HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2006-08-14 #N
e
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: August 14, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
,NO. 06-4 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-160
FOR A 35 FOOT IDGH TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM
DEVELOPMENT - 132 THIRTEENTH STREET
The City Council has the following options:
I)
Adopt a resolution for approval of CUP 06-4 Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160,
with reasonable conditions designed to ensure compatibility with the
neighborhood, including a 2 story height limit.
e
(CUP 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 would be approved as a two-
story development with a 25-foot height limit and other conditions)
2) Adopt a resolution for approval of CUP 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
for a three-story development with a 35-foot height limit on the rear half of the
subject property, with reasonable conditions designed to ensure compatibility with
the neighborhood.
(CUP 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 would be approved as a
three-story development with a 35-foot height limit and other conditions)
BACKGROUND:
On July 24, 2006 the City Council conducted a public hearing on the subject application,
received all testimony, closed the public hearing and after Council discussion, moved to
continue the matter to this evening for further deliberation and consideration.
e
AGENDA ITEM..lL
Z:\My DocumcntslCUP\06-4 Appeal.CC StalfReport 2.docILW\08-04-06
e
e
e
Attachment:
06-4 Appeal.CC StaffRcport2
06-4 Appeal.CC Staff Report 2
Consideratio1l o/C01lditio1lal Use Permit 06-4 a1ld
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
132 Thirteenth Street
City Cou1lcil Staff Report
August 14, 2006
NOTED
City Council Staff Report re: Public Hearing - Conditional Use
Permit No. 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 - Property
Located at 132 Thirteenth Street, dated July 24, 2006
2
.
-,
e
e
e
IDRAFTI
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-4 AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-160 FOR
TWO STORY, 2-UNlT CONDO
PROJECT AT 132 13TH STREET, SEAL
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SE
FIND AND RESOL VB:
Section 1. On April 18, 2006, Scott
LLC ("Applicant"), submitted an application for a Con
Parcel Map for a 35 foot high, two-unit cond
S on 3. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and
the re latio unplementing the Act, specifically 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~~ l5303(b)
("New struction or Conversion of Small Structures") and 15315 ("Minor Land
Divisions"), this project is categorically exempt from formal environmental review.
Section 4. After a duly noticed public hearing held on June 7, 2006,
the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolutions Nos. 06-22 and 06-
23, conditionally approving a 25-foot high, two unit condominium project, subject to
certain conditions designed to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, the
community in general, the General Plan and the California Subdivision Map Act.
57296.0001.910593
IDRAFTI
"
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, 132 J 3'" Street
August14,2006
,
e
Section S. The Applicant duly filed a notice of appeal, objecting to the
condition imposing a maximum 2S feet height limit.
Section 6. The City Council considered the appeal at a duly noticed
public hearing held on July 24, 2006. Numerous speakers, including the applicant, spoke
in favor of the application. Numerous speakers spoke in opposition to roposed third
story. In addition, the City received several letters in opposition to the ir sto portion
of the proposed project.
Section 7.
e
su . ect p erty is located at the east side of the 100 block of
ots, each 25 feet wide by 117.5 feet deep, for a total
e surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST
57296.0001.910593
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
the Residential High Density (RHO) zone.
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
the Residential High Density (RHO) zone.
Across 15' wide alley, a mix of single-family and
multi-family residences in the Residential High
Density (RHD) zone.
2
IDRAFTI
e
..
e
e
e
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, 132 13110 Street
August 14, 2006
WEST
Across 13th Street, a mix of single-family and multi-
family residences in the Residential High Density
(RHO) zone.
(t) The properties immediately adjacent to the subject property are
developed as follows: a single-story residence on the neighboring prop immediately
to the north; a two story residence on the neighboring property immed' te to e south;
a single-story residence on the neighboring property immediat ac ss 13 et; and
a two-story residence on the neighboring property imm latel ac ss the bac alley.
The other homes in close proximity are a mix of one sto and struc
(g) Oral evidence was presented a
reasonably conditioned, a two-story, two-unit condominium
a 25-ti maximum height is consistent with the City's General Plan. By
t, a condo 'um structure in excess of the standard 25-foot maximum height
n consistent with the City's General Plan. The City's General Plan
a primary goal and objective for the City is the retention of a "small-town
characte. Pursuant to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the City's "small
town feel" with a "small town like" population shall be preserved and enhanced. In
addition, the Land Use Element directs the City to "continue to provide support for its
residents, maintain its infrastructure and provide jobs and housing balance while still
maintaining its small town atmosphere." A two-story, two-unit condominium structure
with a 25-foot maximum height would retain and enhance these goals and objectives. By
contrast, a three-story project would be inconsistent with these General Plan goals and
S7296,OOOl.910593
3
IDRAFTI
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3'" Street
August 14, 2006
."
objectives of retaining the City's small-town atmosphere and character because such a
large structure is more suitable for either an urban setting with similar sized structures, or
an area with more available space and larger lots. A majority of lots in District I are
narrow, 25 foot wide lots. The vast majority of the homes in the vicinity are one or two-
story structures. A three-story structure in that location would erode the small-town
atmosphere.
e
e
As asonably conditioned, a two-story project, with a maximum
stent with the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding
e Land Use Element of the City's General Plan provides a High
oning designation for the subject property. The vast majority of the
es in the vicinity are one or two stories. Thus, a two-story
condo .. is consistent with the General Plan goals of retaining the City's small-town
atmosph re and character. The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the
City's General Plan, as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected
in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, a 25-foot tall two-story condominium is
consistent with the General Plan and compatible with surrounding uses.
87296,0001.910593
4
IDRAFTI
e
''i,
e
e
e
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3" Street
August 14, 2006
(e) The subject property is adequate in size to accommodate two
multiple family units, when limited to a maximum of two stories and 25 feet in height.
The property is approximately 0.135 acres in area.
(f) The Project conforms to the density requirements of 1 unit per
2,178 square feet of lot area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 per unit the District I,
Residential High Density (RHD) zone.
(g) Approval ofa two-story developme .th
compatible to and consistent with the surrounding neigh rhoo
. (h) Approval of a two-story develop ent with
would not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhoo
condition , e design of the subdivision will !lot
uired by the public or utilities that serve the public.
ically suitable for a subdivision to facilitate two
e design of the subdivision, as reasonably' conditioned, is not
al environmental damage.
The design of the improvements will not cause substantial
e damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other
r cause serious public health problems.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 for a 25-foot
high, two-unit condominium project at 132 13th Street, subject to the following
conditions:
S7296,OOOl ,91 0593
s
IDRAFTI
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3'. Street
August 14. 2006
f
e
1. All development shall be limited in height to two stories, 25 feet maximum
height. The applicant shall submit revised plans to the City for a project that does
not exceed 25 feet in height.
2. This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City
"Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applic
of the Director of Development Services, or notarized an re
Planning Department; and until the ten (10) calen day appe
elapsed.
3.
4.
e
5. The appli shall comply with all applicable Seal Beach Municipal Code
proviso , including but not limited to the requirements set forth in Section 28-
3 , prior to submittal of the final map for City review.
6. The project shall comply with all sections as adopted in Resolution 5209, titled
Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval for Vesting and Tentative
Subdivision Maps, 2003 Edition.
7. For stormwater requirements, applicant shall submit an approved Water Quality
Management Plan.
57296,0001.910593
6
IDRAFTI
e
'f
e
e
e
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, 132 13,h Street
August 14, 2006
8.
The applicant shall incorporate all conditions from the City of Seal Beach
Departments into the parcel map prior to submitting the final parcel map for
review.
9.
The applicant shall provide documentation indicating the mathe tical accuracy,
title information and survey analysis of the parcel map and the co ess of all
certificates. Proof of ownership and proof of origin ign res I also be
required.
10.
Section 10.
Beach Municipal Code Section 1.20.01
available, of the City Council's decisio
by other applicable law.
dure and Seal
'cial review, if
Ime is provided
City Council of the City of Seal
2006, by the following
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
57296.0001.910593
7
IDRAFTI
'f
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3'A Street
August 14, 2006
.
e
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH )
I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do hereb c 'fY. that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Numbe
office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by: e Ci
Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on e
,2006.
City Clerk
e
87296.0001.910593
8
IDRAFTI
e
..
",
~
.
.
.
IDRAFTI
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-4 AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-160 FOR
THREE STORY, 2-UNlT CONDO
PROJECT AT 13213TH STREET, SEAL
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SE
FIND AND RESOL VB:
BY
Section 1.
Sectio Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and
the guIations' ementing the Act, specifically 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~~ 15303(b)
tion or Conversion of Small Structures'') and 15315 (''Minor Land
's project is categorically exempt from formal environmental review.
Section 4. After a duly noticed public hearing held on June 7, 2006,
the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolutions Nos. 06-22 and 06-
23, conditionally approving a 25-foot high, two unit condominium project, subject to
certain conditions designed to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, the
community in general, the General Plan and the Califomia Subdivision Map Act.
87296.0001,910936
IDRAFTI
.
.
p
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3'. Street
A.ugust 14, 2006
Section 5. The Applicant duly filed a notice of appeal, objecting to the
condition imposing a maximum 25 feet height limit.
.
Section 6. The City Council considered the appeal at a duly noticed
public hearing held on July 24, 2006. Numerous speakers, including the applicant, spoke
in favor of the application. Numerous speakers spoke in opposition to the proposed third
story. In addition, the City received several letters and photograp support the
testimony that a 3-story structure would impact light, air circulation, p . a an views.
Section 7.
.
mg land uses and zoning are as follows:
EAST
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RHO) zone
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RHO) zone
Across 15' wide alley, a mix of single-family and
multi-family residences in Residential High Density
(RHO) zone
Across 13th Street, a mix of single-family and multi-
family residences in Residential High Density
(RHO) zone
WEST
Section 8. Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the
hearing, including the facts stated in Sections 1 through 7 of this resolution, and pursuant
.
S7296.0001.910936
2
IDRAFTI
".
-~
.
.
.
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3"' Street
August 14, 2006
to ~~ 28-800, 28-2503 and 28-2504 of the City's Municipal Code, the City Council
hereby finds:
(a) As reasonably conditioned, the Project is consistent with the City's
General Plan, which designates the area for multiple dwellings and consistent with
zoning regulations. The Land Use Element of the City's General Plan rovides a High
Density Residential zoning designation for the subject property.
(b) As reasonably conditioned, the P .
surrounding uses and the community in general. Surroun . g use
with
(c) The subject property is adequa
Project. The property is approximately 0.135 acres in
(d) The Project conforms to the de
2,178 square feet of lot area and the minimum 10 e 0
Residential High Density (RHO) zone.
(e)
is compatible
onditions would not be
nditioned, the requested subdivision is consistent
lan, 1 . ng the land use element and the housing element.
i1itate a multi-unit condominium in an area with a zoning
dwelling units. The provision of two residential units will
As reasonably conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not
existing easements, acquired by the public or utilities that serve the public.
(j) The site is physically suitable for a subdivision to facilitate the
Project.
(k) The design of the subdivision, as reasonably conditioned, is not
likely to cause substantial environmental damage.
S7296.0001.910936
3
IDRAFTI
.
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4. J 32 J 3/' Street
August 14, 2006
(1) The design of the improvements will not cause substantial
environmental damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other
habitats, or cause serious public health problems.
~
.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 for a 3-story,
two-unit condominium project at 132 13th Street, subject to the followin nditions:
I. This CUP shall not become effective for any p e
"Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed the a
of the Director of Development Services, or notari
Planning Department; and until the ten (10) alend
elapsed.
2.
3.
.
4. e applicant shall comply with all applicable Seal Beach Municipal Code
provisions, including but not limited to the requirements set forth in Section 28-
2322, prior to submittal of the final map for City review.
5. The project shall comply with all sections as adopted in Resolution 5209, titled
Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval for Vesting and Tentative
Subdivision Maps, 2003 Edition.
.
57296,0001.910936
4
IDRAFTI
.1
\
.
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3m Street
August 14, 2006
6.
For stormwater requirements, applicant shall submit an approved Water Quality
Management Plan.
7. The applicant shall incorporate all conditions from the City of Seal Beach
Departments into the parcel map prior to submitting the final parcel map for
review.
Section 10. Section 1094.6 the
Beach Municipal Code Section 1. .0 5 gov
available, of the City Council' ec io
. by other applicable law.
8.
9. The applicant shall provide a copy of the Coven
(CC&Rs) to the Department of Development S
California Department of Real Estate. CC&
common areas, including open space, p ent
structures.
City Council of the City of Seal
2006, by the following
MAYOR
ATIEST:
. CITY CLERK
87296.0001,910936
5
IDRAFTI
I D R AFT I City Council Resolution 06-_
Conditional Use Permit 06-4, J 32 J 3'. Street
August 14, 2006
I
.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH )
I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do hereby
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number
office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the
Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on
.2006.
City Clerk
.
.
S7296.0001.910936
6
IDRAFTI
,- ~
j'
e
e
e
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA REPORT
REVISED OPTIONS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: July 24, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development servicet:f UJ
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARINGS TO CONSIDER CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 06-4 REQUESTING A 35 FOOT HIGH
TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT AND TO
CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION TO APPROVE TENTATIVE 'PARCEL
MAP 2006-160 - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132
THIRTEENTH STREET
Conduct Public Hearing. The City Council has the following options:
1) Uphold the Planning Commission decision and direct staff to draft a resolution for
approval of CUP 06-4, with conditions limiting the height to 2 stories; and to draft
a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160.
(If such resolutions were subsequently adopted, CUP 06-4 and Tentative
Parcel Map 2006-160 would be approved as a two-story development with a
25-foot height limit, subject to appropriate terms and conditions as
determined by City Council)
2) Grant the applicant's appeal and direct staff to draft resolutions for approval of
CUP 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 for a three-story development with
a 35-foot height limit on the rear half of the subject property, subject to
appropriate terms and conditions as determined by City Council.
(If such resolutions were subsequently adopted, CUP 06-4 and Tentative
Parcel Map, 2006-160 would be approved as a three-story development with a
35-foot height limit, subject to appropriate terms and conditions as
determined by City Council)
3) Deny CUP 06-4 in its entirety and direct staff to draft a resolution for denial of the
application for CUP 06-4 for a three story project. .
(If such a resolution was subsequently adopted, the applicant would be
allowed to build a 3 story 2 unit rental structure as a matter of right because
the Council exempted the project from the current moratorium)
AGENDA ITEM L
Z'~y DocumcntsICUP\06-4 Revised CC StatfRopOJt Cover Page.docILWI07-17-06
.- ---~
e
e
e
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: July 24, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: PUBUC HEARING APPEAL OF PLANNING
. COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDmONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 06-4, PERMITTING A TWO-UNIT
CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT WITH A 2-STORY,
25-FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT; APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 2006-160 - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 132
TBIRTEENTH STREET
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
After receiving all public testimony and considering the decision of the PlAnning
Commission, the City Council has the following options:
1) Direct staff to draft a resolution denying the appeal and sustaining the decision of the
Planning Commission regarding Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and to draft a
resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 as recommended by the
plAnning Commission. If such resolutions were subsequently adopted, the
applications for both Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-
160 for the approval to permit a two-unit condominium at 132 Thirteenth Street
would be approved as a two-story development with a 2S-foot height limit, subject
to appropriate terms and conditions as determined by the City Council.
2)
Direct staff to draft a resolution sustaining the appeal and reversing the decision
of the Planning Commission regarding Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and to draft a
resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 as recommended by the
Planning Commission and revised to be consistent with the City Council
determination on the appeal matter. If such resolutions were subsequently
adopted, the applications for both Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative
Parcel Map 2006-160' for the approval to permit a two-unit condominium at 132
Thirteenth Street would be approved as a three-story development with a 3S-foot
height limit on the rear half of the subject property, subject to appropriate terms
and conditions as determined by the City Council.
AGENDA ITEM
Z:~Y """'~""CUl'I06-4 AppcaLCC StalfReport - 132 '1'hirlelmlh.docYw\07-12.06
J-__,.
Pllhlic Hearings re:
Appealo/Conditions 011 COllditiOlllJl Use Permit 06-4 and
Approvoi ofTelltatwe Parcel Map 2006-160 ..
City Cou""il Stqlf Report _
Jvly 24, 2006
BACKGROUND:
On June 7, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and determined to
approve the subject requests subject to certain terms and conditions, with the condition
imposed on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 requiring the proposed 2-unit condominium.
development be lowered from 35-feet and 3-stories on the rear half of the lot to 25-feet
and 2 stories being the subject of the appeal that bas been filed. On June 21 the
Commission adopted resolutions 06-21 and 06-22, approving the requested conditional
use permit and tentative parcel map. .
The Commission determined to approve both matters on a 4-0 vote (Commission had a
vacant seat at the time due to the election to the City Council of previous Commissioner
Shanks). Please refer to Attachment 2 to review Planning Commission Resolutions No.
06-21 and 06-22 for the findings and determination of the Pl..nn;ng Commission
regarding .the conditional use permit and tentative parcel map approvals, respectively.
Please refer to Attachment 3 to review the Planning Commission Minutes of June 7 and
June 21, 2006, respectively and to Attachment 4 to review the Phmning Comm;~~ion Staff
Report of June 7, 2006.
An appeal of the recommendation of the Planning Commi...'li.on regarding Conditional Use e
Permit 06-4 was filed in a timely manner (please refer to Attachment I), and the matter is
now before the City Council for consideration at a de novo public hearing. Since the appeal
of the Planning Commission's Conditional Use Permit approval requires a public hearing
before the City Council, as does the approval of Tentative Parcel MlqI 2006-160, both
matters have been consolidated for consideration by the City Council. The City Council
will need to take separate actions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel MlqI
2006-160.
FACTS:
lJ Tbe pl..nn;ng Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on June 7, 2006 to
consider Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel MlqI 2006-160. Both
written and oral evidence was submitted, for the project At the public hearing the
applicant spoke in favor of the request and,provided several documents for consideration
by the Pl..nn;ng Conunission. Copies of the written documents received from the
project applicant are provided as Attachment 5. At the public hearing 2 additional
persons spoke in favor of the requests with 13 persons speaking in opposition and the
City received written communications in opposition to the request. Copies of the written
documents received in opposition are provided as Attachment 6. After receiving all
public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and after
discussion, the Commission determined to approve the requested 2-unit condominium
and as a condition of approval for CUP 06-4 imposed a condition requiring the structure e
to be limited to 2-stories and 25-feet in height and requested staff to prepare the
appropriate resolutions for Commission consideration on June 21,2006.
~ Appeal.CC StalJRoport - 132 TbirtooDIh
2
..
e
e
e
.';'0
Pvblic Hearings re:
Appeal ofConditi01U on C;onditioruzl Use Permit 06-4 tZ1Id
Approval o/Tentative Parcel Mop 2006-160
City COllncil Staff Reporl
Jitly 24, 2006
CJ On June 21, 2006 the Commission considered the proposed resolutions and voted to
adopt Planning Commission Resolutions 06-21 and 06-22, approving CUP 06-4 and
TPM 2006-160, respectively, on a 4-0 vote (Commission had a vacant seat at the time
due to the election to the City Council of previous Commissioner Shanks).
CJ On June 29, 2006 an appeal was filed (See Attachment I). The matter is now before the
City Council for consideration at a de novo public hearing.
STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR CONDIDONAL USE PERMIT:
ConditionallJse Permit:
Under Municinal Code Sections 28-2503 and 28-2504, all conditional use permit requests
must be evaluated in light of three issues:
1) Is the use conditionally permitted in the zone;
2) Is the use compatible with the General Plan; and
3) Is the use compattble with, rather than detrimental to, suzrounding uses and
the community in general?
APPELLANTS REASONS AS TO WHY THEY FEEL THE
PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION WAS IN ERROR:
Please refer to Attachment 1 to review the written "Formal Appea1/Request for
Amendment, Resolution No. 06-21 Approving CUP 06-4".
DISCUSSION RELATING TO THE "STANDARDS OF REVIEW"
FOR CUP APPROVALS: .
The su1;lject application is a conditionally allowable project, and the PIATming Commission
was required to make the findings specified in Municipal Code Sections 28-2503 and 28-
2504 in order to approve the application. 'fI!.e plAnning Commission determined that by
imposing a condition limiting the proposed sttucture to 2-stories and 25-feet in height, the
Commission could make the required findings.
Specifically, regarding whether the applicant's proposed use is consistent with the General
Plan and compatible with the surrollDding neighborhood, the Planning Commission
determined that the CUP application is consistent with the General Plan and compatible with
the surrollDding neighborhood, but only if limited to 2-stories and 25-feet in height, as
conditioned for approval by the Planning Commission. Please refer to Section 5 of
Resolution 06-21 and to Section 6 of Resolution 06-22 (Attachment 2) to review the
findings and determinations of the Planning Commission regarding that determination
o~ AppcaI.CC S1BfrReport. 1321bi_
3
.'
.. - "I
Public Hearings re:
Appeol ofConditiom on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Mop 2006-]60 _
City COU1Icil Stoff Report
July 24. 2006
relative to both the CUP and TPM approvals. Upon conclusion of the public hearing before
the City Council, the Council will also be required to make appropriate findings regarding is
compatibility with the General Plan and with the surrounding neighborhood regarding
Conditional Use Permit 06-4.
Resolution of the ren>llining issues will depend on the Council's view as to whether the
proposed development is consistent with the intent, purpose and vision of the General Plan
and the implementing zoning ordinance provisions of the City. During Plllnning
Commission discussion on June 7 the issue of compatibly with provisions of the General
Plan was extensively discussed and debated (Refer to Attachment 3). Additionally, it will
depend on the: City Council's review of the evidence presented during the public hearing
regarding impacts to the surrounding community of the proposed project at the subject
property.
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS re: APPEAL:
After receiving all public testimony and considering the decision of the Planning
Commission, the City Council has the following options:
1)
Direct staff to draft a resolution denying the appeal and sustaining the decision of the
Planning Commission regarding Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and to draft a
resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 as recommended by the
Planning Commission. If such resolutions were subsequently adopted, the
applications for both Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map 2006-
160 for the approval to permit a two-unit condominium at 132 Thirteenth Street
would be approved as a two-story development with a 25-foot height limit, subject
to appropriate terms and conditions as determined by the City Council
e
2) Direct staff to draft a resolution sustaining the appeal and reversing the decision
of the Planning Commission regarding Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and to draft a
resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 as recommended by the
Planning Commission and revised to be consistent with the City Council
determination on the appeal matter., If such resolutions were subsequently
adopted, the applications for both C;onditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative
Parcel Map 2006-160 for the approval to permit a two-unit condominium at 132
Thirteenth Street would be approved as a three-story development with a 3S-foot
height limit on the rear half of the subject property, subjeCt to appropriate terms
and conditions as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Minimal impact to city receipt of property tax revenues.
e
o~ AppeaLCC StalfRcport - 132 1birteoulb
4
.
e
e
.i'
Attachments: (7)
Attacnment 1:
Public Hearings re:
Appeal a/Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council Staff Report
July 24, 2006
. Bahorski
1 Manager
Appeal of Scott Levitt, received June 29, 2006
Attachment 2:
Planning Commission Resolutions 06-21 and 06-22,
adopted June 21, 2006
Attachment 3:
Planning Commission Minutes: June 7 and June 21, 2006
Attachment 4:
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and Tentative Parcel Map
2006-160, Planning Commission Staff Report, dated June
7,2006
Attachment 5:
Written documents submitted to the Planning Commission
on June 7 in Favor of CUP 06-4
Attachment 6:
Written documents submitted to the Planning Commission
on June 7 in Opposition to CUP 06-4
Attachment 7:
Project Development Plans
o~ Appeal.CC SI8ffReport. 132 Thimenth
5
e
e
e
,~
Public HeQ7ings re:
Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council StqfJ Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 1
APPEAL OF SCOTT LEVITT, RECEIVED JUNE 29, 2006
"
o~ Appeal.CC StalfRoport -132 Thirteenth
6
e
e
e
;'
FORMAL APPEAL I REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 06-21 APPROVING CUP 06-4
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
This appeal pertains to the aforementioned resolution discussed in Public Forum on
June 7, 2006, before a 3-person Planning Commission and adopted by a 4-person
Commission on June 21,2006. Applicant, 132 13th Street, LLC hereby requests that
such resolution include the verbiage, "Two or Three story condominiums..
The request for the CUP is required under the City zoning codes. A CUP is not required
for a duplex. Any legal ownership under condominium ve~ting title is required to go to
Commission and Council for approval. The Commission at the June 7, 2006, lead by
Commission Deaton took the opportunity to ignore the fact that the parcel is already
zoned for three stories, and restricted the condos to two stories. In reality, the CUP,
according to the City's Planning Director Lee Whitenberg, is really for allowing:
. . .for review by the City, the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&R's) for
operations and maintenance of a condominium development. After approval by the City
the CC&R's are then submitted to the State Department of Real Estate to ensure that
they meet the City's concems as to how overall maintenance of the property is to be
conducted...
The fact that this is what the CUP is for was completely ignored and the entire evening
was spent discussing the 3111 story. The Commissioners cited incompatibility for voting
against the CUP, and Ellery Deaton read a prewritten speech against the CUP into the
record. It is apparent the Commission is not against condominium ownership as they
passed the CUP for two-stories.
Basically, the Planning Commission has said it is okay to build two stories but not three.
The fact that it is already zoned for a three-story duplex (which was exempted from the
current Moratorium at the June 21, 2006 Council Meeting), creates a constitutional
violation of property rights and a takings violation. It treats two individuals in a "similarly
:
"
situated situation" and discriminates against one of them. In this case the condominium e
owner or builder, verses the common ownership builder or owner.
An illustration might be a proposed restaurant on Main Street. Main Street is currently
zoned for restaurants, but under City Code is required to obtain a CUP. The proposed
restaurant for example were a Mexican food restaurant, and the Commission stated that
they didn't like Mexican food, and some members of the public came to the meeting and
also stated they didn't like Mexican food. So the Commission said, they would grant the
CUP only if the restaurant didn't serve Mexican food. This would be a clear violation of
the applicant's constitutional rights. As the CUP process for a restaurant is concerned
with noise, and health and safety, etc., not what type of food is served, That issue is
completely extraneous to the CUP discretionary process. As serving Mexican food
rather than Persian food for example does not create more noise, or present more
, .
health and safety issues.
In the appeal at hand, the third story is akin to Mexican food, and just because some
people do not like it does not justify the denial of the CUP request. The Planning
Commission simply did not provide the necessary rational, substantial or legal, salient
requirements in denying the CUP.
e
Again, our request is to simply modify the Resolution, to allow the third story which the
lot is currently zoned for and which is exempt from the current forty-five day moratorium.
e
.'
e
Public Hearings re:
Appeal afConditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council Staff Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS
06-21 AND 06-22, ADOPTED JUNE 21, 2006
e
e
O~-4 Appcal.cc Stafl'Rcpon - 1321birtecnth
7
e
e
e
RESOLIITIONNUMBER 06-21
A RESOLIITION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING CONDmONAL USE
PERMIT 06-4 FOR TWO CONDOMINIUMS AT 132 13 TII
STREET, SEAL BEACH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY FIND
AND RESOLVE:
Section 1. On April 18, 2006, Scott Levitt, Member of 132 13th Street LLC,
submitted a requc;st for a Conditional Use Permit with the Department of Development Services.
Section 2. The proposed request is to approve a Conditional Use Permit for
two condominiums at 132 13th Street. Conditional Use Permit approval is necessary for
condominiums on the subject property.
Section 3. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15303b (''New Construction
or Conversion of Small Structures'') and 15315 (''Minor Land Divisions''), this project is
categorically exempt from formal environmental review, in compliance with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated
in ~4 of this resolution and pursuant to ~~28-800, 28-2503 and 28-2504 of the City's Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings:
(a) On April 18, 2006, Scott Levitt, Member of 132 13th Street LLC,
submitted a request for a Conditional Use Permit with the Department of Development Services.
(b) Specifically, the applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit for the
pmposes of creating two condominiums. The proposal conforms to the building and density
standards in the Residential High Density (RHD) zone.
(c) The subject property is described as Orange County Assessor's Parcel
Number 199-081-10 and is located at 132 13th Street.
(d) The subject property is located at the east side of the 100 block of 13th
Street and is comprised of two legal lots, each 25 feet wide by 117.5 feet deep, for a total of
5,875 (5OxI17.5 =5,875) square feet.
(e) The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in Residential High Density
(RHD)zone
10f5
Planning OJmmission Resolution 06-21
OJnditional Use Permit 06-4 - 132 13M Street
June 21.2006
e
SOUTH
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in Residential High Density
(RHO) zone
Across 15' wide alley and mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RED) zone
Across 13th Street, mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RHO) zone
EAST
WEST
(f) A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission
on June 7, 2006 to consider the subject Conditional Use Permit 06-4. At the public hearing, the
Planning Commission invited and considered any and all testimony offered in favor of and in
opposition to said Conditional Use Permit.
(g) In response to the mailed and published public notices, the City has
received several letters in opposition to the third story portion of the proposed development
associated with the subject application. At the public hearing on June 7, 2006, a few speakers
spoke in favor of the application with the proposed third story portion of the development, but
the large majority of speakers spoke in opposition to the third story portion of the development.
Section 5. Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the hearing,
including the facts stated in Sections 1 through 5 of this resolution prepared in conjunction with
this project, and pursuant to DD 28-800, 28-2503 and 28-2504 of the City's Municipal Code, the _
PIHnning Commission hereby finds: ..
(a) A Conditional Use Permit for a three-story, two-condominium structure
would not be consistent with the City's General Plan. A significant goal and objective of the
City's General Plan is retaining a "small-town character." Pursuant to the Land Use Element of
the General Plan, the City's small town feel with a small town like population shall be preserved
and enhanced. In addition, the Land Use Element directs the City to "continue to provide support
for its residents, maintain its infrastructure and provide jobs and housing balance while still
maintaining its small town atmosphere." The proposed three-story condominium would be
inconsistent with these General Plan goals and objectives of retaining the City's small-town
atmosphere and character. The vast majority of the homes in the vicinity are two-story structures.
Thus, the proposed three-story condominium would be incompatible with surrounding uses.
(b) Conditional Use Permit 06,.4 for two condominiums, when limited to two
stories, is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan.
which provides a High Density Residential zoning designation for the subject property and
permits condominiums subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. The vast majority of
the homes in the vicinity are two-story structures, and therefore approving a two-story
condominium would not detract from the General Plan goals of retaining the City's small-town
atmosphere and character. The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City's
General Plan, as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected in, the Land Use
Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. when limited to a _
maximum of two stories and 25 feet in height. ..
(c) The building and property at 132 13th Street are adequate in size, shape,
topography and location to meet the needs of the proposed use of the property, when limited to a
20f5
e
e
e
Planning Commission Resolution 06-21
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 - 132 13110 Street
June 21, 2006
maximum of two stories and 25 feet in height. The property is approximately 0.135 acres in
area.
(d) The proposal conforms to the density requirements of 1 unit per 2,178
square feet oflot area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 per unit in the District 1, Residential
High Density (RHD) zone.
(e) At the public hearing held on June 7, 2006, a significant number of
neighboring residents opposed construction of a third story in conjunction with the subject
application request.
(f) Letters received and public testimony heard on June 7, 2006, in response
to mailed and published public notices, indicate the proposed structure with a third story
component is not compatible and consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. The District 1,
RED zone is very dense and congested, and the third story component would have detrimental
effects on the adj oining narrower residential properties that are restricted to two stories, due to
the potentially adverse impacts on light, airflow, privacy and views.
(g) The incompatibility of the third story with the surrounding neighborhood
is also established by the lack of similar three-story structures. The vast majority of homes in the
Old Town, Planning District 1, east of Main Street neighborhood are two stories. In this area,
there are 48 properties with widths of 50 feet or more, but of these 48 properties, only 6 currently
have 3-story structures and these are considered legal, non-conforming for density and building
area.
(h) Approval of this application, as conditioned to two-story development, is
compatible to and consistent with the surrounding neighborhood.
(i) Approval of this application, as conditioned to two-story development,
would not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit 06-4, subject to the following conditions:
1. Conditional Use Permit 06-4 is approved.for a two-unit condominium at 132 13th Street,
contingent on approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 by the City Council. This CUP
shall not become effective for any pllIpose unless and until the Council has issued such
approval.
2. All development shall be limited in height to two stories, 25 feet maximum height.
3.
The applicant shall provide a copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC&Rs) to the Department of Development Services prior to submittal to the California
Department of Real Estate. CC&Rs shall include maintenance of common areas,
including open space, pavement areas and exterior of building structures.
30fS
Planning Commission Resolution 06-21
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 - 132 13"' Street
June 21,2006
e
4.
This CUP shall not become effective for any puxpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of
Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of
Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until
the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed.
5. This CUP shall become null and void unless exercised within one (I) year of the date of
:final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission
pursuant to a written request fur extension submitted to the Department of Development
Services a minimum of ninety (90) days prior to such expiration date. '
6.
