HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1983-07-06
.
. ,
PLANN~~~~l6~~~~~Ig~-~~~fl~~~.8~'JUL.:Y 6, 1983'
The Planning Commissi.on met in regu-li1r g:ession on Wednesday"
July 6, 1983 in the City Council Chambers of the City Adminis-
tration Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M.
by Chairman Covington and t~e pledge to the flag was led by Vice
'Gha i rman"!Gb Menberg.
,;-~. .,-'
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF:
Jessner, Covington, Smith, Perrin, Goldenberg
None
Charles Antos
The minutes of June 9, 1983 were approved as corrected, with the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Covington, Smith, Jessner, Goldenberg
None
Perrin
Public Hearings
Staff noted that the Specific Plan for 901 Ocean Avenue will be held over
until July 20th.
A. ZTA-4-83 Residential Overlay Zone
e
Staff report presented by Mr. Antos. It was mentioned that the Commission
discussed the concept of a residential overlay zone at the last meeting,
approving the concept with some recommended changes. The area boundary
is Seal Beach Boulevard on the e~st, Pacific Coast Hi&hway on north, 17th
Street alley on the west and Electric Avenue on the south.
The proposed zone area ,was again reconfirmed by staff that it was consistent
with the area that was discussed at the last meeting and for which ~taff
was requested to provide background for this public hearing.
This zoning text amendment would provide incentive to recycle old motel/apart-
ments into mouern residential projects with no increase in density, provide
reside~tial above ground floor commercial, provide incentive to develop
'vacant properties on Seal Beach Boulevard, and provide additional stable
residents in the area who would be customers for various retail uses which
exist or may locate in the area.
Public hearing opened.
1. Barbara Rountree, 13300 Twi n ,Hi 11 s Dr, 46H, asked the Commi ss i oners
if they had personally inspected the study area. Most of the Comm'ission'ers
indica~ed they had visited the site. Staff indicated that each Commissioner
had ,been given a tour of the City, pointing out problems and areas of
interest.
11
.
Minutes of Planning Comm~ssion Meeting
of J u 1 y 6, 1983
Page 2
Public hearing clo~ed as no one spbke in opposition.
Commissioner Jessner asked that the word "study" be removed from the resolution
and to add "as i ndi cated on Exhi bi t A". Staff noted that it was not, necessary
ta add a legal d~scription. Since ~e are dealing with streets, alleys,
rights of way, etc., it is acceptable to usea map. Com. Covington asked
that the resolution be amended to include "with individual applications
within this zone are to be approved".
Res. #1295
Commissioner Smith moved to adopt amended resolution; Commissioner Perrin
seconded that motion and resolution passed with following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Smith, Perrin, Covington, Jessner, Goldenberg
None
B.
ZTA-5-83
This zoning text amendment would require conditional use permits for enter-
tainment licenses, conditional use permits for additions to noncbnforming
buildin3s, garages in R-l zones, clarify that ~ Specific Plan's~percedes
the base zone provisions, and exempts religious, charitable or nonprofit
organizations from the CUP procedure for alcohol licenses.
--
Staff report presented by Mr. Antos. With regard to entertainment permits,
a separate staff report was sub~itted. If this policy had been in effect
at the time 6f ~alt's Wharf's hearings, the problems could 'have been more
effectively handled. It was felt that entertain~ent permits should be
subject to public notice and public hearing prior to issuance, due to,
controversial nature of entertainment permits.
With regard to the additions to nonconforming buildings, staff is proposing
that the parking provision be complied with as a base condition of approval.
With regard to enclosed parking in an R-l zone,
that garages be required rather than carports.
unattractive nature of carports in front yards.
there are alleys leading into garages/carports,
this amendment recommends
This is due to visually
In the coastal zone,
and is.not a p~oblem visually.
The zoning code currently requires all alcohol permits to have CUP approval.
This applies to one day'or short duration permits as well as regular licenses.
The City has not been requiring religious, charitable and ,nonprofit organi-
zat ions to go through the CUP process for thei r ABC 1 i censes. It is recommended
that these or:;anhations be exempted from the CUP procedure due to the
nature of their organizations.
e
Mr. Antos presented a separate staff report regarding entertainment permits.
, He noted that the permits for entertainment are now under the authority
of the City Manager's office, which means the City Manaaer may issue,
revoke or condition an entertainment permit as situations warrant. ~ue
to the recent controversy associated with an existin3 entertainment p2r~it,
it was felt that these types of permits should be subject to public notice
and public hearing prior to their issuance.
,
Planning Commi~sion Minut~s of
July 6, 1983
Page 3
Commissioner'Covington asked if this would impact the cost of an entertain-
ment permit. Staff replied that this was an entirely different matter;
business licenses must still be obtained through the Finance Department.
He also mentioned that the City is changing the entire business license
code and modernizing some of its fees that have been in effect since 1950.
Mr. Covington asked how will the cost of the license be determined when
7A is repealed. Staff replied that business licenses are an entirely
different portion of the code. Section 7A basically says the City Manager
approves the issuance of licenses for entertainment/cafes which includes
live entertainment and/or dancing.
-'
Mr.. Covington stated that 7A deals with live entertainment and/or dancing.
How do we handle other entertainment which may not be technically live
but conforms to same characteristics such as loud noise, etc., i.e., the
big screen and other technological improvements. Staff replied as technology
improves and may present problems, the cod~ will be amende~. Prior to
that time, there is a section in the zoning ordinance which permits licenses
and allows the staff to initially review each application. Any department
can place conditions on that license. Staff has the opportunity to put
conditions, applicant has right to appeal to the planning Commission.
