HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2007-10-03
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for October 3, 2007
7:30 p.m.
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ROLL CALL
III. AGENDA APPROVAL
By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to:
(a) Notify the public of any changes to the Agenda;
(b) Re-arrange the order of the Agenda; and/or
(c) Provide an opportunity for any member of the Planning Commission, staff, or
public to request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate
action.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission
regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning
Commission, provided that the Planning Commission may undertake no action or
discussion unless otherwise authorized by law.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by
one motion unless prior to enactment, a member of the Planning Commission,
staff, or the public requests a specific item be removed from the Consent Calendar
for separate action.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
1. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 07-2, Lampson Avenue Well Project -
Review of Document and Provision of Comments.
VII. PUBLIC HEARING
2. Conditional Use Permit 07-4 (6-Month Review)
1000 Pacific Coast Highway (Automotive Excellence)
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Joseph Harris / George & Barbara Pearson
Approval of 12-month review for existing Conditional
Use Permit 07-4 to allow a vehicle towing operation as
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission . Agenda of October 3, 2007
an accessory use to an existing automotive repair
business.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 07-54.
3. Conditional Use Permit 07-12
1101 Pacific Coast Highway (Vons)
Applicant/Owner: Cherry Protacio & Adolph Ziemba, AlA & Associates /
Regency Centers
Request: To establish an outdoor seating area of three, 4-seat
tables with umbrellas at a proposed new Vons
Supermarket.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 07-57.
VIII. STUDY SESSION
4. Study Session: Preliminary Draft - Municipal Code, Title 11, Zoning All
Portions Except Chapter 2.05 Residential Districts
IX. STAFF CONCERNS
X. COMMISSION CONCERNS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
To adjourned meeting of October 10,2007, at 7:30 P.M.
2
Oct 10
Oct 17
Nov 07
Nov 21
Dec 05
Dec 19
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of October 3, 2007
2007 AQenda Forecast
Study Session: Preliminary Draft - Zoning Code
Conditional Use Permit 07-13 - 3001 Old Ranch Pkwy (Kobe Steak House)
Study Session: Preliminary Draft - Zoning Code
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
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
Minutes of October 3, 2007
Chairperson Deaton called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 3,2007. The meeting was
held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Deaton, Commissioners Bello, DeLay, Massa-Lavitt, and
Roberts.
Also
Present: Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
Jerry Olivera, Senior Planner
Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney
Steve Flower, Assistant City Attorney
Absent: None
AGENDA APPROVAL
MOTION by Bello; SECOND by Roberts to approve the Agenda as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Deaton, Bello, DeLay, Massa-Lavitt and Roberts
None
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Deaton opened oral communications.
There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Deaton closed oral communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
No items.
1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
1 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 SCHEDULED MATTERS
2
3 1. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration 07-2, Lampson Avenue Well Project - Review
4 of Document and Provision of Comments.
5
6 Staff Report
7
8 Mr. Whittenberg stated he would deliver a brief staff report and then receive comments
9 from the Planning Commission (PC) and the public to be incorporated into a final
10 document to be presented before City Council. (Staff Report and Mitigated Negative
11 Declaration are both on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He noted that there
12 would be no action taken by the PC on this item, but Staff would prepare a document
13 with responses to comments recorded tonight. He provided some background
14 information on this item and indicated that this is a City-sponsored project to develop a
15 new domestic water well site on Lampson Avenue at the far east end of the Old Ranch
16 Country Club property. He briefly reviewed the Staff Report and explained that most of
17 the water supplied to College Park East (CPE) is provided by the Bolsa Chica Well
18 facility, and if this well were out of service, the City would not have adequate fire flow
19 capacity for the CPE neighborhood. He noted that should one of the three existing City
20 wells be out of service for any reason, this new facility would provide approximately an
21 additional 5,000 gallons of water per minute per day. He stated that Staff believes the
22 project to be non-controversial with minor impacts for which mitigation measures are
23 proposed. Chairperson Deaton asked if this project had been advertised. Mr.
24 Whittenberg reported that notice was published in the Sun Newspaper and mailed to all
25 property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the project site.
26
27 Commissioner Questions
28
29 Commissioner Roberts asked about the work Phase 1 and Phase 2 would entail. Mr.
30 Whittenberg explained that Phase 1 would include site preparation and drilling and
31 Phase 2 would involve the pouring of the foundation and construction of the building
32 itself. Commissioner Roberts asked if the drilling would have the most impact on the
33 community. Mr. Whittenberg stated that grading work during the site preparation would
34 create the most impact with both noise and dust from earth movement. He explained
35 that the drilling would not create as great an impact as it will not involve pile driving. He
36 also noted that the project requires drilling down approximately 500-600 feet.
37
38 Commissioner Massa-Lavitt asked what the hours of operation would be. Mr.
39 Whittenberg responded they would operate during the allowed construction hours from
40 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays.
41
42 Commissioner Delay stated that he hopes provisions are made to minimize impacts to
43 vehicles traveling along Lampson Avenue. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the City has
44 standard provisions for contractors to provide a Traffic Control Plan.
45
46
2 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Public Comments
2
3 Phillip Fife stated that he lives in College Park East (CPE) in a two-story home directly
4 across from the proposed site. He expressed several concerns regarding this project as
5 follows:
6
7 1. The proposed building for this facility will obstruct the view of the golf course from
8 many of the two-story homes abutting Lampson Avenue.