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 Conditional Use Permit, and from any and all claims and losses
occurring or resulting to any person, fum, 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.
e
7. This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of
Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of
Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until
the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach
at a meeting thereof held on the 21st dayofJl.Ule 2006 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Deaton, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts,
NOES: Commissioners None
ABSENT: Commissioners None
e
40f5
e
e
e
ee Whittenberg
Secretary, Planning Commissio
.***
S ofS
Planning Commission Resolution 06-21
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 - 132 J 3110 Street
June 21, 2006
Ellery Deaton
Acting Chairperson, plAnning Commission
e
e
e
RESOLUTION NUMBER 06-22
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-
160 AT 132 13111 STREET, SEAL BEACH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
Section 1. On Apri118, 2006, Scott Levitt, Member of 132 13th Street LLC,
submitted a request for a Tentative Parcel Map with the Department of Development Services.
Section 2. The proposed request is to approve a Tentative Parcel Map to
combine two existing lots into one parcel for the purposes of division into two airspace
condominium units. The proposal conforms to the density requirements of I unit per 2,178
square feet of lot area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 per unit in the District 1, Residential
High Density (RHD) zone.
Section 3. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~~ 15303(b) (''New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures" and 15315 (''Minor Land Divisions"), this
project is categorically exempt from formal environmental review, in compliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on June 7, 2006 to consider the subject Tentative Parcel Map. At the public
hearing, the Planning Commission invited and considered any and all testimony offered in favor
of and in opposition to said Tentative Parcel Map.
Section 5. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2006-160 will create one parcel from the
two existing lots and two condominium units on the subject property.
Section 6. Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the hearing,
including the facts stated in Sections 1 through 5- of this resolution prepared in conjunction with
this project, and pursuant to ~~ 21-7 and 21-11 of the City's Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission hereby finds:
(a) On April 18, 2006, Scott Levitt, Member of 132 13th Street LLC, applied
for a Tentative Parcel Map to combine two existing lots into one parcel for the Purp9ses of
division into two condominium units.
(b) The subject property is described as Orange County Assessor's Parcel
Number 199-081-10 and is located at 132 13th Street.
lof3
Planning Commission Resolution 06-22
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 -13213'" Street
June 2/,2006
(c) The subject property is located at the east side of the 100 block of 13th
Street and is comprised of two legal lots, each 25 feet wide by 117.5 feet deep, for a total of
5,875 (5OxI17.5 =5,875) square feet.
e
(d)
The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
NORTH
SOUTH
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in Residential
High Density (RHD) zone
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in Residential
High Density (RHD) zone
Across 15' wide alley, mix of single-family and multi-family
residences in Residential High Density (RHD) zone
Across 13th Street, mix of single-family and multi-family
residences in Residential High Density (RHD) zone
EAST
WEST
(e) The proposed Tentative Parcel Map, with two-story development, is
beneficial to the short term lind long-term land use goals of the City of Seal Beach; will promote
the public health, safety and welfare; and is in the public interest.
(f) The proposed Map, with two-story development, is consistent with
applicable General Plan elements and the proposed development application in thilt the Map will _
establish new parcels that are consistent with said plans. .
(g) The design of the parcel map will not interfere with existing easements,
acquired by the public or utilities that serve the public.
(h) The site is physically suitable for the proposed subdivision.
(i) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage.
(j) The design of the proposed improvements will not cause substantial
environmental damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other habitats, or
cause serious public health problems.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission of the City of
Seal Beach does recommend that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The project shall comply with all sections as adopted in Resolution 5209, titled Public
Works Standard Conditions of Approval for Vestine: and Tentative Subdivision Maps.
2003 Edition.
2.
For storm water requirements, submit an approved Water Quality Management Plan.
e
20f3
e
e
e
Planning Commission Resolution 06-22
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 - 132 13M Street
June 21, 2006
3.
All conditions from the City of Seal Beach Departments shall be incorporated into the
parcel map prior to submitting the final parcel map for review.
4. Documentation shall be provided indicating the mathematical accuracy, title information
and survey analysis of the parcel map and the correctness of all certificates. Proof of
ownership and proof of original signatures shall also be required.
5. 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, finns, 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 Parcel 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 flies 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.
6.
This CUP shsll not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of
Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of
Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until
the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach
at a meeting thereof held on the 21st day of June 2006 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners
Deaton, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts,
NOES: Commissioners
None
ABSENT: Commissioners
None
Ellery Deaton
Acting ChaiIperson, Planning Commission
3of4
Lee 'ttenberg
Secretary, Planning Commi
****
4of4
PIQ7l7ling Commission Resolution 06-22
TentativeParcelMap2006-160 -13213tAStreet
June 21, 2006
,
e
e
e
e
Public Hearings re:
Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council Staff Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: JUNE
7 AND JUNE 21, 2006
e
e
o~ Appoo1.CC StalfRoport - 132 Thirteonth
8
.'
e'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
f
:"4
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
t
City of Seel Beech Plenning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
and approximately 8 feet 5 inches from the rear property
line, where the Code requires a 10-foot rear setback,
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
06-20.
Commissioner Roberts asked if the BBQ is to be 5 feet high or 48 inches high. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that Resolution 06-20 should reflect 48 inches as the height of the
Baa. Commissioner Roberts then asked which of the two sets of plans submitted is the
correct one. Ms. Teague stated that the plan that is separate from the Staff. Report is
the correct one.
MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to approve Minor Plan Review 06-5' and
adopt of Resolution 06-20 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
.. ABSENT~ ... .
3-0-1
Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts
None
O'Malley -- - ','
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 06-20 begins a 10-day calendar
appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the
appeal period begins tomorrow moming.
SCHEDULED MA TIERS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 - 13th Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Scott L. Levitt / Bollen Family Trust
Approval of a parcel map to legally combine two lots into one
parcel for the purpose of creating two airspace
condominiums. The proposal conforms to the density
requirements of 1 unit per 2,178 square feet of lot area and
the minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet per unit in the
District 1, Residential High Density (RHO) Zone. A
Conditional Use Permit is required for condominiums.
Page 3 of 13
(
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
(4
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
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
e
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
06-21 aDd 06-22, respectively.
Staff ReDort
Ms. Teague delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
Planning Department.) She provided some background information on this item and
stated that the proposed development meets all zoning standards for density, setbacks,
and height for the construction on the two-lot property under single ownership. She said
that the applicant proposes to create one lot, in this case to construct two
condominiums for separate ownership, which requires approval of a Tentative Parcel
Map (TPM) and. condominiums require approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) by
the Planning Commission (PC). She noted that the two applications must be
considered together. The Senior Planner then reviewed the height limits for the
Residential High Density (RHD) Zone, noting that in District 1, when a lot is up to 37.5
feet wide the height limit is 2 stories, 25 feet maximum, and for lots greater than 37.5
feet wide the height limit is 2 stories, 25 feet maximum in the front half of the lot, and the
rear half is permitted to be 3 stories, 35 feet maximum. She noted that the Code does
not specify heig~t limits ba~ed pn the number of dwelling units. Sh~, said that with the
ability to construct 3 stories on a 50-foot wide property, more building square footage
could be constructed than building one unit on each 25-foot wide property. She said
that Staff has researched similar properties in that area of Old Town and found 48
properties that are 50 feet or wider. Of these only 6 lots have three-story structures,
and each of these structures was granted a Variance. She noted that the primary issue
in this case is neighborhood compatibility, and since there have been no similar
condominiums constructed in the Old Town District 1, the matter of consistency should
be considered, as this is becoming more of a community concem within this district.
She' indicated that due to these concerns, the PC has denied four Height Variations
(HV) for Covered Roof Access Structure(s) (CRAS) in the last 2 years, and on April 19,
2006, a study session on mansionization was conducted by the PC with residents of Old
Town expressing their opposition to three-story structures within District 1. Ms. Teague
noted that City Code does allow three-story structures on lots of this size. She stated
that the TPM as submitted does conform to the City's General Plan (GP).. She .then
explained some of the modifications to the plans that the PC could recommend in order
to deem this project acceptable. The Senior Planner reiterated that the main issue with
CUP 06-4 would be compatibility, and since there has previously been no similar project
submitted, Staff makes no recommendations on the determination of the PC. She then
indicated that Staff received two letters in opposition to this application and copies were
provided to the PC. Ms. Teague then provided a brief PowerPoint presentation of
photographs of the lots along and surrounding 13th Street that could build up to 35 feet
on the rear portion of the lot. (Presentation is on' file for inspection in the Planning
Department.)
e
Commissioner Roberts asked that Ms. Teague provide' a definition of "airspace
condominium." Mr. Whittenberg explained that with airspace condominiums, the
ownership that a person has of his or her unit is most typically of the interior walls of the
e
Page 4 of13
.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~
:0:4
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
t
City of Seal Beech Plenning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
unit from ceiling to floor, with the outside walls, the roof, and the yard areas owned
under a homeowners association with common maintenance responsibilities to ensure
consistent maintenance of the exterior appearance. He noted that he had explained to
the applicant that with a PC of 4 members, a 2-2 vote would constitute a denial. He
explained that at one time City ordinances had required 3 affirmative votes by the PC
for approval of any action, but this is no longer the case.
Commissioner Deaton inquired about the public noticing. Ms. Teague stated that public
notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the
project site, and the notice was also published in the Sun Newspaper.
Commissioner Ladner asked if there is a separation between the two condominiums.
Ms. Teague stated that the two units are side-by-side and are under the same roof.
She added that the RHD Zone requires a 5-foot side setback for the 50-foot wide lots.
Commissioner Roberts asked what the front and rear setbacks are. Ms. Teague stated
that the front setback for the RHD Zone is a 12 foot average and the rear setback is 9
feet. '
Public Hearino
Acting Chairperson Deaton opened the public hearing.
Scott Levitt, stated that he represents the Limited Liability Company (LLC) that is the
applicant for this project. He questioned why Staff just included a small section of Old
Town in their visual presentation, and in all fairness, all of Old Town should be
considered, as he is certain not every person present tonight lives within the boundaries
of the areas presented. He clarified that he is not seeking a Variance of any kind. He
stated that he read the Zoning Code and had the plans specifically tailored to these
requirements. He noted that were he building a duplex with the same architectural
plans, he would not have required any discretionary approval. He said that he wishes to
build a project where he can live in one unit and sell the other, and in this respect he will
be able to afford. to live in Seal Beach. He nClted that if he chose, he could construct a
10,000 square foot single-family residence (SFR) on this site or two, 2-story single-
family residences (SFR) on 7,549 square feet, without any review by the PC. He
provided a spreadsheet listing similar projects throughout Old Town and calculated the
ratio between livable square feet versus lot size, and noted that most of these structures
were built in the 1960's and early 70's. He stated that his project would have 5-foot side
setbacks with a lot coverage ratio under 66%, which is less than the 75% ratio allowed.
He noted that there are approximately 13 other condominium projects recently sold
within Seal Beach and cited several examples of this. He then read into the record
comments made by the Director of Development Services as they appear on Pages 9-
10 of the minutes of April 19, 2006 from the study session on the topic of
Mansionization as follows: '
Page 5 of 13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
C.
.c4
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
"0
.,
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Maeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
e
~ . . in the opinion of Staff, the pattern of existing development, lot sizes
and related setback and lot coverage requirements are sufficient enough
that the perceived impacts of new home construction is substantially
reduced. Modifications to roof style provisions for the front of the
structure, even within the Old Town RMD and RHD zones, would have
some significant impacts on reducing the perceived bulk along the street
frontage. .
'Commissioner Ladner asked if the lot coverage ratio would change if a
properly were made up of two lots. Mr. Whittenberg stated that you,
cannot build across a properly line unless you apply for a parcel map to
create on,e lot, in which case, the requirements for side yard setbacks
increase in size. .
Mr. Levitt stated that increasing the setbacks to 5 feet helps compensate for the shadow
from higher structures. He then referred to new plans prepared with a 30 percent
reduction in the 3rd floor and in the overall square footage so that the condominiums
would be more compatible with the surrounding homes. He then presented photos of a
similar unit at .329 10!/1 Street, constructed within the last 6 months; and others at'12Z
11th Street, and 112 8th Street. He noted that all of approximately 100 owners of
properties in Old Town measuring 37.5 feet wide are able to construct a three-story
structure on the rear 50 percent of the property.
e
Joe Scibelli spoke in favor of replacing six rental units with two single-family residences
and reducing parking impacts. He stated, that property owners within Seal Beach would
rather have an owner as a neighbor than a renter.
Joyce Parque stated that she is the real estate agent for the seller. She said that the
proposed project conforms to City Code and should be granted approval.
Bruce Boehm, 131 14th Street, stated that his home is directly across the alley from the
proposed project. He stated that a three-story, monolithic condominium complex in the
middle of the block,. surrounded by. one and two-story small residential income.
properties would be incompatible with the neighborhood. He noted that this represents
another case of a developer attempting to change the character of the neighborhood in
order to maximize his profit at the expense of neighboring property owners. He stated
that the City needs to change the Code to limit construction of homes within Old Town
to two-stories with a maximum height of 25 feet regardless of the lot size, or limit three-
story structures to the avenues or Main Street, and livable square footage should also
be limited. Mr. Boehm also indicated that the City should require 4 garage parking
spaces that open to the alley for lots that are 5,500 square feet or larger. He noted that
Mr. Levitt's proposal limits parking to one, 448-square foot two-car garage. He stated
that a tandem garage is no substitute for the current 4-car garages that each open to
the alley. He said he would have no problem with this plan if it were for two-story
homes. He recommended denial of Tentative Parcel' Map (TPM) 2006-160 and
, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 06-4.
e
Page 6 of 13
e
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
!
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
.-33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
I
..."
City of Seal Baach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
Nancy Smith, 127 13th Street, said that she has two 50-foot wide lots and will be
presenting plans to the Planning Commission (PC) for adding on to her home. She
explained that she has an approximate 1,500 square foot home that has gotten too
small for her family. She noted that several architects attempted to convince her to
construct a large, three story home, but she does not feel that she can agree to this and
continue to live in this neighborhood. She said that her new home will measure 2,800
square feet and will be 25 feet high. She discouraged the granting of any kind of
Variance and recommended denial of TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4. Commissioner
Deaton clarified that the PC is considering approval of a CUP and not a Variance.
Jim Caviola, 1117 Ocean Avenue, expressed his opposition to the CUP process and to
this application. He said that all that is happening is that the applicant is trying to make
a profit. He stated that homes no longer have 15-foot front setbacks and the new
homes are being built to cover the entire lot. He noted that only after a person's name
is officially on the property deed, should he or she be allowed to submit an application of
this kind.
Bill Ayres, 707 Central Avenue, recommended denial of TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4
. as. this would- set .a- bad--precedent:- - He. said that this - type of project""belongs in . .
Huntington Beach and is really all about money and would set a precedent that would
ruin the uniqueness of Seal Beach.
David Rosenman stated his concerns over the precedent this would set, and said this
would lead to mansionization of many properties in Old Town. He said that perhaps
City Council should review the issue of mansionization more directly prior to making a
decision on a project of this type. He cautioned that allowing the loss of many of the
moderate income homes in town would eliminate an important cross section of the
community that keeps Seal Beach what it is. He recommended denial of this
application. Mr. Rosenman then commented that the City would be losing a very
valuable employee with Christy Teague leaving the City to accept employment with the
City of Dana Point. Commissioner Roberts stated that the PC was in agreement with
this.
Melinda Howell voiced her opposition to TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4. She said that
she loves Seal Beach because it is still a beach community and big homes do not
belong here. She said that when recently visiting Balboa Island, she spoke with a real
estate agent who has lived there for 40 years, who commented about a time when you
could open the doors and windows to your home and fresh air would blow through the
house, but now more homes are requiring the installation of air conditioning because
neighboring homes are so big and so high that air is not circulating between them. Ms.
Howell questioned how a CUP could be granted to a project like this when once it is
constructed it cannot be changed.
Mitzi Morton, 153 13th Street, stated that her family moved to Seal Beach in 1958 and
owns a 507foot wide lot. She said that they constructed a triplex on half of the lot, as
~iS was then the trend. She said that they had the option to add another triplex, but
Page 7 of 13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
(
::t04
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
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
e
chose not to do so and now have 25 feet of open space, which turned out to be a good
decision, as her neighbor has constructed a "monstrous" two-story house that has
ruined her 25-foot lot. She indicated that after receiving notice of this project and
discovering that these were to be three-story structures, she and other 13 h Street
residents canvassed the neighborhood and found that no one was aware that these
condominiums were to be three stories high. She noted that 95 percent of those
canvassed were opposed to having three story structures on this street. She stated that
on 13th Street alone there are seven 50-foot wide lots, and approval of such a project
would have a serious impact upon this neighborhood and would set an undesirable
precedent. She recommended denial ofTPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4.
Carla Watson, 1635 Catalina Avenue, stated she is a 44-year resident of Seal Beach
and has been involved with many community causes throughout the years and now
wants to speak regarding preserving Old Town. She indicated that what has happened
with Seal Beach is an embarrassment as the Old Town atmosphere is being eroded.
She noted that developers and incoming residents are not taking a look at the
neighborhood and considering the compatibility and preservation of the community
environment. She said she believes rental properties are important in Seal Beach
- because'they are a part_of the-C9!1:lmunity cl(mate and provide a diversity of residents:
She encouraged the PC to deny this request.
Richard Moody, 312 13th Street, spoke in opposition to this application noting that he
lives on a large lot in a 900 square foot house with a nice back yard. He noted that next
door there is a three-story "mansion" so that all he sees from his lot is house, and he
now has to install air conditioning since he no longer gets any air circulation as the large
structure blocks the wind. He recommended denial.
e
Commissioner Deaton paused to request a show of hands of those present in favor and
in opposition ofTPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4.
Vie Grgas, 211 15th Street, spoke in opposition. He stated that his 37.5-foot wide lot
prOVides 3 garages for a single-family residence (SFR) and the City shourd consider
increasing the parking requirements for these larger homes. He noted that the _13th
Street LLC includes Councilman Michael Levitt as a member, and he would have to
recuse himself from taking any action at the Council level on this application. He
indicated that allowing a third story on the rear of 37.5-foot wide lots was intended to
provide additional living space for only one SFR per lot. He stated if the applicant wants
to construct one SFR on a 37.5-wide lot, he would encourage the PC to require
additional parking, otherwise the applicant should construct two, 25-foot high units and
prOVide adequate parking for each unit.
Gerri West, 1301 Electric Avenue, presented petitions with 87 si9natures in opposition
to this project. She referred to Government Code (GC) 66424 and the discussion
regarding TPMs on Page 2 of the Staff Report. She asked that someone show her
where GC 66424 states that two parcels can be joined together to create one. Mr. Abbe
stated that there is a pre-existing building spanning two lots, and when such a case
e
Page 8 of 13
e
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
f
"'of
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
t
City of Seel Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of Juna 7, 2006
predates the enactment of the Subdivision Map Act, the practice of the City is to allow
another building to span the two lots. Ms. West stated that the GC refers to subdividing
a lot and not consolidating two lots into one. Commissioner Deaton suggested that Mr.
Abbe research this information and present his comments after the public hearing.
Warren Morton, 153 13t~ Street, stated that the residents of Seal Beach do not want
these three-story structures. He said that air space is needed and residents don't want
Seal Beach to look like Surfside. He recommended denial.
Barbara Barton, 415 Ocean Avenue, said that she and her husband have lived in Seal
Beach since 1965. She noted that at that time it was a very small, quaint beach
community, and she does not want this to change. She recommended denial and said
that residents need to see air, sunrises, sunsets, and horizons.
Scott Levitt, speaking in rebuttal, presented plans showing the elevation views of the
proposed condominiums and noted the with a 12-foot setback, a 10-foot sidewalk, a 30-
foot wide street, and a 10-foot sidewalk across the street, an individual could look up
and would still not see the third floor of the proposed condominiums. He noted the
amoun~ of oPllln ~pace therE!. is between the cpndominiums, and said that the all~y View.
could also be shown on the plans. He then explained that the project will include two, 2-
car garages, and noted that the number of cars will be reduced from what currently
exists for the six-unit apartment structure. He reiterated that he is not requesting a
Variance and indicated that his family moved to Seal Beach when he was 7 years old,
and he lived here for 24 years, and comes to Seal Beach every weekend. He clarified
that this is a cash-funded project and he is not seeking funding to cOmplete it. He
added that it is not the business of the public or the PC whether the LLC will or will not
profit from this project. He emphasized that he is not seeking any type of Variance for
any option that does not comply with City building standards, and he has reduced the
third floor structure by 25 percent. He commented that everyone has their own idea of
what a neighborhood should be, and unfortunately, Old Town Seal Beach is not a
homeowners association, and all he wants to do is build what he is legally allowed to
build. He added that if people are concerned about the building of larger homes, they
should.have spoken up over. 3 years ago when-the 8,000 square foot homes began..
going up along Ocean Avenue. He requested that the PC grant approval to this
application. Commissioner Roberts stated that in Mr. Levitt's comparison spreadsheet
he states that on a 50 x 117.5 foot lot the'allowable square feet for the first floor is
3,860, but that the proposed first floor measures only 2, 862 square feet. He asked that
with the side and rear setbacks, where would the additional 1,000 square feet be. Mr.
Levitt stated that the architect has computed this and perhaps Ms. Teague could
respond to this. Ms. Teague explained that building within the required setbacks on the
first floor would allow 3,860 sq. ft. Commissioner Roberts asked if the third story were
denied, what kind of financial impact would this create for Mr. Levitt? Mr. Levitt stated
that he has not run the numbers on a two-story project, as he designed the home to be
his dream house and planned on living in a three-story home. Commissioner Roberts
asked if he were to" have the option of selling both units, would he still complete the
project. Mr. Levitt said that he would not. Commissioner Roberts inquired about the
Page 9 of 13
l
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
(
'~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
.33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
-;,.",
"
City of See/ Beech Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
e
proposed lot coverage of 70 percent as listed in Mr. Levitt's Application for Public
Hearing. Mr. Levitt stated that the project had been scaled down to 66 percent lot
coverage. Commissioner Roberts noted that with the proposed project quite a bit of
open space is being traded ,for buildings, and the 66 percent does not reflect this. He
said that his position on this project is to proceed without approval of the CUP permitting
the third story. Mr. Levitt stated that he has not seen the petition and has no idea what
these people were told.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Acting Chairperson Deaton closed the public
hearing.
Mr. Whittenberg noted that the Assistant City' Attorney is ready to respond to the
concern expressed by Ms. Gerri West. Mr. Abbe referred to Page 2 of the Staff Report,
which states that generally parcel maps are used for the creation of additional lots under
the Subdivision Map Act (SMA); however, in this case one lot is being created with a
parcel map. He explained that in this case air space is being divided into different lots.
With regard to Government Code 66424, which is a part of the SMA and simply defines
subdivision, and does state that subdivision does include a condominium project, which
is the division "of .air 'space. He noted tl'lat h~ had spQken to the" City Attorney" about .-
whether an additional merger were required in this situation, but was told that it is not a
requirement, as there is already a building on the lot.
e
Mr. Whittenberg then provided responses to some of the comments made as follows:
1. Commissioner Roberts questions regarding the percentage of impervious surface as
noted on the Application for Public Hearing - This is something that the City is
required to have in order to comply with Water Quality Control Board provisions on
water quality and drainage from properties.
2. What is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) conditioning? - Typically what is
conditioned under a condominium project is the requirement to provide for review by
the City the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the operation and
maintenance,of.a.condominium development. After approval by the City the.cC&Rs "
are then submitted to the State Department of Real Estate to ensure that they meet
the City's concerns as to how overall maintenance of the property is to be
conducted. Also, a specific site development plan for that development must be
approved so if in the future the owners wished to add a room, they would have to
apply for approval of a new CUP and seek discretionary approval to revise the
previously approved condominium plan.
3. Regarding the public notice not including information on the proposal of a third story,
the City does not notice for items that comply with City Zoning Standards and that
require no discretionary approval. On properties that are 37.5 feet wide. by right the
property owner can construct a third story on the rear half of the lot. In this case
there is a by right type of use that is subject to discretionary approval because of the
type of ownership for the property being requested.
e
Page 10 of 13
-'
e
l
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
f
"'...
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
-33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
I
......
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
4. Why did Staff not look at all of the 37.5 or 50-foot wide lots throughout Old Town? _
The CUP process is one that deals with compatibility to the neighborhood so Staff
took an approach that included only the immediate neighborhood for 13th Street,
which included the neighborhood bounded by Main Street, Electric Avenue, Ocean
Avenue, and Seal Beach Boulevard. He noted that Staff would take this same
position regarding compatibility for any proposed project beyond the west side of
Main Street.
5. Based upon tonight's discussion Staff would probably have to change some of its
thinking regarding how to deal with the issue of mansionization for lots within Old
Town that are wider than 37.5 feet.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Deaton stated that this project must comply with the City's General Plan
(GP), and in reviewing the GP over and over it refers to the objective of retaining a small
town character in Seal Beach. She then read from the General Plan as follows:
. Introductio,n on Pag~ 4
"The City has been perceived as having a small town feel with a
small town like population. This concept shall be preserved and enhanced
for the future prosperity of the City as suggested by the General Plan
Committee. "
Page LU-36
"People have been attracted to Seal Beach primarily due to its
unique geographical location, educational opportunity, attractive beaches,
ideal climate, and small town friendly character. A goal of the City is to
maintain and promote those social and physical qualities that enhance the
quality of the community and environment in which we live. .
Page LU-37
". . . the City will continue to provide support for its residents, maintain its
infrastructure, and provide jobs and housing balance while still maintaining
its small town atmosphere..
She continued by stating that the PC is not concerned with profit or financing and
everyone deserves the right to "make a buck.. She said that what the PC is concerned
with is maintaining the small town atmosphere with no more shadows and trying to raise
plants with no sunlight and having to install air conditioning because the ocean breeze
is blocked. She stated that, this is what happens when three-story homes are
constructed, She noted that this may be unfortunate timing for the applicant as the PC
has been studying the issue of mansionization and receiving feedback from residents
Page 11 of 13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
C
Lot
25
26
27
28
2
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
"I,)
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Maeting Minutes of June 7, 2006
saying "please allow no more third stories, whether for single-family residence,
duplexes, or whatever." She said that she personally sent a plea to City Council to
begin the process of changing the City Code. She stated that Old Town is beginning to
look like a cookie cutter Truman Show style town, and what residents want is a small
town, friendly atmosphere. She noted that the issue is not square footage as such, but
bulk and integrity of the community. She said she would like to make a motion to
approve the condominium concept, but a project that will be in keeping with a small
town community. She indicated that she believes you can have a lovely home and live
in the community without changing the community in order to do so. She moved that
the PC direct Staff to prepare a resolution approving this project conditioned upon a
two-story structure. Mr. Abbe requested that a condition also be added stating that
approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-4 would be contingent upon City Council
approval of Tenfative Parcel Map 2006-160, because if the PC approved CUP 06-4 and
City Council denies approval ofTPM 2006-160, this could create "a strange legal limbo."
MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Roberts to approve Conditional Use Permit 06-4 with
the condition that the condominium structure be restricted to two-stories. Approval
would also be contingent upon City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0-1
Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts
None
O'Malley
Mr. Abbe advised that the approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-4 is a final decision of
the Planning Commission, and the 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council
will begin after adoption of Resolution 06-22 at the Planning Commission meeting of
June 21, 2006.
MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to recommend approval to City Council of
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 and adopt Resolution 06-21 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
.3-0-1
Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts
None
O'Malley
Mr. Whittenberg indicated that Staff would return with the formal Resolution Nos. 06-21
and 06-22 for adoption at the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 2006. He
advised that adoption of Resolution No. 06-22 would begin a 10-day calendar appeal
period to the City Council and the Commissioner action would be final with the appeal
periOd beginning the morning after adoption. Mr. Abbe advised that the public hearing
on these items is closed and there would be no additional public comment taken at the
l. . meeting of June 21, 2006.
Page 12 of 13
e
e
e
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
e
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Mealing Minutes of June 21, 2006
Bruce Boehm, 131 14l1'l Street, spoke regarding Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 noting
that Mr. Scott Levitt does not yet own the property, and the time to stop construction of
3-story structures is now. He stated that he contacted the California Coastal
Commission (CCC) and was told that Mr. Levitt had already received approval.from the
CCC to construct a 3-story duo/ex at 132 13th Street. He said he did not understand
how CCC approval was granted without Mr. Levitt having reeeived approval.from the
City of Seal Beach. He indicated that the text in Resolution 06-22 is very weak in that it
would allow construction of a 37stoty duplex. He proposed that the text state: "a duplex
built on a combined fot shall remain under the ownership of a single entity in perpetuity."
He stated that a clear recommendation must be sent to City Council that no more
3-story structures should be allowed in Old Town. He noted that if approved, this
project would represent the first time that a 3-story duplex was ever built in the middle of
a single-story, ,and 2-story residential neighborhood. He suggested that the best
solution might tie to table the TPM until after City Council has had the opportunity to
meet on Monday, as Councilman Antos will be proposing a moratorium on 3-story
structures in Old Town.
(
Amold Furr, 116 3111 St, proposed that when looking at the issue of 3-story structures in
. Old. Town, the Planoing Commission should also.evaluate whether tei continue-to allow. _n .
Covered Roof AcceSs'Structufe(s) (CRAS) , 'as there are other ways of having' roof .
access with having the covered stairways.
Joyce Parque stated that she owns a double lot that is surrounded by 3-stoty apartment
buildings. She said that the Planning Commission (PC) should not take away her
property rights until there is a public hearing. She noted that most of the people who
have spoken against this project are owners of nonconforming structures, and yet they
have been allowed to do work on their buildings. She said that this is selective
enforcement, as some people receive special conside~tion for every home they
propose to build in town. She said there are many political and ethical challenges to be
addressed before considering rewriting the Code.
Kim K1isanin, 218. 11th Street, stated that he has lived in Seal Beach for many years and
owns six properties within town, which he worked very hard to acquire. He' said t1iat
should he wish to split one of his properties, or to construct a. 3-story home on a double
lot, he feels that he should be able to do this. He noted that he has clients present
tonight who purchased a large lot on 118 11:th Street and already have their plans for a
3-story home before the Califomia Coastal Commission (CCC). He said that they paid
good money for their property and should not be denied the ability to do this. He then
noted another client who purchased a property at 113 11th Street with a condemned
structure on it, which he has had demolished and is now debating whether to construct
a new home on this lot, or purchase a larger double lot. Mr. KJisanin statec) that he is
concerned, as he sold these lots to these clients with the understanding that they could
. construct a 3-story structure. He indicated that times are Changing and people no
longer live in small, 2-bedroom, 1 bath homes, but are constructing larger homes, and
City does benefit from taxes whenever new construction takes place.
l
c
.
20f7
- 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20'
21
22
-'23
4
-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
Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2006
e
Bob Black stated that he owns two properties in town and what bothers him the most
about Resolution 06-21 is that it caters to a few people. He noted that as long as he is
abiding by City Code, he does not feel that anyone should dictate what he can or cannot
do on his property, and he should be able to get a return on his investment. He said
that the PC is manipulating the real estate industry by prohibiting 3-story homes.. He
noted that he has never heard anything good about the Seal Beach Planning
Commission or City Council, and he promises to fight against this proposed moratorium.
Scott Levitt, the applicant for the 132 13th Street property, stated that he is in agreement -
with the comments made tonight. He said that imposing this moratorium based upon a
few residents prompting a CounCilman to do so is embarrassing. He said that as an
attorney he works to uphold the law and hates seeing the law circumvented. He said
that he has invested a lot of money on the proposed project and noted for the record
that the city did provide written notice to 139 people within a 300-foot radius of the
proposed site, and out of these 139 people, 1 of them attended the public hearing two
weeks ago, which shows the level of concern the immediate neighbors have about
improving a 50-year-old building, and replacing it with a structure that is 3 stories on the'
rear half of the lot, even though the third story is not visible from the front of the lot or
from ,the . street.. .H~.said . that. the-Director of Development Services had-.eorrectly _..- .. - - ---
explained tna' requirement for a Conditional Use Permif "(CUP) in order to' construCt - .
condominiums and noted that this has to do primarily with ensuring that the CC&Rs
clearly present the requirements for common area maintenance. He noted that this is _
what the CUP is for, not to pennit a third story, and this is why he was so upset at the .,
last meeting, as the has PC basically ignored this fact. He indicated that he has
observed several, blatant violations of City Code within the neighborhood, and finds it
interesting that the PC chooses to overlook these. He stated that in reviewing this
application Acting Chairperson Deaton had not been objective nor did she make a
decision based upon City Code, but simply read from selected portions of the GP
designed to help back up her position on this issue. He called for her immediate
resignation.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Acting Chairperson Deaton closed oral
communications:-
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. May 2006 Building Activity Report
2_ Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006.
3. Minor Plan Review 06-6
921 Blue Heron
Applicant/Owner:
Richard Loghry / John & Jayne O'Brien
e
-'
3of7
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
City of Seal Beach Plenning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2005
Request: To construct an approximately 6-foot high waterfalllfire pit
structure in the 5-foot south side setback area,
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
06-28.
