HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2001-11-13 Supplemental - Request to California Coastal Commission for Approval of Modifications to Special ConditionsOF
BY FACSIMLE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL FILE COPY
COPY TO PETER M. DOUGLAS AND STEVE RYNAS
IN COMPLIANCE WITH
EX PARTE COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS
November 6, 2001
Sara Wan, Chairperson
California Coastal Commission
45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94105 -2219
Dear Chairperson Wan and Commissioners:
SUBJECT: APPLICATION NO. 5 -01 -288
HELLMAN PROPERTIES, LLC
HELLMAN RANCH, SEAL BEACH
City of Seal Beach Requests Approval with Modifications to Special
Conditions:
The City of Seal Beach requests the Commission approve this application as in
conformance with the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act, with modifications to the
recommended special conditions as discussed below. This project has been the subject of
extensive and prolonged review at both the City and Coastal Commission, and we urge
the Commission to support the overall recommendation of your staff for approval.
Overall, the City concurs with and supports the recommended conditions of your staff.
However, in reviewing the Commission Staff Report, the City believes the analysis and
conclusions of staff require clarification or are incorrect regarding certain issues. The
A: \Hellman Ranch Comment Lenu- 5 -01- 288.4= \LW 11 -0 l
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -188
Heitman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
remainder of the letter provides a summary of the requested modifications and then
discusses in more detail those areas of clarification and concern to the City of Seal Beach.
Summary of Requested Modifications to Conditions:
Special Condition 1.A. The City of Seal Beach requests that the final "Notice of
Intent to Issue Permit' clearly and specifically enumerate each of the referenced
"relevant requirements ", so that our Planning and Engineering Departments are very
clear as to the responsibilities of the project proponent that must be complied with prior
to the City issuing any grading or building permits for the subject residential
development.
Special Condition 2(e): The City requests clarification as to why construction
debris and sediment may not be disposed at a legal disposal site within the coastal zone,
if such sites exist.
Special Condition 4.A.0): The City requests that the language be revised to read as
follows, which is in conformance with the stated concerns of the City and is in
compliance with condition language regarding the fence analysis recommended by
Commission staff:
"4.A(i) ;ip2ssa41e Perimeter Walls and Fencing. All walls and fencing
within VTTM 15402 facing Gum Grove Park or the lowlands shall be
constructed of solid materials or have decorative bus which are spaced no
more than 4 inches apart'-
impmsablo by that shall minimize the entry of common domesticated
animals (e.g. dogs and cats).... prepared by a qualified biologist which
documents that the modified walls /fencing will be iffipmsabla by
shall minimize the entry of gash domesticated
animals to environmentally sensitive habitat including adjacent wetlands"
Special Condition 4.A(iii)(a): the City would request the language of Special
Condition 4.A.(iii)(a) be revised as follows:
"All landscaping for too __snt all portions of VTTM
15402, except for private residential parcels, and all areas proposed
and required under this coastal development permit to be landscaped
outside of VTTM 15402 shall be, to the fullest extent practicable of
southern California native plants appropriate to the natural habitat type.
;7Ajs _ ....1:........)l loo... Alp V4Z;T6 1 CAM ingioding 1........r
is 1... 1.._d......_..d ,.. ...:.,_ ,.0 .1� -,,..r ,�. M, All residential lot owners
shall be encouraged to utilize southern California native plants within
their private property landscaping plans to the greatest extent
Hellman Ranch Comment Lever- 5 41- 288.doc
City ojSeal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
Special Condition 4.A(iii)(b): The City requests the language of Special Condition
4.A.(iii)(b) be revised as follows:
"The landscape plan shall identify all landscaping for the proposed
development areas including common areas --°`...,r- .�.e:°•+tiel—�, and
landscaping along Seal Beach Boulevard."