9 2. There have been many car accidents along the Lampson Avenue curve and it would
10 make it easier for eastbound traffic making a left turn onto the Lampson Well
11 property if the asphalt area in the center median were removed and the median
12 landscaped to make it easier to identify this as a left turn area.
13 3. He assumes chlorine will be used in the "disinfecting station," but Staff should
14 ascertain the type and concentration of disinfectant to be used.
15 4. Contrary to what the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) states, there will be
16 runoff onto Lampson Avenue, as the facility will largely be constructed of concrete.
17 Pooling of water in this area of Lampson Avenue is already a frequent problem
18 creating traffic hazards and the potential for cars to hydroplane.
19 5. CPE residents are exposed to noise from aircraft leaving and landing at the Joint
20 Forces Training Base (JFTB) on a daily basis and employees at the well facility will
21 also be exposed to this noise. Adequate soundproofing should be included in the
22 construction of the facility, both for employees and surrounding residences.
23 6. Provisions for an emergency power source should be made in the event of an
24 earthquake or broken power main.
25 7. What will the level of ambient vibration be from operation of the pump to surrounding
26 residents?
27 8. What will the height of the well drilling rig and what is the schedule for completion of
28 the drilling?
29 9. With the existing aquifer that underlies Seal Beach running under the JFTB, and with
30 aircraft having dumped jet fuel and hydrocarbons onto the ground in this area since
31 1942, what will be the quality of the water pumped from this well?
32
33 Chairperson Deaton asked that Staff respond to some of these concerns. Mr.
34 Whittenberg stated that he would have to meet with the project engineers and with
35 general contractors to acquire this information. He stated that Staff must provide written
36 responses, and will provide these to the PC and to anyone making comments tonight.
37 He noted that the plans do provide for an emergency generator. Chairperson Deaton
38 asked if the facility parking lot is to have permeable surfaces. Mr. Whittenberg stated
39 that pervious concrete material or pervious asphalt surfaces can be used. He indicated
40 that the main issue is the dimensions of the site, and because of the size of vehicles
41 and equipment accessing this facility it would be difficult to add landscaping, particularly
42 on the narrow end of the property. He added that the project plans do include
43 provisions for grading in such a way that everything drains from' the site into a
44 connection that goes directly into the Lampson Avenue storm drain.
45
3 of 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
Commissioner Roberts stated that he also has concerns with traffic and requested
clarification on the location of the entry driveway. Using the projector Mr. Whittenberg
proceeded to identify the driveway location and describe the general layout of the
facility. He noted that runoff will probably be controlled with a combination of pervious
paving material and on-site drainage. Commissioner Roberts asked if the plans had
contemplated a left-hand turn for vehicles heading east. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the
plans show that the entry and exit out of the facility would be from the westbound right
lane along Lampson Avenue. He noted that it is anticipated that one to three vehicles
per week would be visiting the site. Commissioner Roberts asked if the driveway would
include an electronic gate. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he was not certain whether this
has been decided, but he would inquire. Commissioner Roberts suggested locating the
gate further into the driveway to allow for a "safety pad" for vehicles waiting for the gate
to open. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt recommended that a safety pad be included even
if the gate is a manual one to allow for "stacking" of vehicles entering the facility.
Commissioner Roberts then asked about the type of disinfectants to be utilized. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that he does know enough about whether water purification will be
necessary, but he will request this information. Commissioner Bello inquired about
information on the projected quality of the water. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he
understands that this facility will pump from the same aquifer as is currently used for
City water. Commissioner Roberts asked if the County of Orange were assisting with
this project. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this project is being handled strictly by the City
of Seal Beach. Chairperson Deaton added that in order to enhance the project and
safety, consideration should be given to filling in the asphalt triangle and landscaping
the median on Lampson Avenue, as recommended by Mr. Fife. Mr. Fife stated that
Commissioner Massa-Lavitt's comment on allowing for stacking is a good one, and
recommended having an exit driveway on the westerly end of the facility that allows for
a smooth merge onto Lampson Avenue. He emphasized that the paved area in the
direct center of the median at the center of the Lampson curve should be eliminated.
He then stated that he hoped the facility would not have large, glaring lights on top of
the building. Mr. Whittenberg stated that lighting would not be a problem.
Commissioner Roberts added that he agreed with Mr. Fife's suggestion for a second
exit driveway. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff would present these comments to the
project engineers and Public Works Staff and will provide written responses.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Conditional Use Permit 07-4 (6-Month Review)
1000 Pacific Coast Highway (Automotive Excellence)
Applicant/Owner:
Joseph Harris / George & Barbara Pearson
Req uest:
Approval of 12-month review for existing Conditional Use
Permit 07 -4 to allow a vehicle towing operation as an
accessory use to an existing automotive repair business.
4 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
2 07-54.
3
4 Staff Report
5
6 Mr. Olivera delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning
7 Department.) He provided some background information on this item and noted that the
8 applicant was originally granted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) on March 21, 2007, for
9 the vehicle towing operation with the condition that the applicant return before the
10 Planning Commission (PC) after a 6-month period to ensure that there were no ongoing
11 problems with the business operation and its proximity to residential areas. During that
12 time Staff received no notice of violations of the conditions imposed upon the applicant,
13 nor of anyon-going noise or nuisance issues associated with the adjacent commercial
14 and residential area. In accordance with Condition NO.4 of the original CUP approval, if
15 a 12-month extension of the CUP is granted this evening, the applicant will then be
16 required to return at the end of this period to request an indefinite extension of this CUP.