Member O'Malley noted that although he was absent for that meeting, he has viewed
the videotaped proceedings and will vote on this item.
MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRJED:
AYES: '
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0
Deaton, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts
None
None
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 06-28 begins a 1O-day calendar
appeal period. to. the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight. is. final. and..the . . '- .-..- ".-,.'
"appeal period begins tomorrow-morning. " "
SCHEDULED MATTERS
'C
4. Adopt Resolution 06-21 Approving Conditional Use Permit 06-4 for the construction
of two air space condominiums at 13213th Street.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that Resolution 06-21 and 06-22 were prepared based upon the
PC determination of 'June 7,2006, and they have been reviewed by the City Attorney's
office and are appropriate for adoption as presented.
Commissioner. Roberts stated that the PC could approve these resolutions or suspend
them and attempt to further acquire direction from City Council. ..
Acting Chairperson Deaton asked Mr. Abbe what would occur if these resolutions were
to be tabled. Mr. Abbe stated that given that the proposed resolution is simply to
approve a 2-story dwelling, he recommended approval. Mr. Whittenberg inte~ected that
Resolution 06-21 eliminates the third story, and would approve the condominium project
with a two-story .development. He noted that if these resolutions are adopted the project
applicant or any interested party has a 1 a-day period of time to appeal the decision on
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 to City Council. He said that Staff feels the resolutions
reflect the direction given by the PC two weeks ago, and are a separate issue from the
item on the City Council agenda for Monday night's meeting, which refafes to three story
structures. Mr. Abbe added that based upon the Permit Streamlining Act, if no actio!') is
taken within a specific time period, there is always the risk a project could be deemed
(
40f7
-'
1
1.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1,9
20
21
22
-?3
~
""25
26
27
2
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
city of Seal Baach Planning Commission
Maaling Minutes of June 21, 2006
approved. He said that if the resolutions reflect what the PC voted on, he advised
adopting them rather than postponing a vote,
Commissioner Roberts asked what the significance was of adding the word "duplex"
into some of the approvals when this project talks about .condominiums.. Mr.
Whittenberg explained that the project before the PC is for a condominium project, so
the resolution has to address this. Commissioner Roberts asked if the California
Coastal Commission (CCC) has approved this project as a duplex. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that they have approved it as a duplex, and plans are in the Building Department
to approve the building as a rental unit. He said that if City Council takes an action on
third stories on Monday night, depending on how the ordinance is structured, it mayor
may not stop further proceedings on this project or any others in the pipeline. Mr. Abbe
pointed out that, this is a condominium application and under the Code this requires a
CUP, and the legal standard for a CUP is that you make a finding that it is compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood and consistent with the policies of the General Plan
(GP), which he believes is why Acting Chairperson Deaton read certain pOlicies of the
GP into the record at the last meeting. He said that this was an appropriate action given
the PC's obligation to review the GP for this type of decision.
e
MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to adopt Resolution" .06-21 " approving
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 for the construction of two air space condominiums at 132
13th Street with the imposition of two-story development only, as presented.
e
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0
Deaton, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts
None
None
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 06-21 begins a 10-day calendar
appeal periOd to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the
appeal period begin!? tomorrow moming.
5. Adopt Resolution 06-22 Recommending Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-
160 for 132 13th Street to legally combin~ two lots into one parcel.
MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to Resolution 06-22 recommending approval
of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 far 132 13th Street to legally combine two lots into
one parcel.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0
Deaton, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts
None
None
e
50f7
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1.7
18
19
20
21
22
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
~
CIty of Seal Beach Plenning Commission
. Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2006
eMr. Abbe advised that adoption of Resolution No. 06-22 is a recommendation to City
~uncil and there is no appeal period.
/-
(
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg noted that the July 5, 2006 Planning Commission meeting is to be
cancelled due to vacation schedules and a small staff, with the next meeting scheduled
for July 19, 2006'.
Ms. Teague. stated that it has been a pleasure working with the Planning
Commissioners and she has appreciated the opportunity to work with them on some
very interesting issues. She also noted how valuable Mr. Whittenberg has been to the
City and stated that it has been an honor wc:>rking with him. '
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Roberts inquired about the Rossmoor Business Center. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that the status remains the same, but Staff is aware that they may receive
grading plans and preliminary foundation plans soon.
c
Commissioner O'Malley inquired about the Seal Beach Pier groin project and asked if
the approval for the remodel for Ruby's Diner is due to expire soon. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that he would have to check on the Ruby's approval. He said that the pier is due
to open on June 29th or 30th with all of the groin work completed.
ADJOURNMENT
Acting Chairperson Deaton adjourned the me~ting at 8:11 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
C'........~Cl^^ ~/
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary"
Planning Department
-
l
80f7
e
Public Hearings re:
Appeal o/ConditloTlS on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 <DId
Approval a/Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City COU1lcil Stqff Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 4
CONDmONAL USE PERMIT 06-4 AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-160,
.' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT,
DATED JUNE 7, 2006
e
e
o~ Appeal.cc StalIRepon - 132 'J'hiJtocnth
9
e
,
e
e
June 7, 2006
STAFF REPORT
To:
Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
From:
Christy Teague
Senior Planner
Subject:
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13th Street
Aoolicant:
Owner:
Location:
Classification of
Prooertv:
SCOTI M. LEvm, MEMBER 132 13m STREET LLC
BOLLEN FAMILY TRUST, RENE BOLLEN TRUSTEE
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 132 13m STREET
GENERAL PLAN - RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY
ZONING MAP-RESIDENTlAL HIGH DENSITY (RHO) PLANNING DISTRICT 1
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2006-160 - APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP TO COMBINE TWO LOTS INTO ONE PARCEL FOR 1l{E
PURPOSES OF CREATING TWO AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUMS. THE PROPOSAL
CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENT OF 1 UNIT PER 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF
LOT AREA IN THE DISTRICT 1, RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY (RHO) ZONE.
A CONDmONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR CONDOMINIUMS.
1HIs PROPOSAL IS CATEG9RICALLY EXE..\fPT FROM CEQA REVIEW.
Reauest Summary:
Environmental
Review:
Code Sections:
28-800; 28-2503; 28-2504; SECTION 21-7; SECTION 21-11 OF 1l{E CODE
OF 1l{E CITY OF SEAL BEACH.
PLEASURE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. STAFF WILL PROVIDE AN
APPROPRlA TE RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL OR DENIAL TO PLANNING
COMMISSION AT A FUTURE MEETING, TENTATIVELY JUNE 21, 2006.
Recommendation:
I FACTS I
o
On April 18, 2006 Scott Levitt, Member of 132 13th Street, LLC, submitted requests for
Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit with the Department of Development
Services.
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-,60, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
e
Q The subject Tentative Parcel Map and' Conditional Use Permit applications are
categorically exempt from CEQA.
Q The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council on Tentative Parcel
Maps. If TPM 2006-160 is approved by Planning Commission, the City Council will
hold a future public hearing on this request. The Conditional Use Permit determination is
decided by Planning Commission unless the matter is appealed to the City Council.
Cl The subject property is located at the east side of the 100 block 'of 13th Street and is
comprised. of two legal lots, each 25 feet wide by 117.5 feet deep, for a total of 5,875
('SOxI17.5 "'5,875) square feet.
Cl The applicant proposes a Tentative Parcel Map to combine two lots into one parcel for
the pUIposes of creating two airspace condominiums. The proposal conforms to the
density requirements of 1 unit per 2,178 square feet of lot area and the minimum lot size
of 2,500 per unit in the District 1, Residential High Density (RHD) zone. A Conditional
Use Permit is required for condominiums.
Q
The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows:
e
WEST
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RHD) zone
Mix of single-family and multi-family residences in
Residential High Density (RHD) zone
Across 15' wide alley, mix of single-family and multi-
family residences in Residential High Density (RHD) zone
Across 13th Street, mix of single-family and multi-family
residences in Residential High Density (RHD) zone
NORTII
SOUTII
EAST
Q The City's General Plan and zoning map both designate the subject property as
Residential High Density.
Cl Generally, parcel maps are used for the: creation of additional lots according to state
regulations known as the Subdivision Map Act. In this case, however, one lot is being
created through a parcel map as stated in Government Code ~ 66424 for condominium
development.
Q
Staff has received two neighbor comments by office visit and one neighbor comment by
phone regarding the mailed/published notice regarding Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 as
of May 31, 2006 stating concerns about condominiums and three-story development at
the subject location. No letters have been received regarding this application as of May
31,2006.
e
2
.'
e
e
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160. Conditional Use Permit 06-4
13213111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Repon
Jrme 7. 2006
I
I
DISCUSSION
The applicant seeks approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to combine two lots into one parcel for
the purposes of creating two airspace condominiums. The proposal conforms to the density
requirements of 1 unit per 2,'178 square feet of lot area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 per
unit in the District I, Residential High Density (RHD) zone. .
The proposed development meets all zoning standards for density, setbacks, and height for the
proposed building construction on the two-lot property under single ownership. However, the
applicant proposes to create one lot and construct two condominiums for' separate ownership
which requires approval of a Tentative Parcel Map. Condominiums require approval by the
Planning Commission through a Conditional Use Permit. For this reason the two applications
must be considered together.
The height limit in the Residential High Density (RHD) zone is stated as follows:
Section 28-801 General Provisions
F. Maximum BUilding Height, Main Building and Second Dwelling Units:
Lot widths, less than 37 1/2 ft. -
District I ..........................................:..........2 stories, 25 ft. maximum
Lot widths, 37 1/2 ft. or more-
District 1............................Front 1/2 of lot 2 stories, 25 ft. maximum;
Rear 1/2 of lot 3 stories, 35 ft. maximum
As stated above, the height limit in the RHD zone varies according to lot width. Lots up to 37.5
feet wide have 2 stories, 25 feet height limit and lots greater than 37.5 feet have 3 stories, 35 feet
height limit on the rear half of the lot according to the Code. In this case, the building design of
3 stories on the rear one-half of the lot is allowable since the lot is greater than 37.5 feet wide.
Generally when similar 2-10t properties are purchased for new development, one new single-
family residence is constructed on each lot. In these cases, the construction is limited to 2-story,
25 feet high structures. However, construction on these 25-wide lots can be of similar, "cookie
cutter" design which has been a concem of the community and the Planning Commission.
Through the construction of two units on one larger lot, construction can be more unique within
the Code restrictions and also can be constructed with 3 stories on the rear one-half of the
property.
The Code does not specify height limitations based on number of dwelling units. With the ability
to construct 3 stories on one 50 feet wide property, more building square footage can be
constructed than on two 25 feet wide properties. In this case, the difference in allowable square
footage is 2,565 square feet more for construction on one lot, as illustrated below:
3
..
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160. Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission StaffRepon ..
June 7. 2006 ..
Comoarison of Allowable Construction as 50' Wide Lot or Two 25' Wide Lots
One Lot SO' Wide by 117.5' Deep
StOry Area Within Setbacks
1 II Floor 40' wide x 96.5' deep
2nd Floor 40' wide x 101' deep
3rd Floor 40' wide by 54.25' deep
Two Lots 25' Wide by 117.5' Deep
StOry A:rC:a Within Setbacks
III Floor 19; wide x 96.5' deep
2DdFloOI 19' wide x 101' deep
Allowable Buildinl! Sauare Footal!e
3,860
4,040
2.170
TOTAL 10,070
Allowable Buildinl! Sauare Footal!e
1833.5
1.919
TOTAL 3,752.5 x 2 lots'" 7,505
Staff has researched similar properties in the Old Town, Planning District 1, East of Main Street
neighborhood which could be developed in the future. There are 48 properties which have
widths of 50 feet or more. Of these 46 properties, 6 currently have 3-story structures. A
compilation of photographs and a list of properties 50 feet wide or greater have been provided as ..
attachments to this report. ..
Old Town District I Prooerties 50' Wide or More Existinl! 1-2 StOry Existinl! 3-Story
46 40 6
All of the six existing 3-story structures received Variance approvals between the years 1969-
1973. These are now considered legal, non-conforming structures due to the higher density than
could be constructed within current zoning standards. There have not been any structures built
on lots 50 feet wide or greater, east of Main Street, with 3 stories.
The primary issue is that of neighborhood consistency and compatibility. Since there have not
been other similar condominiums constructed iI). Old Town Planning District 1, the matter of
consistency should be considered.
There have been increasing community and Planning Commission concerns regarding the
neighborhood compatibility of structures in the Old Town neighborhood. Due to these concerns,
the Planning Commission has denied four Height Variation requests for Covered Roof Access
Structures in excess of the 25 feet height limit in the Old Town Planning District 1 area in the
last two years. Similar third story concerns were stated during the April 19, 2006 Planning
Commission Study Session regarding Mansionization. Excerpts of the minutes from the Planning
Commission meetings and resolutions are attached for Planning Commission review. e
The Planning Commission may consider the application approval with appropriate modifications
to the structure to ensure construction is more compatible with the neighborhood. Modifications
4
.'
e
e
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-/60. Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 IJ'l'Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7. 2006
may include increased setbacks, reduced floor area on the third floor, or other changes deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commission.
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 has been submitted by Gilbert Engineering, on behalf of 132 13th
Street LLC, to create one parcel for the two-lot property located at 132 13th Street, a property of
5,875 square feet. The minimum lot size in the Residential High Density (RHD) zone is 25' x
100' , or 2,500 square feet.
Government Code ~ 66473.5 requires that a local agency must find that the proposed
subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the
General Plan.
In determining to approve the subject Tentative Parcel Map, the City must ultimately make
findings regarding the following issues, pursuant to Government Code ~ 66474:
Q The proposed map or the design or improvements of the proposed subdivision are
consistent with the applicable general plan.
Staff Comment:
The development associated with proposed Tentative Parcel
Map 2006-160 is consistent with the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance provisions of the City.
CJ The site is physically suited for the proposed type of density of development.
Staff Comment:
The proposed development complies with all existing land use
development standards for the Residential High Density (RHD)
standards of the City.
CJ The design or proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental
damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other habitats, or cause
serious public health problems.
Staff Comment:
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 is categorically exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under
15303 (b), New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures such as a duplex or similar multi family residential
structure.
CJ The design or the types of subdivision improvements will not conflict with public
easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The
City may approve a map if alternate public easements will be provided.
s
e
e
e
,
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
may include increased setbacks, reduced floor area on the third floor, or other changes deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commission. .
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 has been submitted by Gilbert Engineering, on behalf of 132 13th
Street LLC, to create one parcel for the two-lot property located at 132 13th Street, a property of
5,875 square feet. The minimum lot size in the Residential High Density (RHD) zone is 25' x
100', or 2,500 square feet.
Government Coq.e ~ 66473.5 requires that a local agency must find that the proposed
subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the
General Plan.
In determining to approve the subject Tentative Parcel Map, the City must ultimately make
findings regarding the following issues, pursuant to Government Code ~ 66474:
o The proposed map or the design or improvements of the proposed subdivision are
consistent with the applicable general plan.
Staff Comment:
The development associated with proposed Tentative Parcel
Map 2006-160 is consistent with the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance provisions of the City.
o The site is physically suited for the proposed type of density of development.
Staff Comment:
The proposed development complies with all existing land use
development standards for the Residential High Density (RHD)
standards of the City.
o The design or proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental
damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other habitats, or cause
serious public health problems.
Staff Comment:
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 is categorically exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under
15303 (b), New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures such as a duplex or similar multi family residential
structure.
o The design or the types of subdivision improvements will not conflict with public
easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The
City may approve a map if alternate public easements will be provided.
5
,
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
e
Staff Comment:
There are no existing public easements for access through the
property associated with the request for Tentative Parcel Map
2006-160.
The Public Works Department has reviewed the Tentative Parcel Map and has recommended
conditions of approval that will be incorporated into a resolution regarding Tentative Parcel Map
2006-160 upon its approval.
Conditional Use Permit 06-4
This request for ,Conditional Use Permit 06-4 is contingent. on the request for approval of
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160. Conditional Use Permits are considered for the following
reasons outlined in the Code:
Section 28-2503. Conditional Use Permits Mav Be Granted. The Planning
Commission may grant a conditional use permit in the case of an application for
a use which is required to be reviewed and conditioned prior to approval so as to
insure compatibility with surrounding uses and the community in general and the
General Plan: (Ord. No. 948)
Section 28-2504. Puroose of Conditional Use Permit. The purpose of a
conditional use permit shall be to insure proposed uses are compatible with
surrounding uses and not detrimental to the neighborhood. (Ord. No. 948)
e
The Residential High Density (RHD) zone states Conditional Use Permits as follows:
Section 28-800. Residential H.iQh Density Zone (RHD)
A. Permitted Uses.
The following uses subject to issuance of a Conditional Use Permit:
4. Other similar uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission,
would not be detrimental to the neighborhood in which such uses would
be located.
The primary issue in consideration of Conditional Use Permit 06-4 is that of compatibility with
the neighborhood. As discussed above, the proposed development meets the standards for
density, setbacks, and height for construction on the two-lot property if built for one owner. The
applicant proposes to create one lot and construct two condominiums for separate owners
through approval of a Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit. The Planning
Commission may address neighborhood compatibility concerns through increased setbacks,
reduced floor area on the third floor, or other building modifications. e
Staff has not made a recommendation of approval or denial of these applications since the
Planning Commission has not considered similar applications and the subject of a Conditional
6
e
e
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Repon
June 7, 2006
Use Permit application is that of neighborhood compatibility, which is the foremost issue in this
case.
SUMMARY I
The following is a summAry of the issues, which could be classified as Findings for Approval and
Findings for Denial of the applications for Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 and Conditional Use
permit 06-4:
Findinlls for ADDrbval
1. The proposal conforms to the density requirements of 1 unit per 2,178 square feet of lot
area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 per unit in the District 1, Residential High
Density (RHD) zone.
2. The proposed development meets all zoning standards for density, setbacks, and height
for the proposed building construction on the two-lot property.
3.
Construction on 25 feet wide lots can be of similar, "cookie cutter" design which has
been a concem of the community and the Planning Commission. Through the
construction of two units on one larger lot, construction can be more unique within the
Code restrictions and can be constructed with 3 stories on the rear one-half of the
property.
4. The development associated with proposed Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 and
Conditional Use Permit 06-4 is consistent with the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance provisions of the City.
5. Approval of this application would not be detrimental to the neighborhood.
Findinlls for Denial
1. Neighbors have stated concerns about condominiums and three-story development at the
subject location.
2. Condominiums require approval by the PlAnning Commission through a Conditional Use
Permit. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to determine that a use is compatible
with surrounding uses and not detrimental to the neighborhood. In this case, it is
determined that a two-unit condominium use with three story construction is not
compatible to the neighborhood.
3. With the ability to construct 3 stories on one 50 feet wide property, more building square .
footage can be constructed than on two 25 feet wide properties. In this case, the
7
, .
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Pl!1'mit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Stqff Repon ..
June 7, 2006 .
difference in allowable square footage is 2,565 square feet more for construction on one
lot.
4. Of similar properties in the Old Town, Planning District 1, East of Main Street,
neighborhood, there are 48 properties with widths of 50 feet or more. Of these 48
properties, only 6 currently have 3-story structures and these are considered legal, non-
conforming for density and building area.
5. There have been increasing community and Planning Commission concerns regarding the
. compatibility of structures in the Old Town neighborhood, including Plamrlng
Commission denial of four Height Variation requests for Covered Roof Access Structures
in excess of the 25 feet height limit in the Old Town Planning District I area in the last
two years and similar third story concerns were stated during the April 19, 2006 Plamrlng
Commission Study Session regarding Mansionization.
6. The plAnning Commission finds the application, as proposed, is not consistent and
compatible with the neighborhood since there have not been other similar two-unit
condominiums constructed in Old Town Planning District 1.
7. Approval of this application, as proposed, would be detrimental to the neighborhood in e
which the proposed two-unit condominium would be located.
I RECOMMENDATION I
The recommendation of Staff is to review the application and issues, hear public testimony,
consider identified and other issues stated in public testimony,. and direct staff to prepare a
resolution of approval or denial of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 and Conditional Use Permit
06-4.
For: June 7, 2006
C~~d
Senior Planner
Department of Development Services
J\ttachments: (9)
e
Attachment 1:
Attachment 2:
Application
Assessors Parcel Map Page 199-08
8
e
e
e
Attachment 3:
Attachment 4:
Attachment 5:
Attachment 6:
Attachment 7:
Attachment 8:
Attachment 9:
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission StaffRepon
June 7. 2006
Photographs of 3-Story Structures - District I Properties 50 Feet Wide or
Greater (East of Main Street)
List of District 1 Properties 50 Feet Wide or Greater (East of Main Street)
Excerpts of October 6,2004 Meeting Minutes
Excerpt ofFebruary 8, 2006 Meeting Minutes
Excerpt of April 19, 2006 Meeting Minutes
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
Plans
9
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 1 j'h Street
Planning Commission Staff Repon
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 1
Application
e
..
e
10
.'
e
AppUcatlon for.
TentativeNesting Tentative Tract Map
Department of
PublicWorks
The goal of the Engineering DMsion Is to protect the public by making sure that approved plans will provide
safety from traffic, flood, fire, and hel11th hazards. The private engineer's grading plans must provide safety from
soil failures, flood hazards and meet ocean water quality requirements, their final maps must be technically and
mathematically correct and all the developer's improvements must be able to be economically and safely
maintained. All plans and maps must comply with the City end Stale ordinances and laws and provide good
engineering design.
The City's plan check does not constitute a representation, guarantee or warranty of any kind or nature by
the City nor does it create liability upon, or cause of action against the City, its officers or employees for
any damage that may result pursuant to Incident thereto.
1. Prop~ Information
13213 Street Seal BI'Ar.h. CA 90740
S_ AcIdress .
199-081-10
All_I PucoI No.
30 & 32 'I'l1<<Jc. "*'0/ Bay Ci~
Lot No, B1oc:Ic No. Ttact
e
2. Zoning: Re~itlP.nn..l High nen~ity
3. Project Description: Merge Two (2) 25x117.5 foot parcels into One (1) 5Ox117.5 foot
Parcel.
~\n\l.'" t., ~r "'- ~{'(el M~ 0.. 1Tllt.{- ~I~
'lIIl\r\s. <. ~..rPMIt.IK a /'P. IIIUJ..tA. r I.lTfppftltf.
4. Applicant:
~~~
NIIIlIlI 132 13* street, ILC (Scali 1. Levitt, MmIber)
Telephcm. No. !IO!l-!l41-!1461
Street Addros. I12S S. Grove Ave.
5. Property Owner:
NlIIIlC: Reae BoU.. PlIIIIi1y Trust
Street Address 10502 RJndall St
6. Other Parties:
NIIDI.
Street Address
7. Size of Property to be Merged:
e .1345
ACRES
City
OnIBrio
Zip 91161
ciiy Onmae
Te10phcma No. 5'''-1'&0 -11\'1..
Zip 92869
Te1ophllllO No.
Cit;y
Zip
5880
sQ. F!',
8. Number and Size (in square feet) of each proposed lot:
.
,IAPPU~tioh'Mr.'(c:i~~ll,;i;;; 1r ~i..~:~i"I' '
, .i......~..1 ~ ,'1. .... f..:' ..~tl' "...
,". '",'.',., ;,.}~,J;1l:J.t~.jN J. ,1l.,,?,:.M',~'.~\.~.
""'""~':;j,;'~~~~r.;;&,~~l;'~~~~~'~,
~~'~lI'~~~~~+'1M"'~~' ~;;;'~~.i',i~kl' :
~\.""" .nor" ""! ......" ,.,....
..~+;-.~. J:j~' ~l .' ..::d {i;,,'':.' .::V:". ~~~::rl"( ...
0, '''I':!llllA .r1.UanJI;M<:-r .,:.,' '.:'
:';' :~ .,.,,~;.,~m\- tA>""'\:"t"~('~l~"'l~\ll(;i:t.l,:~
Q:;O:~' ....VIjl!~c;.eNARl:I;o, i.\..:s~";.l1V;"\,"
'~..., )~G~P."< 'f,o...~~t.t.>:m~ . " '....... ,a"..
'~_ .,-,. 'PAlZili1ii ~~ .' >,., " "
',' !.1'~.:.J!"'~~tl::.. ~'\. ~ ;.."'::) ': ,,!;"
. l"oth'ei-1.t . ,'.,,'
:t. ~ ...::~it. I t.-,ot.\J ":':1I.~: f '.. ,.\ .
.:-6" ,Ii ~~"""!?^41' -!~:'~'.,7~~~~'Qr1..~;:.\li.i
'.. ,1f1B;... l~'" ",. .~~J'. 1':... I ).,.. . '~k:'~.~.
Cllyal6111 BeaCh
APR 18 2006
CITY OF SEAL BEACl'DeveIopmentSVcs.
PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION
',' '. '. ',' ". "',l.""""" """'~"""ijl<oo.;I",...,.!trt..,.".".,
.. ~...~~. . ..' . I~JI I' . . I.... ~\8~~., ... llIIi".l!!lC.'.t;J
'A~~I' ti'\!I'~l'r','!' illf' "'~~.fg~.q~f!C?f.ll-~.i;:,,'p~~ y*, ~"IZJ~, :,B.\"ff <.,t~':< ~ ,.:..',.\.!'.:\'..
pp 1\=8 ,on.NO.: 1'1 '" " .....~NI.., ,1....:<:" Resolutlor:l, o.:r. ~;, ~"l...';' ,:,' .',
. ,,"~". "_p-." ~.~"""~""'~'^"-.l''''\' "
~'.''''~~''v', l .,.." ..~. ~c:.ot.-\, ~~fi:.-. ",',"'."'I1'\\":;:'\Ij'.t..'t.,I._""""I"~\.&.j..'''' , 11'
P.lanning Commission Date: ' ';. ~! 1\~,~'I.~. Date Complete: '.' , '.:( ".~,.,~.,. ~. :". .' '
.' " .' .. ..1 '" ,:. "..",:'! II' ':,".., II ..' ,'. "I
1. Property Address: 132.. I ~~ ~-+-
2. County Assessor's Parcel No: li~-rnl-ID
3. Applicanfs Name:~wrtrJ M"N~_.J~'l. \~ :'S-t~J L.LC
Address: JJJl5 5. G-rnlle A.IJ'G... nVl.../--1l v; 11 I'.A ~ Ii '" I
Phone: Work (l\l9,\)~ Home: (1t"l, )~'),
FAX: (qBr.\)~1~5'.'l"i\ Mobile:('3\O)~
Property Owner's t:la"\B:~I~lblJ 1f1l~e..
Address:J0500..~~dll.~__ -~
Telephone: (~'l )300-11\\1...
General Plan and Zoning Designation: _R \\-~ - \\-e5\t\e/lt\-~\ \:\tr .:DtN'fi''\-f-
Present Use of Property: ~B~~, ~\ltr-\wlll\\-<.
Proposed Use of Property: 3wo- 15btMllIIIM8.:2.~tL\ -tOJJ~~N'i.s
Request For: ~~ ~ ~,ru\ ~9
e
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9. Describe the Proposed Use: B\li\! -tWo S~\e .QQ.":~1-fes~~tJ\~~ \JtJ~
~\\~ ()Ne. (\C\ti\~t\"''tJ\i..\\ .......
.
10. Describe how and if the proposed improvements are appropriate for the cha acter
of the surrounding neighborhood: ~, \
\ ,
e
Page 7
Rov. 6103
e
11. Describe how and if the approval of ~s Permit would be detrimental in any way to
other property in the vicinity: -:Gt- \I..!' f\~ clt~\ \t.\ e..~~1.
12. Proof of Ownership
Staff is to attach here a photocopy of a picture 1.0. and a photocopy of the Grant Deed provided by the
applicant
or
Signed and notarized Owne~s Affidavit to be completed and a\tached to the application.
13. Legal DeSdnption (or attach description from Title or Grant Deed): ~a~! 32 iN
t~.~~~ ~~~~t~~~~~~~~Q=::~)n\=~:~.
BY'~~ By:
.~ (~iflnature qf Ap!{Ii,CfInt) t1'- \lU;~II.\'('"
-5~. LRAfrtt"1 MtlttbeL.-
~iroor6Co
(Date)
(Signature of AppflCant)
(Pint Name)
e
(Date)
e
Page 8
Rw.llI03
e
e
e
Environmental Information and Checklist Form
., ,~. ~1.r~I'!I"'!~"'il' ~I' ,'" .~..'..:;:, 'F Ofti '.u' 0 h.H......~~~I,~:. "-/'i~~"y\\ :.'f:~ ':-:-~ . ~'.t~:'j.
; '. f"'.w "'I i:;'., : "'~..-~1~.. ~fltl'("ofI" it, .' "1!~...i.I!:,1i I....~t ~ c~ r ~II .11~'i~"'''' ;i.' '\ 'Wi-" .'!y......(l... "~I~.~~..t, 11_~p~ ; .r.,}.t!. -izr
. I ....~ .Xllo).,~.' ~,.~,-.. ":!f,,,,l;"rl-1Jt; I roo ,,~.(r~','f....ll t, t LII,~~_"'~" ~,j'~"I' 'IS~'.~~~I _, __r, ,
'A'.it~11"'<'.":' 'N:: .,,-':-,'" ;"'\1\;',"'" " ";~,I:.:o'..' ,~;,.,' ~~l,~ 'h i~ ,)_..a..1.1" .:.J,;':'F"~I !,i\f.\;l.:.~"L,,\'f~'i,~' ,,:t:~l'.1. .,." . ;,j.'
"\DDlication 0.:- ~f +iI_~ -....I~ '0" ~~""Ii' .1:........ ;':;u," -. t:t,: P"~~I'~'.~ :t~'r.]_ Date I eCf:13-:J;,,'t,uIjl:...... [I .,..q;il:I,,)'I; .. .r-L....~lII::
Generallnfonnation
1. Name and address of Developer or Project Sponsor:
Name:~?a \~ ~J LhC
Address:,~ .::s. Gnl\lt.. ~e..
City: <D'"r-l-af'1'O ) .. State: Zip:~
Telephone: Cl(fLq- 1\47-- "1jID 7 FAX: 7'
2. Address of project:J 3~ \~ 5'lfef..+J oo.\.'Rertc. h C. A. <1Q1jo
Assessor's Parcel Number: I ~O
3.
Name, address, and contact information of Project Contact Person:
Name: ~c:.co4.:lh. Le.\l:4t-
Address: ~ ~. GrCllII~ Mt..
City: (0.\,1.\0(>10 State: CPr' Zip:C!r&L
Telephone: C1~-~~~ FAX:~QC\-Qt.t:l' h2\1
E-mail Address: -.5~ ~tff:cr.o.C()1/V\
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for
this project, including those ~uired by city, regional, state and federal agenc~
~~~~~~~~~~:~1!;~~{;~t:t~~
5. Existing zoning: ~\~bJ\~\ \\'\) Existing General Plan:
6. Proposed use of site: ~\~ ~o "\1lUJ"'~ \!.I\*, IOPIe- ('i)~~ ~
('!)~\~ ~ p,~~ C 1~ (t~\l\I.e..M~~~(i~ljl-l-hmt~ \.t.~\.'r' f'~\t~.Il~
Page 11
Rev. 6/D3
e
Project Description
7. Site size (square footage): 5 ~10
,16. For residential projects, indicate the:
A. Number of units: !l..
B. Schedule of Unitsizes: ~:L3 oS} :!4. \ \(tlllle.. ~
C. Range of sale prices or rents: $;lJ€m f~6 P d..,^
D. Household size(s) expected~-(iMe,...
a.
9.
10.
11.
Square footage of proposed Project:
Number of floors of construction: 3
Amount of off-street parking provided: ..:J
12.
Existing and proposed impervious surface coverage (Impervious surface coverage
includes all paved areas and building 1J[l9l0r structure footprints):
Existing ,impervious coverage: (,Q'() %
Proposed impervious coverage: 10 %
Attach plans including ,preliminary grading plans, drainage plans. Water Quality
Management Plans (WQMPs) for large-scale c!evelopmen!S, construction site Best
Management Practices (BMPs) Plans.
Proposed scheduling of Project:
13.
14. Associated Projects:
e
15. Anticipated incremental development:
17. For commercial projects, indicate the:
A. Type of project:
B. Whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented:
C. Square footage of sales areas:
D. Gross building area:
E. Size of loading facilities:
18. For industrial projects, indicate the:
e
Page 12
Rev. &lO3
e
A.
8.
C.
Type of project:
Estimated employment per shift:
Size of loading facilities:
19. For institutional projects. indicate the:
A. Major function:
8. Estimated employment per shift:
C. Estimated occupancy:
D. Size of loading facilities:
E. C.ommunity benefits derived from the project:
20.
If the project involves a variance. conditional use permit/unclassified use permit,
height variation or zone change application, state this and indicate clearly why the
application is required:
e
Variance:
Briefly explain:..Net.~ 'Jcl
"\"'-'6'1.