Special Condition 4.A(iii)(d): The City would request the language of Special
Condition 4.A.(iii)(d) be revised in pertinent part as follows (proposed revisions affect
sentences 2 and 3 of said condition):
wipwksgs of wall .._,a _....c ...:.,.:_ a.,.:a.....:ava , o,,.�a. In addition to
shrubs and groundcover, specimen size trees (24 -inch
box minimum) shall be planted ^- aFy ' ^ f�°' °f °'^^°.'��r . as indicated on
the approved landscape plan in such a manner as to form a visual
landscape barrier to break up large expanses of wall or roof within
the identified viewshed, along the west/northwest facing sides of ..°
(Remainder of Special Condition language unchanged).
Special Condition 4.A(iii)(e): The City would request the Commission revise this
condition language as follows:
"All landscaping on individual residential lots shall be completed within
69 days a 180 days for the front yard and 365 days for the rear yard
after sampi '4°- of the close of escrow of each
residential lot"
SSoecial Condition 4.A(iv)(a): The City requests that this condition be deleted
based on the discussion pertinent to this proposed Special Condition, as indicated on
pages 10 and 11 below.
Special Condition 4.A.fiv)(b): The City requests that this condition be deleted
based on the discussion pertinent to this proposed Special Condition, as indicated on page
12 below.
Hellman Ranch Comment Lencr - 5 -01- 288Aoc
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -188
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
Special Condition 5.A. and Special Condition 5.B.: The City requests that these
conditions be deleted based on the discussion pertinent to this proposed Special
Condition, as indicated on pages 12 and 13 below.
Special Condition 7.A.: The City requests that the language be modified as
proposed below:
"Accordingly, any future Wtke room additions or
alterations that exceed the heieht or allowable floor area coverage of
the single family homes described in this permit,
P.@gwlPAi@As, eantions 13:252(a) (b) shall require an amendment to Permit
No 5 -01 -288 from the Commission or shall require an additional coastal
development permit from the Commission or from the applicable certified
local government"
Statement of Concerns of City of Seal Beach:
Clarification of Intent of Special Condition IA:
This proposed condition states "All relevant requirements of Coastal Development Permit
5 -97 -367, as amended by Coastal Development Permit 5 -97- 367 -A1, are hereby
incorporated by reference." The City of Seal Beach requests that the final "Notice of
Intent to Issue Permit" clearly and .specifically enumerate each of these "relevant
requirements ", so that our Planning and Engineering Departments are very clear as to the
responsibilities of the project proponent. It is most important for there to be close
coordination between the Coastal Commission and the City of Seal Beach during the
development of this project. It is also important for our permitting departments to clearly
understand all requirements prior to the City issuing grading, building and public
improvement permits for this project.
Clarification of Intent of Special Condition 2(k).
The condition indicates that construction debris and sediment "shall be disposed at a
legal disposal site outside the coastal zone." The City requests clarification as to why
construction debris and sediment may not be disposed at a legal disposal site within the
coastal zone, if such sites exist. The City is unclear as to the concern of the Commission
as to the proper disposal of construction debris and sediment, assuming the disposal is at
a "legal disposal site ", either within or outside of the coastal zone.
Hellman Ranch CmvMeem rafter - 5 -01- 288.&c
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
Concern regarding Condition Intent and Modification of Language of Special
Condition 4.Ad):
This proposed condition indicates that walls or fencing facing the lowlands or Gum
Grove Park "shall be constructed of materials or have decorative bars which are spaced
in a manner which renders the wall or fence impassable by common domesticated
animals (e.g. dogs and cats)" (Emphasis added). The language of the proposed
condition sets, in our opinion, an impossible standard to be met, that of rendering a wall
or fence "impassable to dogs and cats ". The City understands and concurs with the
concern of the Commission regarding the potential adverse impacts of domesticated
animals to the existing lowland habitat areas and Gum Grove Park. It is impossible to
design a fence or wall that will be impassable to dogs and cats; certain types of dogs, and
particularly cats, can jump or scale fences or walls of substantial height. The City is of
the opinion that it is impossible to render a fence impassable to dogs and cats.
The subject areas of the Hellman lowlands and Gum Grove Park, and the creatures that
inhabit or visit these areas, have been exposed to domestic animals in excess of 40 years.