17 The City has received no comments, written or otherwise, in response to the public
18 notices of the hearing on CUP 07-4. Staff recommends approval, subject to conditions,
19 and adoption of Resolution 07-54.
20
21 Commissioner Questions
22
23 Commissioner Roberts asked what the purpose of the 12-month review period was. Mr.
24 Olivera stated that based upon prior complaints and concerns related to nuisance and
25 noise issues associated with this business, the City wished to take additional
26 precautionary measures by imposing a 6-month trial, followed by a 12-month review
27 period, prior to considering an Indefinite Extension of this CUP. Commissioner Roberts
28 confirmed that no complaints had been received during the 6-month period. Mr. Olivera
29 stated that early in the review period one complaint was received, but Staff has received
30 nothing further. Mr. Whittenberg explained that Staff had received a telephone call from
31 a neighbor within the first two months of operation indicating that there had been a
32 vehicle drop off after 11 :00 p.m., which had created some noise issues. Staff had
33 explained that the business is allowed to have drop offs at this hour, but they would be
34 reminded that they must make these instances as unobtrusive as possible.
35 Commissioner Roberts inquired about the posting of signs prohibiting tow trucks along
36 10th Street. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the PC had made a recommendation to City
37 Council (CC) to consider posting these signs and the CC had considered this request,
38 but he is not certain of the final determination. He noted that Staff would acquire this
39 information.
40
41 Public Hearinq
42
43 Chairperson Deaton opened the public hearing.
44
45 Joe Harris referred to the complaint mentioned, and noted that this had not been one of
46 his trucks. He stated that this drop off had occurred shortly after 10:00 p.m., and added
5 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 that he has posted signs on his property stating that tow trucks dropping off vehicles
2 late at night must proceed as quietly as possible and he has mailed the requirements to
3 tow businesses that drop off at his business location. With regard to the placement of
4 the signs prohibiting tow truck, he noted that if someone on 10th Street needed a tow
5 truck, this would prohibit his trucks from driving on that street to assist. Commissioner
6 Roberts asked about the complaints received from the employees of the dental office
7 adjacent to Automotive Excellence. Mr. Harris stated that he and the employees have
8 worked out a solution and noted that none of his vehicles have ever been parked in that
9 business parking lot. Commissioner Roberts commended Mr. Harris for covering
10 damaged vehicles that are parked on the lot facing Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) while
11 awaiting repair.
12
13 Commissioner DeLay emphasized to Mr. Harris that due to the location of his business,
14 he must take stringent measures to make sure that his tow trucks and all aspects of his
15 business are following the guidelines. Mr. Harris emphasized that being a good
16 neighbor makes for a better business.
17
18 Commissioner Massa-Lavitt also commended Mr. Harris for having only one complaint
19 in a 6-month period. She noted that it takes hard work to do this and the City
20 appreciates this.
21
22 Mr. Harris commented that both Mr. Whittenberg and Mr. Olivera had been very helpful
23 throughout this process.
24
25 There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Deaton closed the public
26 hearing.
27
28 Commissioner Comments
29
30 Commissioner Roberts asked if there were a fee associated with the application for the
31 indefinite extension of this CUP. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that there is a fee.
32 Commissioner Roberts asked if a fee had been paid for tonight's hearing. Mr.
33 Whittenberg said that there was and explained that Staff must provide notice whenever
34 a public hearing is conducted, both by publication in the Sun Newspaper and mailing of
35 notices to all property owners and residents within a 300-foot radius. Commissioner
36 Roberts stated that he was still not sure why this is being extended for another year,
37 particularly since there had only been one complaint in 6 months. Mr. Whittenberg
38 stated that Staff has adhered to the direction of the Commission as given during the
39 public hearing in March 2007. He noted that if the Commission wished to do something
40 different, Staff would still have to re-notice and conduct another public hearing.
41
42 MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Massa-Lavitt to approve a 12-month review period
43 for Conditional Use Permit 07-4, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 07-54 as
44 presented.
45
46 MOTION CARRIED: 5 - 0
6 of 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Deaton, Bello, DeLay, Massa-Lavitt and Roberts
None
None
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 07-54 begins a 1 a-day calendar
appeal period to the City Council. The Commission action tonight is final and the
appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
3. Conditional Use Permit 07-12
1101 Pacific Coast Highway (Vons)
Applicant/Owner: Cherry Protacio & Adolph Ziemba, AlA & Associates /
Regency Centers
Request: To establish an outdoor seating area of three, 4-seat tables
with umbrellas at a proposed new Vons Supermarket.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
07-57.
Staff Report
Mr. Olivera delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning
Department.) He provided some background information on this item and noted that
Staff feels that with the nature of the proposed Vons Supermarket and the new
amenities to be offered within the market, an outdoor dining area would complement
this new development, and would not create any adverse impacts with the operation of
the business, the center as a whole, or with the adjacent residential areas. He reported
that Staff has received no comments, written or otherwise, in response to the public
notices of the hearing on CUP 07-12, and Staff recommends approval of this request.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Roberts asked if there were standards for setbacks from driveways or
streets for seating areas like this. Mr. Olivera stated that he is not aware of any, but
noted that the Planning Commission (PC) could impose such conditions. Commissioner
Roberts asked if Staff is satisfied that the tables would be set back far enough from the
curb lines. Mr. Olivera stated that Staff has found this acceptable as proposed. Mr.