CUP: _ Height Variation: _ Zone Change:_
(tccrJ. \-reel 'fMe--kl er~t~ lllr.Je ~rc.e\ ~
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items
checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
~
i
\'
<
e >(
21. Change in eXisting features of any bays, tidelands,
beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration of
ground contours?
22. Change lIT scenic views or vistas from existing
residential areas. or public lands or roads.
23. Change in pattem, scale or character of general area of
project.
24. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
Page 13
Rev. 6103
~
x
~
x
...2(
~
~
Environmental Setting
e
26. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water
quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage
pattems.
27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels
in the vicinity.
28. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more.
29. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such
as toxic substances, flammables or explosives.
30. Substantial change in demand for municipal service
(police, fire, water, sewage, etc.).
31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption
(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
32. Relationship to larger project or series of projects.
e
33. On a separate page, describe the project site as it exists before the project,
including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any
cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site,
and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site.
34. On a separate page, describe the surrounding properties, including information on
plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects~ Indicate the type
of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family,
apartment homes, shops, department stores, etc.), and s~le of development
(height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity.
e
Page 14
Rsv. 6/03
e
e
e
Environmental Impacts (Please explain all "Potentially Significant Impacf', "Less
Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" and "Less Than Significant Impacf'
an~wers on separate sheets.)
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a sub~tantial'adverse effect on a
scenic vista? :
b) Substantially damage sce':lic
resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings?
, d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In
determining whether impacts to
agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to the California AgriCUltural
land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia
Dept. of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts orr
agriculture and farmland. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance. (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
Califomia Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williaml!on Act
contract?
Page 15
Potentially
Signlftcant
Impact
C]
C]
C]
C]
:' C]
C]
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
C]
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
C]
o
C]
o
o
o
Rov. 1103
No
Impact
~
h-
a:-
~
~
>r1
132 13tb Street, Seal Beach
e
Parcel Map Application
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
33. The site currently sits as a flat, level lot homogenous to those around it. This particular
parcel has two building. The first building runs the long length of the parcel and consists of two
stories containing multiple one-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment units. The second building
consists offour single-car garages, with multiple one-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment units
above the garages. This building is built at the rear end of the lot, over the property line. This
lot is technically (2) 25x117.5 foot lots, but as stated has a building built across the property line
dividing the two lots. The property is mostly concrete where not improved by the buildings, and
contains a small pitch of grass. There are a total of six, one-beth:oom, one-bathroom apartments,
all built around 1950. There appears to be no cultural, scenic, or historical aspects to this
property.
34. The surrounding properties consist of single family homes and multiple family homes,
condominiums, and rental apartments. All buildings are between one and three stories and all
are residential units, with no co=ercial units. There appears to be no significant aspects
regarding plant life, AnimAl life, culture, historical, or scenic aspects.
The surrounding homes and apartments appear to generally conform to the height restrictions e
and set-backs. However there may be some non-conforming improvements in the vicinity that
have been "grandfathered" in, as some appear to be in violation of current front setback
requirements.
e
e
e
e
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by
the Califomia Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal. filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors. or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan.
o or other. approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
V. CUI.. rURAl.. RESOURCES - Would
the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in!i 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to!i 15064.51
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Page 17
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
:' CJ
CJ
CJ
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
o
o
CJ
D
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
o
D
D
D
CJ
D
D
Rov. 1103
No
Impact
<<
~
~
~
~
~
~
2r
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
pollution contfol district may be relied
upon to' make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard
(inclUding releaSing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pOllutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would
the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Page 16
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
o
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
CJ
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
CJ
o
Cl
o
Cl
o
R8Y. 8103
e
No
Impact
~
)ir
yt
~
e
(
~
~
e
e
e
e
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, Injury, or death
involving:
(I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent A1quist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
(Ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
(Iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
Including liquefaction?
(Iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or sail
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result In on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-8 of the Uniform
BUilding Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
Page 18
Potentially
Slgnlflcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
Llllls Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
LIlll8 Than
Significant
Impact
'0
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
Rev. 6IlI3
No
Impact
~
1(
~
~
a:
~
~
.(
~
0\
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or tl1e environment through
reasonably :foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project
area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Page 19
Potentially
Slgnmcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less TlIan
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Rev. 6103
e
No
Impact
~
~
~
1St'
e
%
)(
~
e
e
e
e
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are
IntelTTlixed with wildlands?
VlII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Violate any Water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume
or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattem of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter t\1e existing
drainage pattem of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or
SUbstantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
Page 20
Pol8ntJally
Slgnfflcant
Impact
o
o
CJ
CJ
o
Cl
o
L... Than
Slgnlncant with
MItigation
Incorporated
o
o
CJ
CJ
D
D
o
Less Than
Slgnfflcant
Impact
o
CJ
Cl
o
o
o
o
RrI. BI03
NQ
Impact
,r
lsr
a
~
~
~
P(
g) Place housing within a 1 DO-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 1 DO-year flood hazard
area structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
inVOlving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
D Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff
from construction activities?
I) Potentially impact stormwater runoff
from post-construction activities?
m) Result in a potential for dIscharge of
stormwater pollutants from areas of
material storage, vehicle or equipment
fueling, vehicle or equipment
maintenance (including washing), waste
handling, hazardous materials handling
or storage, delivery areas, loading docks
or other outdoor work areas?
n) Result in the potential for discharge of
stormwater to affect the beneficial uses
of receiving waters?
0) Create the potential for significant
changes in the flow velocity or volume of
stormwater runoff to cause
environmental harm?
p) Create significant increases in erosion
of the project site or surrounding areas?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would
the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
Page 21
Potentially
Slgniflcant
Impact
o
o
,0
o
o
o
o
o
:0
o
o
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Slgnmcant
Impact
o
Cl
Cl
o
Cl
Cl
o
LJ
o
(j
o
RoY. 1103
e
No
Imp~ct
~
~
~
Jt(
1('
.3:
~
e
~
~
~
~
e
e
Potentially
Significant
Impact
e
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan. policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
Oncluding, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation 'plan or natural community
conservation plan? '
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-Important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
XI. NOISE - Would the project result In:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation
of excessive groundbome vibration or
groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
e
Page 22
Leaa Than
Significant with
MItigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Rev. &Ill3
No
Impact
~
-:a:
~
~
~
~
~
~
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or
working In the project area to excessive
noise levels?
f) For a project Within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people. necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, In
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection?
Page 23
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
LBsa Than
Significant with
Mlllgation
Incorporated
o
.0
o
o
o
o
Less Than
SignIficant
Impact
o
o
o
LI
LI
LI
Rw.1iI03
e
No
Impact
~
'Y
g(
e
~
~
<
e
e
e
e
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project Include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XII. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either Individually or
cumulatively, a level of seNice standard
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic
pattems, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
Page 24
Potentially
SignIficant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
CJ
CJ
o
LDSS Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Leas Than
Slgnlftcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
RoY. 8103
No
Impact
~
~
J!(
.R('
'e(
r(
~
~
~
d) Substantially increase hazards due to
a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
, dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
f) Result in inadequate parldng capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans,
or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts. bicycle
racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitments?
Page 25
Potentially
SIgnificant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
tJ
o
o
o
o
Less Than
SIgnIficant
Impact
o
o
D
o
D
o
D
D
o
Rov.6I03
e
No
Impact
~
~
~
~
a;
~
e
a:
a:
,e(
e
e
e
e
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
, projecfs solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, 'state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
h) Would the ,project include a new or
retrofitted stonn water treatment control
Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g.
water quality treatment basin,
constructed treatment wetlands), the
operation of which could result in
significant environmental effects (e.g.
increased vectors and odors)?
XVII. MANDATORY' FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable?
f'Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed In connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or Indirectly?
Page 26
Potentially
SIgnificant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
SIgnificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
D
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
D
o
o
0-
D
RoY. &103
No
Impact
~
a:
~
~
'if
b('
e
. -.... f I 11 I I , .'.... . '," I ~ ~ 110. rt ' I I I ,. . ."', .' " I .
.~O'f5=~_~~~;1! ~a.t!}P7,ncv. c::?:n "a:~.th.\l!. ap,?!~~~:~..~~~e.;,~. ~~n~ r:r:\u~ ~~~ut~~ r~t.~
prepared pursuant to...ection l!5962.5'.ilf the Government COde"and sulim~ a slllned statement Indlcatinll'
Whet6e.;tn ~prorect aOd -any -art:ffiati~r~~ iOt:aiea 'Bn' a Site \Vhich' il IncludecJ (on IiJy\"sUGll. ~SC~d' shctrj.
.~s'" '. " an iisi:"r4~1/IJ~M-~;li.!~:i:I~IijW'Mt.iM;'i.:.Ij.tJ,W,k.I(I1,tf.~""'M-'~'~' ~l~l'~'t':~~'1Ii.lJdH~'
Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement
The development project and any altematives proposed in this application are contained on
the lists complied pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Govemment Code. Accordingly, the
project applicant is required to submit a signed statement which contains the following
information: ,
1. NameoiapPlicantJ~~ \3~ .5treet- -rhlG
2. Street: J 7~ .s. GrCllfJ ~e..
3. City: !(&r-\-a .(~<9 J ~
4. Zip Code: Q\1(p.\
5. Phone Number: ~~ 7
Add.... of ,Os (weet """ ,;pl: J ~~ :;
Local Agency (city/county):~_ _ L_ __/
Assessor's Parcel Number: ~ - {fA l:-1O
.
- tj{~L.l.t\l,tt I~
I
6.
~o
e
7.
8.
9. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code:
10. Regulatory identification number:
11. Date of list:
~/~OG
Signature:~
Applicant: 5ctnt ~. LeN \+[
Date:
e
Page 27
Rev. 8103
e
e
e
NOTE: In the event that the project site and any alternatives are not listed on any
list complied pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, then the
applicant must certify that fact as provided below.
I have consulted the lists complied pursuant to Section 65962.2 of the Govemment Code
and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this
application are not contained on these lists.
Dale, ~PO~
Signature:~
Applicant: .:JC'Df:{- L t.w~ttryf.bev
13;;J.. \~i1\ Stfee.-\j ~ c.,
Page 28
Rev. &/03
e
PROPERTY OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
COUNTY OF ORANGE }
(I)/(We) ~ Ai ~. r. ~o M~ ./
(Name)
swear that (1 am)/(we are) the owner of the property at:
I~ l?l-& ~ .5ect l.P:t.a.ch
(street Address) : (Cily)
CPt-
(State)
qo 7q~
(ZIP)
/,19 .50 2!. c;;::'.,(HI" q A y./ ....-;;,L ~;p>'e "7 sf ~-
(Address - Please Print) (Clly, Slate & Zip) (Telephone)
.6~~_
2. !f?j)-/'9J~
SUBSCRIB&D AND SWORN TO BEFORE~
~ 6 DAVOF ~
~{~
ota Puti ic
JOSEPH VANDERHOFF
COMM. #lEi46963~
OlARY PUSlIC-CAlIFOIIIIIA CI,I
ORANGE COUNT fi.I
MY COllI!. Exp, 11IM 12.lal0'"
o..tl ~ ~.6~tfJ, _._J
,j.ILe~
e
Page 31
Rev. 1103
e
e
e
lil~!I i 0
!I . t
,,,lie a
t~rl
ill~M
HIUI
I~:@~!~!
;.
!!
:..
~
"'.
...
~
U
HI"
&t
I #) 'illfjl. I .. . . L1..(;)..-"
,"'- I I I.
Q ~ i~ @ @~ 3. 0'1 N ;:; " ~ .. @ r-Y~-
..,
. Ie: "'J ~,. r-:; ,1Jl
'.1 ". ~I.....:;l.. D .~ l;!" ....
. W , . I. .::1. It';
. . ; ~ . il 1I(j...'f1.11 . I" ::=IU.
I... .
- N .., .. " .. ... .. ~ !! ='" :l :t:~- " 1::" .. N
:~ .. ,:;:. .
I- - !!l I
. . . . .
-:r:
..:~
~..~
!/I1:l!s
I!..
Jl
..
~il:l
=~g
h;
",,,, ~
I
I:!
i
gf
11I_
,!,.!.
~~
H.J.N33J.1If1(U I
I I ~!
I I ..."
.. - " .. .., N ... ~ ili~
.., . ..
"1"1'.
. ..,
N
N ~
.. '" .. C: " il
lie! !!!
ill " - ~
on ,1I.cr -
I/.IN33.lI11U. I I
/ II r-
LO
DdsczoLpC:l.OZl: Qr&DgII, CA AlIse..Qr JIap 199.8 Pagel ~ c~ 1. .
Oreler I _ctap.a ComaIe.at:
=;n
1 c &6
"C':;:IEIII
CIlhQI,1 ,..
..!!~u! 'Z
..ot>>> ~
s;'f5J.1 :t
;:to.. ..;~ 0
~~ani u
_1II::'o,l \:J
=~ 01,1 U
u(:1I,1..J Z
,g K~~l <
.e~.:~ !5
- - >- f.,
~5ala ~
.. '=:I ~ Is LU
sa=- j:!
>~1t'.. F
Cim.!!:a"co
- i;~ 0 ~
:9~i!H
i;:s:;u
.. aEU
.- r= =' Ii
r:_.s:."'=
r e3:::!
CALIFORNIA ALL.PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~..-<,ft.("~.-;,(-H./";#;"~Jt'Y"~"~~1'Y"r.<'.~...~.t'::""~l:<"6""~"'./'!('.t'Y'"h"~~....,..t':<"~~~.t;<".cc-..."'"{"'~.r.<"~~~..er-.-v-...-:."".:-...z...-<-....::,.
~ ~
. .
State of California
}ss.
, County of tJ ~A ,J 6-6
On ~" 2.OtJb before me Joseph Vanderhofff, Notary Public
DaL I , Naml Ind TiUlt of Officar (ell.. . Jane Ca., Netlry Public-) I
personally appeared p. /!,J E ~ . B 0 u. c J.J
Hem'(II) of S"1QI"I1r(11
,-
.'
.'
o peJ;JPnally known to me
~ved to me ~e basis of satisfactory
evidence .....-C:alifornia Drivers Lie.
",;
~
;;
'5
.:
..,
. to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within Instrument and
. acknowledged to me that helshelthey executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
capacity(les). and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or
the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed tl'le instrument.
'JOSEPH VANDERHOFF
COMM. #13434 73~
NOTARY PUm.IC-CAUFORNIA~
ORANGE COUNTY' ..
M'r COIlII. EXP. lIAR. \2. 2006
"
~
~
.
.:
PlICI NatatY Sui AbcMt
.~
i;
"
"
(j
..
~
~
~
OPTIONAL
Though /he Informalion below is nol requlfBd by law, it may pIOve valuable 10 persons fB/ylng OlIlhe document
and could pfBvent fraudulent fBmoval and fBeltachment oI/his form 10 .""ther document
Description of Attached Document
Ti~e or Type of Document:
Number of Pages:
Document Dete:
,
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
.'
,)
Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer
Slgner's Name:
o Individual
o Corporate Officer - litle(s):
o Partner - 0 Limited 0 General
o Attorney in Fact
o Trustee
o Guardian or Conservator
o Other:
f
TOr;:l of thumb hare
- .'
_.- -. ....
RIGHT THU"lBPRIr-If
OF SIGNER
I~
('
"
r:
Signer Is Representing:
. . ~.
C11997 NilIItl:nINotaryAuaclliIlan .83500. SoloAv&-, P.e. Box 24Q2. Chlll:lwarth, CA 8131:J..24D2
Prod. No. 59Q7 Rearder: Call TclII-F.... 1-1QD.878-8B27
AA Mobile Notary, Fingerprinting & Paralegal - 7 Days a Week -
Office (714) 997-5800 * * * Short Notice (714) 496-9696
"
'.
Q
~
,
i.
.
~,
~
,
-;
~
.'
e
'I
~
.~
>
:,
r:
"
~
~
r.
~
I
..,
~
.:
~
~
i
g
_
.'
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-i60, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7. 2006
ATTACHMENT 2
Assessors Parcel Map Page 199-08
e
e
11
.... ,", _....(".\~" .:t1~1
~i~~lg i ~,:';.~
l!i !~i '" ,~ :~
.~ ~"1II t " '.
iQ!il.~~! '. :i..,
'!i'!;Ir. .' ,~~,
'ij:~ii~1
~~..~o~~
~b~~ ~o.
~
.
'I. "",,,:, ,,:\
...;.........
. ,
~.. .::
"'~ "'"
~, . u..J
.' 0
, .
..
~", I
;or Ol
-~
<.: .
~I ....
,.
f..
\....
t" .
.
!;,
,,~ "
~:..:.'"
~-.
fio::
.!'
;;"
1';.' .
,'.
~,
~.
~ , .
r-:,'
:(, .
~k"
g.,,'
~I'::' '
.. '
,: .
.f.;.
~.
.'-....
f'" ,
,;:,
if..~
;t.
;s.,,:
,.:':
l~~
~..
~r
~~.~
~.. ./
",,1.." ~
~.':. 'JS, t;,
~~:. H.J. g 'ii.
",,:.j' 7i;J
&......
~:> .
~:. ".
:rl':,
...... _".. :::J
'oj' "'I I
P" ")
l\ ....
~:.:.,;, '. .. , ~ ~33lJ.!..~
\"::"-" ..
c:t .j.' . . ...,..... ,li5 ..: oil'" .!i".R....o o. . . . . \. ,!;C" ir t"'Ui'a.CIlI.
~:. . .' '.;~.l'. @t'r.' .\' '~l."~:,' . ~ .. :., \>1 ~ ~y:~~:-:-i'
~'~l':-; , .. , ;-;:'~ Ill" f;;' ~ :ll iA'~ O!;,::l J:j ;;; g ~ ~ :;!,,\:!. '(ID ~ ':,~":$' ."
.tl'_'~. .' 0"\ .... ." .'::, . .... t I C"__.~__
:,.d. . ",,', ", ~ 'J.:" '" .R1'''" :~f.~" I .' ~~~ ~ :'I'~ . '. ." ..~4.IR'r.'c ...-:11', ~
,...','. . ',~:d'~, ~ !'l' ',", ;;~'.. "::; :!!l :"y N'... '=',.-,...., 1> '!.! .J.... '. l::l.
:..',,~.:~,~...~..:'..~,..,:,':,..., jf/i"i :~..",~.''; ..' ~ .. ,,'0,.. 00"" . '.. '~,';' .. ~'.. '.., ..~i> :,.. ~ ,t.'
r_ ..~.....1I1~... ...:...r~.....I'?.I'n.'.,,}~. ..llIIto ~ ."'I...~';:.I 'ill'-~:.It.:I. '~"'~".;
1,_.... tt"I..~ ,-; ". oIll-~.~tl:I,; -~.I:I(.:}~..... ,o.e ~..@.d~ "!'~. l'7,":'o-
";. .... !;;.fi;'" .' " -' m ",'. . - on ... ..,' '.' '" '.,,..,. ~
"':." :.No ":~""'.t'4~. "! 10 1O,;"n" r- ',_ ..~:-..... oot.- """..:.- - 0:-' "I .:" .
,.,..... ,"Y...,.) "."',' '" ~1. r,' ~ .,..1., oj. .."'...'.
'.:~ ~ - . .. '. r oJ. ~ '.. "':" I r. . .; ~..[ '. .... cd '. I :-,... ." " . -;:0-
[:;.?~. ~ .~'/ .~.~ ~.~.\~!.' ". ~~~l'.~i..~ '.~~r:'-~ .~,r .'iIt .:....1:.: :r~,~:: .. "'II' .:.; : .~.:' .... :n:: :.t.I:tj. . ~,. ~ ~II ~
.....~ '" ~ ~ I.....,", 0,"0 ,_ .... ~__ _-.\ ._ .':'" ......
...}....,:.l..~. l':,.~":"':'.':': -'..:...~...._:1'.t,.'~... .._,;,:.....~::. -'\..... ....... ...:,,":;.:-, \.~..;:..,
.o:..."':,..:~,.......l~~..,. ...,..:.......". "". : .:.'.,... :"'." ;~t1I1W~
;.a' ,_1, I ~. .. ~..-w.. i.~,~..~..~.:..~ ....5-:... ..::':
:f{~J>::.~.7'"!::i.~.~~~:.;~.~~.::.::.~:::;;...~\.~..";:~:~:~.:.;--::'..'.: ..~ '~.';'~":~-'"~''' . .~... '".~J"'. '. I
'.
':..
90
81
'llA7B
~>'l1
"
6(j
'is
,HJ, .tl
"$
1I.!S1
.
.'
':3f1N31l'f
NlHd700 i
~. /... r .~ -+-,; I<q; ..... '"': ," ':"",_~ r.i'I;..._:
.... A ,..... ; " 1..;' , . ...........I.eiI, ".
'a-i~~'2@ @r.ni.~"... .., '" ;;; 0 ~ ~'@ ~m' (-:
'~ I~~~ ~ ,a. ,.7j<~I'" ~,\P '" ..,,.,,,, ~ if'
I'. I:' .:, ~ ,,,! I;,! '....i~ 5.'. ~,~ III!> ~? -'
Io' '00 .117... · ,;:tt:;
..l':l~';'~".~~~...'1 ~~;:"I,,!.. ~~ ~
.,.. .-. ~ I .R,.A ...~..~O.
. ' '~
_ C'o& t"I ... in lD " lXJ i:P g = .~ ~ :t @ - $! t:: $! ~
\=floC
I
IC6
. . . . . . . . . . '. .n
-=r::
..
N'. '.
o
'"
lft.,. ..III
.;1.
. S!!_
. ,
H1.N33J.lJf/O.;/ il .'
. .....
. '.
". :...
'.
..
. '
'.
,
:.'"
.. .~<;,o
III,
...q I'
0: '
'.l~'
. "< .
0: "~
. \I> '\is"
~:1!:~;~
~~~~
ti
- .-:''!
.;0\1
il~
~~~;1
2i '~$
~ ~ ~.ffl
'" ~ ll: ~
l;l~'~ .~
'II( ... y) ..-
I ".7it
,<s
'" '<!!j
cl
~. ,:1~
"~
:~
~ ~;~~
IW)' Qt.::'."
:l!::i.':;~
::!l::i ~r
:...":."~:~
'~'
).. c.,
t....~r
'<:1'....' ..
0"
.~."lC'::,.
'~:~ :~
".:.
.'(
..'10;
t . ~~~
..,;"" .....::-...
~."" '. ~:.r..::
~.. ',: .....
. ~r:. " ,Ill >'
: ,n:..... . ~~." .:~
~::~ l' . ':;':' "~:'::':,.'
. ~. "
.: '. ~.r;-:,. . . .!'.
~.. .] . '.4
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 3
Photographs of 3-Story Structures -District 1 Properties
50 Feet Wide or Greater (East of Main Street)
e
e
12
t
r-
~
I
~
r-
Q)
'(,)
c:
co
"......... .-
~'-
c: co
'0>
'- '
:'1 .J ..c
~ C)
e Q) :J
Q) 0
'- '-
~ ..c
cn~
..c J!3
......
0 c:
~ Q)
-,:- E
-,:- 't
-,:- CO
~
........
.-
c:
::>
0
e ~
. ~ --
'ffi
Q)
....,.;.- ~
Q)
Q)
~
Cf)
5
o
-
"'
e
e
"'
"-
"'
e
<.0
~
,
~
t-
~
c:.
~
.-
~-:~ '-
c:. ~
o~
~~.c
.., -0)
Q)~
Q) 0
'- '-
w.s
s:, .1!!
at::
-c- Q)
N~
-c- ~
~o..
.((
~
c
':>
o
~
e
~ --..
~
co
Q)
~
....... .J
'+-,
. '''.
--\.IiI
Q)
~
+-'
en
..c:
.....
o
"
N
"
~
e
- '11.H4 .
" I jl~_
IC;-..... .
;::...~ I
e
e
l
CX)
~
I
N
t-
Q)
(.)
c:
~~.~
C \..0
o CO
\..0>
~-'"
......"G
+"'0)
e Q) ~
~ 0
+'" \..0
cn~
-:S J9
('f)
~ c:
CO Q)
E
~
~ t.
to
2-
+'"
.-
C
::>
.q-
e
,. .......
L-
eo
0)
L-
........- .JIll
+-'
..0)
'0)
L-
+-'
en
..c:
+-'
('I') .
,
co
~
~
e
e
e
~
\
(j)
t.D
ct
0-
~~
e..c
~ -:.. en
..-.., ::;)
0;0
e 0) '-
.t:;~
Cf)~
~ Co
NO)
~E
~-c
C'1 ~
~O-
4.
~
c
::>
to
e
~ -.....
\.-'
(Q
Q)
....\.-~
e
~.:-~--~- .
e
~
0). -....-.
-..-.-' ---
Q)
;;
Cf)
:S
N
-
"
-
"'
'"
"
.' ..'
-
\
\
I
I
i
,
,
e
(0
~
I
(\')
f'.;
Q)
u
c:
co
,........., .-
...... L...
c: co
0>
L...
~..c:
...... 0')-
Q) :J
e Q) 0
L... L...
...... ..c:
en......
..c: en
..... ......
~ c:
~ Q)
~ E
0 t
N co
C.
<(
......
.-
c:
:::::>
0
e ~
~ -....
L-
eo
(I).
L-
......... ~
~
(I)
Q)
L-
+-'
C/)
..c:
.......
"
"
"
o
C\I
e
e
e
e
I'-
~
I
~
I'-
Q)
U
e
co
...-. .-
~ .....
e co
e>
~..c'
'..j...i' C)
Q) :J
e ~ e
00=
.s:: en
-- ~
~ e
-r- Q)
-r- E
~t:::
N co
a.
<(
~
.-
e
e
::::l
o
-r-
~ ......
CI)
-c
--
UJ
...... .J
+-'
(I),
~
+-'
en
J:: :~ .
+-'
~
~
~
~
C\J
e
e
e
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160. Conditional Use Pt!111lit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
me 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 4
List of District 1 Properties 50 Feet Wide or Greater
(East of Main Street) ,
e
e
13
-'
e
e
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13111 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
List of District 1 Properties 50 Feet Wide or Greater (East of Main Street)
Addresses of Lots East of Main Street. South of Electric Ave. 50' Wide or Greater with 1 or 2
, Storv Buildin2S
III lOth Street
112 10th Street
120 lOth Street
121 lOth Street
126 10th Street
129 10th Street
133 lOth Street
139 lOth Street
148 lOth Street
208 10th Street
130 11 th Street
135 11th Street,
121 12th Street
138 12th Street
ISO 12th Street
129 13th Streeet
132 13th Street
135 13th Street
141 13th Street
142 13th Street
153 13th Street
111 14th Street
925 Central Avenue'
138 Dolphin Avenue
1510 Dolphin,Avenue
909 Ocean Avenue
1001 Ocean Avenue
1007 Ocean Avenue
1011 Ocean Avenue
1016 Ocean Avenue
1101 Ocean Avenue
1113 Ocean Avenue
1201 Ocean Avenue
1212 Ocean Avenue
1213 Ocean Avenue
1217 Ocean Avenue
1315 Ocean Avenue
1317 Ocean Avenue
1603 Ocean Avenue
1611 Ocean Avenue
1501 Seal Way
1519 Seal Way
Addresses of Lots East of Main Street. South of Electric Ave. 50' Wide or Greater with 3 Story
Buildings
III lOth Street
112 10th Street
201 11th Street
211 11th Street
121 12th Street
118 13th Street
14
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditio1lll1 Use Permit 06-4
132 1 J'h Street
Planning Commission StaffReporl
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 5
Excerpt of October 6, 2004 Meeting Minutes
e
e
15
e1
.t.
3
4
5
6
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
,.
, ,
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
Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2004
Commissioner Questions
None.
Public HearinQ
Chairperson Ladner opened the public hearing. '
Ms. Beth Aboulafia of Hinman & Carmichael stated that she and Mr. Mark Robinson
from Target were both present tonight to respond to questions from the Commission.
She stated that no problems have resulted from adding the sale of packaged beer and
wine. She requested that the PC grant approval of the indefinite extension CUP 03-4.
Commissioner Roberts asked if Target had received a Type 20 ABC license for beer
and wine. Ms. Aboulafia confirmed that this was correct. Commissioner Roberts noted
that one year ago the request indicated the sale of wine only with the possibility of
selling beer in the future. He asked what the status is today. Ms. Aboulafia stated that
Target is still selling wine only. Commissioner Roberts asked if there are any plans to
add the sale of beer. Ms. Aboulafia responded that all of the Target stores that are
licensed in the state of Califomia are selling only wine, and currently there ar:e no plans
for the sale of beer. Commissioner Deaton asked if Target had posted the signs in
accordance with the conditions of approval for CUP 03-4. Ms. Aboulafia stated that
they had. She said that she was not aware that one of the signs had come down, nor
was she certain what the reason was, bu.t this situation is being remedied.
There being no one. else wishing to speak, Chairperson Ladner closed the public
hearing.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Shanks to approve the Indefinite Extension of
Conditional Use Permit 03-4 and adopt Resolution 04-50 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Ladner, Deaton, Roberts, Shanks, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 04-50 begins a 10-day calendar
appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the
appeal period begins tomorrow moming.
Height Variation 04-6 148 121h Street
Height Variation 04-7 150 12th Street
Height Variation 04-8 152 121h Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Huntington Pacific Development, Inc.
To construct three Single-family residences on threE!
contiguous legal lots, with each residence proposing a non-
Page 3 of 11
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
,,~
(
-- ,
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
Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2004
e
habitable Covered Roof Access Structure (CRAS) in excess
of the 25-foot height limit. Specifically, the proposed CRAS
structures would exceed the height limit by approximately 5
feet.
Recommendation: Approval sUbject to conditions and adoption of Re;;;olution
04-47,04-48, and 04-49, respectively.
Chairperson Ladner asked if this public hearing had been property noticed, to which Mr.
Whittenberg responded in the affinnative and he also noted that one communication
was received from Roger and Geraldine West in opposition to this matter.
Staff Reoort
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection In the
Planning Department.) He provided some background information on these items and
stated that the proposal is to construct three separate single-family residences on a lot
that is currently developed with an existing apartment building, which would be
demolished. He said that the lot is a 75-foot wide lot, and underlying are three,legaJ.25,
foot x 117-foot lots. He noted that the proposal also includes the provision on each of
the three structures for a Covered Roof Access Structures (CRAS), which would exceed
the height limit by approximately 5 feet. He explained that there are provisions in City
'Code that allow for these types of structures to exceed the 25-foot height limit for this
zone by up to 7 feet for a maximum height for a CRAS of 32 feet. Mr. Whittenberg then
added that the PC has adopted a set of design standards for different stairway
configurations for CRAS with the maximum allowable area of 38 square feet. He noted
that the proposed stairway configuration for Height Variation (HV) 04-6, 04-7, and 04-8
measures 32.25 square feet. He said that since the dimensions fall within the maximum
limits, Staff feels that the CRAS would not block any primary views from properties, as
in this area the homes are facing west on 12th Street looking toward downtown Main
Street. He stated that the proposed design of the homes is compatible with the
neighborhood. so Staff is recommending approval of HV 04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04-8.
subject to conditions. He noted that a separate motion would be necessary for each
application,
e
Commissioner Questions
. Commissioner Sharp asked what style of staircase was to be used. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that straight-run stairways would be used.
Commissioner Deaton indicated that on the map provided, it appears as though Central
Avenue does not dead-end into these properties. She noted that this is incorrect. .
Public Hearina
e
; Chairperson Ladner opened the public hearing.
Page 4 of 11
e.
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
_ _19
20
21
f
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
.
CIty of Seel Beech Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2004
(Note: Neither the applicant nor a representative of the applicant was present tonight.)
Mr. Roger West of 1301-B Electric Avenue spoke in opposition to HV 04-6, HV 04-7,
and HV 04-8. He said that for over 40 years he has been fighting to preserve the
identity of the community, and he is stressed over this matter. He stated that although
the architect for this project knew what the building requirements are, he exceeded
them anyway. He said he did not understand why this project could not be built to
comply with the building standards. He indicated that there is no reason to exceed the
height limit for these homes. He encouraged the PC to begin "standing up to these
things' and noted that this would probably eliminate half of the work for the
Commission. He said that everyone assumes that the requirements don't mean
anything, as all they have to do is come before the PC and the Commission will make
an exception for them. He noted that the developer is from Huntington Beach, and said
that this city has block after block of "cookie cutter row houses' being constructed, and
now these developers want to do the same in Seal Beach. He asked that the PC take a
stand for Seal Beach and keep the community the way it is. He recommended denial of
HV 04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04~8. Commissioner Sharp asked if Mr. West was just
opposed to building the CRAS 5 feet above the height limit. Mr. West stated that the
public notice _had indicated that the project would. exceed the height .limit .by 7 -feet.
