Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1984-02-01 ......-- I SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA City Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, California a.The Seal Beach Planning Commission meets i.n session every first and third Wednesday of each _month at 7:30 p.m. If you wish to address the Commission on any particular public hearing item, the Chairman will call for public testimony first for those in favor of the project, and second, for those who are not in favor. When you see that the speaker's position in the center of the room is unoccupied, step up to the microphone and when recognized by the Chairman, speak directly into the microphone by first stating your name and address clearly and distinctly for the'records. State your business as clearly and succinctly as possible and then wait a moment ~o see if the Commissioners have any questions in regard to your comments or questions. If there are no other questions or comments, return to your seat so that the next person may address the Commission. If you wish to address the Commission on matters other than public hearings, the agenda provides for that time when the Chairman asks for comments from the public. Address the Commission in the same manner as stated for public hearings, always stating your name and address first. ***Next Resolution #1308 February 1, .1984 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 11 a ti q .' 3. Approval of Minutes of January 18, 1984 4. Public Hearings: ,I a. Al Voda, V-8-83 125U Pacific Coast Highway A request to deviate from the re~uired: 1. Drive aisle width 2. Provision of landsca~ing 3. Number of parking spaces And a request to allow valet parking for the conversion of an office building and auto re~air service building into an auto sales and service facility. 5. Architectural Review of 83 Riversea Road 6. Specific Plan Denial, Bixby Ranch Company-Ole R~~ch Susiness Park, Resolution #1307 7. COinmission P.equests 8. Oral Co~unications . 9. Cor.~ission Comnunications 10. Report from Secretary 11. Adjournment .' It . . MINUTES OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION '! MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1984 The Planning Commission met in regular session on Wednesday, February 1, 1984, in the Council Chambers of the City Administration Building. The meeting was called to order at 7: 37 p.m. by Chairman Go}denberg and the pledge to the flag was led by Comnissioner-Jessner_. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Goldenberg Commissioners Jessner, Murphy, Perrin Commissioner Covington arrived 8:30 p.m. Also present: Gary Johnson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer John Baucke, Principal Planner COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 18," 1984 Page 1, line 7, corrected to read "pledge to the flag was led by Corrmissioner Murphy. " Page 2, line 4 & 6, add "Murphy" to AYES, delete "Jessner" and add "Jessner" to ABSTAIN vote and delete "Murphy". Page 4, 10th line from, bottom of page, corrected by deleting "you" before "Bixby". Page 4,'7th line froql,bottom, delete "have you" and insert "has Bixby" in its place. Page 7, 8th line from bottom of page, delete "Seal Beach Boulevard" and insert "405 Freeway" in its place. Page 8, 11th line from bottom of page, delete "$20" and insert "$25" in its place. Page 8, 3rd line from bottom, add "Jessner" to AYES vote and delete "Jessner" from ABSTAIN vote and insert "None". Chairman Goldenberg asked that original minutes be corrected as motioned, but that Commissioners'accept copies given to them this evening with corrections noted for their files. Jessner moved, second by Perrin to approve the minutes as corrected. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Goldenberg, Jessner, Murphy, Perrin None Covington Motion carried Variance Application, V-8-83 Staff report presented by John Baucke. He indicated that the applicant is converting an office building and auto repair service building into an auto sales and service facility. After denial without prejudice '- Planning Commission Meeting of 2/1/84 Page 2 . at the December 21st meeting, applicant discussed alternative measures with staff and' is back before Commission with a variance 'r.eqtiest for drive aisle width, lqndscaping,' and requesting a determination to be made regarding the number of parking spaces required. , ' Commissioner Murphy asked that the second floor use be defined in order for interpretations to be correctly made. St?ffreplied that it was presumed that a portion of the upstairs would be used in conjunction with auto, sales, and a portion of it also be lease space. It was pointed out that the applicant was here to clarify any questions Commission might have. . Commissioner Goldenberg mentioned a request by the applicant to allow valet parking. Commissioner Murphy asked for definition of valet parking. Staff replied that an employee would park customer cars on site. Staff presumed site to be able to accbmmodate all cars. Public hearing opened. It Randy Morris, Phelps, Morris & Associates, 4400 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, agent for the. applicant. He indicated that since the last meeting, applicant had met with staff to try and come up with a program with as .few variance requests as possible. ,Mr. Morris felt that with valet parking, he could actually place 26-28 parking spaces 'on the site, but that they would all be substandard size. .In subsequent meetings wi th staff,. i.t was