Whittenberg added that for other applications for outdoor dining areas, Staff has
required screening walls to protect these areas from driveways or parking areas, but in
this case Staff does not feel this is necessary.
Chairperson Deaton noted that although Condition No. 7 does establish requirements
for trash receptacles and removal of trash and debris, she is still concerned with what
the general cleanliness of the seating area will be. Mr. Whittenberg stated that standard
health requirements of the Municipal Code would address this. Chairperson Deaton
7 of 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
asked if this CUP could be revoked if this were not included as a condition. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that if cleanliness were an ongoing problem, the PC retains the
authority to revoke this CUP.
Public Hearinq
Chairperson Deaton opened the public hearing.
There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Deaton closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
None.
MOTION by Massa-Lavitt; SECOND by Bello to approve Conditional Use Permit 07-12,
subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 07-57 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Deaton, Bello, DeLay, Massa-Lavitt and Roberts
None
None
Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 07-57 begins a 10-day calendar
appeal period to the City Council. The Commission action tonight is final and the
appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
STUDY SESSION
4. Study Session: Preliminary Draft - Municipal Code, Title 11, Zoning All Portions
Except Chapter 2.05 Residential Districts
Mr. Whittenberg stated that tonight's Study Session would begin with a brief overview
followed by a review of Chapter 4.10 through the remainder of Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.
He then proceeded to provide an overview of the previous Study Session discussions
reading from the handout "Overview of Previous Study Sessions Non-Residential
Parts." (Document is onfilefor inspection in the Planning Department.) He then proceeded
with the material for tonight's Study Session beginning with:
Chapter 4.10, Section 4.10.020 Peiformance Standards
Section A - Lighting
Pgs. 72-75
Mr. Whittenberg began by briefly reviewed the Lighting standards and called attention to
the Illumination levels as listed on Table 4.1 0.020A on Page 73 of the Preliminary Draft
of the Seal Beach Municipal Code, Title 11 Zoning. (Document is on file for inspection in
the Planning Department.) He indicated that the Planning Commission (PC) had
8 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 previously reviewed this information. Commissioner Roberts asked why a range was
2 provided rather than a maximum. Mr. Whittenberg stated that these numbers could be
3 stated as a minimum and maximum illumination level. Chairperson Deaton asked why
4 foot candles are used rather than lumens, as discussed during the study session on
5 Main Street signage. Mr. Whittenberg explained that lumens are used when referring to
6 illumination of a sign and not a broad illumination of an area. Chairperson Deaton then
7 asked if samples of the different levels of illumination are provided. She asked how
8 many foot candles a 100-watt light bulb emits. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he could not
9 answer this, but Staff could provide photographs of different locations in town and
10 provide the foot candle illumination levels for each area. Mr. Whittenberg stated that
11 Staff had reviewed these standards for most coastal cities within Southern California
12 and these ranges are comparable. He then noted the standard for building-mounted
13 decorative lights on Page 73, which reflects no more than 5 foot candles measured 5
14 feet from the light source and noted that this applies primarily to night security lighting to
15 the rear of commercial buildings. Chairperson Deaton stated that she likes the
16 standards for Shielding to help reduce glare, noting that she has received many
17 complaints regarding the lighting at Bank of America. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff
18 would speak to the management about shielding their lighting.
19
20 Chapter 4.10, Section 4.10.020 Petformance Standards
21 Section B - Noise
22 Pgs.75-78
23
24 With regard to Noise Levels Mr. Whittenberg explained that the definitions as presented
25 on Page 75 generally conform to state law and what is seen in a CEQA Environmental
26 Review document. He referred to Tables 4.10.020.B.2 and 4.10.020.B.3 showing
27 outdoor and indoor noise levels for specific uses, noting the indoor residential noise
28 level of 45 dB, which is a state requirement. He indicated the new proposed noise
29 standards for Outdoor Noise Levels, Transportation Noise Sources, Indoor
30 Instantaneous Noise Levels, Evaluation of Noise Impacts in Existing Residential Areas,
31 and Noise Study Required, and Noise Mitigation Measures. Commissioner Roberts
32 asked if the City has the capability of taking noise measurements, or does this type of
33 process have to be contracted. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff does have the
34 equipment for doing quick readings, but City Council also recently approved a second
35 consultant for on-call services for completion of more detailed noise analyses when
36 needed.
37
38 Chapter 4.10, Section 4.10.020 Performance Standards
39 Section H - Storm Drainage and Storm Water Runoff
40 Pgs. 79-80
41
42 Mr. Whittenberg stated that there are provision for storm runoff for public property and
43 roads in other sections of the Code, but because of the Water Quality Control Board
44 permit regulations to which cities are now subject, Staff is recommending that language
45 be included to ensure that the public is aware of these requirements. He noted that the
9 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 City would be liable for any violations and could be subject to substantial penalties for
2 noncompliance.
3
4 Chapter 4.10, Section 4.10.025 Recycling and Solid Waste Facilities
5 Pgs.80-84
6
7 Mr. Whittenberg indicated that these standards currently do not exist in the Code. He
8 explained that Staff proposes that multi-unit projects of five or more dwellings would
9 have to meet specific size requirements for both solid waste and recyclable material
10 bins on the premises (Table 4.10.025.D.10n Page 82). He also noted the proposed
11 requirements for non-residential development as listed in Table 4.10.025.D.2 on Page
12 83. Commissioner Roberts asked if any consideration is given to the type of business.
