greater
28 usage of their property. Chairperson Brown inquired of the City Attorney if he recalled
29 Chairperson Brown's recommendation. Mr. Steele responded that he recalled
30 discussion of the beach stub-properties, but he did not recall discussion of targeting the
31 beach stub-properties only. Commissioner Lyon asked by how much this would reduce
32 the side yards. Chairperson Brown explained that it would depend upon the size of the
33 property.
34
35 Public Hearing
36
37 Mr. Reg Clewley stated that reduction of side yard setbacks could interfere with
38 installation of public signage (stop signs, stop lights) at corners. He also stated that this
39 would obliterate the view from one block corner to another. He stated that what the City
40 needs is a local coastal program to responsibly approach requests to build. Mr. Clewley
41 said that when this issue came up for discussion, it was in reference to stub-alley
42 properties on the Gold Coast only. Mr. Clewley stated that rather than issue variances
43 on a case-by-case basis, the Commission had decided to request a zoning text
44 amendment specifically for the Gold Coast. He said that if this amendment were
45 approved citywide, it would create discrepancies in the side yard setback requirements
46 between properties in Old Town and properties on "The Hill." He stated that this could
5
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 also create access problems for emergency service personnel and equipment. Mr.
2 Clewley stated that approving this amendment would pollute our building code, as it
3 would create many problems between property owners.
4
5 Ms. Sue Corbin requested that this item be tabled. She stated that the City would have
6 a local coastal plan very shortly. She said that the City needs to have uniformity in
7 requirements for property owners. Ms. Corbin noted that property was recently
8 purchased in Surfside and the owner wants to build a structure that the residents of
9 Surfside do not want. She stated that the City was going to be forced to have a local
10 coastal plan and, if not, she would go to court to pursue this, and ensure that the plan
11 would protect Surfside also.
12
13 Chairperson Brown closed the public hearing.
14
15 Mr. Cummins stated that he had spoken to the City Engineer, Steve Badum, and Mr.
16 Badum had assured him that there would be no line of sight issues.
17
18 Chairperson Brown stated that unfortunately, he believed Staff had misunderstood his
19 request. He said that his objective was to allow residents near the stub-alleys to
20 landscape on the other side of the walls to help beautify the alleys. Chairperson Brown
21 stated that it was not his intent to reduce side yard setbacks to allow property owners to
22 build on their property. He stated that he would vote against Zoning Text Amendment
23 99-2 as it did not reflect what he had intended to accomplish.
24
25 Commissioner Larson stated that he sympathized with property owners who were
26 subject to side yard restrictions, and that he was not comfortable with granting
27 variances on a case-by-case basis as opposed to approving a citywide ordinance for
28 side yard setbacks. He said that he did not feel there would be a problem with
29 obstruction of site view for automobiles driving by or for emergency vehicles.
30
31 Chairperson Brown asked to clarify an issue regarding the Variance approved for a
32 property on the 300 Block of 3rd Street. He stated that the issue was whether the
33 property owners could build new construction within the side yard setback. There was
34 pre-existing construction within the side yard setback, which the variance allowed them
35 to keep, but they were not allowed to build new construction within the side yard
36 setback. He stated that traditionally the Commission had allowed property owners to
37 keep pre-existing structures, but that the Commission had never allowed a Variance to
38 intrude into a setback on a new structure. He also noted that the copy of the resolution
39 on the Ocean Avenue property provided to him was not readable. Mr. Cummins stated
40 that this was the best copy that could be taken from the microfiche, and, unfortunately, it
41 was difficult to read.
42
43 Commissioner Hood requested that this item be referred back to Staff for "rethinking or
44 redevelopment." Chairperson Brown indicated that if the Commission denied this
45 amendment, Staff could redevelop it and revisit the item if they so decided.
46 Commissioner Hood asked Chairperson Brown if he preferred flat out denial of the
6
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 amendment as opposed to referring the item back to Staff, to which Chairperson Brown
2 responded that he preferred to deny.
3
4 Commissioner Lyon inquired as to the number of wide lots on side streets having a 15%
5 setback requirement. Mr. Cummins stated that there were many of these lots.
