Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1970-08-19 . e MINUTES OF TH~ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 1970 . The P1ann~ng Comm~ss~on of the City of Seal Beach met ~n regular sess~on on Wednesday, August 19, 1970, ~n the Counc~l Chambers at the C~ty Adm~n~stration Bu~ld~ng. The meet~ng was opened at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Knapp and V~ce Cha~rman Morr~s led the Pledge of A11eg~ance to the Flag. The Cha~rman ~ntroduced and welcomed M~ss Ju1~e Dorr as a new appo~ntee to the P1ann~n~ Comm~ss~on. Present: Absent: Dorr, Knapp, Lann~ng, Morr~s None The minutes of the meet~ng of August 5, 1970 were approved as presented. 1, Pub11c Hearing - Andrew Brown, V-16-70 Mr. Brown, 1420 Catal~na, r~quested a variance to permit construct10n of a bU11d1ng at 207 Main Street consisung of a commercial store on the f1rst floor and two 2 bedroom apartments above w1th s~x tandem park1ng spaces on-s1te. Park~ng spaces would be substandard in w1dth and ut~lize the same area as the requ~red 10ad~ng zone. The type of commercial use was not spec~f~ed. Hear~ng opened. No protests were rece~ved. The plans presented were very ~ncomp1ete and ~t was difficult to determ1ne the owners ~ntent. Park~ng was d1scussed at length. Mr. B~own requested recommendat10ns of poss1b1e acceptable ways to develop the property. M1SS Dorr made several suggest10ns of methods to ut111ze the property and recommended that Mr. Brown consult w~th an arch1tect who spec1a11zes 1n small, valuable beach propert1es. Hear1ng closed. Chairman Knapp deferred action unt~l more detailed plans can be prepared and presented 60r~thecSeptember 16, 1970, meet1ng. . 2. Pub11c Hear1ng - Bernard Solomon, V-17-70 Mr. Solomon presented plans request1ng a variance to allow 53% lot coverage 1n 11eu of the max1mum allowed of 50% for a proposed condom1n1um at Montec1to Rd. and Rossmoor Center Way. Th1S matter was d~scussed w1th other variances at a public hearing on August 5th, but was not spec1f1ca11y advert~sed. Mr. Solomon advised that F.H.A. had requ1red spec~al cond1t10ns regard1ng the corr1dors tthan would normally be prov1ded in an apartment development. The structure walls of the bui1d1ng would meet the code requ~rements, but the project10n of ba1con1es exceeds the maximum lot coverage. No protests were made. Hear1ng closed. Mr. Morris moved to perm1t a max~mum lot coverage of 53% for the projection of balcon~es on the proposed condomin1um. Seconded by Mrs. Lann~ng and passed unan1mous1y. Reso1ut10n No. 473. 3. Oral Communications Mr. Neprud~of the staff requested c1ar1f1cat10n of the Plan ReV1ew PR-35-70 for Gordon Logan. Or~entat10n of the house on the lot would make ~t infeas1b1e to set the carport as sketched. A slight variat10n would be more praatica1 in use and appearance. The Cha1rman w~th the concurrence of the members d1rected the staff to proceed with the plans as meetin~ the~r intent. 4. Wr1tten Commun1cat10ns . A staff report was presented requestdng a determinat10n of the proper zone for "Real Estate Off1ce" by the Commiss10n. It was recommended that the c-o Professional Off1ce Zone be the most 10g~cal. Mr. Knapp moved to determ~ne the c-o Zone as the proper zone for "Real Estate Off1ce" and recommend City Counc~l approve such determ1nation. Seconded by Mr. Morr1s and passed unan~mously. Resolut~on No. 474. e . . At the request of the Comm1ss1on, a proposed resolut10n was submitted honor~ng Mr. Barton for his service to the City. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the resolut10n. Mrs. Lanning seconded the motion and 1t passed unan1mous1y. Resolution No. 475. 