Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1972-06-21 . . . . . MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 21, 1972 The Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session in the Council Chambers at the City Administration Building. The meeting was opened at 7: 40 p.m. by Chairman Knapp and Vice Chairman Ripperdan led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Present: Absent: Dunn, Knapp, Lanning, Ripperdan O'Toole Mr. O'Toole's absence was excused due to business. The minutes of June 7, 1972, were approved as presented. l. Public Hearing A. Laura C. Delacy (Richard Moody), V-22-72 (cont'd) ... Applicant's request for sideyard encroachments was continued from June 7 and the Secretary reviewed the request, reported on the status and advised of notification of approval by the Board of Directors from Surfside. Hearing reopened. Mr. Moody spoke at length about many other existing structures with the same encroachments and that they are allowed under the Uniform Building Code. He also stated the projecting timbers were necessary for load strength: Discussion of possibility of running the fireplace flue inside. Mr. Moody advised that the existing piling will be cut off below grade and the 3 foot sideyard will be preserved. Hearing closed. Mrs. Lanning again requested arrangements be made to allow the Commission to view the properties in Surfs ide when an application has been submitted. Secretary in process of making arrangements. Mr. Dunn moved to approve the variance with the conditions that interior dimensions of the garage be lB' x 20' minimum with parking open and unobstructed, that bearing walls not encroach into the sideyards, and that copies of the Grants of Easement be furnished to the City following recordation. Seconded by Mrs. Lanning and passed unanimously present by the members present. Resolution No. 645. B. Mildred Creighton & Lucille Farr (Burgess-Donovan, Inc.) v-24-72 (cont'd) Secretary reviewed the application and revisions submitted since the hearing was opened and continued at the June 7th meeting. Revised request is for lO units in lieu of 9.79 and all other code requirements have been met. A written communication was received from W. S. Knighton opposing because of the increased parking need and the congestion in the area. Hearing reopened. Mr. Burgess cited the changes that had been made and pointed out that provisions had been made for l7 covered parking spaces (Code would require 15). Chairman reviewed the proposed conditions and the applicant agreed to meet all of them. Chairman also felt that the Commission could not sanction additional proposed parking in the sideyard setback. No other comments, the hearing was closed. Mr. Ripperdan moved to approve v-24-72 with the conditions that the engineering conditions be met, detailed landscaping plans be submitted to the satisfaction of the staff, and that a land use agreement be executed stipulating that the 17 parking spaces would remain open and accessible, that the number of units not exceed lO and provide for annual inspection. Seconded by Mr. Dunn and passed unanimously by the members present. Resolution No. 646. ~ . . . e e C. Charles & Rachel Sauerbier (Burgess-Donovan, Inc.), V-25-72 (cont'd) Public hearing opened at the June 7th meeting and continued. Applicant supplied revised plans meeting code requirements with the exception of a maximum of lO units on a single parcel. Density formula would allow 13. Hearing reopened. Frank Carollo, l34 6th, opposed the proposal because of the present congestion in the alley directly behind a l6 unit complex. Resident at l28 6th St. objected to allowing any variance from the code. Others concurred with this concept. Mr. Burgess, with confirmation by the Secretary, pointed out that lot area would allow l3 units and 23 parking spaces were provided in lieu of the minimum requirement of 20. Letter received from W. D. Knighton objecting to the congestion the new proposal could create. Discussion followed regarding the purpose of a limit of lO units on one site. Hearing closed. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the variance subject to the conditions that engineering conditions be met, that landscaping plans be approved by staff, and that a land use agreement be executed providing that the 23 parking spaces remain open and accessible, number of units limited to l3, and annual inspection provisions. Seconded by Mrs. Lanning and passed unanimously by the members present. Resolution No. 647. D. Mr. and Mrs. Terry O'Connell, v-26-72 Mr..and Mrs. o 'Connell: requested a variance to permit the enclosure of an existing patio between a nonconforming garage and existing residence. Morris Mitchell, representative of the applicant, was present. Hearing open. Mr. Mitchell advised that both occupants are sightless and this proposal would improve their living quarters, and no change in density would occur. All other code requirements have been met with the exception of the nonconforming garage. Proposed enclosure would not encroach into any sideyard. Hearing closed. Mr. Ripperdan moved to approve v-26-72 as presented. Seconded by Mrs. Lanning and passed unanimously by the members present. Resolution No. 648. E. Richard Kimball (George Hammond), V-27-72 Applicant proposed a two unit addition on a parcel with an existing single residence. Six parking spaces would be provided with four in tandem. Hearing open. Mr. Hammond indicated a willingness to comply with all staff recommendations. Mr. Knapp pointed out that any future additions or construction would not come under this variance. After applicant learned that increased parking requirements were going to be considered in the near future, he requested a continuance to incorporate two front units into the plan at this time. Chair so ordered. Continued to July 5. F. Bob Rudd, V-28-72 Mr. Rudd requested a variance to permit a fence exceeding 6 ft. in height at 4480 Birchwood. Fence is existing and was not1ce by a Building Inspector. Hearing open. Mr. Rudd explained he had been misinformed and did not realize he was in violation of code. Purpose to screen pool area from neighbors whose lots are on a higher elevation. Hearing closed. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the variance as presented. Seconded by Mr. Dunn. Ayes: Nays: Dunn, Knapp, Ripperdan Lanning Motion Carried. Resolution No. 649. e e 2. Oral Communications . Mr. Robertson asked where on the agenda his request for zone determination would be considered and was advised under written communications. There were no other oral communications. 3. Written Communications A letter from William L. Robertson to the City Manager was referred to the Planning Commission for a determination of zone for an"Arts & Crafts Center." The proposed use is planned to be located at II Pacific Coast Highway. Mr . Richard Lester explained the type of use: small booths in a "shopping mall." He stated he is operating similar centers in Encino and Santa Barbara. It is basically retail with a few artists producing their specialties on site. Extensive discussion followed regarding parking, master lease, sublease, other uses for which current business licenses have been issued for the same location. Mr. Robertson said he would not continue those in conflict with this operation. Boat storage might possibly continue. Surface of the entry road was discussed. Mr. Lester advised the types of shops in the Encino center. Planning Commission desired to inspect the premises to get a visual concept of the plan. An appointment was made to inspect on July 5 at 6 p.m. Decision of determination to be continued to the next meeting. . City Council directed the Planning Commission to set and hold a public hearing to consider increasing the on-site parking requirements in the residential zone for multi-family use. Chair ordered the heariD€' for July 5 with proper legal notices and a press release to inform the public. In reply to Mr. Ripperdan, Secretary advised that other recommendations regarding parking to be considered with the revision of the General Plan. 4. Unfinished Business Secretary requested that all plans be returned by the Commissioners. If a hearing is continued, they would be redistributed. Mr. Dunn asked to have prior plans returned with revised plans. Secretary had distributed the first draft of the open space element, reviewed it and pointed out the few revisions that had been included. Brief discussion followed throughout the review. Timing of adoption of the element was discussed. The Recreation Commission had reviewed the element and a report was received. Chairman ordered public hearing set for July 5. Mr. Ripperdan felt some state- ment to the effect that "open space is needed to separate urban areas" should be included in the introduction. Priorities were discussed. Commission felt it should remain open at least until after the public hearing where the public could express their desires. Mr. Knapp reported on a letter from the League of Cities regarding the annual conference at Anaheim asking for agenda items. No further business, the meeting was adjourned,at 9:35 p.m. . ~~ a...,~ Lo s Arnold Recording Secretary