13 Mr. Whittenberg stated that there are provisions that would allow for increases, if
14 necessary, and noted that restaurants would probably have more solid waste material to
15 dispose of. Commissioner Roberts asked if the Orange County Health Care Agency
16 (OCHCA) has oversight over disposal of waste. Mr. Whittenberg stated that OCHCA
17 does have maintenance requirements for trash areas, but has not established size
18 requirements. Commissioner DeLay asked if the City could require a metal container
19 with a lid. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the City does require containers with a lid that
20 locks. He then quickly reviewed that remaining proposed standards for trash
21 receptacles. Commissioner DeLay asked if business owners could be required to bag
22 and tie all trash going into the container. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this has not been
23 proposed, but Staff will review the possibility of incorporating such a requirement. Mr.
24 Abbe interjected that he sees no legal problem with this.
25
26 Commissioner Roberts asked if the number of new proposed standards is comparable
27 to the zoning codes found in other coastal cities. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this would
28 depend upon how recently these cities have updated their zoning code. He explained
29 that the proposals presented are comparable to other coastal zoning codes, and there
30 are some that are even more stringent than what is being proposed for Seal Beach. He
31 noted that the last update of the Seal Beach Zoning Code (ZC) was completed in 1974.
32 Commissioner Roberts then stated that Staff should, therefore, be quite comfortable
33 with what they have presented, and he how the Commission should proceed on this
34 issue at this point. Mr. Whittenberg stated that once Staff knows what the code
35 provisions will be, standard plan check forms will be created with a checklist to give to
36 applicants to ensure that all standards are met.
37
38 Chairperson Deaton commented that it was a shame that no business owners are
39 present tonight to provide their input regarding the new proposed standards, which
40 would help the Commission in making its determinations on these items. Mr.
41 Whittenberg reminded the Commission that even after a new ZC is adopted, the need
42 for further amendments will still become necessary as the new code standards are
43 implemented.
44
45 Eldon Alexander asked if the recreational court lighting standards applied only to tennis
46 or basketball courts, and would they apply to only public courts or to private courts also.
10 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Mr. Whittenberg stated that these standards would apply to public or private sport
2 courts. Mr. Alexander stated that the lighting standards should be different for a football
3 sports complex or a baseball diamond. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff did not
4 incorporate this as the ball fields in town that are lit are located on school properties and
5 the City has no authority to control these uses. Mr. Alexander reiterated that the
6 proposed lighting would not be adequate for a baseball diamond or a football field.
7 Chairperson Deaton suggested changing the category heading to read "Recreational
8 Lighting," with subcategories for baseball and football.
9
10 Chapter 4.15 Fences Hedges and Walls
11 Section 4.15.010 General Height Limitation
12 Pg.89
13
14 Mr. Whittenberg referred to the tables on Page 90 reflecting the allowable heights and
15 noted that modifications to the standards are permitted subject to the Administrative
16 Use Permit (AUP) or Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process, and he will verify that the
17 PC had directed that these be subject to the AUP category. Commissioner Roberts
18 noted as he recalls wall heights greater than 30 inches would be subject to a CUP. Mr.
19 Whittenberg stated that he recalled the height being 40 inches, but he would confirm
20 this. Chairperson Deaton asked if these standards apply to residential. Mr. Whittenberg
21 stated that these standards would apply to all zones within the City. He noted that Staff
22 proposes that the new height limit for rear, street side, and interior side walls be 7 feet
23 by right, with a provision for an additional foot of height as long as a percentage of this
24 area remains open and is not constructed of solid material, as this will help with privacy
25 issues, particularly in Old Town. He then reviewed Table 4.15.010.A.2 on Pages 90-91,
26 which lists the streets where 1 a-foot rear walls would be allowed for lots located along
27 these roadways. Commissioner Roberts asked if you had a 6-foot wall, could you then
28 add a 2-foot lattice. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this would be allowed. Chairperson
29 Deaton stated that her concern is ending up with street corridors with solid walls on both
30 sides with no greenery. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt asked about the requirement for
31 having a completely new redesigned wall if desiring to increase the height to 7 feet. Mr.
32 Whittenberg confirmed that anyone wishing to increase their fence height would be
33 required to demolish their existing fence and construct a new one. He then noted that
34 1 a-foot walls are permitted by right on property lines between residential and
35 commercial properties, which would also require engineering.
36
37 Chapter 4.15 Fences Hedges and Walls
38 Section 4.15.015 Height Limitations/or Retaining Walls
39 Pgs. 93
40
41 Retaining walls below 48 inches would not require a permit, but terraced, landscaped
42 areas in between multiple retaining walls must have an automatic sprinkler system for
43 irrigation.
44
45 Chapter 4.15 Fences Hedges and Walls
46 Section 4.15.025 Special Wall and Fencing Requirements
11 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Pg.96
2
3 Mr. Whittenberg noted standards A. and B., which indicate:
4 A. Walls for swimming pools, spas, and similar features are subject to state building
5 code requirements.
6 B. One architectural feature, such as an arbor, trellis, or archway, will be permitted by
7 right at the front of a property for each 100 feet of street or private easement
8 frontage.