In an urban environment with domestic animals being kept very close to such a vacant
area, it is impossible to prohibit domestic animals. If it is the intent of the Commission to
require either a solid wall or fence, or a wall or fence with closely spaced vertical features
that would generally prohibit animals from squeezing between the closely spaced vertical
features (as appears to be the intent based on language within the last sentence of this
condition), the condition should be revised to clearly indicate that intent. The City would
recommend utilization of the standard employed for fencing around swimming pools now
required; that vertical features must not have a distance between features greater than 4
inches.
The City requests that the language be revised to read as follows, which is in
conformance with the above concerns of the City and following condition language
regarding the fence analysis recommended by Commission staff:
"4.A(i) impassab! Perimeter Walls and Fencing. All walls and fencing
within VTTM 15402 facing Gum Grove Park or the lowlands shall be
constructed of solid materials or have decorative bus which are spaced no
more than 4 inches apart +'ri ... 011 OF f41%.
tgassap a-by that shall minimize the entry of common domesticated
animals (e.g. dogs and cats).... prepared by a qualified biologist which
documents that the modified walls /fencing voill `" `_-_ """"° ~"
"a animals "-d shall minimize the entry of sash domesticated
animals to environmentally sensitive habitat including adjacent wetlands"
Concern regarding Condition Intent and Modification of Language of Special
Condition 4.A(M)Ca):
Hellman Ranch Comment Lever - 5 -01 �288.doc
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
This proposed condition stipulates that "All landscaping for the entire development shall
be of southern California native plants appropriate to the natural habitat type. This
provision applies to all lots within VTTM 15402 — includinn but not limited to
residential lots and associated lawns or other turf on those lots — and all areas proposed
and required under this coastal development permit to be landscaped outside of V7TM
15402." (Emphasis added). Discussion of the reasons to support this proposed condition
language appears on pages 17 -19 of the Commission Staff Report. The City of Seal
Beach has very specific concerns regarding the language of the condition and the driving
forces behind the suggested condition language. First, however, the City supports
completely the utilization of southern California native plants within ".. all areas
proposed and required under this coastal development permit to be landscaped outside of
=M 15402." This portion of the condition applies to those areas within Gum Grove
Nature Park and the newly created parking area along Seal Beach Boulevard that we to
be dedicated to the City and incorporated into Gum Grove Nature Park.
It is requested that the proposed language be clarified to allow the replacement of existing
eucalyptus trees within Gum Grove Nature Park with other species of eucalyptus trees, as
they we not "southern California native plants ". The eventual loss of eucalyptus tree
habitat within Gum Grove Nature Park due to possible later misinterpretation of this
condition language could result in an unintended significant adverse impact upon the
ability of the monarch butterfly to continue to utilize Gum Grove Nature Park as a
wintering site.
The City is very much concerned with the proposed impact of the condition language as
to those areas within VTTM 15402, including the open space lots and in particular the
residential home site themselves. Gum Grove Nature Park and the lowland areas of the
Hellman Ranch have been bordered for more than 40 years by the residential homes of
the "Hill' area of Seal Beach. Along Coastline Drive, Surf Place, Catalina Avenue and
Crestview Avenue there are 82 homes immediately adjacent to either the Hellman
lowlands or Gum Grove Nature Park that have been landscaped with typical suburban
landscaping, including lawn and turf areas, without any identified adverse impacts to
either the lowlands or Gum Grove Nature Park during the past 40 years.
The staff report indicates that "The Placement oranv non - native Plant snecees within the
development, which could potentially spread to the natural habitat areas, is a threat to
the biological productivity of adjacent natural habitat and would not be compatible with
the continuance of those habitat areas" (Emphasis added). There is no indication within
the staff report as to the concurrence of this statement by a biologist of the Coastal
Commission, or to any study previously done by the Coastal Commission or other
biological consultants that are site- specific studies and that would support such a far-
reaching conclusion. Without any documentation to support this conclusion, it is a
statement of opinion and not of fact, and therefore, the determination and the resulting
condition language lacks a rational or proportional nexus, and is an inappropriate
condition.