felt that it would be, harder to approve many :subs~andard parking spaces than adequately sized spaces of lesser quantity. It' was pointed out that the applicant fully intends to park 26 or 28 cars on the site; that there is room to do that. Therefore, the applicant is not asking for a variance for the number of parking spaces required:, since Corimissio~can approve the interpretation' which indicates 16 ,parking spaces is adequate. For every'decrease in' aisle width, the applicant is increasing the width of every space 1 foot. It allows a full 24 ,foot turning radius without having 24 feet in drive aisle: It is appl icant 's ' conclusion that they are presenting a standard acceptable parkirigplan~ It was pointed out that the show room has been eliminated and applicant' is not showing tandem spaces on the plan. Applicant will be parking .tandem but 1S not asking for anything other than the 16 legal parking .sp~ces.' , Mr. Morris further indicatl2d that the only exception the' applicant is asking for is 6% landscaping rather than 10% because the exterior is completely landscaped to the maximum amou~t. Putting another 4% landscaping on the inside will takt? Giway fFom the parking spaces. -Todd PerrIn, asked for correspond~nce from Home Federal Savings with regard to par.king on their lot at the December meeting. Mr. Morris replied that Home Federal Savings did_not ,comply with that' request, that they do not seem to be willing to allow Seaport Imports to utilize ,their parking lot. . . '. .~-- . Planning Commission Meeting of 2/1/84 Page 3 Ron Jessner, asked is it the intent that any and all cars that are going to be serviced by this facility will be parked by an employee of the business? Mr. Morris stated that is the practical correct answer, however, the plan ,in front of Commission is configu~ed such that people can park their own cars, therefore the applicant is not asking for approval for valet parking nor tandem parking. l\pplicant is asking that the 16 spaces he enough to. service this facility. Mr. Morris indicated that the ,use of the second. floor would be for the applicant himself. There will be no leasing of the upstairs floor. Commissioners determined that lA alternative would therefore apply to the appli~ant with 10 parking spaces being required. Ron Jessner questioned as to how the 16 parking spaces were determined. S~aff replied thqt was if the garage would fall into general retail use. Commissioner Murphy felt ~at this facility would be more accurately termed a garage, assuming alternative lA and 2B, then a total of 19 spaces would be needed. Commissioner Jessner indicated that if lAand 2A were assumed justifiable, then 16 spaces would be adequate. Staff . indicated that Code does not separate uses; Commission must make the determination.' , Commissioner Murphy questioned the condition regarding off street parking, that the situation be reviewed in a year to see whether any problems have occurred. Staff indicated that condition was to insure problems from occurring in surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Morris expressed concern for the applicant, that time and money would be spent on the facility and the possibility it could be removed in one year. . Commissioner Jessner asked how many parking spaces can fit onto Pacific Coast Highway and 13th Street. Mr. Morris indicated that on Pacific Coast Highway there are four Spaces and 1-1/2 spaces on 13th Street. Commissioner Jessner stated that the design as submitted with 16 parking spaces with the widths oversized, with valet parking and with the five extra off street spaces, 'that he is in favor of alternative lA. Commissioner Murphy agreed with lA alternative. Commissioner Perrin as well as Commissioner Goldenberg agreed with alternative lA. Commissioner Covington asked if it was appropriate for him to comment and vote upon this proposal since he arri vedlate. Staff replied that if Mr. Covington felt he wa$ adequately informed". it would be appropriate. Mr. Covington then concured with al ternati ve lA. '. - . Planning Commission' Meeting of 2/1/84 Page 4 Commisioner Covington brought out the fact that the daily turnover for this facility would be less than that for a service station. Alternative 2A or 2B The Commissioners deliberated the the acc~ptance of alternative 2A or 2B. ' Commissioner Perrin rule in favor of 2A to go along with 16 parking spaces concerning the trade offs involved. Mr. Covington stated that in his opinion six spaces. is not as. 'much as it should be, but nine is probably more than is required, he would therefore vote for 2A. Mr.~ Covington also felt that staff stlould dete,qn~~e',~f9~' simj] far future. d' reques-ts, ~ wh-ether"any 'either dTi es:"d'i ffe'rent i atedbetween.auto, seY'vi ce- a'nd-auf6-,repat,rwi th regard to parki ng requirements. Commissioner Goldenberg stated that the Commissioners had voted for alternative iA and 2A which indicated that 16 parking spaces is adequate for this faciUty. Staff reconmended 11 conditions should:the COnmiss'ion approve the 16 parking spaces proposed. 