9
10 Commissioner DeLay stated that Leisure World has barbed wire at the top of their
11 1 a-foot walls. He asked if this was permitted. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the current
12 code has no provisions for prohibiting the use of barbed wire.
13
14 Eldon Alexander referred to the City Council (CC) hearing of the appeal of Variance
15 07 -2 for 429 Beryl Cove Way and stated that the applicants had presented a very nice
16 design with pilasters that more than offset what any plantings could do. Commissioner
17 Massa-Lavitt stated that she has observed the work in progress and it may not
18 necessarily reflect what was presented to CC. Mr. Alexander said the fears that higher
19 walls would create streets with long concrete corridors may be unfounded. Chairperson
20 Deaton commented that the entire ZC should not be revised based upon what one
21 applicant proposes to construct.
22
23 Commissioner Bello asked if the fencing around the DWP property is temporary. Mr.
24 Whittenberg stated that this is a security fence for the property and is essentially a
25 permanent fence.
26
27 Chapter 4.20 Off-Street Parking and Loading
28 Section 4.20.020 Required Off-Street Parking Spaces
29 Pg.100
30 Table 4.20.020.A.1-Pgs. 102-110
31
32 Mr. Whittenberg quickly noted that the PC had provided direction on how to deal with
33 shared parking programs and other types of parking reductions, with most of these
34 being assigned to the AUP process. He referred to Table 4.20.020.A.l, which reflects the
35 direction of the PC, noting the requirement for the provision of 2 off-street parking
36 spaces per residential dwelling unit, with the number increasing based upon the number
37 of bedrooms in a residence. Commissioner Roberts asked for the definition of off-street
38 parking, to which the Director replied, two parking spaces within an enclosed garage.
39 Commissioner Massa-Lavitt asked if tandem parking is allowed. Mr. Whittenberg
40 confirmed that it is allowed.
41
42 Eldon Alexander stated that he had observed parking in various locations in Seal Beach
43 and noted that when a 16th Street resident had applied for a Variance to construct a
44 deck over an enclosed courtyard on a nonconforming structure this was approved when
45 the applicant provided proof of adequate parking space for an economy car and an
46 electric vehicle in the rear driveway apron. He indicated that what is proposed is a
12 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 redefinition of what parking space is, which means that for most properties in Old Town
2 that now have 4 parking spaces, this redefinition would reduce these to 2 spaces. He
3 again stated that he does not believe there is a parking problem within Seal Beach.
4 Chairperson Deaton asked how Mr. Alexander determined that most 25-foot lots in Old
5 Town have 4 parking spaces. Mr. Alexander explained that two cars are parked in the
6 garage and two cars can be parked in the driveway apron. Mr. Whittenberg stated that
7 the City does not define driveway parking as off-street parking. Mr. Alexander
8 countered that the PC had defined the driveway apron as off-street parking when it
9 approved the 16th Street project. Mr. Olivera clarified that this project was approved for
10 a 37.5-foot lot on Ocean Avenue and the applicants were not stating that they had two
11 legal parking spaces, but were simply able to fit these two vehicles on the driveway. Mr.
12 Whittenberg stated that for years the City has required a parking standard of 2 spaces
13 per dwelling unit in an enclosed garage and has never defined the driveway apron
14 space behind homes as meeting the parking requirement. Mr. Abbe added that the
15 Code will require a minimum size for these spaces, and regardless of what mayor may
16 not have been approved in a Variance it is not binding upon subsequent applications or
17 the use of the Municipal Code. Mr. Alexander asked for a definition of off-street. Mr.
18 Whittenberg repeated that the definition for off-street would be parking spaces in an
19 enclosed garage. He noted that simply because people park in their driveway apron
20 does not mean that this meets the off-street parking requirements. Commissioner
21 Roberts noted that a new home in College Park East (CPE) would usually have 4
22 bedrooms, and requiring a 3-car garage "is not going to fly," as this is not what CPE is
23 trying to solve. Mr. Alexander added that this probably would also be the case on The
24 Hill and in College Park West (CPW). Mr. Whittenberg stated that for CPE, CPW, and
25 The Hill, space designations on the driveways could be designated for parking. Joyce
26 Parque stated that in CPE there is not enough space from the sidewalks to the garages
27 to use for parking. She then commented that allowing houses in the Seal Beach Trailer
28 Park (SBTP) discriminates against the rest of Old Town, as there are no parking
29 requirements for the trailer park. She also asked why it costs 3 times as much to build a
30 home in Seal Beach as it does in Newport Beach. Chairperson Deaton stated that
31 perhaps different areas of the City do need different parking requirements, as each
32 section has different needs. She suggested dividing up this section by area of the City
33 in an attempt to address the needs of each separate area. Mr. Whittenberg explained
34 that in the late 60's early 70's the SBTP was approved under an Unclassified Use
35 Permit with the requirement to maintain common open parking for the entire park
36 spaces with a ratio of 1.5 spaces per property unit. He noted that when a new unit is
37 installed, residents are not required to provide parking in the trailer space itself,
38 although some of the spaces do have parking. For those that do have parking, the City
39 continues to require that they maintain these spaces, but there is a common pool of
40 parking with assigned spaces. He reiterated that these parking standards are for single
41 family homes and what Staff had heard during previous study sessions on residential
42 was that there was a concern that with the construction of larger homes with a lot of
43 bedrooms and more kids with cars, this would create greater density of cars and
44 increased parking problems. Chairperson Deaton mentioned that many owners of
45 these larger homes are now renting out bedrooms, and this is another issue related to
46 parking that should be addressed. Commissioner Roberts stated that rebuilds in CPE
13 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 would be rare, and because of the size of the lots, he does not believe that teardown
2 and rebuild will become a trend there. Chairperson Deaton suggested that this issue be
3 re-visited prior to the public hearings on the revised Code.