Hellman am¢h Comment Liner - 5 4)I- 288.dw
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
Novemher 6, 2001
Further, the condition language would require all of the homesites within the
development to also be landscaped only with "southern California native plants ". This
proposed provision is unacceptable to the City. To require all landscaping of every
residential lot within the development to be only of "southern California native plants" is
arbitrary, capricious, and without a reasonable nexus.
Homesites immediately adjacent to this site for more than 40 years have not had any
previously identified adverse impacts as to the types of plant species currently located
with Gum Grove Nature Park or the Hellman lowlands. These homesites are not located
within an ecologically sensitive area, they are located within an area that contains over
137 acres of ruderal grassland and 60 acres of disturbed areas and 25 acres of degraded
and severely degraded wetlands. The ruderal grassland areas are disced yearly for fire
prevention purposes and the disturbed areas are primarily fill areas that has occurred
since 1922, including dredged material from the San Gabriel River and we generally
graded and barren.) The nearest homes are between 171 and 270 feet from the nearest
three concentrations of wetlands. It would seem most appropriate for the Commission to
require "southern California native plants" to be utilized to the fullest extent practicable
for the common open space and recreation areas within VTTM 15402 and to encourage
the utilization by homeowners of "southern California native plants" within their private
property landscaping plans.
Portions of the common open space areas within VTTM 15402 are envisioned to be
neighborhood gathering and recreation areas for residents and visitors, and the inability to
have lawn or turf areas within portions of these common areas would be detrimental to
the purpose and intent of these gathering areas within the community.
Given the above concerns, the City would request the language of Special Condition
4.A.(iii)(a) be revised as follows:
"All landscaping for all portions of VTTM
15402 except for Private residential parcels and all areas Proposed
and required under this coastal development permit tobe landscaped
outside of VTTM 15402 shall be, to the fullest extent practicable of
southern California native plants appropriate to the natural habitat type.
This -._..- :..:.._ __L'....
' "Hellman Ranch Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report", pages 5 -39 to 5 -41.
Hellman Ranch Comment 1,vur. 5 -01- 288.doc
City of Seat Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 1001
native plants, and said plant Palate is to be incorporated in the Codes.
Covenants and Restrictions (CC &R's) or the architectural guidelines
of the homeowner association." (The rest of the language would remain
unchanged)
Concern regardine Condition Intent and Modification of Laneuaee of Special
Condition 4.Afiii)(b):
This proposed condition stipulates that "The landscape plan shall identify all landscaping
for the proposed development areas including common areas, residential lots, and
landscaping along Seal Beach Boulevard." (Emphasis added). It is not reasonable to
expect landscape plans for individual homesites to be prepared and approved prior to the
issuance of the coastal development permit. Residential lot owners traditionally prepare
their own landscape plans, not the developer of the housing project. It is the
responsibility of the homeowner association, with oversight by the City, to ensure that
landscape and hardscape improvements are compatible with neighboring properties and
in compliance with the development standards of the City. The landscape plan review
process for residential lots will occur after the homes have been completed, escrows have
closed, and the new owners have moved into their homes.
The City would request the language of Special Condition 4.A.(iii)(b) be revised as
follows:
"The landscape plan shall identify all landscaping for the proposed
development areas including common areas�ets, and
landscaping along Seal Beach Boulevard "
Concern regarding Condition Intent and Modification- of Language of Special
Condition 4.A(iit)(d) in coniunction with Special Condition 4.A(iii)(B:
This proposed condition stipulates in pertinent part ".. a minimum of one specimen size
tree (24 -inch box minimum) shall be planted every 10 feet of property along the
wesNnorthwest facing sides of . .' Special Condition 4.A(iii)(f) also requires the
landscape plan to be ".. reviewed and endorsedlapproved by the California Department
offish and Game prior to submittal for review and approval by the Executive Director of
the Coastal Commission." It would seem more appropriate to allow the licensed
landscape architect to propose a tree spacing plan that will form a visual barrier to the
residential units from the areas of concern of the Coastal Commission and have that plan
"reviewed and endorsed/approved by the California Department of Fish and Game ".