6 Commissioner Lyon again referred to the stub-alleys in reference to the side yard
7 setbacks, to which Chairperson Brown responded that his original intent had been to
8 allow landscaping on the city side of the stub-alleys abutting the walls which separate
9 the properties from the alleys. Mr. Steele confirmed that Chairperson Brown did not
10 intend to make what was approved in the last Variance a legal use. Chairperson Brown
11 again restated his intent to allow for beautification of the stub alleys leading to the
12 beach. Mr. Steele stated that his impression was that Staff was attempting to legalize
13 what had been permitted by the Variance on the Ocean Avenue property. He stated
14 that Chairperson Brown's recommendation was more of an encroachment permit, which
15 has been used by some of the beach cities. Chairperson Brown stated that if Staff felt it
16 was a good idea to have a 10% side yard setback, then he would like to see further
17 analysis by Staff on this issue.
18
19 Commissioner Lyon read from Page 3 of the Staff Report regarding previous issuance
20 of Variances for reduction of side yard setbacks and stated that only 2 had been
21 approved. Mr. Cummins stated that 3 had been approved. Commissioner Lyon said
22 that making this a citywide amendment could be like "opening a can of worms."
23
24 MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Hood to deny an amendment to the Code of the City
25 of Seal Beach to reduce the required side yard setbacks in residential housing zones
26 that abut streets. The setback requirement is currently 15% in all housing zones (RLD,
27 RMD, and RHD) and is proposed to be reduced to 10% in the RLD, RMD, AND RHD
28 zones.
29
30 MOTION CARRIED: 4 — 0
31 AYES: Brown, Hood, Larson, and Lyon
32 NOES: None
33 ABSENT: Cutuli
34
35
36 4. Zoning Text Amendment 99-3
37 Citywide
38
39 Applicant/Owner: City of Seal Beach
40 Request: To consider an amendment to the Code of the City of Seal
41 Beach to limit the number of items that may be placed on a
42 temporary banner in the city. Specifically, the proposal will
43 limit the number of items of information placed on the
44 temporary banner to three (3) on streets with speed limits of
45 35 MPH or more, and proposes to limit banners to two (2)
46 items of information on streets less than 35 MPH.
7
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 Recommendation: Recommend approval to the City Council.
2
3 Staff Report
4
5 Chairperson Brown asked if this was a modification to the original Banner Permit
6 approved by the Commission, to which Mr. Cummins responded in the affirmative.
7 Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
8 Planning Department.) He stated that this request was to limit the number of items of
9 information that could be placed on a temporary banner. Mr. Cummins noted that the
10 request would be the same as the sign ordinance but would require that banners placed
11 on buildings fronting streets with speed limits of less than 35 MPH have only two (2)
12 items of information, and banners placed on building fronting streets with speed limits of
13 35 MPH or more have no more than three (3) items of information. He stated that
14 currently there was no limit to the information that could be placed on a temporary
15 banner, which has led to banners that are very cluttered and aesthetically unpleasing
16 being placed on buildings. The intent of the code is to allow these temporary banners
17 as supplemental advertising and clearly states that banners may be displayed for only
18 30 days at a time, no more than 3 times a year, with at least 14 days between displays.
19 He stated that currently there are applications for temporary banners that do not fit the
20 spirit of the code. Mr. Cummins stated that approval of this zoning text amendment
21 would make the Banner Ordinance consistent with the City Sign Ordinance and would
22 present little or no fiscal impact tot he City.
23
24 Commissioner Lyon asked for a definition of a banner. Mr. Cummins responded that it
25 had to be affixed to a building. Mr. Cummins presented examples of acceptable and
26 non-acceptable banners. Chairperson Brown asked how a determination would be
27 made on the number of items on a banner. Mr. Cummins responded that he would
28 complete approval of banners. Chairperson Brown asked the City Attorney if
29 enforcement of this banner requirement would be feasible. Mr. Steele responded that
30 prior to approval Staff could work with the business owners in providing
31 recommendations for creating banners that would be in compliance with this
32 amendment. Chairperson Brown asked if pre-approval of banners was currently
33 required. Mr. Cummins responded that once a banner was approved a tag was issued
34 to permit display of the banner for a specified time period. He stated that although
35 there was an ordinance restricting items on signs within the City, there currently was no
36 restriction for banners, and this zoning text amendment would incorporate enforcement
37 of item clutter on temporary banners.