The Planning Commission can uphold or overtake any decision and if they
are unhappy with that, the applicant can appeal to the City Council.
Staff has been r~ther quick to r~spond to technological changes.
Mr. Goldenberg asked if the City had a bingo ordinance. Staff replied
there is ~o bingo ordinance. Our response by state law would be that
the City does not h~ve th~ necessary provision on the books to handle
this.
Mr. Covington asked if we have already existing a description of hbw organi-
zations qualify as a religious, charitable, nonprofit organizations.
In banking they must present a copy from the State which shows they'are
exempt. Staff replied that that the same would hold true for the City
unless it is an obvious case, i.e. the Catholic Church. Certification
would be needed only when some doubt was presented.
Public Hearing Opened. No one spoke in f~vor.
1. Reva Turchin, 1625 Seal Way, felt that charitable and nonprofit exemp-
tions could mean almost anyone. Staff replied that if there was any doubt,
a certificate must be presented from the State and those certifications
are not lightly given. Mrs. Turchin was concerned that an organization
such as the "US Festival" might come under that exemption. Staff also
mentioned that all cases will be reviewed by each City department and
any conditions or denial can be imposed by a department, so that in all
instances, applications will be regulated.
;. '
.
Planning Commission ,Minutes of
July 6, 1983
Page 4
2. N~ncy Kredell. 161,5 Seal Way, asked if the condition regarding a specific
plan superceding base zoning would allow the Planning Commi~sion to spot
zone. 'Staff replied that the specific plan is an amendment to the General
Plan. It allows,' if necessary the zone to be changed on a particular zone,
requires public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the City
Council before a specific plan is adopted. It can apply to a small area
or a large area such as Hellman. It is really a modification of the General
Plan for a specific piece of property on the basis of specific reasons
that are identified in the public hearing process. This can be adopted
by two ways, by resolution or by ordinance~
Public Hearing Closed.
Res. #1296
Commissioner Smith moved to adopt resolution; Commissioner Goldenberg
seconded.
Discussion followed. It was asked that -the wording be changed in the
resolution to delete "live" and add "Code of the City of Seal Beach".
Changes were-agreed to by Mr. Smith and Goldenberg and resolution passed
with the following vote:
e.
AYES:
NOES:
Smith, Goldenberg, Perrin, Covington, Jessner
None
Res. 1297
Changes were incorporated into Exhibit A deleting "live" and adding to
condition #7 the words "with surrounding land uses." Changes were also
indicated in the resolution to read "Code of the City of Seal Beach".
Staff, replied to Mr~ Jessner's questions, that the building of garages'
only deals with replacement covered parking. This would not be retroactive.
Mr. Jessner also remarked that regarding the exemptions for alcohol licenses,
that the intent was for tempora~y types of licenses. He did not feel
that he would be in favor of allowing this for a permanent type of thing.
He felt that there should be a 'differentiation in what is temporary and what
is permanent. If applicants are applying once or twice a year, then he-
did not feel they should go through a CUP process. Staff replied that currently
all organizatjons must use the CUP process for the serving of alcohol.
What this amendment is doing in effect is codifying practice~ that the
City is already following. Organizations will be carefully reviewed with
respect to appropriateness.
Commissioner Goldenberg and Commissioner Smith agreed with amended changes.
Resolut~on passed with following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Goldenberg, Smith, Perrin, Covington, Jessner
None
,e
STUDY SESSION
Mr. Antos presented staff report regarding the specific plan for the State
Lands Parcel. ,He stated that the City Council adopted an urgency orddinance
Planning Commission Minutes,of July ~~ 1983
Page 5
.
, ~lacing a 45-day moratorium oh issuing buildin& permits on th~ State Lands
Parcel in order to prepar~ aSpeEific Pl~n on the site. Subsequently,
staff met wi th represefltati ves of the State Lands Commi ss 10n _ to discuss:
State restrictions on thesit~ as well as Ci~y goals and objectives for
the ~ite. According to the State, the uses that will be~ermitted ~re:
visitor serving, retail, ,and marine-related. The City was concerned
with the f.act that it is the entrance to th'e City, adjacent to scenic
highway, and abuts a designated vletland area. '
Jay asked that more inf6rm~tion b~ pfovidedr In particular, what the
City has di~cussed i~ most recent meetings with ,the State, and hoW did
they respond. Are there any proposals that the City has considered and
what options hav<< been discussed. Co~ies of corresponde~ce'between the
State Lands Commission and the City staff or RDA, if'they wer~ ihvolved,
should be provided to the Planning Commission. t~r. Covington stated that,
the value of the sHe has increased many times and he would really like
, to take the opportunity to study the new i nformat i on as soon as poss ib 1 e'
'and then hold some 'public heari'ngs- sowe,cat:1 benefit the City and the
re,s i dents and do what shoul d have been done, during the last 8 years.
e,
" .. . .. ,
Staff noted that the only way the State Lands Commission could' get r,id
of that property would be to trade it with-land of equal value,., As, far
as the State Lands Commission is concerned with the lease that they en:tered
into with the consortium of developers, ,this lease expires 9/83,with' '
one caveat~ and that is because we have imposed a moratorium until
we develop a specific plan. It is their. opinion that they will extend
the le~s~ for that period of time whi1e we 'develop a s~ecific plan.
At the next meeting, staff will provide a copy of the lease ,and correspond-
ence dealing' with the property up until this time. The City att.oney,
will review the lease. ' "
Meeting adjourn~d at 9:45 p.m.
.~
~ ~.~' .'. .'~
" ,RecoY'dingSecretary,' . "
"
at