'Mr. Murphy agreed with the conditions as shown. It was further agreed that item # 8 would be deleted'" It was also determined that the condition regard tandem parking be deleted. , . ,f . Mr. Goldenberg called attention to the applicant the condition which states that valet parking service will be provided during all open hours. Jay Covington, moved that the Commiss.ionrBs~d~ "~ufficient findi~gs" to autherize 'approval of a variance request for this. particular piece of property. Perrin seconded ~e motion, which passed wi~h the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Goldenberg, Jessner; 'Murphy, Perrin None None Motion carried . e !. =-- Planning Commission Meeting ot.:_2/l/84 Page 5 Commissioner Perrin moved to ,approve V-8-83 with the nine corrected conditions, Murphy seconded. Motion passed with following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Goldenberg, Jessner, Murphy, Perrin .. .None ~ . ~ . 'None Motion carried Atchitectural'Review, 83 Rivers~a Road" AR '4-83 Report presented by staff who indicated this item was before the Commission on December 21, 1983. Commission had a number of questions at that time regarding use .of equipnent area, solar panels, etc. The staff report dated January 24, 1984 does not reflect the modified plan which was delivered to staff this afternoon. The staff report recommended denial because of the question of whether the deck would be used for sunning purposes for the occupant and the question as to whether. the solar panels pointing to the north would even work. The modified. plan indicates there is no longer a deck and no stairway noted as there is no access to that area any longer. Mi. Covington asked whether the trailer can be removed from the structure as modified. Staff stated that in discussions with the applicant's representative, the working drawings would denote such as to which walls are corrmon and how the trailer can be pulled out. St~ff would also consider a condition of approval that shows those items, especially along the north elevation. The Commissioners discussed the definition of two story cabanas and the fact they felt this type of construction was getting away from original idea of low cost housing for low income persons. Sane discussion was held regarding mitigating measures for building large residences on top of trailers, creating possible parking problems, difficulties in removing the trailer from cabana structures. Mr. Perrin stated that the reason he opposed the original idea was because he did not believe that trailers can be removed from cabanas and still be serviceable. Mr. Covington stated that regardless of what tonight's decision. was, staff should ,do some research with regard to limiting maximum square..,:" _ ' footage of floor space permitted as a ratio or function of thec8esignated ''', J.e,a,$~.,ar:'ea. '. Gary Johnson explained the State regulations with regard to cabanas, along with the City ordinance. Mr. Johnson mentioned that State require- mentssupercede our own but perhaps some provisions that would require the builder of cabanas after oompletion of construction to, for instance, remove the trailer and put' it back, to show actual proof - - not only on the plan, could be required. . Commissioner Murphy felt that these particular plans should be resubmitted arid brought up to date to show what is not being presented to Commission. Mr. Covington concurred and stated he would ,like the correct date to show on the plan, and would like to see the exit path' for the trailer, .along with the removal door for the trailer. Mr. Goldenberg stated . Planning Commission Meeting of 2/1/84 Page 6 a plot plan would also be need ed- to'-Sho-~ _adja-ce-nt ~~~as wou'fd not Be impacted wi th removal of trailer. Mr. Jessner asked that the square footage being added in excess of the trailer be noted, that the sprinkler system also be noted on the plans and that existing walls be shown along with what is new, and to show exactly where the trailer is located. Mr. Covington moved this review be continued until the next meeting when the applicant can have a revised plan incorporating all additions mentioned tonight. . Mr. Jessner seconded and the motion passed with following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAiN: Covington, GOldenberg, Jessner, Murphy None Perrin Resolution #1307 - Bixby Specific Plan Item #F in the resolution was changed to read "Airport and Aircraft Acti vi ties" . Mr. Perrin moved to approve Resolution #1307 with the change as made by Commissioner Murphy, denying and recommending to City Council denial of the Bixby ,Ranch Company Specific Plan. Covington seconded the motion, which passed with following votE:!: AYES : NOES: ABSTAIN: Covington, Goldenberg, Perrin, Murphy , None Jessner e REPORT FROM SECRETARY ,- Staff reported on meeting with Al Brady of the Orange County Airport Land Use Cammmission with regard to putting together a schedule'for adoption of an Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). He indicated that AFRC Los Alamitos has developed a master plan in draft form and that after it is completed, the military is expected to have a consultant perform an AICUZ study. With the present limitation on staff resources, and since the AFRC is moving very quickly towards adopting a new plan' and the City must comment on that plan, it is recommended that the City plan be held in abeyance and we respond _to the AFRC 20 year plan. Staff also requested the Commission to determine how much discretion would be left to staff with regard to architectural features such as spires, cupolas, parapets. The Code does not define those pro- trusions. Mr. Covington stated he would be interested in seeing how other cities, especially coastal cities such as Huntington beach, handle that particular subject. Staff 'replied that information regarding this subject will be brought back to the Commission at a future date. . ~~ Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.