4
5 Chapter 4.20 Off-Street Parking and Loading
6 Section 4.20.025 Parking Reductions
7 Pg.111
8
9 Mr. Whittenberg briefly noted that the PC has directed that shared parking programs
10 related to commercial parking standards be subject to an AUP. Commissioner Massa-
11 Lavitt asked if the parking standards for commercial properties, as proposed in Table
12 4.20.020.A.1 are the same as in the current City Zoning Code (ZC). Mr. Whittenberg
13 stated that most of these standards do not exist in the current ZC. Commissioner
14 Massa-Lavitt asked if discussion on these standards should be conducted. Mr.
15 Whittenberg noted that this discussion had taken place at a meeting for which
16 Commissioner Massa-Lavitt had been absent. Chairperson Deaton asked what her
17 concerns were. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt referred to Page 105 and asked if the
18 standards for auto sales and service stations had been thoroughly reviewed. Mr.
19 Whittenberg stated that most of the parking standards are current standards, but the
20 process for discretionary approvals is not currently a part of the ZC. Mr. Whittenberg
21 continued by noting that the major focus of shared parking standards is to give people a
22 better idea of how parking lots are to be designed and landscaped. Commissioner
23 Roberts stated that he thought one of the objectives was to have everything shaded,
24 when the trees are mature. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the objective is to have 10
25 percent landscaping and enough trees for 50 percent shade coverage after 5 years of
26 installation. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt then asked about shared parking. Mr.
27 Whittenberg stated that these requests would be subject to discretionary review and
28 approval and he believes the PC had agreed that this would be subject to the AUP
29 process. He noted that shared parking program must be designed based upon Urban
30 Land Institute standards.
31
32 Chapter 4.20 Off-Street Parking and Loading
33 Section 4.20.030 General Parking Design Standards
34 Pg.114
35
36 Mr. Whittenberg briefly reviewed parking design standards noting additional provisions
37 for drainage, landscaping, markings, and wheel stops and curbing, which currently are
38 not required. Chairperson Deaton asked why wheel stops are necessary. Mr.
39 Whittenberg explained that this prevents a collision with the car parked in the facing
40 space and prevents cars cutting across parking lots. Chairperson Deaton stated that
41 landscaped curbs are good for percolation purposes, but wheel stops have the potential
42 for people tripping over them. Commissioner Roberts asked about the City's policy on
43 speed bumps. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is not proposing this, but would have
44 no major concerns with permitting speed bumps in parking lots.
45
46 Chapter 4.20 Off-Street Parking and Loading
14 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Section 4.20.035 Driveways
2 Pg.124
3
4 Mr. Whittenberg indicated that Staff is proposing a standard for the widths of entrance
5 and exit aisles into large parking lots with more than 200 parking spaces.
6
7 Chapter 4.20 Off-Street Parking and Loading
8 Section 4.20.040 Required Off-Street Loading
9 Pg.125
10
11 The Director of Development Services stated that Staff proposes required loading space
12 areas based upon the size of a building, as indicated on Page 125.
13
14 Commissioner DeLay asked about allowing parking along Pacific Coast Highway
15 (PCH). Mr. Whittenberg stated that street parking would not be covered in the ZC, but
16 is determined by each city, and City Council has determined to maintain PCH as a two-
17 lane road with parking available.
18
19 Chapter 4.25 Sign Regulations
20 Pgs.129-158
21
22 Mr. Whittenberg indicated that the PC had reviewed this Chapter earlier this year,
23 including the Table of Uses, and had completed the Main Street Sign Regulations
24 approximately 3 years ago and there are no changes. He briefly reviewed Section
25 4.25.020 on Prohibited Signs and noted that by and large City sign standards have
26 proven to be reasonable. He explained that although the Bay Theater has the only
27 marquee sign in Seal Beach, sign standards have been added to address this type of
28 signage, and Staff is also proposing that portable A-Frame signs be permitted on private
29 property, subject to specific size and design limitations as outlined on Page 142.
30
31 Chapter 4.30 Landscaping and Buffer Yards
32 Pgs.159-177
33
34 The Director of Development Services stated that this is all new language, but has had
35 prior review by the PC. He indicated that these standards require that a landscape and
36 irrigation plan be submitted for specific size projects within the City, and this would
37 include the required water quality measures. He specified that this would apply for
38 multi-family residential projects of more than 5 units, and all non-residential projects.
39 He noted the provisions for buffer yards and shading requirements for parking lots.
40 Commissioner Roberts asked if developers of projects within Seal Beach have reviewed
41 these standards. Mr. Whittenberg stated that was not done, and he believes the City
42 should create standards based upon what they wish to see within the City. He indicated
43 that Staff has attempted to create standards that will provide clarity for developers in
44 designing parking lots for large projects. He then explained that Section 4.30.045 on
45 Buffer Yards is a new addition to allow for an increased width of landscaped areas
46 between properties with differing land use classifications.