The approved plan would then reflect, appropriately, the design of a licensed landscape
architectural firm and the comments of the most appropriate resource agency to review
the plan. Depending on the types of trees ultimately approved, a 10 -foot spacing may be
altogether inappropriate in that trees planted that close together may ultimately compete
with each other for necessary nutrients and light if planted to closely together, resulting in
diseased and unhealthy tree specimens.
Minim Ranch Comment Letter - 5.01- 286.doc
City of Seat Beach Comment Letter re.:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
The City would request the language of Special Condition 4.A.(iii)(d) be revised in
pertinent part as follows (proposed revisions affect sentences 2 and 3 of said condition): 4- 1-FOSA OP iffee
,.,,o V.44 _ .,.° a°,,.:4iad .. ....,....+. In addition to
shrubs and groundcover, ° -°i'`° UM 09 " °° specimen size trees (24 -inch
box minimum). shall be planted as indicated on
the approved landscape Plan in such a manner as to form a visual
landscape barrier to break on lame expanses of wall or roof within
the identified viewshed, along the west/northwest facing sides of.
Concern regarding Condition Intent and Modification of Language of SPeciat
Condition 4.Afiii)(g):
This proposed condition stipulates in pertinent part (second sentence of proposed
condition) "All landscaping on individual residential lots shall be completed within 60
days of completion of construction of the house." The reasoning for this condition for set
forth on pages 17 -19. As discussed above under Condition 4.A(iii)(a) and 4.A(iii)(b), the
nexus for this condition is questionable. The individual residential lots are between 171
to 270 feet away from the nearest three concentrations of wetlands, which we classified
as either "degraded' or "severely degraded'. Residential properties have adjoined the
Hellman lowlands and Gum Grove Nature Park for more than 40 yews without any
recognized or clearly identified adverse impacts to those areas from the existing non-
native, suburban landscaping. In addition, landscaping of private residential properties,
particularly of the size and expected cost of the subject properties, has traditionally been
designed and completed by the residential property owner after they have closed escrow
on the home and taken occupancy.
It is not reasonable to expect residential lots. to be landscaped within 60 days of
construction completion; escrow on the home may not be closed within that time period
and there may be no responsible property owner at that time. To expect a purchaser of
property to either purchase a home already landscaped by the project developer or to
landscape within 60 days after construction completion, when an escrow may not close
until after the 60 day time period, is totally unrealistic. It is reasonable to require the
residential properties to be landscaped within a certain period after the close of escrow,
and the City would suggest 180 days for completion of front yard landscaping and 364
days for rear yard landscaping.
The City would request the Commission revise this condition language as follows:
"All landscaping on individual residential lots shall be completed within
49�ays -ef 180 days for the front yard and 365 days for the rear yard
after the close of escrow of each
residential lot"
Hellman Ranch Comment Letter- 5 -01- 288.doc
Ciry afSeal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -07 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6,1001
Concern regardinr Condition Intent and Deletion of Special Condition 4.ARv)(a):
This proposed condition stipulates that "The proposed vehicle control gates shall be
modified to allow uninterrupted, on- street passage into and out of VTTM 15402 via
bicycle." The City disagrees with the intent of this condition, and feels it is not in
accordance with the findings and conditions of the Commission as set forth in Coastal
Permit 5 -97 -367 and 5 -97- 367 -A1. The Commission found in granting permit 5 -97 -367
the following regarding Public Access and Recreation:
"Finally, the Commission finds that there is no need to require that the
proposed subdivision's streets be public or allow public vehicular access
over private streets if public parking and a separate access entrance
point off of Seal Beach Boulevard to the parking is provided. However,
the Commission does not sanction exclusivity in the coastal zone andfinds
that gates which preclude pedestrian and bicycle access cannot be
approved consistent with the access and recreation policies of the Coastal
Act. Therefore, the Commission attaches Special Condition No. 5 which
prohibits the installation of gates precluding pedestrian and bicycle
access to the subdivision proposed under Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
15402." (Emphasis added)
The Commission subsequently found in granting permit 5 -97- 367 -A1 the following
regarding Public Access and Recreation:
"The Commission previously found that, in this case, there is no need to
require that the proposed subdivision's streets be open for public
vehicular access over the private streets so long as public parking directly
accessible from Seal Beach Boulevard is provided However, the
Commission did not sanction exclusivity in the coastal zone and found that
gates which preclude pedestrian and bicycle access cannot be found
consistent with the access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act.