Commissioner Sharp clarified that up to 7 feet is allowed, but these homes would only
exceed the height limit by 5 feet. Chairperson Ladner added that the law in Seal Beach
allows up to 7 feet. Mr. West asked why these applications had to come before the PC
if the law allows this. Commissioner Sharp stated that this is the way the PC handles
these applications. Mr. West clarified that if someone wants to exceed the building
limits all they have to do is come before the PC and the Commission decides whether or
not they can do so. Commissioner Sharp noted that this is in the Code and there are
many other CRAS in town, which have all come before the PC for approval. Mr. West
stated that someone has to fight to hold the line. He said that he frequently meets
people who comment on how nice the city is, and he tells them that he and many others
in town have been fighting for 40 years to keep it this way, and prevent it from looking
like downtown Huntington Beach and Long Beach. He again encouraged denial of HV
04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04-8.
Mr. Chris Mewes spoke in opposition to HV 04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04-8 and noted that
the developer did not even have the decency to show up for this hearing. He stated that
this is the same PC that approved the project at 12th Street and Electric Avenue that the
neighborhood residents appealed and fought to prevent, and were able to have
overtumed by City Council (CC). He said it appears that the PC sees this as another
.slam dunk." He noted that there are other doghouses in town, but not every one of
them is built on a HV. He stated that to give this developer three HVs would block
everyone's view of the neighborhood. He commented that the Commissioners may not
be concerned as the only Commissioner that lives in old town is Commissioner Deaton.
Mr. Magus said that 12th Street is already overburdened with large buildings, and
approving this request would just continue to destroy the neighborhood. He stated "we
have a little jewel down there that most of the Planning Commission just seems to throw
PagB 5 af 11
.'
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
"."
I,
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
Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2004
e
away." He said that if residents are forced to appeal this application, it would cost them
over $2,100.00. He begged that the PC deny this request.
Mr. Larry Horowitz of 146 12th Street stated that he resides next door to the proposed
project. He said t\1at it would be nice if the PC just "killed the whole project," as this is
such a beautiful piece of historic property. He said he lives in a one-story house and
this project would totally block any view. He recommended denial of HV 04-6, HV 04-7,
and HV 04-8.
Commissioner Sharp asked the Director of Development Services if, with the exception
of the proposed CRAS, this project is meet the requirements of City Code. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that it would be best to respond to these questions after the close of
the public heari~g.
Ms. Terry Mavis of 150 12!" Street stated that she has come before the PC many times
to oppose variances to the building code. She said that she does not understand why
the Code exists, as it appears that it does not mean anything. She indicated that what
is being given away is the blue sky of the City of Seal Beach, and before long as you
walk down to,.the.beach, there will bano sunligbt, but only shade. She said that this is
not why she moved to Seal Beach. She stated that she enjoys the community the way
it is. She recommended denial of HV 04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04-8.
e
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Ladner closed the public
hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Deaton stated. that she would like to motion to deny all three HVs
because she feels that this is a completely differerit situation than what has previously
been approved. She said that Central Avenue dead ends into these properties, and the
project would obscure the view for the entire width of this street, and the homes are all
lined up creating a "block" with no depth or difference in the homes. She stated that the
CRAS that the PC has approved in'the past have been individual homeowners with
individual needs for that particular CRAS, and these homes have not yet been
constructed and have no pre-existing need. She said she would like to move to deny
HV 04-6, HV 04-7, and HV 04-8.
Commissioner Shanks stated that he was in agreement. He commented that all the PC
can approve or deny is the CRAS. He said that if the developer wants to construct
these homes without the CRAS, they are in conformance with the law and can proceed
to do so. He noted that he had received a telephone call from Joan Stegman whose
grandparents owned the Willard Hotel, which formerly operated at this location, and she
stated that she is opposed to this project.
e
Page 6 of 11
e:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19.
20
21
,:
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
.33.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
4t
Cily of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of Octobtlr 6, 2004
Commissioner Deaton stated that she had received several telephone calls from
concerned residents. She indicated that when this type of home begins going up in
rows this can create a big problem for the City.
Mr. Abbe noted that each HV would have to be voted on separately. He asked' if
Commissioner Deaton wished to amend her previous motion.
Commissioner Sharp asked if Commissioner Deaton was moving for denial on the basis
of the aesthetics of the property, and if not, on what grounds was she moving for denial.
He said that unless the PC has a good reason to deny, he has a problem on the legality
of this, particularly since similar requests 'have previously been granted throughout the
city. Commissioner Deaton stated that she chooses to deny based on the following:
1. Protest of the community, which has not occurred with other applications for HVs.
2. A street dead ends directly into the property, which will allow a complete view of
the three homes, right in a row.
3. She does not believe that there is a legal problem, but she would like to discuss
this further with Mr. Abbe. She said that it is her understanding that the PC is
. always able .to accept,or deny these, and that no precedence has been created,
and neither will this set a precedent. She asked Mr. Abbe if this was correct.
Mr. Abbe stated that this is correct. He said that the courts have established that every
property is unique in its own way. He explained that the fact that the PC has granted or
denied these in the past should not affect the ability of the PC to grant or deny these
variations at this time. He clarified that this application is for a Height Variation and not
a Variance, for which the legal standards are very different. He added that under City
Code the PC has the discretion to approve or deny based upon whether it will obstruct a
primary view, and considering the character and integrity of the neighborhood and how
the HV would affect this, which can be a very subjective determination. .
Commissioner Sharp clarified that Mr. Abbe had stated that the PC had the right to deny
this application because of obstruction of a primary view. Mr. Abbe stated that the PC
could determine to deny if the HV would significantly impair the primary view of any
property located within 300 feet, and also considering the character and integrity of the
neighborhood and how the variation would affect that. Commissioner Sharp stated that
he has been on the Commission for a few ye.ars and the issue of view has been argued
on a lot of properties and was never allowed to be a deciding factor in approving or
denying a HV. Mr. Abbe stated that this discussion relates to CRAS only. He noted
that the standard is very different for a Variance, which Involves granting an exception
to a legal standard. He indicated that here this 'is not the case as 'the ~ allows a
height of 25 feet. and above that an additional allowance of 7 feet could be granted
subject to PC approval. Mr. Whittenberg inte~ected that there have been several cases
where HVs for CRAS have been modified to reduce the impact upon view. He noted
that most of these are found in Surfside Colony for homes in the A Row wanting to
construct CRAS that would have obscured the view of homes in B Row. He also
indicated that there have been cases with people on the ocean side of Ocean Avenue
Page7of11
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.!)"\
(
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
,33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
AI)
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2004
e
wanting to construct a CRAS, which could have obscured the view of homes on the
inland side of the street. He said that another issue is whether or not it is appropriate
for the integrity of that particular neighborhood, and as Mr. Abbe has stated, there is
some subjective thought involved in making a determination. Commissioner Sharp
stated that he is arguing this because he wants to make sure that the PC is not dOing
something that it should not be doing. He said that he believes "if the PC denies thIS
application, City Council will proceed to approve it on appeal.
Commissioner Roberts stated that he agrees with Commissioner Deaton, ~ and noted
that his major concern is having three similar structures in a row that will only differ in
exterior color, and this will significantly affect the character of the neighborhood. He
said that it is a shame that what the PC is doing here tonight is not going to change this,
but he d~es not:know how to get around this.
Commissioner Sharp stated that the same problem has occurred with the latest bUilding
on The Hill, so 4n1ess the City adopts an ordinance that allows the PC to control what is
built, this will become a problem.
Chairperao.n Ladner. agreed wjth Commissioner Sharp and noted that .this issue, will
continue to a.rise whenever someone wants a HV to build higher than the 25-foot height
limit. He asked the Director of Development Services how long ago construction of the
CRAS had begun. Mr. Whittenberg stated that CRAS have been constructed for
approximately 20 years. He said that for a long time they were simply approved at the
Staff fevel without any discretionary approval from the PC. He noted that this became
an issue in the early 90's, and in 19!;l2 the City adopted the standards in use today,
which means that all of the CRAS constructed since 1992 have been built in
accordance with these provisions and have come before the PC for approval. He
emphasized that the request is a discretionary action, and the PC does have the
authority to say "yes" or "no" based upon the particular circumstances of the application
and the area where the project is located. He commented that although he cannot
recall a recent case where the PC has denied a CRAS, this is the first time a request of
this nature has come before the Commission.
e
Chairperson Ladner commented that previously he and Mr. Whittenberg had discussed
the limitation of HVs within Seal Beach and. Chairperson Ladner had stated that he
believed no one should be allowed to build beyond a height of 25 feet, and Mr.
Whittenberg had stated that because of a precedent, these structures were allowed.
Mr. Whittenberg clarified that City Code does allow people to request a HV, and as long
as it allows this, people have a right to file an application and the City must process and
consider the application. He emphasized that the decision of the PC would be based
upon .the particular circumstances of each property In light of the public comments and
concerris that the Commission has. He stated that as long as the City ordinances
, maintain this provision and allow someone to make the application, Staff must process it
and the PC is authorized to consider it and make a decision on it. He said that if the PC
wishes to eliminate this process, they would have to change the Zoning Code.
e
Page 8 of11
e:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1!;l
20
21
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
J
CIty of Seal Belich Plannfng Commission
Meeting MInutes of October 6, 2004
Chairperson Ladner asked if the PC could do this. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the PC
could recommend to City Council that the Code be changed.
Commissioner Roberts read from Section C-1B of the City Code regarding whether
such variation is appropriate for the character and integrity of the neighborhood, and
stated that this is exactly what ls under discussion now, and certainly is something that
the PC can "hang its hat on." He stated that he is very concemed with the character
issue, and although denying the HVs is not going to resolve this, it would allow the PC
to make a statement.
MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Shanks to deny Height Variation 04-6.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES: .
, NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
4-0-1
Ladner, Deaton, Roberts, and Shanks
None
None
Sharp
MOTION by D_e.aton: SECOND. by Roberts to deny .Height Variation 04-7.
MOTION CARRIED:
,AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Ladner, Deaton, Roberts, and Shanks
Sharp
None
MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Shanks to deny Height Variation 04.8.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
4-0':"1
Ladner, Deaton, Roberts, and Shanks
None
None
Sharp
Mr. Whittenberg reported that Staff would return with resolutions to deny for these items
to be adopted at the next Planning Commission meeting of October 20, 2004. He said
that after adoption of these resolutions the appeal period would begin.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg stated that the new Senior Planner, Christy Teague, began work on
Monday, October 4, 2004. Unfortunately, she became ill this afternoon and was not
able to be in attendance this evening.
He then provided an update on Ruby's Diner and indicated that the hearing before the
California Coastal Commission (CCC) is scheduled for October 13, 2004 in San Diego.
He stated that there would be a staff report on the City Council agenda for Monday,
Page 9 of 11
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use PermiJ 06-4
132 Ii" Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7. 2006
ATTACHMENT 6
Excerpt of February 8, 2006 Meeting Minutes
e
e
16
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
26' .
21
22
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35'
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
City of Seal Beach Planning Ccmmisslon
Meeting Minutes of February B. 2005
law to do enforcement of Title 25, which involves the development, land use, setback
standards, and construction standards for mobile homes within California. He stated
that the state representative made Staff aware that effective July 2005 cities can no
longer require discretionary approval for a trailer space adjustment within a mobile
home park. He noted that state law indicates that trailer spaces can be adjusted within
a trailer park, but this requires that the owner of the park and the affected space owners
all agree to the adjustment. Once this approval is given, documentation must be
submitted to the City, a new survey must be completed to indicate the new survey
points, and if a determination is made at the Staff level that the request is not in accord
with the land use approvals granted at the time the park was established, the space
adjustment can be denied. Mr. Whittenberg indicated that this issue will have to be
further explored at the state level, and at this point trailer space adjustment is not an
issue that the Ci,ty would have to deal with. He noted that in their letter the SBAHC has
indicated that tfteir board will meet on February 13, 2006, to revisit this issue, and
should they decide to consider adjusting spaces, then applicants will go through the
process as outlined under state law, and at that point the City would deal with these
requests.
Commissioner Roberts referred to the discussion in the OCFA letter regarding agreeing
to t .S-foot setbacks; and noted that the state -reqtlires a '3-foot setback from 'the-property. - - - - - - - .
line. He asked if the 1.5-foot setback referred to by OCFA would begin at the property
line. Mr. Whittenberg stated that OCFA has indicated that the 1.5-foot setback would be
the minimum reduction they would like to see. Commissioner Roberts stated that in
reading the letter from Seal B~ach Trailer Park Resident Owners' Association
(SBTPROA), it appears that they would be willing to keep the physical location of the
building where it is today. Mr. Whittenberg noted that the SBTPROA letter states that
they believe they should be able to build up to the space line without the 3-foot setback.
He added that in the discussion with the representative from the state, Staff learned that
the waiver granted by the state in 1978 to allow the greenbelt to be considered a public
access road did not give these trailer spaces the right to have their unit located on the
front of the space line. He explained that the state's position is that you may have a
space there that fronts the greenbelt, but you are still subject to the 3-foot setback
requirement from that space line to the first part of the mobile home. He ended by
stating that if new information is presented at the February 13th board meeting, Staff will
provide an update to the PC.
Chairperson Shanks so ordered to Receive and File: Status Report Re: Trailer Space
Adjustments, Seal Beach Trailer Park.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Height Variation 06-1
203 2nd Street
, Applicant/Owner:
Mark Coppess! Brendan Baker
5 of 13
e
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
e
,.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
City of Seal Beach Pfanning Commission
Meeting Minutes of February 8, 2006
Joanna Rivera expressed her opposition to HV 06-1 and noted that her home was
constructed in 2001-02 on a 25-foot wide lot and the home has'a roof deck with a
stairway without a CRAS. She added that a home across the street from 203 2nd Street
also has a roof deck without a CRAS. She stated that the roof access could be
constructed without the spiral staircase. She provided maps designating the line of
sight view from her home, noting that this CRAS would totally obstruct this view. She
recommended denial of HV 06-1 and suggested that Mr. Coppess provide an alternate
design that would not exceed the height limit.
Joyce Politz spoke in opposition to HV 06-1 and stated that an extra 5 ft. 11 inches
would have the effect of encroaching upon her privacy and deprives her home of
additional light and air.
Ralph Rivera spoke in opposition to HV 06-1 and noted that he agreed with his wife,
Joanna, that this home could be designed to provide roof access without the CRAS.
John Baker stated that he lives on First Street from which he has a beautiful view of the
bay and beyond. He said that in the early 1980's he had constructed a roof deck over
his garage without a CRAS. He indicated that his roof deck also has a.straight stairway
along the side of "the "hoqse"and-up-to.the roof deck: He recommended redesigning-the- ----
home without the CRAS.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Shanks closed the public
hearing. -
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Deaton stated that she would define the primary view for homes in Old
Town as any view of the ocean, mountains, or the marina, and although she normally
has no objections to a CRAS, when she visited this neighborhood she saw only 4 single
story homes, as the majority of single story homes in Old Town have been demolished
or converted to large homes covering every inch of the property and constructed as high
as allowed. She said that granting this CRAS would lead to more homes asking for the
same type of approval. She stated that she would vote to deny.
Commissioner Roberts stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Deaton's
comments and would vote to deny.
Chairperson Shanks stated that he was also in agreement and would also vote to deny.
He indicated that the home could be redesigned to provide everything the applicant
wants without exceeding the height limit.
MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Roberts to deny Height Variation 06-1 and direct
Staff to present amended Resolution 06-9 at the next scheduled Planning Commission
meeting.
7 of 13
.'
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13" Street
Planning Commission Staff Repon
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 7
Excerpt of April 19, 2006 Meeting Minutes
e
e
17
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
,20
21
22
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
-
City of Seal Beech PlannIng Commission
Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2006
4. Windows. Some cities ban windows on the side walls of home to protect the
privacy of neighbors; however, there are many window styles and glass types
currently available such as opaque glass, including frosted and tinted glass,
pattemed glass, and glass blocks, which can provide both light and privacy.
5. Architectural Review. To ensure adequate application of bulk requirements, some
jurisdictions have initiated additional review and regulation requirements for
additions of second stories or any expansions greater than a set percentage of the
existing building area -
In conclusion, Mr. Whittenberg presented Staff recommendations for consideration by
the PC for managing mansionization within the City of Seal Beach, as follows:
1. Limit any rl1ansionization regulations to the RLD-5000 zoned properties only (the
"Hill," the "Coves," College Park East, and College Park West other than potential
changes to roof style requirements that may be applicable within Old Town).
Beyond these 'areas, in the opinion of Staff, the pattern of existing development, lot
sizes and related setback and lot coverage requirements are sufficient enough that
the perceived impacts of new home construction is sUbstantially reduced.
. . Modifications' to roof style" provisions' for' the-front of the structure, 'even'within- the ' -- _._-
Old Town RMD and RHD zones, would have some significant impacts on reducing
the perceived bulk along the street frontage.
2. Focus on the "incentive concepts" that encourage flexibility and innovation in
preparing development plans for new 2-story residences within the City, as
discussed above regarding "Second Story Regulations" and "Rooflines", or
consider requiring additional side yard setback for height above a certain level. If
the Commission determines these suggestions are worth pursuing, Staff will return
with additional information at a later study session.
He then presented photographs of some of the larger homes within the City, followed by
a brief review of the Supplemental Staff Report provided to the Commissioners at
tonight's meeting. (Supplemental Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning
Department.)
Chairperson Shanks commended Staff for the work done on the issues brought before
them by the PC. -
Public Comments
Chairperson Shanks opened for public comments.
Tom Arthur stated that his concern is that the recommendations for additions not be too
restrictive. He suggested including "grandfathering clauses" that would allow current
homeowners to use the building standards in place at the time of their home purchase.
9 of 12
e~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
"20
21
22
~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
e
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeling Minutes of April 19, 2006
Chairperson Shanks agreed that building out to the property line needs to be looked at.
He emphasized that mansionization is an important issue that should be addressed, as
it will give property owners the confidence to know what they can and cannot do and will
ultimately make Seal Beach a better town.
Commissioner Deaton asked why "pop outs. were eliminated in Old Town. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that there is a provision that allows for architectural projections by
right for certain types of things, like bay windows, fireplaces, etc. Commissioner Deaton
stated that this is a good way to not restrict square footage, yet still allow architectural
variation.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff would draft more information to return to the PC in
June or July, li!,nd he would consult with some of the local architects to get their
feedback on how these restrictions might affect their ability to design homes.
Commissioner O'Malley added that The Cove neighborhood also experience flOOding
due to a lack of permeable surfaces 'and runoff from The Hill. Mr. Whittenberg noted
that Staff is aware of these issues and explained that a Charter Amendment was
approved during the recent election that increased the transient occupancy tax and
.- these- funds are- to be -used for' storm drain improvements throughout the community.' .. -
Commissioner Deaton referred to the 37.5-foot corner property referred to by Ms. Sarah
Fuller and stated that this is a problem because this three-story home is surrounded by
single story homes. She said that if this home had a 2nd or 3id story setback, it would
not be a problem. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the issue of setbacks for comer lots in
Old Town could be reviewed.
Commissioner Roberts asked if the proposed standards for Old Town would be different
from those for the rest of the city. Mr. Whittenberg stated that they would, as the issues
are so different in this area of town.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg indicated that the Planning Commission meeting for May 3, 2006, has
been cancelled due to a lack of business items, and the Chairperson would be
adjourning tonight to the regular meeting of May17, 2006.
Mr. Abbe stated that passage of Assembly Bill 1234 in 2005, requires that public
officials obtain two hours of ethics training, and members of the Planning Commission
are required to complete this training by January 1, 2007. He indicated that his 'Iaw firm,
Richards Watson and Gershon (RWG) is offering free seminars to provide this training,
and noted the seminar dates at the closest locations as follows:
June 2, 2006
June 29, 2006
Cerritos, CA
South Coast Plaza, Costa Mesa, CA
11 of 12
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
13213'" Street
Planning Commission StajJRepo,t
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 8
Tentative Parcel Map 2006~160
.'
e
e
18
t fVE~':~(~ ;..,
. ";~:' n..n'@"."
'" :lR 1NJ 0 c
. l~.' 'E" ''ir,~~'.'- ..:: ,: dt.;;.~hL' BEACH
1_.1.1 ~mPTt..".. :.::..... t~.:~.;g- .~i..~;e~ 1YH~.F..;."fiANGE
~."............onf,~..~:<-'~,1"i:... ',;". ,~ 'Pf'\:rE':'9F:,~A-UfORNIA
. ~ I ...1 .....,. . " ~ r~~' ...a. .
~~ ..' ',' ....' . ","',;;).'. ;"!:''''l~~l,j..,.,~t ~, 'i'"
.~+):.:. '::', ':,.\,;.~:7:,..'~' '. ~',. '":"'.' -,.:.;~-,:'"
" ~\'". ..,.... I,' _ ....../' .~~ '" .. ~.~
,,- ....' ~ . ", ..........
, """" ",' . ;" ' , >. :1;. ....
" -. ~, ... .1!.IlI!fII".-fIII;I~...
~:<'" .....".O'~:. .;,~ .
. ," .' . J" "IJ. ('1' It .
-~. I)' ,-'. '. ,L. ..".. -p-"'I'~~_'_'''~
~. ,l'J'iI',.............,"~ . _=" .
" II .erlK~~~M~~~4" . ~~~~~.. .
.., fI'lQlMC;lllmlCATC:II......Ii:lNoMKT.~1m... ...~~.:: '~ffi'.".a.:""r~:~' .
=1CCiIIIHKCl'!TIt!-urr-.TIaN~~ .~!!:!!:.-.- J!-'-..~.... .
"'dGHJr "AlDMH.:~-az.':' .__~ '_" .....CL'
.~ .HCII!Nl-..eOl' ~1L."p.."" _CN'M!......
. ~'OPT.N!:R'IIIUe'n!IL.,.CPTIII! c:uq.: . "" . . _"~Cll""'~"'!IT.AtIMClNl:GN
~~u:It"'1!D1"IIllH1II!'SClUI'IL,tOU1llrf.... ", '~IG.~:"'P' '1;' ~t;I"'t:lIUINlII!
. DelllDllll_II'.u:.". ',r' ". I" . 1CQ,tt1'l".iCl't. .~.' . .i!!' r . ~._ ~.: . .
. .........,.....,.. . '.' ~ ,.:t ,. ., ...,. . .
,..~. I " lun'.JT"I"..~.:,.L . "" ....
0WrI!A:/~ _._~ I ...:. ~
~ .I.....l. LUo "'{"~~MS&!JH1Wtf'Y .' .
i: ='';.~AW..'' . ......-urr.6ft__~ .~:.., .
.........Gf,.... ....' . .HA1I!R-l:oI"':AI".....IIMCtI. . ....
r" '-'-".~'... ' . .J . ~_.ecun;-~!I:II5llN~.
~~tra!:I!A-:. I .' ~~-."~' . .' ...~' '.'
:~~-m.=.:+~-~ .' ...., ,~
~4112l.lNCGLHAVISII!
.~-
~~-
',: .-
SGA.LEI 1- II 10'
SHEET I OF I SHEET5
.
~@(0)~<:JlJ~@
1--..,
. ....~'MItl~_JII!IooIl)VSJ IbiI
MSftMe1M! e
lJ
--....
M.__1oWH:lIJ!
.. '
...
r_
..
....
~
.
....... ....
.........
~ IU!VA'natI
-""""-
-..........
-...
.......-
'. ..:'
..
'{iff.
..
,I.,
l :~ I ( II
l- I II lexl
~ j.J~l.~)I:.
,n III I I
UI III II
III I
. III~'
~"
. II I
: J I 1
1111 I I .,
111 I I "i'1
I II I I~.. \P
I II.. ~ r I '~'II .
l'I~~4r. I II'~ ..!I
III I I Iii' "II
III I I,. '.11
~II I." II'
n~'.L.-f"Il .. II
"" I J/ I I: II
. "
I II. I ill II
I .. IL
, " '-___4J!,
I Ill... I -"'"
11' I, I
I I'U.I'
'!)tGI....,6] 'l,' :
III I
I" ItlU!'
-",""\I
1- ;;'C;.i 1--:
.:-;" ~
.~::r~.. :.~:>
.<
. ~ ::-- : ..' :"
}~,
~.'
,....
,....
'.t~
li;.h'
" 'l/.' ./..,,' . .'
_:;.0;..' .'I...i,,!t. \...30". .,110, .
'~',"" ~.! ....,~.,.,. :-;"-1~' -~ ~
't"'I. "
t'
"
"
"
'1
"
"
~
I
,
-,
"
I',
'.
..,: .?.... '.
" ~' ~\.
';:..'" l"J' \"'..
."'..
," " "
,..... .. II
~ I,~~O ~F'="'';' FF='!l".:20'.. .J:
""., ., - , PAD=f>.10.' I'
"
"
"
. :. . t.. ,. . . ~ II,
'. \ .....J
""=---~".---.,..-,s..-_-~~-~",,,?--_-=w-_--n..-_-~;;L..I.~~
, ...- .
" ,
-----....--- -_..&_----...--
:, I' ...;:_.' ,
~
..
...
-,
~ .
i
e
'.
...,)
,,~
.' .
:,,;
,
_I.
t~
:'"
"
."
"
w,
".
e
Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, Conditional Use Permit 06-4
132 13110 Street
Planning Commission Staff Report
June 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT 9
Plans
.'
.
e
19
.'
e
'. .
e
r'-'-- -.-.--.-,
I I
I I
.1 I
II I
II
I
i I
! I
I I
L_,_, __"
I
.!il U
n
Jt
~
e
f-'-'- '--'--1,.,11
!: : 1.'
I 11~11
~~ I'
I I
II · · 1111
I I
l~I'
-- -
I 'n-'-'-'---'-
In
I
I
I
I
~
!
.
.
.
......
,
___ -11II'
1111 1111111 Hi
I I
uoa 111.", III
I I
.
,
. .
~ J I" 1111i!llIlllIi-
, I z "Iii ~ ill 1,- I i IJ~II .~
-I '!l !24i~ ~. --1 ';, II'I:II! II
~ I Illl ~ h ! I~ I 1"lliil't1U
I'.) ; ! I.', '.
i; ~-I--- --. --
plii,
- P.
-
.
J
Ii ~J
II
!ll
e J ' I
, I .
i
,
I
i I
I · I
31_, '-.-
0
IJ II !j
s 'j8 ~
~ rn
!!l
m ~ 8
I
m
~ 8 8
::l
0
z 8 8
.
. .
e ~~l ~I . 1.;'11'111111
d d I bli'llh481
~ --- - , I I I~ I ! !I i Ili,r..lilll;
',~
. - 1"V I -J J', I, J,;
. . .
- . - ..
---.-
~
.
t ~I '
I!!-~--'--
gi 1
.l!I enl
A
-=- " ,
\ ...
Wt\~\J\\ ~I\\
\\,. ~ \ \ ~~~l llr.
. \n'\i' .,
'Y'l \"i" . . .
~ \1 \t,; .~.,
\\ " ,.,e
1\\\\ "t'\
; , " ~, I .
\ ,\\~\\ ,
~ a\
\\.\\ .ni ii
~ ,if'
:z \
I I \.
.
"
,
. \ \
e \ .
~
\
\
1
.
.
.
\ ~
~ \ \
.
. . .
e , \\ I' ~lll\'\\\\\~ L ~\
jCP ~ ,\ \\ \ '\Y~l~* \\- tA-\ .---
.-: ,~~ . \l
~. -- - ,~ (J)\
f ~!, ,'l'\~\'ll a
.-------- - _.:---
e
Public Hearings re.'
Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council Staff Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 5
WRITTEN DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 7
.' IN FAVOR OF CUP 06-4
e
e
06-4 Appeal,CC Staff Report -132 ThirtCClllb
10
e
e
e
FuU Report
Page 1 of 1
Scott Levitt
CONDO
Residential
Closed Sale 123 13th St A
Seal Beach (lA)
Orange County (OR)
Mon, Jun 5, 200610:15 AM
Seal Beach (SLB) Price $465,000'
Zip 90740- TGNO ~
XSTS 13th Streetl Ocean Ave Aerial Map ~
Attached
RES
P297496
Bed 3
Baths 1.75
View No View
ASqFt 1,274 Assessor YrBlt 1977 Assessor
ALotSlze 0 Assesaor Dim
Prkng Garage Attached, Garage Door Opener
Garage 2 A Rem 2 Spc Cpr! RV Acc
Maslsr Bedroom Downslalrsl Close To Beachl Fronl Yerdl 2nd Floor Balcony 2 Cer Tandem Garage. Show And Sell II
Rooms
Living Rm Uvlng Room
Media: 0
Builder Tract - (-)
Model-(-)
Stories Two Levels
HOA Dues $ 50 + $ 0
Land Fee $
No picture available.
Acras
Rsnge $: No
Bedrooms Meslsr Sulle
Othsr Laundry In Garage
Dining EeUng Araa
A menltle_
Pool No Pool Spa No Spe 1V Firapl Uving Room
Appliances Buill-In Ges Renge, Dishwesher. Ges Dryer Hook Up Other
InlsrlorlExlsrlor/Structural
Cooling No Air Condnlonlng
Plumbing
Sprlnklera
Lot/Community/Association
Security No SecuMty Syslsm
Hsating Forced Air
Roof Other-8ee Remarks
Cond
Floors Concrels Slab
Patio
DoorsIWlndows
APNO 938-098-053
Lot Nol Horae Properly
Sewer In, Conneclsd & Paid
HS DlsI Los AJamilos Unified School DislMcl
Amenities
Unite 2
Land Fee
Zoning
Legal In Special Study Area. Nolin Flood Zone
Water Dlsbid Yard No Yard
Elemen MCGAUGH Junior OAK
Lot/BlocklTract -1/-
Mello Rooa Y
High Sch LOSAL
HOA Dues $ 50 +$0
Lae Trans $
Lsnd LeelYr $
FinancIal Information
Tax Amt $
2nd TO $ Type
Listing Office/Agent Info
OffIce 562-596-6600 Fax
Pager 562-795-0767 Cell 562-657-1043
Agt WSlte
Lee Ren
Lee Exp
Terms Cash To New Loan
1st TO $ Type Inte....t %
Total Assessed Velue $
Inllll.st % Seller Pnts
List Office BaYlown ReallY (PB4047)
List Agent Kllsenin, Jim (ZKLISJOH)
Agt E-Mail Yu.
Priv Rmks Thank You For Showing.
