Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1973-01-03 . . . e . MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 1973 The Planning Commission of the C1ty of Seal Beach met in regular session on Wednesday, January 3, 1973, in the Council Chambers of the City Administration Building. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Ripperdan at 7:35 p..m. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Vice Chairman Dunn. Present. Absent: Dunn, Hammond, Knapp, Lanning, Ripperdan None The minutes of the meeting of December 20, 1972, were approved as presented. Secretary reviewed the public hearing procedure. 1. Public Hearings A. Michael and Ann McGlone (Carl Irwin), V-16-72 Applicant first presented plans for hearing in April, 1972 and requested a continuance for revised plans and completion of the lot coverage study. New plans require a 3~ foot encloachment into a portion of the rear yard for the addition of a family room. Proposal does not exceed lot coverage maximum. Hearing open. Mr. Irwin pointed out this was an "atrium" plan which precluded every possibility meeting code and be a usable room. He also stated that other homes constructed by this plan had been granted variances in the past. He also brought out that the lot adJoining at the rear had a three+ foot higher elevation and the addition would not affect its light and air. Mr. Irwin explained that a room 11' x 21' as suggested by the staff to not excroach would cover a window to an existing bedroom. Mrs. Lann1ng stated other variances were based on irregularly shaped lots. Discussion of proposed use. Mr. Irwin felt the irregularly shaped residence on a regular shaped lot was a hardship. Mr. McGlone advised that none of h1s neighbors objected. No comments from others were rece1ved. Hearing closed. Hr. Knapp spoke stating the atrium style was a problem and felt the applicant had made every effort to conform to code provisions. In add1tion, he mentioned this was one of very few atrium designs with side-entry garage. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the Var1ance subject to compliance with eng1neering conditions. Motion died for lack of second. Mrs. Lanning moved to approve with the cond1tion that there be no rear yard encroachment by revision of room. Secretary explained procedure. Mrs. Lanning amended her motion to deny the Variance as requested. Seconded by Mrs. Hammond. - Ayes Noes: Dunn, Hammond, Lanning, R1.pperdan Knapp Motion Carried. Resolut10n No. 716. Applicant advised of r1ght of appeal. B. Rezoning 1/2 Block from C-l to R-3, CZ-1-73 Following a request by petition of the property owners of Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block H of Tract 1009, and Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block Do Tract No. 1 for rezoning, the Planning Commission initiated action to consider a rezone from C...l to R-3. Staff reviewed the location and circumstances of the property and felt the rezoning was feasible. Hearing opened. Mrs. Crowley asked to have the area clarihed. No other comments and the hearing was closed. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the rezoning and recommend to the City Council that the Zoning Map be amended accord1ngly. Seconded by Mrs. Lanning. e . . Ayes Noes Abstain Hammond, Knapp, Lanning, Ripperdan None Dunn Motion carried. Resolution No. 717 C. Amendment to Article 2, defining "Covered Patio" and to Article 18, 18, Section 1805.1 This amendment deals with lot coverage to allow patios if properties have been constructed to maximum. Secretary rev1ewed history of lot coverage problem and various solutions considered. Hearing opened. No comments received from the audience or in writing. Hearing closed. Mr. Knapp expressed concern about lack of direction from City Council. Mr. Dunn commented that the only reason to define "covered patio" would be to allow them to exceed maximum lot coverage. He felt it should remain as originally recommended unless more direction given. Mr. Ripperdan felt original recommendation better. Mr. Dunn felt past mistakes should not be condoned, but guidelines be set and conformed uith. Mr. Knapp felt this proposal would add future problems. Mr. Dunn moved to return the original proposal to the Council as the recommended solution and advise the new alternative was undesirable. He stipulated that the findings show no comments received for or against this proposal and the Planning Commission had rediscussed the issue at length. Seconded by Mr. Ripperdan and passed unanimously. Resolution No. 718. 2. Oral Communications . There were no oral communications. 3. Wr1tten Communications There were no written communications. 4. Unfinished Business Secretary advised that no report was complete regarding the Bixby parcel and that it would be available at the next regular meeting. 5. New Business A. Rossmoor Business Center (Boston Store), PR-18-72 BOston Store proposed non-illuminated fascia signs on the new rear addition to the store in the Rossmoor Center. Mr. Ripperdan abstained from action due to conflict of interest. Plans acceptable as presented. Mr. Knapp moved to approve, seconded by Mrs. Lanning. Ayes Dunn, Hammond, Knapp, Lanning Noes: None Abstain: Ripperdan Motion carried. Resolution No. 719. B. Seal Beach Center (Tiny Naylors), PR-19-72 . A sign change is proposed at the Wooden Shoe with a bell tower added. Sign to be lowered from 39 ft. to 27 ft. Mr. Howard Freedman of Heath & Co. present as the applicant's agent and advised the room would be changed to mission tile to establish a Spanish motif. Sign would not flash or rotate. !Ir. Dunn moved to approve the plan review subject to compliance with engineering conditions. Seconded e . . by Mrs. Lanning and passed unanimously. Resolution No. 720. 6. Secretary's Report Discussed Bridgeport pat10s and covers. He understood the intent had been not to cover any outside patio area. Staff requests direction from Commission. Mrs. Lanning explained the intent was for no change whatsoever. Mr. Ripperdan and Mrs. Hammond felt homeowners should have a right to a covered pauo. Mr. Dunn said sideyards at a m1nimum under the precise plan and should be retained as open areas. He pointed out that the patios of the area are always shaded in some part because of close proximity of buildings. Staff requested to check what actual lot coverage is as built. Architectural Review Committee explained and discussed. Commission advised of proposed 10 R-l homes on Coastline Dr. Secretary advised of joint meeting with Council on January l5 at 8:00 p.m. with the consultant for overview of goals. No further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. until January 15, 1973 at 8:00 p.m. .~6'~c.&. ~ Lois Arnold Recording Secretary .