Therefore, any method of prohibiting public vehicular access to the
subdivision (e.g. gates) must be designed such that public pedestrian and
bicycle access to the subdivision is not impeded The Commission finds
that these requirements must be maintained as part of the development
proposed in this amendment. However, several modifications to the
references in Special Condition 5 are necessary to update this condition.
Therefore, the Commission replaces, in its entirety, Special Condition 5
with Special Condition 18." (Emphasis added)
Special Condition 18 states in pertinent part:
Hellman Ranch Commmt Letter - 5 -01- 288.doc 10
City of Seal Beach Commem Letter re.:
Coastal Commission Application No, 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
"B. Residential Community Streets (Vesting Tentative Tract Mao
No. 15402). PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall execute and record
a deed restriction, in a form and content acceptable to the
Executive Director, which shall provide that: 1) public pedestrian
and bicycle access to the streets and sidewalks constructed
within the area subject to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
15402 shall not be precluded, 2) no locked gates, walls, fences, or
other obstructions prohibiting public pedestrian or bicycle access
to the streets and sidewalks constructed within the area subject to
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15402 shall be permitted, 3) no
requirement to allow public vehicular access over the private
streets is necessary if the applicant is willing to provide public
parking within Gum Grove Park and a separate vehicular
entrance from Seal Beach Boulevard to said public parking, 4)
.." (Emphasis added)
The Commission staff have now further expanded the previous determinations and
findings of the Commission to determine that bicycle access into and out of the proposed
residential development must only occur on the roadway, and that bicycle access is not
acceptable on the publicly available sidewalk that is immediately adjacent to the roadway
area, in clear and direct contradiction to the finding of the Commission that "no
requirement to allow public vehicular access over the private streets is necessary if
the applicant is willing to provide public parking within Gum Grove Park and a
separate vehicular entrance from Seal Beach Boulevard to said public parking ",
which the project proponent is providing. By allowing bicyclists to access the project
through the open and accessible sidewalk entry/exit locations, the clear intent of the
Commission is maintained — not allowing "gates which preclude pedestrian and tricycle
access ".
Commission staff has provided no sound reason as to why bicyclists cannot enter into the
proposed residential development on the sidewalk, as can pedestrians. This can easily be
accomplished by providing a transition ramp from Street A to the sidewalk area at an
appropriate point to allow bicyclists to either ride on the sidewalk or on Street A, go up a
transition ramp to the sidewalk if necessary, and ride on the sidewalk through the open
and accessible pedestrian/bicyclist entry feature and then either continue to ride on the
sidewalk or go down a transition ramp onto Street A, at the option of the bicyclist.
To require a continuous free access point on Street A for bicyclists would create a public
safety issue with the potential conflicts of vehicles, opening gate structures and bicyclists
that should be avoided.
The City requests that Special Condition 4.A.(iv)(a) be deleted
Hellman Ranch Comment Lever- 5 -0i -28K&c 11
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -07 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
Concern reeardine Condition Intent and Deletion of Special Condition 4.A.60(h):
Proposed Special Condition 4.A.(iv)(b) stipulates "The 'entry trellis' structures which
span the sidewalk and the low wall which flanks the sidewalks at the entrance of =M
15402 shall be removed." The discussion regarding the reasoning for the imposition of
the condition is on pages 22 to 25. It is indicated that " .. the presence of trellis
structures spanning the sidewalks gives the sense that pedestrian entry into the
residential development is controlled and may require special permission."