Price Excl
Occupant Vacanl
Res
Primary 562-431-1259
Occupant Name
Listing Activity
Date Added 6/27/2002 Tran Oats 9130/2002
Prav Price $ 499,000 Cur LIst Pre $489.000
Pending/Sold Informstlon
Sellin9 Terms
BegIn Escrow 7/2612002
SPlSqFt $ 364.99 Sold/List 95%
Selling Office/Agent Info
Sell omce Firat Team Real Estale(PB4438) OffIce 582-598-9911 Fax 562-596-4661 Res 714-952-3461
Sell Agent Sheri Whltnev (NWHITGUY) Pager 000-0000 Cell 714-290-8584 V-Mall 000-0000
Agt E-Mail YII Agt WSlts 4RealEstalsHelo com
The accuracy 01 alllnlormeOon l8gerdless 01 source. Including but not Dmlled to square Ioolages and 101 sIZe. Is deemed ralleble but Is not
guaranteed and should be Independenlly verified through pel1lOf18llnspectJon by andlorwtth the eppropJfaIa professlonels. Copyright SoCalMLS,
List Oats 6/2412002
Org Price $ 509,000
DOM 32 COE: 9/27/2002
Off market 9/27/2002
LPlSqFt $383.83
Comp 2.5%
List Prlce$489,000
Cont Price $ 460,000
Sold Price $ 465,000
FinancIng
Cloeed 9127/2002
DOM 32
iVf7V'v
I'f fJrJ)'6
h C 1975 ~ }cr7J)
3 Uq[3)-)<1B7)
-
http://www.tempo.socalmls.comlSearchDetaiVScriptsIPrtAgtFu1IPrtAgtFul.asp?UidList=80... 6/512006
Full Report
Page 1 of 1
Residential Mon, Jun 5, 2006 10:14 AM
RES Closed Sele 123 10th St 2 Seal Beach (SLB) Price $390,000
Seal Beach (lA) Zip 90740- TGNO BZW
Orange County (OR) XSTS Elmaln St.a1pch,nlocean Aerial Map ~
5261194 Media: 1 Builder Tract Old Town (OT)
Bed 2 Model 3 Unit Bldg (0)
Baths 2 Stories Two Levels
View City Lighls Vwm, No View
ASqFt 1,337 Other VrBlt 1979 Estimated
ALotSlzejJ.l\,1l Dim
Prkng Garage Attached, Garage Door Opener
. Garage 2 A Rem 2 Spc cprt RV Ace Range $: No
Absolutely Adorable Condo In 3 Unit Building Near Beach.pler,'old Town' Shops & Restaurants.unlt Shows Great & Is Spacious &
'move-in'condltion. Tiled Enlly,vaulted Ceillng,tiled Fireplace W/gas Loga, New White Ceramic TIle Counter Tops, Kitchen Built.
ina.large Pantry,large Deck W/lots Storage 2' Blinds Throughout.2 Car Tandem Garage W/opener.nice Complex & Location I
Rooms
Living Rm Uving Rm Entrance, Living Room
Scott Levitt
CONDO Attached
e
HOA Dues $100 + $ 0
Land Fee $
Acres
Bedrooms Master Suite, Walk-In Closet
Other Inside Laundry , Stonige Space
Dining Eating Area
/ manitlaa
Pool No Pool Spa No Spa TV Cable TV F1repl Living Room Sacurlty No Intercom
Appliances Bui~-In Gas Range. Dishwasher. Garbage Dispoasl Other Tumkey. No Wet Bar
Intenor/Exterlor/Structural
Heating Forced Air COOling Attic Fan, No Air Conditioning Floore Ceramic lile. Sheet Vinyl, Well-to-Wall Carpet
interior Mlsc Cathedra~Vau\ted Ceilings, Window Blinds
Roof Composition Plumbing
Cond Sprinklers Front Only. Sprinkler limer
Structural OtherCustom Built Faces South
APNO 937-053-002 Zoning
Lot Curbs-Walks, Alley Access. Lot Level-Flat Ocean Side of Highway 1, Legal CC&RS. Homeowners
Ocean Side of Freeway. Not Horse Property Association
Sewer In, Connected & Paid Water District
Elemen
HS Dist Loa Alamitoa Unified School Ofstrtet MCGAUGH
Amenities Assoc Earthquake Ins Pd. Assoc Insurance Paid. Assoc Trash Paid
Units 3 HOA Duas S 100 + S 0
Land Fee Lee Trans $
Land Lae/Vr $ Lae Ren
r1nanclallnformation
Tax Amt $0 Total Assessed Value $ 0
Type lnte..st % Seller Pnts 0
Listing Office/Agent Info
Ust Office Seal Beach ReallY (H0483O) Office 562-430-2545 Fax Res
Ust Agent Russell. Sharon (SRUSSSHA) Pager Cell Primary 000-000-0000
Agt E-Mail Yn Agt WSIte www sealbeachreallY net
Prlv Rmks Sq.flas Per Previous Seller.appt.lhrough OWners.spacious Well Located Up. Stairs Condo, open & Charming Wlv..... Of
City. large Master Wlwalk-in Closet & Oual Vanities, Whole House Fan, Centra Heat,champagne Cerpet.hurry \I
Price Excl
Occupsnt Owner
pccupant Name
Listing Activity
Tran Date 12/21/2001
Cur List Pre $395.000
PendlnglSold Infonnatlon
Selling Tenns
Begin Escrow 10/20/2001
Sold/List 99%
Selling Office/Agent Info
Sell Office Coldwell Banker Residentlal(0065) OIIIce 562-494-4600 Fax 562-597-2968 Res 714-301-3115
Sell Agent Las Andre (ZANDRLES) Pager 714-301-3115 Cell V-MaIl714-301-3115
Agt E-Meil:in Agt WSite lesand.. com
The accuracy of alllnformaUon regardless of source, Including but not nmJted to squafB footages and lot slze,ls deemed reliable but 18 not
guaranteed and should be Independently ver\fled through personellnspectlan Ily and/or wIIh the approprlate professIonals. Copyright SoCaIMLS.
Tsnns Cash. Cash To New Loan
1st TO $ Type Interest %
2nd TD $
Patio Patio
DoorslWlndowa
let/Community/Association
e
Lot/Block/Tract
1/110428
Mello Roos V
Yard No Yard
Junior
MCAULlF/OA
High Sch LOSA
Lae Exp
List Dale 9/2912001
Org Price S 395,000
Date Added 9/2912001
Prev Price $ 395.000
DOM 21 COE: 12120/2001
Off market 12/20/2001
LPISqFt $295.43
Comp 2,5%
List Price$395,000
Cant Price $ 390.000
Sold Price $ 390,000
Financing
SPlSqFt $ 291.69
1....... .11
Closed 12120/2001
DOM21
e
Full'Report
Scatt Levitt
CONDO Attached
Page 1 of!
e
ResIdential .
RES Closed Sale 205 10lh St 'c'
Seal Beach (IA)
Orange County (OR)
. Mon, Jun 5, 200S 10:14 AM
Seal Beach (SLB) PrIce $380,000
ZIp 90740- TGNO 828E4
XSTS Main 1 Central Aerial Map *'
P14S81S
Bed 3
Baths 2.5
VIew No VIew
ASqFt 2,897 Asaessor VrBlt 1975
ALoISI.. 4.408 Assessor Dim
Prkng Garage Alleched, Garage Door Opener
Garage 2 A Rem 2 Spc Cprt RV Acc Range $: No
Largest Condo In Old Town 1 Custom Built 1 Master Bedroom Suite 1 Loft Den Cathedral Callings 12 Cer Tandem Garage Wlstorage
Space 1 Fresh Paint Great Location 1 Walk To Shopping, Beach,pier. Carpets Are Being Cleaned On 8111/99. Do Not Show Until
8/12/99, Thank Vou
No picture available.
Medle: 0
Builder Tract - C-)
Model-(-)
Stories Two Levels
HOA Dues $ 0+ $0
Land Fee $
Acres
Rooms
LiVing Rm Living Rm Enlrsnca, Living Room
Bedrooms Dressing Area, Master Suite
Other Laundry Area, Den/orc
Dining Eating Area
AmenttJeJ.
Flrepl Living
Room
Othsr
Interlor/Exterlor/Structural
Heating Forced Air Cooling No Air Conditioning
Interior Mlsc Cathedral-Vaulted Ceilings, Window Blinds
Roof PlumbIng
Cond Sprinklers
Structural OtI1erCustom BuilL Termite Clearanca
Security Intercom, No Securlty
System
Pool No Pool Spa No Spe 1V Cable 1V
Appliances Dishwasher, Gerbege Disposal, Gas Dryer Hook Up, Ges/Electric
Range
e
APNO 937-lJ53-014
Lot Alley Access, Not Horse Properly
Sewer In, Connected & Paid
HS Dlst Los Alamites Unified School District
Amenities
Units 1
Land Fee
HOA Duee $0+$0
Lae Trans $
Floors Wood
Patio Patio
Doors/Wlndowa
L~t1Communlty/Assoclatlon
Zoning
Lagal CC&RS, In Speclel Study Area, Not In Flood Zone
Water Disbicl Vard No Vard
Elemen MCGAUGH Junior OAK
LotIBlocklTract 1//197
'Mello' Roos V
High Sch LOSAL
Land LseIVr $
Financial Information
Tsx Amt $ Total Asseued Value $
2nd TO $ Type Intersst % Seller Pnfa
Listing OfflcelAgent Info
OffIce 562-596-6600
Pager 795-0799
Lae Ren
Lae Exp
Terms Cash, Cash To New Loan
1st TO $ Type Interest %
Occupant Name
Listing Activity
Tran Date 101111999
Cur List Pre $395,000
PendinglSold Information
Selling Terms
aegln Escrow 8/31/1999
SP/SqFt$131.17 Sold/Ust96%
Selling Office/Agent Info
Sell Ofllce Coldwell BenkerCl083) Offlce 714-965-9500 Fax 714-965-6364
Sell Agent Michael Obrlen CIOBRIMIC) Pager 000-0000 Call
Agt E-Mail Agt WSlte
The accuracy of all information regardlesl of source, Including but not Dmlted to oquere footages and lot size, Is deemed reliable but II not
guaranteed and should be Independently verlfisd IhlOugh personellnspection by sndlorwllh the applOprtete plOlesslonals. Copyright SoCaIMLS.
List Office Bavlown Realtv (PB4047)
List Agent K1lsanin, Jim (ZKLISJOH)
Agt E-Mail Yn
Price Excl
Occupant Vacant
Fax Res
Call Primary 562-431-1259
Agt WSlfa
List Dete 7/3011999
Org Price $ 395,000
Dlte Added 8/711999
Prlv PricI $ 395,OO~
LPISqFt $136,34
Comp 2.5%
DOM 32 COE: 913011999
Off mlrket 913011999
List Prlcl$395,OOO
Cont PrlCI $ 380,000
Sold PrlCI $ 380,000
Financing
Closed 913011999
DOM 32
e
Ras 714-536-0356
V.Mail 000-0000
httn'/Iwww tpmnn ~n..",lml~ Mm/~p"'mhn"t"i1/Sr.rint~lPrtApfF'111IPrtApfF'111_,,~n?T Hrlr .;~t=RO___ 1iI~I?OOIi
Residential
Closed Sale 127 11 th St B
Seal Beach (lA)
Orange County (OR)
P418559
Bed 2
Baths 2
Vlaw No View
ASqFt 934 Assessor YrBlt 19n Assessor
Alotslze 2,500 Estimated Dim
Prkng Driveway, Garage Attached
Garage 2 A Rem 1 Spc 1 Cprt RV Acc Range $: No
BACK ON THE MARKETI Custom hardwood floors have contrasting Inlay accents. Granite top kitchen island has built-in gas stove.
breakfast bar and plenty of storege. Custom slate kitchen sink counter end designer faucet Custom bookshelves In living room wtth
buitt-in color TV (w/o warranty), Skylights give naluralllght to hallway and bath. Remodeled bathrooms are tiled with new glass shower
enclosures. Crown molding, and wood blinds In mesterbedroom with large walk-In closet
. Rooms
Bedrooms Masler Suite, Walk-In Closat lIving Rm Living Room
Other Laundl}' In Garage
Full Report
Scott Levitt
CONDO
Page 1 of 1
Man, Jun 5, 200610:16 AM
Seal Baach (SlB) Price $556,000
ZIp 9074D-6424 TGNO BMS
XSTS N/Ocean E1Main AerIal Map ~
e
Media: 8
Builder Tract (01)
Model (A)
Stories Top Level
HOA Duas $ 85 + $
Land Fee $
Acres
Dining Breakfast Counter/Bar
A mlnitJes
Pool No Pool Spa No Spa TV Cable TV, TV Satellite Dish
Appliances Built-In Gas Range, Conveclion Oven, Dishwasher, Garbage Disposal, Gas Dl}'er Hook Up,
Gas/Elec Dl}'er Hook Up
Flrepl Living
Room Sacurity
Other Turnkey
Interior/Exterior/Structural
Haating Forced I'Jr Cooling No I'Jr Conditioning Floors Ceramic Tile, Hardwood
Interior Mlsc Cuslom Window Covering, Window Drapes-Curtains, Window Shutters
Roof Spanish Clay Tile Plumbing Patio Balcony, Deck, Wood
Cond Sprlnklars Doors/Windows Skylights
Structural OtherRaln Gutters
Land LselYr $
r1nanclallnfonnatlon
Tax Amt $3673
Interest % 2nd TO $ Typa
listing Office/Agent Info
list Office First Team Real Estate (PB4438) Office 562-596-9911 Fax 626,606.0336 Res 626.658.5118
list Agent Woody Dahlen (pdahlwoo) Psger 000-0000 Call 714.676.9148 Primary 714.676.9148
Agt E-Mail Yn AgtWSlts www.MvRealtoMloodv.com
PrIv Rmks Subjecllo cancellation of current esaow. Kllybox at lop of stairs. Klly also opens side garage door, Tendem car spaces
and laundl}' hookups closest to door, Unit B waler healer Is strapped to code.l'Jl interior ...modeKng and rear balcony from Masler
bedroom has City of Seal Beach permits which are avaKable to aK potential buyers upon request
Price Excl
Occupant Owner
Occupant Name Call Woody'
Listing Activity
Tran Da1ll111212005
Cur List Pre $579,900
PJndlng/Sold Informal/on
financing Conventional Selling Terms
BegIn Escrow 1/12/2005
Sold/LIst 96%
S~lIIng Office/Agent Info
Ssll Office prudential California ReallY(NB07) OffIcs 562-860-2443 Fax 562-924-4060 Res 562-860-2443
Sell Agent Deborah K Fresman (PFREEDEB) Peger 000-0000 Call V-Mall 000-0000
Agt E-Mail Ves Agt WSIIII
The ac<:Ul8CY of aK Information regardless of SOlI""', Including but no! Umlled to square loolages end 10ts1ze. Is deemed reUable but Is not
guaranlaed snd should be IndependenUy verified through personellnspectlon by end/or with the epproprlafs professionals, Copyrfght SoeaIMLS.
APNO 937-53-010
lot I'Jley Access, Curbs-Walks
Sewer In Street Peld
HS Dlst Los l'Jamitos Unified School District
Amenltlea
Units 2
Land Fee
HOA Dues $ 65 + $
Lse Trans $
Tenns Submit
1 st TO $ Type Conventional
Lol/Communlty/Association
e
Zoning lol/BlocklTrect 16611111
Legal CC&RS, Homeowners Association Mello RODS N
Water District Vard Wroughllron
Eleman Junior High Sch Los Alamltios
lseRen
Lae Exp
Total Assea.ed Value $ 350,198
Inlllrest % Sellar Pnts
714.878,9148
LIst Oafs 9/27/2004
Org Prlca $ 579,900
Dalll Added 9/27/2004
Prey Price $
DOM 107 COE: 2/1/2005
Off market 2/112005
LPlSqFt $62M8
Comp 3%
List Prlce$579,900
Cant Price $ 556,000
Sold Price $ 556,000
SP/SqFt$
Closed 2/1/2005
DOM 107
e
Full'Report
Page 1 of 1
Scotllevitl
CONDO Attached
e
Residential ., .. -- -. .u.. Mon, Jun 5, 200610:17 AM .
RES Cloeed Sele 127 2nd SI A Seal Beech (SLB) Price $650,000
Seal Beech (lA) ZIp 9074D-B003 TGNO 826E4
Orange County (OR) XSTS S. PCHlE. 1ST. Aerial Map.
P417401
Bed 3
Bathe 1.75
View No View
ASqFt 1,234 Assessor
ALolSlze 0
Prkng Garage Attached
Garage 2 A Rem Spc Cprt RV Acc Range $: No
Very nice condo. 3 bedroom, 1.75 bath, large tandum gerage, 2 un" condo complex, lower unit A only 1/2 block to beach, beautiful Seal
Beach shops and pier. Unit has front patio. Condo was remodeled 2 yeers ago with new appliances, counter tops, paint and carpet
leundry in gerage,
Media: 0
Builder Tract (00)
Model (0)
Stories Two levels
HOA Duss $ 95 + $
Land Fse $
No picture available,
YrBlt 1 967 Assessor
Dim
Acre.
Rooms
Bsdrooms
Othsr
Living Rm Uving Room
Dining Braakfast Counter/Bar
Nnenltles
Pool No Pool Spa No Spe
Appllancss Dishwasher, Garbage Disposal
1V
F1repl
Other
Securlly
Heating Forcad Air
Rool Composition
Cond
",terlor/Ex1erlor/Structural
Cooling No AIr Conditioning Floors Concrete Slab, Wood
Plumbing Patio Balcony, Concrete Slab, Deck
Sprlnklera DooralWlndo_
L.tlCommunlly/Assoclatlon
e
APNO 938-96-041
Lot
Sewer In Straet Peid
HS Dlst Seal Beech Unified School District
Amenities
Unite 2
Land Fee
Zoning
legal CC&RS, Homeowners Assocletion
Water District Yard
Elemen Junior
LotlBlock/Trect 0//194
Mallo Roos N
High Sch
Terms Cash To New loen
1st TO $ Type Conventional
land LaslYr $
I'lnanclallnlormatlon
Tax Amt $2639
Interest % 2nd TO $ Type
Listing Office/Agent Inlo
List Office Coldwell Banker Ster ReallY (0299) OffIca 562-804-1385 Fax 562-920-7101 Raa 562-494-8222
List Agent Robert Austin (zaustrob) psger 000~000 Cell Primary 562-804-1385
Agt E-Meil Agt WSlte
Priv Rmks Seller has had properly appraised for $740,000.00 by s certified residential Real Estate appraiser.
Price Excl
Occupant Owner
HOA Dues $ 95 + $
Lae Trans $
LaeRsn
Lae Exp
Totel Assessed Value $ 247,491
Interest % Seller Pnts
List Price$740,000
Cont Price $ 650,000
Sold Price $ 550,000
Occupant Name Joan J Dayton
Listing Activity
Date Added 912012004 Tran Date 3/31/2005
Prev Price $ Cur List Pre $740,000
Pandlng/Sold Infonnatlon
Financing Conventional Selling Tenns
'Begin Eacrow 121712004
SoldlLlst 88%
S~lIIng Office/Agent Info
562-431-5627
List Date 9/20/2004
Org Price $ 740,000
DOM 78 COE: 1/31/2005
011 market 1/3112005
LPlSqFt $599,68
Comp 2.5%
SP/SqFt $
Closed 1/3112005
DOM 78
Sell Office Outside Area listinos(lOUl) Office Fax Res
Sell Agent Outside Area (LOUTAREA) Pager Cell V-Mall
Agt E-Mail Agt WSlte
'!11e accuracy of all Information reganfless of sourco, including bu1 not nmlllld 10 oqu.... footages and lot size, Is deemed reliable but Is not
guaranteed and should be Independently verltled through pellOnallnspectlon by end/or with the appropriata professionals. Copyright SoealMlS.
e
htto:/Iwww.temoo.socalmls.comlSearchDetaiI/ScriotsIPrtAlltFul/PrtAlltFul.asn.!lJidList-=95...fi/~1700fi
Full Report
Page 1 of2
-Residential.. - ,. .
Closed Sale 222 7th 5t
Seel Beach (lA)
Orange County (OR)
- Mon, Jun 5, 2006 10:17 AM
Seal Beach (SLB) Price $740,000
Zip 90740- TGNO ~
XSTS S/central & W/main Aeriallllap ~
e
P293417
Bad 4
Baths 3
View No VIeW
ASqFt2,108 Estimated YrBlt1981 Estimated
ALolSlze 5,875 Estimated Dim 50Xl17.5 Acras
Prkng Pari<ing Space, RV AccasslPari<in9, Garage Attached, Garage Door
Opener
Garaga 2 A Rem 2 Spe 2 Cprt RV Ace Range $: No
A 10+ Premium Throughoutl Gourmet K"rtchen With Granite Counters, Sub-zero, Embossed 11n Ceiling. Family Room With Fireplace,
Antique Mantle, Vaulted Ceiling, Oak Wet Bar And Franch Doors Lead To Lerge Entertainment Deck. Den Wrth Franch Doors Lead To
Large Private Patio With Jacuzzi Hot Tub. Los Aim. Sehls. Walk To Beach,shops,restauranls,parf<s,library,maln Sl
Rooms
Bedrooms Main Floor Bedr~om, Master Suite, Walk-In Living Rm Uvin9 Rm Entrance, Living Dining Formal Dining Rm. In
Closet Room Kitchen
Other Femily Room, Inside Laundry, Storage Space, Worf<shop, Den/Ofc, Separate Femily Room, Laundry In Garage
.A.menW..
Pool No Spa Private TV Cable TV, TV Antenne, TV Satellite
Pool Spa Dish
Appliances Ges Dryer Hook Up
Media: 2
Builder Tract (OT)
Model (0)
Slorles Two Levels
HOA Dues $ 120 +$0
Land Fee $
Flrapl Family Room Security No Intercom
Other Turnkey, Wet Ber, Barbecue Private, No Water
Softener
Interior/Exterior/Structural
H tI Fo-~ AI Coon~g Ceiling Fen, No Air FI Other
..a ng ''''''' r Conditioning oora
Interior Mise Cathedral-Vaulted Ceilings, Custom Window Covering
Roof Wood Shakes Plumbing
Cond AddiUonstAlter, No Sprinklers
Additions/After
Structural OtherCustom Buil~ 220V In Garage
Pstio Enclosed PsUo, Patio, Brick
DooralWlndows French Doors, Slained-Leacled Glass
Window
e
Lot/Community/Association
APNO 938-D!llHl60 Zoning
Lot Alley Access, Ocean Side of Highway 1, Not Horse Legal Homeowners AssoclaUon, Not In Flood
Properly Zone
Sewer In, Connected & Paid Water District
HS Dlst Los Alamilos Unified School District Eleman MCGAUGH
Amenities Assoc Insurance Paid, Assoc Maintenance Peid, Assoc Trash Paid
Units 3 HOA Oues $ 120 + $ 0
Land Fee Lae Trans $
Lot/Bloek/Traet
1/0100240
M..llo Roos Y
Yard Wood, Yard
Junior High Sch LOSA
Land Lae/Yr $
Financial Information
Tax Am! $4230 Total Assessed Value $ 407,975
Type Intaraat % Seiter Pots
Listing Office/Agent Info
List Office REIMAX Colleae Pari< R (0021) Office 562-594-9447 Fax Res
List Agent Kelly, Dian.. (ZKELLDIA) Pager 000-0000 c..n Primary 562-493-2294
Agt EoMall YlIi Agt WSile dianekellv eam
Priv Rmks Unique Property, Front House Totally Private, 2 CondoslndMdual1y Owned Off Alley On 50 Fl Wide Lol
Price Excl
Occupant Owner
Lae Ren
Lae Exp
Terme Cash, Cash To New Loan
1st TO $ Type Inlerast %
2nd TD $
Occupant Name
Usting Activity
Tran 0atlI7/1212002
Cur List Pre $799,000
l'endinglSold Information
Selling Terms
BegIn Escrow 61812002
SP/SqFt $ 351.04 Sold/List 93%
Selling Office/Agent Info
Sell Office ReMa. Colleae Pari< Reallv(0021) Office 562-594-9447 Fax 562-594-5955 Ree 562-493-2294
Sell Agent Diane Kellv (ZKELLDIA) Pager 00?-?oo0 C..II V-Mall 000-0000
Agt E.Man Yn Agt WSile dlanekellv,com
The accuracy of aUlnfonnallon regardless of sou...., including but not limited Ia square footages and lot size, Is deemed reliable bulls no\
9Osra_ end should be Independently verified through persenallnspecllo" by ""dlDr with the approprtlte professionals. Copyrtghl SoCalMLS,
List Date 513112002
Org Price $ 799,000
Calli Added 513112002
Pray Price $ 799,000
DOM 8 COE: 7/1112002
Off market 7/1112002
LPlSqFt $379.03
Camp 3%
List Price$799,OOO
Cont Priel $ 740,000
Sold Price $ 740,000
Financing
Closed 7/1112002
DOMB
e
1..'"""'-."_____. .
. .
,~
, Full 'Report
Scott Levitt
CONDO
Page 1 ofl
e
ResidentIal _ MDn, Jun 5, 200610:15 AM
CIDsed Sale 1493 Seal Way Seal Beach (SLB) Price $489,000
Seal Beach (1A) Zip 90740- TGNO mfg
Orange CDunty (OR) XSTS 12th Street/Dcean Avenue Aerial Map *"
P240178 Modia: 1
Bed 3
Bath01.75
View Voew
ASqFt 1,200 Other YrBlt 1985 EsUmated
ALDtSlzo 0 AssessDr Dim 30 X 90
Prkng Garage Attached, Garage ODDr Opener
',- ",.".. '. _ ' Garage 2 A Rem 2 Spc Cprt RV Acc Rango $: No
CDndD On Ocean Front-loceUon-loceUDn-lacaUDnl One Of 3 In Building Very Fow CondDa On Saal Waylfirst FIDDr UnR-steps To Sandl2
Car Tandem Parking W/Dpeners
Attached
RES
.-
...
.,1
"""rif'
....
,
Bulldor Tract Old Town (On
MDdel (0)
Slorlos One Level
HOA Dues $ 150 +$0
Land Fee $
Acres
Rooms
Living Rm Uvlng RDDm
BedroDms Master Suite
Other Inside Laundry
Dining Dining Ell
.t..menltil.1
~~~ ~~~ ~
Appliances Dishwasher, Freestending Electric Range, Garbage OlspDsal, Gas Dryer
HDok Up
Flrepl Living Sacurily ND Security
RODm System
other ND Water SDftener
Heating Wall Electric
RDDf WDDd Shakea
CDnd ND AdditiDns/Alter
Structural OtherTermite Clearance
1..terIDr/ExterIDr/Structural
CDDllng ND Air CDnditiDnlng
Plumbing
Sprinklers
F1DDrs Wall-to-Wall Carpet
PatlD PaUD, WDDd
DDDrslWlndDWlI
Land LseNr $
r1nanclallnfDrmotiDn
Tax Amt $0
2nd TO $ Type
Listing Office/Agent InfD
Office 562-598-5600
Pligot 562-795-0799
e
APNO 938-098.{)63
LDt NDt HDrse Properly
Sewer In, CDnneded & Paid
HS Dlat Los AlamltDs Unified SchDDI Dlstrid
Amonlties
Unl1ll3
Land Fee
HOA Duos $ 150 +$ 0
Lae Trans $
Torms Cash TD New LDan
1st TO $ Typa Interest %
Lot/CDmmunlty/AssDclatlDn
Zonln9
Legal ND Special Study Area
Water Dlstrld Yard ND Yard
Elamen MCGAUGH JunlDr OAK
Lat/BIDckfTract 1/1274
MellD RDDs N
High Sch LOSAL
Lea Ren
LeeExp
TDtal Aesasaad Value $ 0
Interest % Sellar Pnts
Fax Res
Coli Primary 562-431-1259
AgtWSlte bavtDwnreallv.cam
Llot OffIco Bovtown Reoltv (PB4047)
List Agont Kllsanln, Jim (ZKLISJOH)
Agt E.Moil Yn
Prlv Rmko Tenant Occupied W/2 YDung Children. ShDwn By AppDlnbnent Only.
Prlco Excl
Occupont Tenont
Occupant Namo
Listing Activit)
Trsn Data 6/26/2001
Cur List Pre $489,000
PendlnglSDld informatlDn
Soiling Torms
Begin Escrow 5/16/2001
SPlSqFt $ 407.50 SDld/L1st 100%
Soiling Office/Agont Info
List Date 51812001
Org Prlco $ 489,000
Oate Added 51912001
Prey Prlco $ 489,000
DOM 10 COE: 6/1912001
Off markot 6/1912001
LP/SqFt $407.5
CDmp 3%
List Prlco$489,OOO
CDnt Price $ 489,000
SDld Prlco $ 489,000
Financing
CIDsed 611912001
DOM 10
Soli Ollico Out Of Areo Oflice(P999) Office Fax Ros
Sell Agont - Out Of Arsa (OUTSIOE) Pager Cell V-Mall
Agt E-Mail Agt WSlte
The accuracy of an InfannaUDn regardless Df source, including but nDlllmlted to square footages ond lot s1zo, Is deemed reliable but is nQt
guarenteed and shQuld be independonlly verified through persanallnspecl1Qn by and/Qr wllh tho oppropriato professlQnals. CQpyright SoCaIMLS.
e
httn:/Iwww.tp.mnn.n..nlml...nm/Sp-..Tr.hnf.tnillS..nnt.lPrtAatF1l1IPrtAatF1l1 n.n?TTirU i.f=lln
f./ii..nnnf.
Full Report
Scott Levitt
CONDO Attached
Page 1 of 1
. Residential _ ,
Closed Sale 805 Ocean Ave 6
Seal Beach (111.)
Orange County (OR)
P392102 Media: 1 Builder Tract (0)
Bed 3 Model (0)
Baths 2 Stories Two Levela
View Peek-A-Bao VISW, PierVISW, VifNI
ASqFt 1,225 Assessor YrBIt 1975 Assessor
ALotSlza 0 ' Dim
Prkng Garage Attached, Garage Door Opener
Garage 2 A Rem 2 Spc Cprt RV Acc Range $: No
Small View 01 Pier And Ocean From Bay Window Seal This Is The Reer UnllAlI On The Second Level. All NawTile Floolll In Living,
Dining And Kitchen Tile Counter Tops In Kllchen. Skylight In Kitchen.
Rooms
Living Rm living Room
..
RES
Man, Jun 5, 200610:18 AM
Seal Beach (SLB) Price $820,000
Zip 90740- TGNO ~
XSTS Main And Ocean Aerial Map "'"
e
HOA Dues $ 150 +$ 0
Land Fee $ 0
Acras
Bedrooms Dressing Area, Master Suite
Other Laundry In Garage .
Dining Breakfast CountedBar
.\.menltJes
Pool No Pool Spa No Spa lV Cable TV
Appliances Dishwasher, Freestanding Gas Range, Garbage Disposal, Gas
Dryer Hook Up
Flrepl Uving Security No Intercom, No Security
Room Systam
Other No Wet Bar
lot/Community/Association
Zoning
Legal CC&RS. Homeownslll Associsllon, No Special Study AMa, Not
In Flood Zone
Sswer In, Connected & Paid Water District
HS Diet Los Alamitos Uni1led School Eleme MCGAUGH
District n
Amenities
Units 6 HOA Dues $ 150 + $ 0
Land Fee Lee Trans $
Heating Forced Air
Interior Mlsc Window Blinds
Roof Other-See Remarks
Cond No Additions/Alter
Structural OtherTermlta Clearance
APNO 937-033-006
Lot Not HOllie Property
Lend LeelYr $0
Terma Cash, Cash To New Loan
1 stTD $ Type Interast %
2nd TO $
Inlerlor/ExterlorlStructursl
Cooling No Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Sprinklers
Floors Ceramic Tile
Patio
Doors/Windows
e
Lot/BlocklTract
0/0/10415
Mello Roos V
Vard No Ysrd
Junior OAK
High Sch LOSA
Lae Ren
Lae Exp
Flnanclallnformallon
Tax Amt $921 Total Assessed Value $ 72,620
Type Interest % Seller Pnte
Llsllng Office/Agent Info
Office 562-799-2434 Fax
Pager 000-0000 Cell 562-884-7079
Agt WSlte
Llet Office FlllIt Team Real Esta (G107)
List Agent Ross, Joyce (PROSSJOY)
Agt E-Mail Yn
Priv Rmks Call Joyce To Show, Appointment Only 562-884-7079
Price Excl
Occupant Owner
Occupant Name Call Joyce To Show
L1sllng Activity
Tran Date 812/2004
Cur List Pre $850,000
Pan ding/Sold Information
FInancing ConvenUonal Selling Terms Standard Sale
Begin Escrow 712012004
Sold/List 96%
Selling Office/Agent Inf~
Sell Office PNdential CeUfomia Reallv(E524) Office 714-998-7250 Fax 714-998~25
Sell Agent Jeannie Averill (PAVERJEA) Pager 714-974-1547 Cell 714-974-1547
Agt E-Mail Yn AgtWSlte
The BcaJracy of aU Information regardless of source, Induding but not limited 10 square footages and lot size. Is deemed reliable but Is not
guaranleed and should be indapendenlly verified through p8r&Onal inspection by andlor with tha appropriate professIonals. Copyrlght SoCeIM~S.
Res
Primary 562-430-4018
List Date 5/812004
Org Price $ 850,000
Date Added 5/1412004
Prev PrIce $ 850,000
DOM 73 COE: 81212004
Off market 812/2004
LPlSqFt $693,87
Comp 2.5%
Liet PrlceSB5O,ooo
Cont Price $ 850,000
Sold Price $ 820,000
SPlSqFt $ 889.39
1...++-./1...............___ ____1___'_
'"
Closed 812/2004
DOM 73
Res 714-974-1547
V-Mall 714-974-1547
e
.'
1.,..... ..'''' . . _
, Full Report
Page 1 of!
Scoll Lovlt!
CONDO Attachld
Residential Man, Jun 5, 2006 10:18 AM
RES Closed Sale B09 Ocean Ave 4 Seal Blach (SLB) Price $620,000
Seal Beach (1A) Zip 90740- TGNO 826E5
Orange County (OR) XSTS Ocean Avenue/main Street Aerial Map *'
e
S345762
Bed 3
Baths 2
View No View
ASqFt 1,261 Assessor VrBlt 1975 Assessor
ALolSIze 0 Dim A
Prkng Garage Attached, Garage Door Opener
Garage 2 A Rem 1 Spc Cprt RV Acc Range $: No
This Is A Must See. Absolutely Adorable Seal Beach Condominium. Right Across The Street From The Seal Beach Pier. In A Desirable
Location Near Shoppln9, Beaches, Mein Stree~ Restaurants, And More. Beautifully Upgraded. Hardwood Floors, Crown Molding,
Granite KitchIn Counters,
No picture available,
Media: 0 Builder Tract r)
Model (j
Stories Top Lovel
HOA Dues $ 125 + $ 0
Land Fee $
Acres
RDoms
Living Rm
Bedrooms Mester Sulle ,
Othsr Fsmily Room, LaundrY In Garage
Dining Femily Kitchen
.\menitle_
Pool No Pool Spa No Spa lV
Appliances Dishwasher, Freestanding Electric Range, Gerbage Disposal, Gas
Dryer Hook Up, Microwave
Flrepl Family Security No Intercom, No Security
Room System
Other Tumkey, No Wet Ber
IntarlorlExtarlorlStructural
Cooling Central Floors Hardwood, Wall-to-Wall Carpel
Plumbing Patio
Sprinklers DoorslWlndowa
Lot/Community/AssociatIon
Heating Forced Air, Electric
Roof Tar and Gravel
Cond
e
APNO 937-032-004
Lot Not Horsl Property
Sewer In, Connected & Paid
HS Dlst Los Alamltos Unified School District
Amenities
Units 4
Lsnd Fee
Zoning
Legal Homeowners Association
Water District Vard No Vard
Elsmsn Junior
Lot/Block/Tract 1//10249
Mallo Roos N
High Sch
Land LseIYr $
Flnanclsllnformstlon
Tax Amt $
2nd TO $ Typs
Listing Offlcs/Agent Info
List Office Star Real Eststa Har (H45560) Office 714-840-1031 Fax
List Agent Daymude, Katrina (SDAYMKAT) Pager 000-0000 Cell 714-296-1588
Agt E-Mail Yo. Agt WSlta,
Prlv Rmks Shown By AppointmentOnty. Call Katrina To Ses 7141296-1586. Owne~s Are Asking ForA60 Day Escrow. No Lock Box
On Property, Pleese Do Not Disturb The Tenant.