38
39 Public Hearing
40
41 Ms. Sue Corbin noted a Main Street business that had erected a 5-foot long structure,
42 which had been built into the easement, advertising a business special. She stated that
43 these are a safety hazard, and that all citizens have to pay if someone falls over them
44 and is injured. She said that the easement is there for safety reasons and that if this
45 law is passed it would not be enforced, as the City does not enforce laws for any of the
8
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 Main Street businesses. She states it is unsafe to walk on Main Street and business
2 owners need to get back to following the law.
3
4 Mr. Reg Clewley stated his opposition to Zoning Text Amendment 99-3 as written. He
5 said that banners should not be construed as being exempt from the Environmental
6 Quality Review Act and proposed an amendment to this amendment, requiring that all
7 applications for banners be approved by the Environmental Quality Control Board. He
8 stated that Staff was not qualified to determine what is aesthetically pleasing or what
9 constitutes 3 or more items per banner. He requested that the Commission deny
10 Zoning Text Amendment 99-3.
11
12 Commissioner Comments
13
14 Commissioner Larson asked who would make the determination of what was
15 aesthetically pleasing, as what is pleasing to one person might not be as pleasing to
16 another. He stated that the marketplace should make the determination of what they do
17 or do not like, and it should not be within City jurisdiction to decide what is "pretty," and
18 on this basis, he would vote against this amendment.
19
20 Commissioner Lyons stated he was in agreement with limiting the number of items
21 advertised on banners as too many items in advertisements make them ineffective.
22
23 Chairperson Brown stated that the City basically functions as "landlord" to Main Street,
24 with responsibility for furthering the interest of the community by increasing property
25 values, increasing sales tax revenues, and having a pleasant place to shop. He said
26 the City had not done a particularly effective job in this capacity, but because Seal
27 Beach has chosen to maintain a small town atmosphere with residents and visitors able
28 to walk down Main Street and stop to shop or dine, he feels that this is a reasonable
29 attempt by Staff to help keep the visual clutter to a minimum.
30
31 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Brown to approve Resolution 99-25 as presented.
32
33 MOTION CARRIED: 3 — 1 — 1
34 AYES: Brown, Hood, and Lyon
35 NOES: Larson
36 ABSENT: Cutuli
37
38
39 STAFF CONCERNS
40
41 Mr. Cummins reminded the Commissioners that election of a new Chairman and Vice-
42 Chairman was to be held at the next Planning Commission meeting.
43
44 Mr. Steele introduced Terrance Boga who would be replacing Mr. Steele as the City
45 Attorney for the City of Seal Beach beginning in the fall.
46
9
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 4, 1999
1 COMMISSION CONCERNS
2
3 Chairperson Brown referred to a letter received by the Commission regarding
4 O'Malley's On Main. He confirmed the Planning Commission had voted that O'Malley's
5 could not open for patio dining unless signage was posted on the church parking
6 spaces, but that this was not a scheduled agenda item. If the applicant was not able to
7 provide signage, he could reappear before the Commission or appeal to Ctiy Council.
8
9 Chairperson Brown referred to another letter received questioning the accuracy of the
10 minutes. He stated the intention of the minutes was not to provide a verbatim account
11 of meetings, and because videotapes of the meetings are made, he does not believe
12 Staff should expend a great deal of time with verbatim transcriptions. Chairperson
13 Brown stated that in the majority of organizations minutes are a summary of events,
14 which he believes to be more accurate. He said that the Resolutions provided
15 represent a word-for-word transcript of what was voted on. Chairperson Brown
16 requested that in the future Staff present a summarization of the minutes as opposed to
17 a verbatim account of proceedings.
18
19 Commissioner Hood agreed that the minutes should summarize what has taken place
20 (motions made, resolutions passed, etc.), and not have to reflect what everyone says.
21 Mr. Steele stated that the verbatim transcript of the meetings had evolved because of
22 complaints from members of the public who believed their statements had been
23 inaccurately summarized. Chairperson Brown confirmed that it was the consensus of
24 the Commission that minutes should reflect a summarization of events and not a
25 verbatim account and requested that Staff conform to this procedure.