5. PdBn5Review9- R & B Development Co., PR-39-70 R & B Development Co. presented plans for the 1andscap1ng of the1r proposed apartment complex. Staff recommended that it be st1pu1ated that 1andscap1ng be so arranged to prevent obstruction of f1re lanes or movement of emergency veh1c1es. Mr. Neprud adv1sed that the F1re Ch1ef had reviewed the plans and 1ndicated h~s approval. Mr. Morr1s moved to approve the plans as submitted w1th the cond1t10n that landscap1ng not interfere w1th fire lanes or movement of emergency veh1c1es. Seconded by Mrs. Lann~ng and passed unan1mously. Resolution No. 476. 6. Plan Review - Gary W1nters, PR-40-70 Mr. W1nters, 319 17th St., presented plans to perm1t a room add1t10n to the rear of an exist1ng home. Proposal meets all code requ1rements. It was suggested that a Land Use Agreement be executed and recorded to prevent converS10n to two un1ts w1th insuff1ent on-site park1ng. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the plans as submitted subject the execut10n and recordat1on of a land use agreement prior to issuance of a bU11d1ng permit. Seconded by Mrs. Lanning and passed unan1mous1y. Reso1ut~on No. 477. 7. Plan Review - James Vandergr1ff, PR-41-70 . Mr. Vandergr1ff, 5607 E. Seas1de Walk, Long Beach, represented by W1111am R. Siverson, Jr., presented plans for construction of a single fam11y res1dence at A-41, Surfside. Certa1n features of the proposal requ1red approval by Surfs1de Colony, Ltd. due to deed restrict~ons and a letter from the Colony was received ind1cat1ng that approval had been g1ven by the Board of Directors. Mrs. Lanning moved to approve the plans as subm1tted. Seconded by Mr. Knapp and passed unanimously. Reso1ut10n No. 478. 8. Plan Review - W111iam R. S1verson, Jr., PR-42-70 Mr. S1verson, Jr., C-20 Surfs1de Colony, presented plans for construct10n of a s1ngle fam1ly res1dence at A-112 Surfs1de. As 1n PR-41-70, a letter was rece1ved from the Board of D1rectors of Surfside Colony, Ltd. 1ndicat1ng their approval of the proposal. Mr. Morris moved to approve the plans as subm1tted. Mrs. Lann1ng seconded the mot10n and 1t passed unanimously. Reso1ut10n No. 479. 9. Plan Rev1ew - M~chae1 Comm1nos, PR-43-70 Mr. Comm~nos presented plans for a roof mounted s1gn to be added at the ex~st~ng restaurant fac1l1ty, 1600 Pac1f1c Coast H~~hwav, w1th no a1terat~ons 1n other s1~ns. Mr. McLaugh11n of Quality Neon S1gn Co. was present as h1s representat1ve. He stated the owner des1red to create a breakfast and luncheon hus1ness and the present s1gn is not noticed unt11 travelers have passed. It was d~scussed whether present s1gn could be adapted to 1nc1ude new 1nformat1on or moved to a better locat1on. M1ss Dorr stated that the ne1ghbor~ng bU11d~ngs and s~gns would obscure the proposed and 1t would not accomplish the purpose 1ntended. Mr. McLaugh11n said the present ID s1gn was 1nstalled by the property oWBef and the lessee was not free to change or move ~t. In add1t1on, he expla1ned the proposed s~gn as . e e . a non-mov1ng, non-f1ash~ng type with 1nter10r 111um~nat10n and not proJect1ng forward of the roof1~ne. Comments were made commend~ng the restaurant operat~on and the desire for ~t to continue and be successful. Mrs. Lann~ng moved to approve the proposed sign. Seconded by Mr. Morr1s. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Knapp, Lanning, Morr1S Dorr None Motion carried. Reso1ut1on No. 480. No further bas1ness, the meet1ng was adjourned at 8:45 P.M. ~~~ Lois Arnold Record~ng Secretary . .