Price Excl
Occupant Tenant
HOA Dues $125 +$ 0
Lse Trans $
LoeRen
LoeExp
Terms Cash, Cash To New Loan
1 st TD $ Type Interest %
Total Assessed Value $
Interest % Seller Pnls
Rls
Primary 714-298-1568
Occupant Name
Listing Activity
Tran Date 612812004
Cur List Pre $850,000
Pending/Sold information
Financing Convsntlonal Selling Tsrms
Begin Escrow 5117/2004
Sold/List 96%
SllIlng OffiCI/Agent Info
SIll OfflcI Star Real Estate Hlrbour Homes(H45560) Offlce 714-a40-1031 Fa,. 714-846-5249 Rls 714-514-8290
SIll Aglnt Russell Rudesell (SRUDERUS) Pager 000-0000 CI1I714-514-8290 V-Mall 714-840-1031
Agt E-Mail YGAgtWSltamoveuo1.com
The accuracy of alllnlonneUon regardles. of source, Including but not IImlled la sque... Ioatages end lot size, Is deemed relleble but I. not
guaranteed end should be IndependenUy ver11led through personal Inspedlan by end/or with the appropriate professionals, Copyright SaCaIMLS.
List Data 312212004
Org PricI $ 850,000
Dlte Added 312412004
Prev Price $ 850,000
DOM 56 COE: 6/2812004
Off marklt 6128/2004
LP/SqFt $874.06
Comp 2.5%
List Prlcs$850,000
Cant Prlcs $ 850,000
Sold Price $ 820,000
SPlSqFt $ 650.27
Closed 8128/2004
DOM 56
e
htto:/Iwww.temoo.socalmls.cnm/Rearch netRill~crint~lPrl A o1Fnl/Prl A o1F1,1 aqn?T TinT; qf=ll'l
"/,,nnnF.
Page 1 ofl
e
Proporty Detail Roport
139 6TH ST # 2, SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6142
Owner Information:
Own.. Name: GRIFFITH BOBBIE A GRIFFITH EILEEN A
Mailing Addrno: 139 8TH Sf. 2, SEAL BEACH CA 90740. 6142
Phon. Number: V..tlng Cad..:
Location Information:
Logal Description: BAV CITY LOTS 39,41 BLK5 (AND NLVll2 LOT 37 BLK5TR 115
County FIPS: 6059 APN:
Csneus TracllBlock: 0995114008 Thoma Bros. Mep':
Legs' Book/Page: 19~31 Tract.:
Legal Lot 39 Tract Neme:
Logs' Black: 5 Tawnshlp-Rango-Ssct:
Last Market Sale Information:
RscordlnglSalo Dal8: 11/13/19921
Sale Price: $422,439
Sale Typo: F
Document Numbor: 000000778220
DHd Typs: U
Tltls Company: FIOELITY NATIONAL TITLE
Soli.. Nsmo: QUINN JAMES MICHAEL
ItfN
19~31-36
828-E4
115
BAV CITY
1" Mtg AmountlTypo:
,., Mtg Term/Due Date:
,.. Mtg DHd Type:
2nd MIg AmountlType:
2nd MIg Deed Typo:
LInder:
$1
$1
Prior Sale Information:
PrIor ReelSale Date: Prior Sale Type:
Prlar Sal. Price: $ Prior Deed Type:
e Prior Doc Number: Prior ,.. Mtg Amt $
Property Characteristics:
Gra.. Ai'll.: 0 G.ragB Area: 0 Conebuct Typo: FRM
LlYlng Area: 7824 Gorago Type: 140 Heat Type:
Building Ares: 7824 Parking Typo: 140 Exterior woll: STU
Tatal Roams: D Parking Spacn: 0 Building Typo:
Bedrooms 0 Basement Ana: 0 Pool:
Bath(F/H): 010 Bsmnt Finish Type: Pool Type:
Vsar Built/Eli: 19851 Foundation: eRE Air Conditioning:
.ofStorln: 2.0 Roof Shape: FOO Style Typo:
Stories Typo Roof Cover: 025 Quality: CAV
Unite.: 8 Roof Framing: Flaor:
CondlUon: FA! F1replsco:
Site Information:
Zoning: R3 Acrea: 0.17 Fuol Typo:
Property Indicator: 22 Lot Area: Sower Typo:
Flood PansllD: Lot Width/Depth: OxO Water Typo:
County Uss: 2 Lend Use: 133
Tax Information:
Ass....d Value: $1,134,019 Property Tlx: $13,371 Ta: V..r: 2005
Lind Value: $843,706 Tax Arlie: 12007 Homnteed ExempUon:
Improvement Value: $290,313
e
httn"/ImAnq r1ia;tAlmAnrpntrAl rnm/nrnrlnf't1nn/rndn-rn/Qnt"AlrnlQ/"pr'\ 1 7 ?'c:.nr.Almhl 'html
'i/17nnn,;
Page 1 ofl
Proporty Ootall Roport
134 5TH ST, SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6121
e
Owner Information:
OWnor Nlmo: SAOOFSKI GORDON
MIlling Add....: 2030 RANGEVIEW DR, GLENDALE CA 91201. 1157
Phono Number: 8189411487 Vesting Codo.:
TRI
Location Information:
Legl' O,.crlptlon: BAV CITY LOT 34 BLK 5 ANO LOT 38 BLK 5(ANO N112 LOT 32 BLK 5 TR 115
Counly FIPS: 8059 APN: 199.031-28
Con.ul TracllBlock: 0995114008 Thorne. BI'OII. Mlp': 828-E4
Legl' Book/Page: 199-031 Tllcl#: 115
Legll Lol: 34 Tract Nlmo:
LogII Block: 5 Townohlp-Rongo-Soct
Last Market Sale Information:
RocordlnglSlle Olte: 07121/19721
Silo Prlco: S
Silo Type: F
Oocumenl Numbor: 001023800311
Deed Type: G
TiUe Company:
S.n.r Name:
101 Mlg Amounl/Typo:
10' MIs TennlOuo Olio:
,01 Mlg Deed Typo:
2nd Mlg Amounl/Typo:
2"" MIs Deod Typo:
LInder:
SI
SI
Prior Sale Information:
Prior RoelSolo Olio: Prior Silo Type:
Prlor Sale Price: S Prior Oood Typo: e
PrIor Doc Number: Prior ,., MIg Am\: S
Property Characteristics:
Gross Area: 0 Glllgo Areo: 1185 Con.trucl Typo:
Living Arel: 7578 GOllgo Typo: 010 Hell Type: 001
Building Arel: 7578 Plrklng Typo: 010 ExIorlor Will:
TolIl Roome: 0 Parking Spac.., 0 BuildIng Typo:
Bodroome 0 Basement A....: 0 Pool:
SllIt(FIH): 010 Bemnt Finish Typo: Pool Type:
VOir BuINE": 19831 Foundation: Air CondllJonlng:
. of StorIoo: 2.0 Roof Shape: Slylo Type:
Slorlee Type Roof Cover: Quall1y:
Unite.: 7 Roof Filming: Floor:
CondllJon: Flrepleco:
Site Information:
Zoning: ACNS: 0.17 Fuo' Typo:
Property Indlcolor: 22 Lot Area: Sower Typo:
Flood Pinel 10: OS02330228H Lol WldlhlDop1fi: 8h 117 Wetar Type:
Counly U..: 2 Land U.o: 133
Tax Information:
Asau.ed Value: S218,119 Proporty To: $3,923 Tax V.ar: 2005
Land Valuo: S78,888 Tax Ar.a: 12007 HomeolB.d Exemption:
Improvement Value: S141,231
e
Page 1 of 1
e
Property Detail Repo"
234 6TH ST, SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6164
Owner Information:
Owner Neme: B & C PROPERTIES INC
Mailing Add...e: PO BOX #1177, WILMINGTON CA 90748-
Phon. Number: V.IUng Cod..:
COI
Locationlnfonnation:
LogalDeecrlptlon: BAY CITY LOT 34 BLK 108(AND LOTS 38, 38 &40 BLK 108TR 115
County FIPS: 8059 APN: 199-051-05
Canaua Tract/Block: 0995115008 Thomea Brae. Map': 828-E4
Legal Book/Page: 199-051 Tract#: 115
Logal Lot: 34 Tract Name: BAY CITY
Logal Block: 108 Town.hlp-Rengo-Sect:
Last Market Sale Infonnatlon:
Raconllng/Sale Do,te: 01102/1998 I
Sale PrlCI: $
Salo Type: F
Document Number: 000000000392
Doed Type: G
TRio Company:
Sailor Namo: COOPER & BRAIN INC
1"' Mtg Amount/Type:
1" Mtg Tlrm/Due Dal8:
1" Mtg Deed Type:
2nd Mtg Amount/Type:
2nd Mtg Deed Type:
Linder:
$1
$1
Prior Sale Infonnation:
Prior RlelSale Dal8: 0410911978 Prior Sale Type: F
Prior Sale Price: $ Prior Deed Type:
e Prior Doc Number: 001189900841 Prior 1" Mlg Ami: $
Property Characteristics:
Groll. Ana: 0 Garage A....: 2717 Conatruct Type:
Living AI": 11809 Gorage Type: 001 Heat Type:
Building Araa: 11809 Parking Type: 001 Exterior wall:
Total Roo",": 0 Parking Spacee: 0 Building Type:
Bedrooms 0 Bas.ment Area: 0 Pool: Y
Balh(FIH): 010 Bemnt Flnlah Type: Pool Type: 300
Year Built/Elf: 19841 Foundatfon: Air CondlDonlng:
. 0' Storie.: 2.0 Roof Shape: Stylo Type:
Storlee Type Roof Cover: Quality:
Unite .: 17 Roo' Framing: Floor:
Condition: Fireplace:
Site Information:
Zoning: Aerel: 0.27 Fuel Type:
Property Indlcetor: 22 Lot Area: Sewer Type:
Flood Panel 10: 0802330228H Lot WldlhlDeplh: 100 x 117 Water Type:
County Use: 2 Land Us.: 133
Tax Information:
AI..sled V11IU8: $484,218 Property Ta.: $8,550 Tu Year: 2005
Land Value: $228,054 Tlx ArIIB: 12007 Homeltead Exemption:
ImprovelT18nt Value: $238,182
e
httn:llmRnc o;o;tRlmRnrpnfTRl rnm/nmrlnrtinn/r.ndnml.nr~lml.l"pr"i 17 ?/.nr~lml. h1Tnl
"ili7nnnl;
Property Detail Report
701 W OCEAN AVE, SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6147
Owner Information:
OWner Name: WALlACE RANDY LESTER
Mailing Add....: 501 OPAL OR. OAK POINTTX 75088- 2242
Phone Number: V..t1ng Cod..:
TRI
Location Information:
Legal De.c~ptlon: BAYCllY LOT 1 BLK7 AND LOT 2 BLK 7TR 115
County FIPS: 8059 APN:
Cen.u. T..cVBlock: 0995114004 Thoma. Broa. Map':
lotIol Book/Page: 199-03/ T..cU:
Logol Lot: 1 Tnet Neme:
Legal Block: 7 Townahlp-Range..sect:
Last Market Sale Information:
RocordlnglSale Dets: /
Sale Price: $
Sale Type:
Document Number:
199-033-16
828-E4
115
$/
Deed Type:
TItle Company:
Seller N.me:
,0' Mia Amounl/l'ype:
101 Mia TennlDue Data:
10' Mtg Deed Type:
2nd Mtg Amounl/l'ype:
2nd Mtg Deed Type:
Lender:
$/
Prior Sale Information:
Prior RlelSlle Da..:
Prior Sale Price: $
Prior Doc Number:
Prior Slle Type:
Prior Deed Type:
Prior 101 Mtg AmI:
$
Property Characteristics:
Gross A.....:
LlYlng A..a:
Building A..I:
Total Roome:
Bedrooms
Beth(FIH):
Year Built/Elf:
. 01 SlDrIoa:
Sto~11 Type
Units.:
CondlUon:
o
8225
6225
7
o
010
1981/
2.0
Garagl A....:
Garege Type:
Parking Type:
Plrklng Spe..s:
Ba.ement A....:
Bsmnt Flnleh Type:
Foundation:
Rool Shape:
Roof Cayer:
Roof Fremlng:
Fireplace:
v
955
010
010
o
o
Conltruct Type:
Heat Type:
Exto~or wall:
Building Typo:
Pool:
Pool Type:
Air CondlUonlng:
Style Type:
QUlllty:
Floor:
RAS
013
7
Site Information:
Zoning:
Proplrty IndlCIIDr:
Flood PansllD:
County Ule:
Tax Information:
Ass.ssed V.IUD:
Lind Value:
Improvement Value:
R-1 Acr8l: 0.13 Fuel Type:
22 Lot Arel: Sower Type:
0802330228H Lot WldthlDeptJi: 25 x 110 WI..r Typ.:
2 Land UI.: 133
$307 ,495 Property Tlx: $4,728 TIX V.lr:
$128,S03 Till Arel: 12007 Hamestead Exemption:
$178,992
,.. II
'I. ". .
Page 1 of!
e
e
BHO
STU
CNT
FEL
SPU
\WU
2005
e
e
Property Detail Report
133 10TH ST, SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6459
Owner Information:
OWner Neme: PRATHER RONALD RAY
Mailing Addre..: 48B4 LAKEMONT Pl, BOISE 10 83714- 3912
Phon. Number: Ve.tlng Cod..;
Location Information:
lega' Deecrlptlon: BAY CITY lOT 33 BLK 9(AN0 lOT 35 BlK 9 TR 115
County FIPS: B059 APN:
C.neue Trect/Block: 0995114002 Thom.. Bros. Mep I:
legal Book/Pege: 199-041 Tl'llctl:
Legal lot 33 Tl'llct Name:
Legal Block: 9 Townehlp-Range-Sect
Last Market Sale Information:
RecordlnglS.l. Date: D3I03I1972I
Sale Price: $25.000
S.le Typ.: F
Document Number: 001002400508
Deed Type: G
TIll. Company:
Seller Nams:
1.' Mtg AmounllType:
1"' Mtg T.nnlDue Date:
1"' Mtg Deed Type:
2nd Mlg AmounllType:
2nd Mtg Deed Type:
Londer:
Page 1 of!
TRI
199-044-06
82B-E4
115
$1
$1
Prior Sale Information:
Prlor ReelSale De"': Prior Sal. Type:
Prior S81e Price: $ Prior DHd Type:
e Prfor Doc Number: Prior 1"' Mlg Amt $
Property Characteristics:
GroSI Ar..: 0 Garage Area: 0 Con.truct Typ.:
living Area: BB95 Garege Type: He.t Typ.: D01
Building Are.: BB95 P.rklng Type: Exlerlor w.lI:
To"'l Roome: 0 Parking Sp....: 0 Building Type:
Bedrooms 0 Baslment Area: 0 Pool:
S.th(F/H): DID 80mnt Flnl.h Type: Pool Type:
Y.ar Buill/Eli: 19721 Foundation: Air Condlllonlng:
I of Storle.: 2.0 Roof Shepe: Style Type:
Storie. Type Roof Cover: Quellty:
Units I: B Roof Framing: Floor:
Condition: Fireplace:
Site Information:
Zanlng: Acru: 0.13 Fuel Type:
Property Indicator: 22 Lot Area: Sewer Type:
Flood Panel 10: OB0233022BH lot WldlhlDeplli: 50 x 117 Water Typ.:
County Use: 2 Lend U.e: 133
Tax Information:
AI.....d Value: $230,BOO Property Tox: $3,719 Tlx Year: 2005
Land Value: $52,773 To. Area: 12007 Homestead Exemption:
Improvement Value: $177,827
e
'httn.IITn'<l"c! rlin;tal,.,.,Q'..""pnt?al ,..nTn'n...nrll1M;nn',.."ofn....'con,..a.l......1.../..,lI:a....c;, '"1 ")/Qn,..Q1T't"11D lotfTn1
~/1..,nnn~
e
e
e
City of Seal Beach
California
OPERATING PROGRAM OF SERVICES BUDGET
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-07
CITY COUNCIL
Charles Antos, Mayor
John Larson, Council Member (Mayor Pro Tem)
Ray Ybaben, Council Member
Mike Levitt, Council Member
Paul Yost, Council Member
Gordon Shanks, Council Member Elect
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
John B. Bahorski, City Manager
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
Linda Devine, City Clelll
Malll K. Vukojevlc, PE, Director of Public Wollls/City Engineer
Keith A. Evanoff, CIMA, CRP, CRRA, Director of Administrative Services
June Yotsuya, Assistant City Manager
Lee Whittenberg, Director Of Development Services
Joe Bailey, Lifeguard Captain '
Jeff Kirkpatrick, Police Chief
Prepared by
Department of Administrative Services
Keith A. Evanoff, CIMA, CRP, CRRA
Director of Administrative Services/City Treasurer
:
.'
e
Budget Transmittal Letter
May 17, 2006
Honorable Mayor and City Council:
In accordance with the City Charter Section 1002, the proposed budget was transmitted to City
Council at least 35 days prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. The proposed budget for FY
2006107 being submitted to City Council will be subject to Council budget wort(shops and a public
hearing prior to adoption.
The budget for:mat is composed of three separate documents:
. FY 2006107 Budget - is the traditional budget document that City Council will review and
adopt as required by the City Charter.
. Capital Improvement Program - provides a five-year plan for capital improvements.
This five-year program outlines how the City will address its long-term capital needs. In
addition, the five-year Capital Improvement Program also contains the identified needed,
but unfunded, projects that the City must eventually address.
. Budget In Brief - summarizes the proposed FY 2006107 Budget and provides an
overview of the budget to the members of the Seal Beach community, For detailed
budget information, It is best to use the proposed FY 2006107 Budget.
Combined, these three documents ere the FY 2006107 budget package that is being submitted to
City Council for consideration and approval.
The proposed budget takes an optimistic approach to the City's short-term fiscal health. This is
due to the hard wort( over the last few years to reduce expenditures, restrain spending of one-
time revenues, and ensure that expenditures do not exceed revenues. This formula has resulted
in the City being able to fund reserves at acceptable levels and provides for a stable fund
balance. This year the City Council approved a one-year budget approach in order to change the
budget cycle. In many ways, this is a transitional budget that ailows the City to retum to the two-
year budget beginning In FY 2007/08. Although this will create some additional wort( by staff, It
will allow new Council Members more time to study the budget prior to undergoing a budget
process. The proposed budget reflects a carefully balanced budget that provides essential City
services at acceptable levels. On a cautionary note, the City still needs to examine its long-term
fiscal health.
e
\City Council Goals!
The City Council established four goals that provided the staff with a blueprint to guide the City
over the next several years, With the assistance of a facilitator. the City Council'developed the
foilowing four goals:
. Deliver responsive, user-friendly customer service
. Improve the quality of life for ail residents
. Create sustainable revenues for essential City services
e
1
e
IFinanclal Overview!
In FY 2006107, total General Fund revenues are projected to be $23.9 million. this is a $475,000
(approx.) Increase from FY 2005106. The Increase In revenues is primarily due to the 9.3%
increase in properly taxes.
The City's top three Generel Fund revenues sources continue to be properly tax, utility user tax,
and sales tax.
Properly Tax
" Ulllity Users Tax
, Sales Tax
FY 2006107
$6,699,000
$4,600,000
$3,600,000
In FY 2006107, these three General Fund revenues represent $14.9 million of the $23,9 million in
total General Fund revenues. The top three General Fund revenues are projected to remain
unchanged in FY 2006107. Over the next year, revenues are expected to remain fairly stabla
assuming no significant changes occur in the top threa General Fund revenues.
e
General Fund expenditures in FY 2006107 are budgeted at approximately $21.8 million.
Excluding transfers out to other funds, this represents an increase of approximately $2.1 million
over FY 2005/06 results. This increase is predominately due to the increase in salaries (e.g.,
Safety employees) and PERS obligations.
,
Water Fund revenue in FY 2006107 is projected at approximately $5.2 million. This represents an
Increase of $144,000 (approx), or 2.8%, over FY 2005106 results. Overall, the revenues in the
Water Fund are higher due to the water rate adjustment approved in August 2003. Expenditures
in the Water Fund are projected at approximately $3,5 million in FY 2006107. Expenditures in the
Water Fund increased by 3.8% in FY 2006/07.
The Sewer Fund is projected to have revenues of approximately $1.4 million in FY 2006107. This
represents an increase of 5% over the prior year due to the increase in water rates. Expenditures
in the Sewer Fund are expected to Increase by 9.8%. The Sewer Fund is projected to have a
positive net Income of $398,000 (approx). '
Tidelands Beach Fund revenues are estimated at approximately $1.3 million In FY 2006107. The
General Fund subsidy to the Tidelands Beach Fund Is projected at $874,000 (approx.) with
expenditures in the Tidelands Fund estimated at $1.3 million (this amount Includes $250,000 for
pier l'Ilnovation) during FY 2006/07.
IDevelopment and Economic Assumptions!
e
In the FY 2006107 proposed budget staff has developed conservative yet realistic revenue
estimates in large part due to the uncertainty of development within Seal Beach. Uncertainty
exists with the following developments: the Pacific Gateway Project, the Rossmoor Shopping
Center, the Regency Shopping Center, completion of Heron Polnte, and the PanatlonilHampton
Inn development. Staff cannot project when these developments will be on-line and in a position
to reflect full revenue potential. As a result, staff Is not comfortable projecting revenues from
these developments. Once revenue figures are available from these developments, staff
5
recommends that the current revenue projections be adjusted. As City Council is aware, the
Heron Pointe project (which was delayed for 18 months and Is just now nearing completion) is tha
main reason why staff takas such a conservative approach to revenue projections.
e
A consistent question has been raised concerning what can be done to improve Seal Beach's
long-term fiscal health. Seal Beach has Improved its fiscal health due to increased sales tax
generators, which resulted from the Bixby and a portion of the Rossmoor developments.
However, those revenues are starting to flatten and n is doubtful that a significant increase in
sales taxes will result from these mature Shopping centers, There Is no doubt that without these
two additional sales tax generators Seal Beach would be In a less favorable fiscal snuation.
Unfortunately, although the Bixby and Rossmoor shopping centers provide additional revenues
needed for the City, rising PERS rates have offset the anticipated benefits.
Over the long term, Seal Beach still needs to make decisions that will improve its long-term fiscal
heanh. Fiscal ,health for Seal Beach can be achieved by reducing expenditures, increasing
revenues or . combination of expenditure reduction and revenue Increases. This very simple
formula will bring long-term fiscal health to the City but will require difficult policy decisions to be
made. Unfortunately, the revenue option is very limited due to a lack of land within the City
available for development and the community's reluctance to make changes that may impact the
character of the community.
In California, the economic outlook is likely to remain stable in FY 2006107. According to the
Orange County Assessor in June 2001 the median home price was just over $300,000. In just
four years, the median home price has more than doubled to $621,000. Within Seal Beach the
2005 median home price is $769,000. However due to the large number of pre Proposition 13
homes, the City is not recognizing the added property taxes. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for
Califomia is projected to range from 5.0 to 5.2% in fiscal year 2006107. A larger source of concern
is the cost of raw materials that has increased dramatically and negatively impacts the City's
capital improvement projects. For example, concrete prices have risen 28% during the time
period 2003-2005. Diesel fuel costs have increased by 90% between 2004-2005. Staff has
significantly raised fleet fuel cost in anticipation of gasoline exceeding $3.00 a gallon. According
to the Chapman Economic Forecast 2006, the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Is
expected to grow at 3.4% rate. In Orange County the economic forecast Is for continued growth.
but at modest rates. The forecast by Chapman University calls for a small decrease in housing
prices, but no sudden drop in the housing market. With the national and state economies
growing slowly, the proposed budget has conservatively projected revenues and expenditures.
e
IAcknowledgemen~
The Executive Management Team of the City deserves special recognition for their efforts in
daveloping revenue and expenditure projections that meet the needs of the community. The City
extends a special 'thank you' to the Staff in the Administrative Services Department for their
effort in completing the budget while simultaneol!sly managing a growing number of significant
projects. Their long hours and necessary teamwork required to bring this budget to completion Is
greatly appreciated.
Respectfully submitted:
f~h
John B. Bahorski
City Manager
e
6
e
Analysis of Major Revenues
As the spreadsheet on the opposite page reflects, the total estimated revenues and transfers in
from other funds for all City Funds for FY 2006107 is $43,300,618. General Fund revenues
totaling $23,915,720 are not restricted and therefore can be used to fund the operating
expanditures of the City such es fire services, police services, public works, recreation and
general government administration. The Special Revenue Funds, CapRal Project Fund,
Enterprise Funds and Redevelopment Agency Funds revenues are restricted and cannot ba used
for general operating expenditures.
Analvsls of Maior General Fund Revenues
ProDertv Taxes
e
Property Taxes account for $6,699,000 or 28% of FY 2006107 General Fund revenues, The
California voters adopted Proposition 13 In 1978 that changed the definRion of taxable value for
all real property in the sllita. Proposition 13 defines tha taxable value of rear property as factored
basa year value or market value on lien date (January 1"'), whlchavar Is lower. The base year
value of property acquired before March 1, 1975 is the 1975 assessad value and the base year
value of proparty acquired on or after March 1, 1975 Is usually the market value when the
property was transferred and or purchased. The factored base year value of properties that have
not changed ownership since the prior January 1 is calculated by adding the value of any new
construction and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increase but no more than 2% per year.
Included in Property Taxes, other than secured, are unsecured property taxes, supplemental
assessments, Homeowners Exemption, property tax in-lieu of VLF and property tax related
penalties and Interest.
2003104
2004105
2005106
2006107
Amount % change
4,074,918
5,698,m
6,127,896
6,699,000
28.5%
7,0%
8.5%
7,000,000
6,500,000
6,000,000
5,500,000
5,000,000
4,500,000
4,000,000
3,500,000
2003104
2004/05
2005106
2006107
Budoet AssumDtions - As the table and graph Illustrate, the City experienced a signlflcant growth
in property tax revenues from FY 2004105 resulting from the 'Triple Flip. which replaced Property
Tax In-lieu of VLF. Increases after FY 2004105 ate the result of new development and increases
in assessed valuation resulting from sales of property.
e
Utility Users Tax
Utility Users Tax eccounts for $4,600,000 or 19% of.FY 2006107 General Fund revenues. The
Utility Users Tax rate is charged to customers of electric, naturel gas, and telephone companies
to raise revenue for general governmental purposes of the City. The Utility Users Tax rate is 11 %
of the custome~s monthly charges. The utility companies collect the tax and remit them to the
City.
31
,
.
4
5
6
7
B
9
:J
1
2
3
~
)
3 .
7
3
l
)
I
e
City of Sea. Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of Apn119, 2006
4. Windows. Some cities ban windows on the side walls of home to protect the
privacy of neighbors; however, there are many window styles and glass types
currently available such as opaque glass, including frosted and tinted glass,
patterned glass, and glass blocks, which can provide both light and privacy.
5. Architectural Review. To e.nsure adequate application of bulk requirements, some
jurisdictions have initiated additional review and regulation requirements for
additions of second stories or any expansions greater than a set percentage of the
existing building area .
In conclusion, Mr. Whittenberg presented Staff recommendations for consideration by
the PC for managing mansionization within the City of Seal Beach, as follows:
1, Limit any mansionization regulations to the RLD-5000 zoned properties only (the
.HiII," the .Coves," College Park East, and College Park West other tha.n potential
changes to roof style requirements that may be applicable within Old Town).
Beyom;f these areas, in the opinio'n of Staff, the pattern of existing development, lot
sizes and related setback and lot coverage requirements are sufficient enough that
the perceived impacts of new home construction is substantially reduced.
., .. Modifications- to roof style-provisions' for'the-front of-the structure, 'even'within -the' - ..- .. ,..
Old Town RMD and RHD zones, would have some significant impacts on reducing
the perceived bulk along the street frontage.
2. Focus on the "incentive concepts" that encourage flexibility and innovation in
preparing development plans for new 2-story residences within the City, as
discussed above regarding .Second Story Regulations. and .Rooflines., or
consider requiring additional side yard setback for height above a certain level. If
the Commission determines these suggestions are worth pursuing, Staff will retum
with additional information at a later study session.
He then presented photographs of some of the larger homes within the City, followed by
a brief review of the Supplemental Staff Report provided to the Commissioners at
tonight's meeting. (Supplemental Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning
Department.)
Chairperson Shanks commended Staff for the work done on the issues brought before
~~h~ .' .
Public Comments
Chairperson Shanks opened for pUblic comments.
Tom Arthur stated that his concern is that the recommendations for additions not be too
restrictive. He suggested including "grandfathering clauses" that would allow current
homeowners to use the building standards in place at the time of their home purchase.
9 of 12
.-
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20--
21
22
?-~
....
,
20
27
28
29
30
31
~2
~3
14
15
16
17
18
i9
,0
,1
2
3
4
"
City of SBllI BBllch Planning QJmmission
Meeting Minutes of Apri/19, 2006
Chairperson Shanks -noted that the request for grandfathering clauses was previously
proposed, and had not been implemented, so he doubts that it would happen now. He
said that the proposed regulations don't appear to be too restrictive, particularly
conceming Old Town.
Sarah Fuller stated that her concern is with limiting the height of homes in Old Town.
She invited the PC to tour Landing Avenue from 12th Street to Seal Beach Boulevard
and to consider whether it would be appropriate to have the same rules apply to corner
lots as for those in the interior lots. She stated that having third story developments on
comer lots changes the character of the neighborhood.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Shanks closed public
comments.
Commissioner- Comments
Commissioner Deaton stated that she does not believe mansionization is a problem in
Old Town; however, whatever is done, must be looked at from Old Town's perspective
in order to eliminate the cookie cutter look that is occurring. She referred to the plans
.. 'presented for-1he'development''Of homes'at'-400-Marina'€lrive; andnnoted.that,this is" -... '" -.-
leading to "row houses" in Old Town and everything of character is going, and she _
would like to address this problem. _
Commissioner Roberts stated that the secret to this process is to not make it so
restrictive that it infringes upon property rights; however, the City does need to look at
this issue, otherwise the City will be overbuilt within 20 years. He stated that he agrees
with the re~mmendations made by Staff, and believes incentives can be used to help
control mansionization. He would like to see more discussion on ~offsets" and setbacks,
specifically, second-story setbacks, and he believes the issue of flat roofs is a concern
that needs to be looked at.
Commissioner Ladner asked if the lot coverage ratio would change if a property were
made up of two lots. Mr. Whittenberg stated that you cannot build across a property line
unless you apply for a parcel map to create one lot, in which case, the requirements for
side yard setbacks increase in size.
Commissioner O'Malley presented the aspect of the environmental impacts from
mansionization. He stated that in Old Town it has created a problem with light and air
circulation. He proposed that one of the incentives should involve ensuring that any
new construction allows adequate light and circulation of air to neighboring homes, He
indicated that his main concem is with providing adequate drainage with new
construction on The Hill and in CPE, as there are problems with flooding in these areas
during winter storms. He noted that building on the entire lot takes away a lot of green
areas and other permeable surfaces, which contributes to less absorption and more run
off. He encouraged creating incentives to leave more green space when new
construction is to be done.
e
10 of 12
..,.
"'~
r-:
..,
'"
.;s
f
'OlE
-", II)
.. inW
... 0 >-
mt
....
J !'
,~ '<
01 .. ~Ift
.5! ,5>-
... ~
'"
~. ..
)!l .9l
"N 11ft
c...
\1..6 '0>-
c E N
iig ....
in
~ 9-
{l
r "6
t:!
'OiC ....11)
e XO "w
~~ 1>-
2" a
1 ~
c
0
in
'"
, "co 1ft
in
i'" "'>-
\
~ 1$~ ~II)
cl)w
CD .;s.~ ..,>-
e -
c.
0 ~
-
CD !
,
0 r ~~
..
.- -x
c: ~
'=?
0 ,
J ~
l-
e ~ ~~
CD
~ iLl 0
! 1100
en ~S
oS ~ ti
C') .g
""" UJ.e
~ 0 ..,c
>>- ~}!