26
27
28 ADJOURNMENT
29
30 Chairman Brown adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
31
32 Respectfully Submitted,
33
34
35 jc:::„
36
37 Carmen Alvarez
38 Executive Secretary
39 Planning Department
40
41
42 APPROVAL
43
44 The Commission on August 18, 1999 approved the Minutes of the Planning
45 Commission Meeting of Wednesday, August 4, 1999. .
10
Public Hearing-Zone Text Amendment 99-3
Temporary Banners
City Council Staff Report
May 8, 2000
ATTACHMENT D
Planning Commission Staff Report of August 4, 2000
12
August 4, 1999
STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
From: Department of Development Services
Subject: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 99-3
Limit the number of items of information to be placed on temporary banners in the
city
REQUEST
To limit the number of items of information that may be placed on temporary
banners within the city. Specifically, the proposal will limit the number of items of information
placed on the temporary banner to three (3) on streets with speed limits of 35 MPH or more,
and proposes to limit banners to two (2) items of information on streets less than 35 MPH.
DISCUSSION
This text amendment is proposed to limit the items of information
that are allowed on banners within the city. Currently, there is no limit to the number of items
of information that may be placed on a banner.
The current banner provision within the sign ordinance of the city Code allows businesses to
place as much information as they can get onto the banner. This can lead to clutter on the
banner and an aesthetically unpleasing advertisement of the business.
The intent of the Code is for banners to be temporary advertisements, being allowed to be
displayed for no longer than 30 days at a time, no more than 3 times a year, with at least 14
days in between banner displayings. Presumably, the code intended that these banners were to
be used for advertising of short term specials that a particular business may be offering.
However, currently there are temporary banners that have been applied for that do not fit the
spirit of the intended use of temporary banners. This has been particularly true along Main St.,
where the city approved a banner with 5 items of information, including: name, phone number,
type of business, special, and other general business information. These items of information
are all wording, causing significant clutter. In addition, this banner, by virtue of its allowable
placement on the building, has created a visual eyesore for the Main St. Area. (Photo provided
as attachment)
Staff recognizes the need to allow for different amounts of information to be displayed on
banners relative to the speed limit on the streets which front the business. A business along a
street with a speed limit greater than 35 MPH such as Seal Beach Blvd. or Pacific Coast
Staff Report-Zoning Text Amendment 99-3
August 4, 1999
Highway, which has very little pedestrian traffic relative to Main St., should be allowed more
items of information This could be name, phone number, and special, for example. Where as, a
business on a street with a speed limit less than 35 MPH could advertise the special and their
phone number.
In discussing this matter, staff has limited the number of options considered to two.
Specifically, these are: 1) limit the number of items of information placed on temporary
banners on streets with speed limits 35 MPH or greater to 3 items of information and limit the
number of items of information to 2 on banners which front streets with speed limits less than
35 MPH.; and (2) do nothing, thereby retaining the ability to place as much information as
wanted in the allowable space under the current Code requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT
Minor. Allocation of staff resources to prepare appropriate
Zone Text Amendment application, and processing of application for public hearings before
Planning Commission and City Council.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Commission, after receiving both
written and oral testimony presented during the public hearing, adopt a resolution
recommending approval of the zone text amendment to be forwarded to the City Council.
Staff has provided the Commission with two potential options in considering this proposal:
Recommend a limit be placed on the number of items of information to be placed on
a temporary banner within the city. Specifically, on streets with speed limits greater
than 35 MPH, three (3) items of information will be allowed to be placed on the
banner, and on streets with speed limits less than 35 MPH, two (2) items of
information will be allowed to be placed on the banner.
- No change— allow as much information as customer wants to be placed on the
banner.
FOR: August 4, 1999
Page 2
99-3 Banners
Staff Report-Zoning Text Amendment 99-3
August 4, 1999
Ai
Mac Cummins / F Whittenberg
Assistant Planner Director
Department of Development Services Department of Development Services
Attachments (2):
1. Proposed Resolution
2. Photos
Page 3
99-3 Banners
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NUMBER 99-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 99-3, AMENDING
SECTION 28-1801 TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF ITEMS OF
INFORMATION THAT MAY BE PLACED ON TEMPORARY
BANNERS IN THE CITY.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
Section 1. At its meeting of August 4, 1999, the Planning Commission
considered Zoning Text Amendment 99-3. This amendment would limit the number of items of
information on banners that are located on buildings on streets with a speed limit of 35 MPH or
greater to three (3) items of information; and on streets with a speed limit of less than 35 MPH,
the limit would be two (2) items of information.