Proposed Special Condition 4.A.(v)(b) stipulates "Informational and directional signage
shall be installed on both sides of Street A of VYTM 15402, in the locations generally
shown on Exhibit 8a of the findings in support of approval of this permit, which direct
public vehicular traffic toward the public parking lot required for Gum Grove Park,
allowed and welcome and which notes that vehicular access beyond the gates to the
residential area is limited to residents or guests or other authorized personnel. The
signage shall remain in place and be maintained such that it is legible and visible to
vehicular traffic and pedestrians and bicyclists using Street A." (Emphasis added).
It is unclear as to why the trellis structures we determined to provide an aspect of
"controlled entry" when the Commission is requiring clearly visible signs on both sides
of the project access road, approximately 80 feet in front of the trellis structures, that
notify the public that `pedestrian and bicycle traffic into the residential area is allowed
and welcome': Assuming the Commission imposed sign notification program is
effective, it should be very clear to pedestrians that their right of entry into the residential
project is "allowed and welcome ". Further, if the sign notification is effective, then there
is no reason as to why the trellis structures could not be provided. The trellis structures
provide a sense of place for the overall residential development and are designed to work
in conjunction with the other architectural features at the entry into the residential
neighborhood and throughout the residential neighborhood to define the character of the
neighborhood inside the entry points.
Based on the assumption that the sign program proposed by the Coastal Commission staff
is adequate and effective in indicating the ability of pedestrians to into the residential
project, the prohibition of the trellis structures is unwarranted and without a rational or
proportional nexus and should be eliminated.
The City requests that Special Condition 4.A.(iv)(b) be deleted.
Concern reeardine Condition Intent and Deletion ot" Special Condition S.A. and
Special Condition S.B.:
Proposed Special Condition 5.A. and 5.13. require approval by the Executive Director of
exterior colors of the residential structures, specify only certain colors and tones are
allowable, and require a deed restriction reflecting the above restrictions on exterior
Hellman aanch Comment Umr- 5 -01.288AOc 12
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 1001
colors within VTTM 15402. The City is concerned as to the intrusion of the Coastal
Commission in determining what are acceptable exterior colors of structures within the
coastal zone, and having those determinations subject to deed restrictions. The concerns
of the Coastal Commission regarding the visual impact of the structures have already
been mitigated through the use of appropriate screen planting area along the exterior
boundaries of VTTM 15402 that are adjacent to the Hellman lowlands and Gum Grove
Nature Park (Special Condition 4.A.(iii), as requested for revision by the City).
The City concurs with the Commission that landscape screening and use of native plants,
as determined appropriate by qualified landscape architects and biologists, are an
appropriate and reasonable method of ensuring compliance with Coastal Act provisions.
The City is in strong disagreement with the position of Coastal Commission staff that the
Coastal -Act allows the Commission to dictate the exterior color of single family
residences, or any other structures, that are adequately screened by approved planting
from open space and recreation areas of importance to the Commission. If this position
of Commission staff is embraced by the Commission, then will the Commission also start
to dictate the exterior color of existing homes adjacent to the Hellman lowlands and Gum
Grove Nature Pak that wish to add to the size of their existing homes, or to demolish an
existing home and rebuild a new residence? What about the exterior color of homes
adjacent to a public beach? Further, the City of Seal Beach does not establish by
conditions of approval the exterior colors of structures, but does allow an applicant to
present color boards to indicate to the community what the anticipated exterior colors
will be. The City also does not require any type of a permit to repaint an existing
structure, and would therefore have no mechanism to require a submission to the Coastal
Commission for such repainting of structures.
Based on the assumption that the landscape screening program proposed by the Coastal
Commission staff is adequate and effective in reducing visual impacts in compliance with
the provisions of the Coastal Act, the proposed control over the exterior color of
structures is unwarranted and without a rational or proportional nexus and should be
eliminated, as should be the proposed deed restriction requirement.
The City requests that Special Condition 5.A. and 5.13. be deleted.