15 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Chapter 4.40 Nonconformillg Uses, Structures, and Lots
2 Pgs.179-190
3
4 Staff has proposed no changes whatsoever to this chapter.
5
6 Chapter 4.45 Tral1sportatiol1 Demand Mal1agement
7 Pgs.191-196
8
9 Staff has proposed no changes whatsoever to this chapter.
10
11 Chapter 4.50 Adult Businesses
12 Pgs.197-198
13
14 The PC has previously reviewed this chapter and determined that these uses cannot be
15 subject to the AUP process. Mr. Abbe added that the City must ensure there is a
16 theoretical possibility for a minimum number of adult uses, and Staff will use whatever
17 the maximum separation may be and is within the legal requirement. Mr. Whittenberg
18 added that the City cannot establish separation standards so as to preclude an adult
19 business from locating within Seal Beach.
20
21 Chapter 4.55 Affordable Housing Bonus
22 Pgs. 199-208
23
24 Mr. Whittenberg indicated that these provisions are required in order to comply with
25 state law.
26
27 Chapter 4.60 Hazardous Waste Facilities
28 Pgs. 209-234
29
30 This reflects existing language from the current ZC, which was provided by the County
31 of Orange several years ago, and has been adopted by the City of Seal Beach
32
33 Chapter 4.65 Tattoo Establishments
34 Pgs.235-240
35
36 This chapter was previously reviewed by the PC.
37
38 Chapter 4.70 Wireless Telecommul1ications Facilities
39 Pgs.241-258
40
41 Mr. Abbe indicated that the City can pass an ordinance requIring that all wireless
42 facilities must be under grounded, but this would be subject to federal law, which states
43 that a city cannot prohibit a wireless facility.
44
45 Chapter 4. 70 Commoll Interest Developmel1ts
46 Pgs. 259-262
16 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 These standards would apply to a development similar to Leisure World, which is a
2 stock cooperative.
3
4 Chapter 4.75 Condominium Conversions
5 Pgs. 263-267
6
7 Staff has proposed no changes whatsoever to this chapter.
8
9 Chapter 4.80 Tenant Rights
10 Pgs.268-270
11
12 Staff has proposed no changes whatsoever to this chapter.
13
14 Chapter 4.85 Use Classifications
15 Pgs. 273-286
16
17 Staff has proposed no changes whatsoever to this chapter.
18
19 Mr. Whittenberg noted that Staff had advertised for a continuation of this discussion at
20 the Planning Commission (PC) meeting or October17, 2007, but he will be on vacation
21 on that date. He asked if the PC wished to continue with the discussion on Part V on
22 the 17th, or would prefer to wait until November 7, 2007. The Commission agreed to
23 wait until November ih. Commissioner Roberts noted that he wished to continue the
24 discussion on residential parking and open space standards during another study
25 session. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff will need time to research this information
26 and due to the holiday schedule he recommended scheduling the study session for the
27 second meeting date in January 2008. Chairperson Deaton suggested that in order to
28 create no further delay for the public hearings, the PC conduct an adjourned meeting in
29 early January 2008 to conduct this study session. Mr. Whittenberg suggested
30 scheduling the adjourned meeting for Wednesday, January 16, 2008. Chairperson
31 Deaton agreed and polled the Commission. Commissioner Roberts stated his feeling is
32 that the PC will take the time necessary to get this process done correctly, regardless of
33 the potential for delays.
34
35
36 STAFF CONCERNS
37
38 Mr. Whittenberg provided an update on the Shops at Rossmoor and the Pavilions
39 Market. Commissioner Roberts asked if the gas station would still be constructed. Mr.
40 Whittenberg stated that at this point Vons is not proposing to build this. He then noted
41 that Staff has the agenda and staff reports for the meeting of October 10th ready for
42 distribution to the Commission tonight.
43
44 Mr. Abbe indicated that the new Commissioners must be scheduled for ethics training.
45 He stated that this could be done on a one-to-one basis or could be done with the entire
17 of 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2007
1 Commission. Chairperson Deaton inquired about home study, and Mr. Abbe stated that
2 this option is available.
3
4
5 COMMISSION CONCERNS
6
7 Chairperson Deaton requested an update on the vacant lot on the southeast corner of
8 Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway. Mr. Whittenberg stated that there is nothing
9 new to report. She then inquired about the DWP Property. Mr. Whittenberg stated that
10 there have been a few inquiries about development allowed, but nothing further.
11 Chairperson Deaton noted that her brother recently moved to Leisure World and after
12 viewing the floor plans for the 1- and 2-bedroom units she found that the 1-bedroom
13 units have 200-sq. ft. patios and the 2-bedroom have 400-sq. ft. patios. She said that
14 after viewing these patios she was able to determine that 200 sq. ft. for a patio in a
15 multi-unit development would be very reasonable. Mr. Abbe cautioned that this
16 discussion should take place during a properly noticed study session and not during
17 Commission Concerns.
18
19
20 ADJOURNMENT
21
22 Chairperson Deaton adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m.
23
24
25 Respectfully Submitted,
26
27
28 ~A'\..\I..~f<o. C\~~9<_
29 Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secre~ary
30 Planning Department
31
32
33 APPROVAL
34
35 The Commission on November 7, 2007, approved the Minutes of the Planning
36 Commission Meeting of Wednesday, October 3,2007. ~
18 of 18