Section 2. Pursuant to 14 Calif Code of Regs. § 15305 and § II.B of the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff has determined as follows: The application for Zoning Text
Amendment 99-3 is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif Code of Regs. § 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations), because it consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in average slope of less
than 20% and does not result in any changes in land use or density; and, pursuant to
§ 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the approval
may have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 3. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on August 4, 1999 to consider Zone Text Amendment 99-3.
Section 4. The record of the hearing of August 4, 1999 indicates the
following:
(a) At said public hearing there was oral and written testimony and evidence
received by the Planning Commission.
(b) The proposed text amendment will revise the City's zoning ordinance and
enhance the ability of the City to ensure orderly and planned development in the City through an
amendment of the zoning requirements.
(c) The proposed text amendment will require that temporary banners be
limited in the number of items of information in the following manner: Those banners located on
buildings which face streets with speed limits of greater than 35 MPH will be limited to three (3)
items of information and those banners located on streets with speed limits less than 35 MPH be
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-3
August 4, 1999
limited to two (2) items of information.
Section 5. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated
in §4 of this resolution and pursuant to §§ 28-2600 of the City's Code, the Planning Commission
makes the following findings:
(a) Zoning Text Amendment 99-3 is consistent with the provisions of the various
elements of the City's General Plan. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General
Plan. The proposed amendment is administrative in nature and will not result in changes
inconsistent with the existing provisions of the General Plan.
(b) The proposed text amendment will revise the City's zoning ordinance and
enhance the ability of the City to ensure orderly and planned development in the City through an
amendment of the zoning requirements.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby
recommends approval of Zoning Text Amendment 99-3 to the City Council subject to the
following:
1. Article 18. Subsection (3) of Section 28-1801 of Chapter 28 of The Code of the City of
Seal Beach is hereby amended by adding a new section (e) to read as follows, and revising
existing sections (e) through (m) to sections (f)through (n):
"(e) No more than three(3) items of information shall be permitted on temporary
banners that are to be located on buildings that face streets with speed limits
greater than 35 MPH and no more than two (2) items of information shall be
permitted on temporary banners that are to be located on buildings that face streets
with speed limits less than 35 MPH. An example of one item of information would
be the name of the business, specialty item, unique service, etc."
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach
at a meeting thereof held on the 4th day of August, 1999, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
Brian M. Brown, MD, Chairman
Planning Commission
Page 3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-3
August 4, 1999
Lee Whittenberg, Secretary
Planning Commission
AAA A
•
Page 4
CA O
o 5 s"
r.
p"' O d'
U
� �
a
O
Cl)r7i
I)
O �
O
ci) r24N
(4_4
O
cn
5 kr)
,-1:7
;_ii
.� c.)
II
,i
c...)
4-
•
0 .�.-)
CI) a) U
5 O
'4-4c_,
(i.1.)
• v..4
....,
>..
ct Z —
• •
o
• . ., . .. . .........„...:.::.*:.:.............,. ... .... • .:•• :„.......:::.:,.. * •
. ............,..:.„7„...... ..„.. . • •. :::.:.:..:.... . :::„4..&...„...z........,.....:„..:.•mz,A
...„:.:::.:.: . .. :.. : ...... ••.:...O
. ...::,..,.. ........ . . , .... .:•......,..:. ,„. iW
...:,...:...xtiii........x.1:40o......I.g.........:,.... . ... . 4,,,,... .. :....... .. . .„ . ...{{ve...I)
9
::, . :': ‘,:>::.;:::.i:”... A'.. .... ::::::;:i*:. It.'" -:-..:...t.' -1t*0 Or:
(I) 44' .1...,....4...,. . .,-..:: " t.:..88:,',...: ... -,....,.,1 ,.. .t..-.....,,..-....•.:,1 :.? ti, ...- .,
--.. .i.:,::::;,. ...: . - ..- -,.jiez. :-.11t-,- . .....'4:... ,C,..'.:. ,:V?**Nt; '. ::::ii].'::.