Concern rezardin¢ Condition Intent and Modification of Laneaaee of Special
Condition 7.4.:
Proposed Special Condition 7.A. requires approval by the Commission of certain repair
and maintenance activities as specified in Public Resources Code Section 30610(d) and
- Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 13252(a) -(b). The justification for this
requirement is unclear to the City.
Public Resources Code Section 30610(d) indicates that no coastal development permit is
required for improvements to single family homes unless there is a "risk of adverse
environmental effect ", and then the provisions of Title 14, California Code of
Hellman Ranch Comment Lcaer- 5 -01- 288.dnc 13
City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -188
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 2001
Regulations, Sections 13250 et. seq. apply. Title 14, Section 13252, Repair and
Maintenance Activities Requiring a Permit, then indicate the types of activities that
require a permit as being: (1) any method of repair or maintenance of a seawall
revetment, bluff retaining wall, breakwater, groin, culvert, outfall, or similar shoreline
work; (2) any method of routine maintenance dredging; and (3) any repair or
maintenance to facilities or structures or work located in an environmentally sensitive
habitat area, any sand area, within 50 feet of the edge of a coastal bluff or
environmentally sensitive habitat area, or within 20 feet of coastal waters or streams.
As the City views the subject provisions of Public Resources Code and the California
Code of Regulations, it would appear that the residential homes to be constructed within
the confries of VTTM 15402 do not meet any of the above stated criteria of Section
13252 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, and have no reasonable
expectation of creating a "risk of adverse environmental effect' in accordance with the
provision of Section 30610(d) of the Public Resources Code, assuming all of the
appropriate mitigation measures of the certified Hellman Ranch Specific Plan EIR and
this coastal development permit are complied with. Therefore, there seems to be no
rational nexus for imposition of the proposed condition.
The Coastal Commission staff discussion regarding this issue is on pages 20 and 21. The
City recognizes there is a reasonable concern regarding room additions to the subject
residential units that could result in the creation of a "risk of adverse environmental
effect" in accordance with the provision of Section 30610(d) of the Public Resources
Code, and that additional coastal development permits may be required for approval of
room additions. Although this would seem to be a very unusual circumstance, it is still
an understandable concern.
The City would therefore request that the language be modified as proposed below:
"Accordingly, any future e the room additions or
alterations that exceed the hei¢ht or allowable floor area coveraee of
the single family homes described in this permit, inuludimg bw no; limited
shall require an amendment to Permit
No 5 -01 -288 from the Commission or shall require an additional coastal
development permit from the Commission or from the applicable certified
local government."
City Support of Approval of Project, as modified by the
Recommendations of the City:
The City of Seal Beach recognizes the extensive staff and Council /Commission effort
that has been devoted to this project by both the City and Coastal Commission over the
past 12 years, and believes this final approval has been thoroughly reviewed by both the
Hellman Ranch COmmem Un,- 5 -06288.daa 14
City ojSeal Beach Comment Letter re:
Coastal Commission Application No. 5 -01 -288
Hellman Properties LLC (70 -Lot Residential Development)
November 6, 1001
City and Coastal Commission. The City, with the exception of the few issues discussed
above, thanks the staff of the Coastal Commission for a thorough and complete review of
this project, and stands in support of the Commission approval of the project with all
conditions, as modified by our comments above.
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.
Sincerely,
2lilLQ/
u, Yots a, Assistant City Manager
City of Seal Beach
Distribution:
Commissioner Cynthia McClain -HUI
Commissioner Christina L. Desser
Commissioner Patrick Kruer
Commissioner Mike Reilly
Commissioner Gregg Hart
Commissioner Patricia McCoy
Executive Director Peter M. Douglas
Orange County Supervisor Steve Rynas
Dave Bartlett, Dave Bartlett Associates
F. Jerome Tone, Hellman Properties LLC
Commissioner Cecilia Estolano
Commissioner Pedro Nava
Commissioner John Woolley
Commissioner Dave Potter
Commissioner Shirley S. Dettloff
Seal Beach City Council
Seal Beach Planning Commission
Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board
City Manager
Director of Development Services
Hellman Ranch Comment Letter - "1- 288.&o 15