I~
.- C'\l
1U..:
o'<tCOOlt'l'<tocomN
OC')CO'<tOCO'<t.....r--C')
""':C'!CJ:!C!~~""":q~"I"'"
.,....T""O'C""'"~C\I.....T"""T""
$!oo'<tcomlt'llt'llt'lON
1Q_\30Nr--ONmr--OCO
..COCOlt'lCONCO'<t'<tr--
iit-:ri..;r-:r-:":uiui..;r-:ui
.....
.Ii
II)
Gl
N
in
g
"CI
:i
m
QCOCO.....lt'lOOlt'lCOCOCO
CQC')C')C')COlt'lIOr--OO.....
= CQ.m.m.m_N_r--.r--.CO_'<I:.'<I:.CO.
.liIQNNr--r--~NIO'<t'<tlt'l
II)
~
II)
'0
..J
q)t'lT""'\O(f)""ltT""N
.,QCOCOCOCOCOCOr--
:Qmmmmmmm
:1(\1 T"""'r"'T"""T"'" "'r""'T"""T"""
m
..
os
~
'<tcor--
o Or--
oom
NN.....
l/I
C
o
l/I
.;:
OS
c.
E
o
o
€'
Gl
C.
o
..
D..
ai
i'GiGi ~Gii;
Q.GJculi-1D;CO<<DaJ
1~~~~~~~8~~~
._....r=.r=II)CI)CI)O.r=.r=CI)
~u~(;)5~.c:>o~:5&
CD.~T""""""COLOCD>""""""CX) f!
o -S N CO m '<t '<t ..... C') 'N N Gl
"~NNC')C')(>,)0C')N""'3
D..CI).,.....,....,........N.......,....,.....,...........
iO CO N CD
_ Q) 0...... ......
l5 e..ee ~
"C N
c -
::l
-
1:::
~
Gl
lJ
C
l!!
~
c
Gi
z
~~
CDCDClO(I')
"""om,,,,"
lXlCD",,"
~~ .
...
I:'Il:'IlXlI:'I
CD"''''Cl>
COI:'I",,"lO
('1..(1')...,.... ,..:
I:'Il:'IlXl 1:'1
CD (') Cl> en
ti lXl. 1:'1. """ It)
CD N ('l"),... ......-
'e-
a.
"C
Gl
III
o
Co
e
a.
...;
u.. 0 000
. co """ r-- r--
c::rClC:) 0.,.... 0
U) M "'" 1:'1 C
CD ....
:is
1lI
~
<
in
,..:
....
....
~
It'l
~
l!!
::I
ti
2
-
U)
...
-
-
o ... .L- ...
...J 0 0 0
G)..Q5!c
cu..u..u:
01i;-g"E!
....1:'1'"
.... lXl
.... '"
r-- lXl
f'i ~-
~
a:
u..
en
l::!.
rn .... ... ....
_ 000
a 000
.....u:u:u..
F-~ u; -g "E
.....1:'1(')
e
e
Cl>
.;:1;
r.:
e
..
VJr}>-'
I
\ -
-
, .
""~:.~r'
c.
.... .... .......~.~r
.
l
, ~
. -
-
-
....-
\~
. ..
e
e
.
\
i
,
i
/\
I
\
I
.\-'
,,/ I
.' I
- I.
_ /'1
/ I
./ I
I
I 'I
..
~
-
e
I
I
I
I
I
- e
t
e
e
~
~
,
~
^
,
I,
,
...
.--..;-
. ;;....4,.~~;...
. rh....?:~.
v.t<'~
.. l'~'; ..r';., :r
__ ~.!'~;~~~. r -~..:
\ \ \
...
e
e
-
ef..-.. .
....... ,.
'..;., .
\~.:~~:::. ,. ~~.
e
/.:2:2 J I IE. 'Slj2-c:E)
e
.
e
~ - -' - .. .'
"
, ' e
, '
, ' '
.. '
.. ~J- VlJ I D~
C~I/l?\~ )J
e
. - ~. .'
- . ~ -..
'j}J1 I~
~( _'3 ~+ZX'1'
e
e
e
e
~
e
) "3!1-) S; \ vFEJ-
- ... ."
.. .
e
,
\ "3 \7-1 S p'" -C:El"
e
e
Public Hearings re:
Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 ond
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160
City Council StalfReport
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 6
WRITTEN DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 7
: IN OPPOSITION TO CUP 06-4
e
e
Ol?-4 Appcal.CC StaffRcporl- 132 Thirlccnth
11
e
BRUCE W BOEHM
PO Box 155, Seal Beach, CA 90740-0155
13114th street..... Seal Beach, CA 80740
Home: (582) 431-0211 Celt (714) 337-2388
bruceboehm@ealthlink.net
June 7, 2006
Chrisly D. Teague, A1CP
Senior Planner
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Dear Christy,
My hlllll8 at 131 14th SInIet sIs cfueclly across the auey from the pnlpOSBlI cIev8IopmBnl
cleague@ci..seal-beach.ca.1IS
(562) 431-2527 EXT. 316
Re: Proposed development at 132131h St, Seal Beach
e
A three sloIy, mono6thic condOminilA'll compIeK in the middle of our block surrounded by one &
two sloIy small85idenliaJ income properties _uId be inconlpaIitje with the neighbomood.
The Planning COmnEsion should deny SCott LeviIl and his 132 13th SlnIelIlmiled Dabi6ly corp.:
1) a concIiIion8l use pennil to coll5bud a two unit condo compIeK with a common wan; and
2) a pemdl to sub-divlde the lot into two parcels (a charlge to the Cily's plot map).
This siluafion represents anolhBr case of an out-oMown developer attempling to change the
chaRIcIer of our neIghborf1ood In 0RIer to maximize their profit at the ....pej1Se of neighboring
llt<lperty owners.
SUN reporteJ Charles M. Kelly d=wibad a sIudy s] s sian held during the Ap11119l11 PlannIng
Cuo,..lildon meeting in which CIIy Development DinIcIor Lee WhillenbBIg ".."",uuended the
WIIl,lission Iimil mansionizalion l8gulalion to CBdllin oil:dricls spedIicaIly IllIduding Old Town.
"For Old Town, he (Lee) thought there should be ,esb idlonS on roof styles. (The staff report said
a fIaIlllOf can add to the apparent mass of a house and suggesled that a ban on fiat roof houses
migtII help relieve some of the problems reIaled to mansionizlllion.)"
Is that it? Simply banning fiat roars and requbing setbacks to create a "IluiIding envelope" wilhclul
Dmiling building size or reducing building height Is NOT going to "relieve some of the problems
reIaled to mansionil.alion" and stop these three (3) stoIy mUlRlbudies from IUining our town.
In addition. LevIlt's proposal nKluces parldng to one 446 aqua'" foot 2 Car Garage. A tandum
gaRIQe is NO subslilute for the CWTent four (4) garages that each open to the alley. The proposed
loss of perking is Iudic:rous.
e
The PIenning COmmIssIon should:
1) Umil aD houses and COI'IdoBto a maximll'll height of 25 feet reganIBss of lot size. OR
Umlt three sloIy slrud:ures to the Avenues. Main Street and the Main St sides of 8th &
10tt1 SIreBlS. AND
2) Llmit liv8bIe square footage. I}..evIlt's JlI'lltJOlied -3,800 sq.fl per condo unills too BIG).
3) RequI", four glll1llle parking spaces that open to the alley for lots >5500 sq.fl
Should the Planning COmmission approve these penniIs 8lIllin5l the wishes of the neighbors, we
will request an appeeI before the Cily Council. What procedure we will need to follow?
Sincarely,
~~
e
e
e
234 14th Street
Seal Beach, Ca
90740
June 7, 2006
CllYot $181 &each
.lUM - 7 2006
Development Svcs,
Dear Planning Commission,
I have lived in Seal Beach for 26 years and have certainly seen some
changes. Many good changes and some not good.
I am aware of a CUP coming before you concerning a 3 story building
on 13th street~ My understanding it is to be a condominium of 2 units, I
am very much AGAINST condos in our Old Town Area.
I also think that building a 3 story unit in the rear of a 50 foot lot is the
same as giving a CUP for someone to build a 3 story on a 25 foot lot.
The configuration is simply tumed around.
I am opposed to this building,
Sincerely,
Ma~nKatz
Dear Mr. Antos,
-1 L lot
e
e
Congratulations on your re-election as our
Old Town councilmember,
I would like to voice my opinion on overbuilding
or, "mans ionization" . I enco~age you to maintainJ
and enforce,the 25 foot limit on houses and enforce
laws that provide that a certain per cent of a property
must remain available for prop'er drainage. If a person
wants a bigger, or higher, house go to Manhattan
Beach or some other over developed beach area. No
more V ARIANCE8 that allow over building.
25 feet is 25 feet.
Also, it seems to me that if the city makes one hour
parking on Fourteenth 8t. and Fifteenth 8t., between
PCR and Landing, and, enforce it ,the city could make
a lot of money off the people that patronize
MARE and park on our residential streets.
.Y~~~
~o7 14m. -
e
)-----
~; ~LE COP~'
PB'rITIOB 'to DBBY CUI' 06-0& AT 132 139 S~BT
e The~ proposed cond01llinium use with three story construction is not compatible with
the neiqbl)orhood. .
If ~pproved the buildinq would exceed the present city code by 2.565 eg: ft for this
property preatinq more density.
In :Qiet.l of the 48 properties with widthe of 50 feet or more on1y 6 current1y bave
- ..--3. S1le:&Y-BUaGl1;ur-ee-.;md..theee -we;,:e-bu~"n-the-early...19:l.O!.s-before_ownl!.Ul..1TD1untari~".down_._....
zoned their properties to 1~ densitiee in 01d Town,
- ..._.___...-fte.:pl~....i"g.--cammieein" bIOS ...... i.."........sin9_conc......... ......garding.J;~.i..ll.UJ.:tY q;f ..____.__.
structures in Ol.d TQwn neighborhoods end have denied similar requests,
__ .._ ____ _.....The-.appl i....+-in.. .is....nat...cDJ1uataJ1.t;...1d.tIl-tb.ILwU.ql!hn....hnnd..ll.i.~!L there ,ave been no . ..____.
other simi1ar two unit co........i..iums constructed in the 01d Town. '.
/3.--
~-_.
. ..
. ,
----'---~ 42!iJi~t~~-J;j;{k,Adi-JJ~-
- ,,~ . '~'rtl:.y~.rg~4-(-f-..9.RZ-La____.-....._.._----.
"'~_'_J - -"::K - ___jy'_~5<______-It.t!(.. d~~~C?04111)..,_:.._._...__.__:- ----..
H_~ ____~-1!!!L?p.L_ ~l,5~~-~EI,ui"_~ 7:10___
~-.' ".- . 7).l~Ld ~a.y~-ik4-2d2~.?2...-_~
f.... .- .!It. -ffN.--.dJtl-~('[.&~(t :9A~(~_2Ql..$(6__....
. __~~.<;~8_~- _J~~' <::-.~~.~._......._' ..-__. -~1r~--f:(:?7Y:.Qn.._.
:-._.._~. ~ ". --. --... ~;;--~&~7J~. .--...--Sf:.-----.-9Di:~t).-.-.-...
--O~-- "..--. ...--.,--.,,-.--.-~..:...-.. ---, -..-~-_..._---".-,-.- ..--.- .----..-- .-.--.-.
_L~___. ,_.' _~'_. - -.-..L]k--..-S~A_i..~--_._-_---5.....t.---..1() lX 0____..__.___.
_l!_M", -... .. ' ----17 b ._~~~.tJ. ........__..__.5..6,_.......:lp.1.t/.1L__._._ u_
_L ___:. ._____.n\b..\~_~.1J.j~ .__.__._...._..~~_.__. ...faZ&J.___."'.._.,
.__..JJ,31s:Mif - .-.-----~--gt21~d
/133~~ .----~-Ld~ 94"74__
~...--~_____1_... _~.____.__n.__.._____....... "_"_0___ _......____..___ __ ....___ ...._._._.._,..._.__ .__ .._~_
......----t----....--.-------.___.____._._. ,__...___~....___..__._._". _....____._ __......__.,~..._....
__ ".0'__, __.________..______....____.___.__._.._____._..____........_.._.--."'""-"___________________
-..-..----..---..---..---------....-.-------...-------. .-...- ---..--......-- -----.-- -,.....----.-......-...- -- ...-----
e--
.-----..-.-------.-----..--..--.....--..-------.---....-..--..-..--....._- -....-- .. ...
--.-------...--..--------. -- ---..----. .-...-.._~._______..._..._~.._____._ _.____......_ "N .........._...___.,. ..
-~------- _._--~-....---
-.-__......_____...N.._
-..--..-----
.-----.-.------..----..- .~...._-_......----_.- ---.
.. . .-. '. .... ..
PftJ:2'J:Olll 2'0 DBIm CUP 06-04 U 132 13!1!B S2'BBft e:
The"proposed coo"nmini_ use with three story construction is not compatib~e with
the neighDorhood.
J:f lWProved the bu.i~ding wou~d exceed the present cit]' code b]' 2,565 sq ft tor this
property :creating more deDsity.
In :airt.l of the 48 properties with wid1:hs of 50 f_t or more onl]' 6 =-tly have
. 3-..toJ!y~aI>=es and ..these .1ftQ:e.-bW.lt-on.-t:he..earJ..y. .19.7.11.!.e..befare-0wne2:a. :mlJmta2:ilJ!;...dawn...
zoned their properties to lower deDaities in O~d !!'oWn.
...... .... . ._\rhe.;'p]...nn~rg cClllllliasiDD \I". ..had. in........"..tnq .c-_rnR .r.egardjng ..~~nt:U.t.y..~. _._..__
structures in O~d TolIn neiqhborhooda 8JId have ""n i e" s i...i, ar requeste.
, . .....__ . --!I!he!\.IIPP' i",..Hnn ...ilLnat..consi.Btan~~J:Ju!L,.:1~~lL 'Lh..~. P.no_~q,.!!9_...._,
other silllilar two unit c^""",",iniDIIIS constructed in the Old Town.
~'~~~:. '-.'~~_..1&~'_:-~<<l7S-:L&~~~..=....:.~~~~~
- -''''' ..__.l/A-..~Jd7f--~"-- -.!:.------.-... ...- -""
, .__......__... ______._... __..___.,._..._ C-d..'(jg". - .f__...
~~.. _-_....._...~1..__1tIt....sfr.~t__....~,e.aL.e:t(~_==
. .-i:Lq _....$t/L~tl'(~L._SeaL 8..eacJ _....__
--]j'-'''~ ..-.........-..-.--..-...- --. ,.-----._..-.---~A~.---e
......._-'__. ~~_..../ Lf_.5.fh. Sb.e<:L._ ..SJ~___..._.
.- -.. ----...: ........ .." ----- ---. ...-.... -----.. ""h_.-_.-..--SE..~--.9.d.~.ffJ
.....- ---..~_. .. .---.- ...........- .....--.. --..- -" _...:::~~
\:l. '"_''''' ___.. _...._.... _._.... ____.......__ .___..._. _'_"" ._,,_,,___..._. ._...~~~. .---.....
II._'.._~_L::..,,~._. _ _. _-=~=_ ._JJ:_f".!P_ _.. .t-f1____ .._. ---&JaL.D~I1.r~~~~~
... -- ----"".. -' ..-..-,.- -'-..---" ----".---...-.~.~.:T--... ..-
._==.J(jf'=-ZiJ,blJ.;~=- ~~J::~.
d'l'.-t7=.---.--........ .dQ 1......_CF!.tfJtuL 1r!L(L .- ._s.e.~LEe.:.rl.?JL _."
. . .~/~) , _.___.___.___.._., .__,__..._______..___S~.!Zd~.._.
IZ.. ..___ ~_a ~n ___ ___ _Un. ----.-~8. ~9f)'PkL-
16._ ..;.,OJl.~t'6,oj __~ ____._~. ___..____._n .. ."" ___ ...--_ .__ _ .......-:S.-B....-9..cl.?dd:...-.._..
~f~-:#..-_a~tr-_- -.----.-, -.-,-.------------ _u -.-S8:~fJ()Jit/.---e
.__.___.._ 4~_.. ._..~ ~~____.___... _' ... ...._ __. __'" _. ___._.____..___S. LJ.__'1._Z_ II;,
A~ L '(~'---"'-I' 0. ~. . -. -
~~.~~.~..
~-----~. ~
. CAI..O
3_._._ ... ~_. ..__ '_
1
f ._...~
I~ .. .__._
'J. _... ,__~qjd,
~._~. - -.--.--"l"'""'"-..-----..--.---.-.....---.. ....__....---....._....-_._~-___._.___._~.__... ...-- --..-......__.....__........
.,.-.... ._..._.__....._......____..____._..._... _..._..______.___... ___...___.._._____.___ ., r __.___...._.___.._
'. l'B'.I:ZirZOB !rO DBIIY CUP 06-04 A~ _ 132 139 SftBB~
.. Tbe .proposed C~"tvninium use with~e S1:~ons1:J:uCt:iOD is not campa1:ib1e with
., the ne.ig!l't)orboolS.
If 8pproved the bui1di.11g 1I011l.d uceed the pr&eeIl.1: city code by 2.565 sq ft for this
property creating JDDre deDsity.
In ~ist,l of the 48 properties with widths of 50 feet or more on1y 6 current1y have
. ..-3-fl-tery-.$uctm:es-lIDIS---t.bese-wm:e. bu!J.1;. em- the-.ear111'.-19:1.O-'.s bet...... ga..........1ZDJ.untarJ.J.:r-.dawn ..
zoned the:.f.r proper1:i.es 1:0 l.aIIer densities in 01d ~.
TIle ,p1l1J1Ding cammissicm. haS. hArt in">eeasi..Dg. .ccmcerna.%&gardiJlg: I::I"'\llP":t.tbiUt.y_ J:It.. _., --. .
structureS in 01d 'loIII1 ne.f.ghborbaocSs BJId have -,.,.. ed simil.ar reqDellU.
_._, ,___ __~~eppJ.icatian.. is....uat.,.cone.f.Jl.t,eDt:,.nt;h_~...JIdgb,b.Qx:~Jl!!v,gO_j;b!ml_ .~~_~.!lJ! M -._ __.
other simiJ.ar two unit CO'ld_i..41D1S constructed in the 01d ~OWD.
~:7_ ~::2P1f~-.~ln~;~=Ji:~-=:::: :::i?!~;'.~:':
L h_li~___ .\'~. -,_._.l..::o_.J~~__&.-L:____.. __ __.__u__. ____~J:_B.J..1._ .-____ --
.. ' A~(J .
~....... _ .. ,~::.._-e......._.__.!m.._,,~k..~..L..._ ._____. ___,__.. _____'33U'J!')C.._ ..--____.
~_..-- --4.4;-----.-...----- !5.Q _-'J.~_~-... ...---- --.-----.-----1; 'rr:.~-eP~--- --.--_.-
~-.: ~ .--..~~.....-.-.l~-..I::tJ:T-.- "'-'-' ~~;f~~~;t~JCL.-....
.u._~ '~f2 . .J'l:Idz__... uuu__..2Lft(jJ>. ....
1 ." --::. ..":1!d~lt~~..____...__. _ ...._ !.~?:._/3_:;t:..'"" ____...__..____~~i-d.f.:-:':.lf.,s..r:.
I~__ ._$!I_~;.--:1R~-~-~-..-...-. _-_ _/t!_/...~__~ ---_._or .___ ___.___.._~,_~).-- tl.:?.:.. .-,,~ s-~.
;'~_:~~'~=: L~~__ .... --. -- '----f/ a..Vt--1~---- ---- - -- ~;J-~r.--~ -;~-"=
i.t.~ 11:::!:: --. -. cJ,... 13.. --. _u. _.1.;..... __.2. 'L . . 1.5.. .
~ :___ ~~~__ ~.._.JJX_~..J..:r:.~_..,.. ..,... __.___ U-~ ?-).$:~_~:__-~7.C.$..4-__'
':L _. ~~__~l..~.__~~~ .___ ._____,~.b,; ).-~,~-,-"""",6..D-~
I:> ( __.. _.._~__. .. __ 1..5.5'- /;;>-;-# ~ fr;~ V.3I-32.ri
_..- ... "'--'---"---I{'---''f/ -- .-. -. --.------- u__... _.___n__ --"---.- - . n'_'
'.~=jj~~~J;}ifi:/fl~L
.._____-._Lif;:J::''"'.:.e:bEK2Jl,u:...difi.... ~~-!:t..3g :.2:-3..2.'1:-. n ___.._
_'_' .4..t::__.L/JJ..s~. _ _ .." .' .?!'13p. ;'?'.Jj...'i_. .",..
_ ____l~~?~?r.... R:h.~__QJl17.2a-?~~t?~_ ,,"_____'
II I ( { {
.
Pft%~%O. B DBIIIr CUP 06-04 A~ 132 13!1!B S~B!r
. .
The: proposed. condominium use with three story construction is l10t campatible with e
the neiqliliorhood..
If :approved. the buildinq would. exceed. the present city coele by 2,565 sq ft for this
property preatiuq more deneity,
In iQist, 1 of the 48 properties with widths of 50 feet or more only 6 currently have
u_ ...._. 3- st-G:EY-~e1sILr-ee---and- these-w~u.LJ.:t..-=-the...e~..19.'Z.O.!.a_.b~e..0wne7:S_:lro:Luntarlly_.dawn... ,-
zoned their propertiee to lower cleneities in Old 'l'OWD.
__-'-___.Th~pl.a.nning C()ftlft'l ....; nn """ "at'! ; n........,sing_.concerns...zega.rdiJlg....cDlI1llai:J.b1U1;1t-gL_________
etructures in Old !rown neiqhborhoods and have denied similar requests.
._ _ . .._ ___~app' ; ..II+; n1I _ie _.Dat....c.oI1ll.i!lJ;SJl.t....w:iJ:tLtoll-lII tI"Lg~ml!1.Jl1I!&;e there ~ bee..A.~___._..
other similar two unit condnm;niums constructed in the Old ToWn,
=L~~~~m~_lib-~5f. -~6._=~s{fzil3Lii~:
_._.~_..___ ~~ ~ ~ .....___. __LJ. 3:._.__~ ~._1>.x__:_1>_(S__._~k~ -~..:.1~J:I:.----
._._3'._. _.. ..____L~6_._L3.!7-1 ~T._...:5/!2.._.____i!i.~~_...6'7.3_:L:JGS~
...._..<1_.___ ___ _.... _.../Cf.k.__I..3./-Pl._.Jt:._.S/3.____. S:6~:_-2!l..h.-~a~
__..L__ ._~_ .... _ ____.. --..I.7>i1--.--L> ;-_zT..__2Ji____J6?::_ 5'1 'I-I.'} Y 8 .
j,---~ -- --r'1ircPAJL-~'L??(.-71f(.
2___,.. _ '& ___'_"'_ __.. ..J_-./-..._..G....... :~...._~.--,---- ._-.~..!::~~-~
--..3...--.- .. - .____~L':"I.2._.-La.~--..~E._._-------~~:l-r;'-~:..l-t..~.?
_3_._ _~oC{ e _.~~~4sI..~ 2_.__'-1._...';.__......_'$fR____..__..__$}?;;~r::_??/ 2
/'" lP~W'~ IS'') l~S'l SoD sc.'2-')-q~S"...,,"1
p7~~ ~=?;7 _ c'e4rP.!,_ ",i~_-:_s~Q.. - ~3~l
- --Pie.. .' fa .'lmt2__.._.._1xu-f.X:ti;l~..-_._-s.J3-._._..stz_-5HfL-5hQ1.-
~._..__. _ ~--_._--J()-o--j}.ctPh.-_._2..S' . _1144JDL._
H 7I~-.... '_ __.._l$..@_c;y..~_fhK ~____ 59~~7"lf?
.~ . WML______~ - ~ ~~~~
~ J Rt>~ ~ ~__.__~__ gr ___' .______~_.__ __._.__...._......___
---_._-----------_.~.__._----...-..-
_____. ~_....__.._____ .........___r__...
....-.....---..- ..--.---. .--.-..---....---.--...
---.-----.---.-------,-.....--..----.-.---.--------...-----~-----...e
_._...-----....,...--_...-_._-~.._-_.-
.____.....____..__r _._____._..._._._...._..__..__.......___._...__. -..
---..--
...-.........-.------.--.--...-...--..-....---.-.-..--
.
PB!fJ.'J!:tOll !fO DBIlY CUP 06-04 AT 132 139 SnBB!f
.. !fhB' ,proposed con"nm;nium use with three story construction is not compatible with
.. the neighborhood.
Xf ;approved the building would exceed the present city code by 2,565 sq ft for this
property ~reatin<J lIllD:ce density.
Xu ~ist.l of the 48 properties with widths of 50 feet or more only 6 currently have
....., -3. .s_ry"sUuGl>UJ1es--and--l>bese-.wel<&'bui-J..~ on_t:he-.ea:rl!r_1930!.S. .before..owners. :voluntatiJ.y. ,down....._.
zoned their propertiee to lower deDsitiee in Old ToWn.
_.. .. ...... ___. \rhe ~plJonn; nq._COIIIIIIissian h... h.... ; n.....easi.ng'_conc.e:r:ne..reqa:r:ding...c::OIlIllatlllUi:tx..DL ..--.. ...-.....
structures in old ToWn neighborhoods and bAve denied similar requests,
.. ..... ._.. _,......Tha. "'PP' ; "atiOD...is...not..J::QnB.iJltl!nt...wiJ;h..:tJull...wglllxN;:ll!lP.!L'iQ.ll.!L~!il.Al~ ~n _!!9... ----.
<)'\:her sinlilar two unit condollliniums const.rUCted in the Old !fawn.
J- ..~~~._.._- '~~=')-----~'~7)-Jili-l;~t-~~' ~~~~._(/'=i~~..~,~~~_~
.l.,-f' . . _~/,=t;I.Ja... ". .~,~.an~~~ ....--..
~.. .. TJL. . __ ...,1.2t!L -:.,8.....E~e:\:r.;c._ .J\1le.~___~.a"l~ad~"i'.c.a-.... .1?>.. 1:~ 0..
~_" L4d.~.l~_... _lL.,.. .L~L7__8..~?k.~fe__ _~~-.-~... [I.r:D.lJJL._ -. ....
s-~#~~':(-rf:~$~~:!,,~'-ff.f::r~~~sp=-
,fa.... ....JX~g-_..LDc.tJ.K(g._~...J:__ __.__ _&_. ,A...~_. --.---~J.,.c;L~L
_ ... .._. _/?Lzl?-: 6-~-fr3~._lhM_-.~L:&arjr cILtf'12-.tf!:.
--: __ a.. .__ __.. _?as_...'€f~~r:z.~'c _.dr(L~/f.t.4~.f~~ .f.1_2.R.21
1_ M,y"._ .____J_!_<?3...._J~.~t~~~.....J1ye...----~.. B ~.~~_~_,.J::1__.Cfg7y
/fJ_~':'_ , ~_._.__._JJf1J__W~~f.,~ ~ 9..Q^L<:fJ;}... .--. --'--'-'
~ ' 11. . ~-1fI!i--~~$-l1ilrrfiF~r-__n___-
_.. .2..._ ifiL-.,?JP&S.._JJi:'. .____._ ._"___._. ,----,- __.___,1!/:___........ ...-..-' _....-....-
J3_.1 .____l~_ / rfl t:t:? ~__, ...0:___-_Cf!! 7t{D ----..----. -..--.........
1.!I:_.(1~ . . .L3.os Bed~,,, ,-4~.---5:li. -...rA--.-~-O-._.._._..-_.._---
Zl;;~ ' .
1):_1?.1~ . eb!.... _.~. ~.__._-~._- --.---.~._-,-._. -~~.. -..:..:.-....., .-..,--. --....... --.-...-:.--
..L.,J).QWLi~Q(WQ_._-I')g.AJlt"ckn6..~..,_;:.-B-_.CA __g.Q.1:J.D.._._____.____....
__fl._._.__....__ __ _ .-. -
- - - -~_.-----.. ---...---.-.-..-----..-.---'-----.--- -~.._.-----_._--
fi/
__ ..._ ___~._..._.______..__........_..._~_..___.__..._.......r__..........__.~...___ _____w__ .--.....--..- ....-
~ -'~=~=-~~=~=~~:==~--~'~=~~=.~~~~'=='=~.:'.-,'-~..':=: ..~:=._~.:..==~~~~~~~.~=~~:.~:.:.~.-.
_.l-l_ ___
.., _.________......___.________.._-_.--____r-_.._.. .-----..---..------.-..-....-.
~J-
-....----..----.
...-...-----.-...... ..-----.---.. ---.._----_..._--..._---------_.-~
e
e
e
.
Public Hearings re:
AppealofCanditions on Conditional Use Permit 06-4 and
Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-/60
City Council Staff Report
July 24, 2006
ATTACHMENT 7
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Ol?-4 Appcal.CC StaffRcport -132 Thirlccnth
12
.
'. -
!!'.II'i!ill.. i I C\I
nll"li= III ~ ;1 i~ 1 ~~~l~ I ~ ( i
Plllllhdlllll i !I I - 'nl~ z, I.!
.1 mill!. . I i "l"""
- . .-. --. '- ! ~ ~~
.-. I sm
e ~a~
'f
~
if'
u
,
, ,
1112111111 I...
I I
m IIllIn II II
,
-- --
I
In ;.
<a
I
['-.-' -'-1
I II II
I
...,.,
- .-
,
---.- ----.---.-.---
Ulil
IIII1 ,II
. II II ~
! I II I
~ I~I t=1
I .1 I I I
I ii' :," . ~ I
II' I .....
I I . .'
I ..
) :' 'II ~ : 'I"
I :! . II
. 111~d ~._._- -.-- _~I
!I
e.
..
. .
e
.' .- . -
--. -~
1\\\\\\\\'\1' i i~ h J
\i\U\\t\\\\\ i ~ '~I Ii
.-- .
,
~
tOO iiI
I ciS
_..- - ~- ~t
1~ ':l
.
=
E
.
--- ~ ~-
iN.
i T"l"
. I I -
ir-
.
8
z
i 0
~
. ~
5 I
ill
1ii ~
:>
i 0
. 0 ..
---, -If
I
.
I
\
e !
t
t
\d
\ II
!\
\
,
I
i
I
\ t
~ ,
e
.
'0----""- ~-
-"
-,\\~
\\\\\\\\\1\1\ .
~ \N'
. 'C":'
\ - \ --\ \-
~\ \ d)
I i \
~~ ---~
\I
\(/) ~~
---- \ct')"'\\
\~ at
~
.
\
,
\
t
. \
"
\
.
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
,~\\
,,,.'
~ ~1~ i\\\\
\\ \\\W \
\ . II ~ \\. \
t II.' 'i,\ I
;n~ \ h'\ H'
~ ,.~. .~ "t hi"
\'.\ \1 \r ,\~,U\\ '\
'1\<\ \\\ ~ ~ \\ \ "\\'
\! \.\\\\ 1\'\'\
l\ 1I1\1\\\\~"~~\
\ \
a
n 'Q
~
\
\
%
'%-
e
. . - :-:--~
. ".
e
,.... '..,. I...,," .,..1. " . ..
. '=l. ':i!0(''l;-;'~'''''3'"-' .:j:.
.i\~.t. :,\:;: ..~,..: ",. 4...~W"'" ." -~:
.'JQl!I8 ...
:J.,
.~
. '
:4'
-<'I
....~
"
.,'
.,1
.~;
. ..;.tl
'''''1>1:
. '~'li
-: 'f' ..,~
~ ~.. ..
. .~. .
..F1'",.r"
- ".' ~'. 'l'~ l'
.' ,
.'4I,.~:.
"
.: 0:
. "'....
I '~.'.f:1
I I I .~.
~jl (~""
! tf~ ..~
I ~ r ..~
: 1,. :\
"I r t:llIJ .,.
I , ....~
I I sli
III ...~
I. ,.
.,.5\ I !'
IJ . I ~~~
, '.6M I~ ~~' "" ~~
=: ~/' > :' ,>'
=- ,0, ~.l: 'Ii>-' ;~
I' · "Ill !I.
, " I ~~..(
~ I }-l." . ':
~ =4J!~:;:
J I t,r.
. - - ---;,. ___ . I....
Q'=-""'_'lIl.=====$';;,~ ' 'I':f
.~..l~l ';"' ~,:;
_I!~'" .
~ I I
:.~~I'
l 11
I~
:~~..,.~ Cl
MStN 1MI . e
[J'
. . I '.~
~~~
.J
:...:
----
ElC.Iaet.MAIfIl:U!
o
""
....
t_
"
....
~
""'''''-
..........
"'.......-
fI;tI.. I"IJXIIIt -..all
--......
"""IM
.............
.
'..
,~'
- ,~
.'
..
.0;.'
I-
III
;~ ..
;. ~.
. ./.:..;~, ". . .
," ,~. :,,:'~~ \.~.~ ~ .:: :~'.~ .
.,\ 1lJ/' .....,. \~. I ",:',
"
"
I?
"
,',
",
.'
.1...
'.
",
........
"
"
"
"
~
"
~
. ,I'
';.
-
e