....;',41.:' . .,t:::.: ote.-... .*:,...: . .:-...$.1,i.-.... ..,..lia. . 1..1 ,„:1•:...i...
ti:
.aa�:�az,-..♦.., rs v:� �>��Q..i-,11. 9nt�, \>.. .
\ K
♦ v
•
Q``Yiv.'� a ? '4
i
•I
Tye Y
o
w '
t4.4.%S.. :.':::;...e*".774,,:''..,..3•: . '
+i.� r.,
• 46:' .:t; mizt< tea. w• ., aaaa.@ e ,;:{; ,^
,gtidNceoearf..Q b•{ .% IX,Y,\z) rk : -'Pv • 0, r �i r ••
y
- ` i.......... ....0...„,......t:. .,•
J
^ .� i
f
Y 7:?:,,,,,..
.y�W�`'� \Q\ /
.. °".:
. \ \ \
YYyy $Z,
^.r'7F _.M1 e"x`�`-.. ,A.T�.axw�c` \\uaa +ate \ u�oiaroi7`a�f�'RYc�icW iri+
1Me'
= a.....? s S. r.-a-1`_ •%.,....S T :\Y )Y.v.A•>. S l 4S\>)t t+`S YY JtM C > t
. { Gr •
tFStGJ • J K J )\ Y S �' Y J f Y
,xLt� ,•',,)'�` '•,i�.'m`' ��� to
yw
5.
"4 1
C)II/ 43 **.'..ipOit5•}"•,v ::+..2wr w T }... #mac. .. 4 555
M "T ,mow "T`�,,R', rROK ` ye,}\
ffx- gg�p
.r.'v 'r••, ti+� : J%u^i. <, ti` ,V`ti \...;,....'``......i....
r.
A.
:. `Ci:N::- •^:yi'^} 333 \ x ?\., .xf:
tO ,: frr "rte ` \
5
eir5.
< ' :Tj !
rs...
..,,,,,,,,s„...s.. , .,.,:n. ,........ • :Ad,,,t„,,.
. .:iiiiiiiii. i_iiiii.„.
>4 \
O
O
C7 v,
CrT1
ci)W
r.4
•
0
• -
C5
_+..) E
ck, 0
cd ...„
$. 0 .
, to
.,—) 5 . .. O
tt (L) •—
4.) c14 Cly a) a;
4) ~
P4 ci) Q ,_,
• •
Ciz:
T-c .
:„,,,..„:„.„,
.. - ,:. ,. :
. .
`z... f
..,.....„,,„‘,...„,,„„. ::, .....:. _.
. ,..,......;„:...........,„.:_,4,::.. ....„,:s: ..., ...
(Id . . . .:; ,:. .,..... 4: .:-.
g:Lui ... .. •"'''''' ty N:i.:i:: ;. .
% \ H` ....,•02:r.
Pmi .:f . : ':c-N.I'.44''''''.i''' 1.A.
3 , c
'`\I
�+.\ \' <,<3<a`''t`'.:;t-y.t.r.; ♦ rix
° 4� ratY}n .-
CZ1 >SY.. a2• tr >v : tiY
t / ...•;:...i. o>.�;..;. r�
.} `` r`` - _ f • f :;'i
y •
CA ‘br`�.''?•'}4::'i..::.. -:'-:`f. Y�'}\.`{;C}{f;'2:1f:.:,�t:y:.. f,:. A.♦-. . �Y'.....-,. ?,,:,:'v
♦ fr '
0.
r: 4 ..• ••• ••• ... ..........
\ \\� w'`,�'.y £ 4.1...:;/::'::4::}:4:'''.6%;.:::......
'. x\ '''‘...1:::::::':
t
r:14
•
-. �` �Tj .
•
Ct
kyr•:.{,Y °o
rZli
•
x
,,t
i,-.',!•`-'''
W '.:,:.
g <
-..: -4, ,
s.4
i : 1
.56
PC)o
U o
tt .
(o
c
a, • � o
5 . ,v—)4 v)
a,
v. 01 el 1
c/) <
• •