Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1992-09-09 . . . . ' CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1992 The regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of September 9,1992 was called to order by Chairman Fife at 7:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Fife led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Fife Commissioners Dahlman, Law, Sharp, Orsini Staff Present: Department of Development Services: Lee Whittenberg, Director Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant Joan Fillmann, Executive Secretary CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of August 19, 1992 MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of August 19, 1992 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: ABSTAIN: 4-0-1 Sharp, Fife, Law, Orsini Dahlman SCHEDULED MATTERS 2. City of Irvine v. Irvine Citizens Against Development Commissioner Dahlman asked what was involved in a zoning amendment designed to achieve vertical consistency? Mr. Whittenberg explained this pertains to appropriate zoning in a planned community in Irvine. He explained how the General Plan is the basic development document and other documents must be consistent with it. Commissioner Dahlman asked if Seal Beach's General Plan designates the proposed Bixby golf course area and the Hellman Ranch as proposed development areas? Mr. Whittenberg said the General Plan designates the Bixby area for a golf course. The application involves an amendment to the '. . .' Page 2 - Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 General Plan, allowing for the residential uses. The Hellman Ranch has an existing Specific Plan on a portion of the property for residential development of 660 condominiums and 130 detached single family homes. ThiS was approved a number of years ago for the non-oil producing portions of the property. The oil producing areas are shown in the General Plan to remain as oil extraction. Commissioner Dahlman said that Specific Plan is unworkable and asked if the General Plan determined it's to be built residential? Mr. Whittenberg said the General Plan says that area Is to be built In accordance with the Specific Plan, for residential uses. The underlying Specific Plan designates the 660 unit condo project. Any change to develop something other than 660 condos and 130 single family homes would require a new Specific Plan to be approved by the City. Commissioner Dahlman said he felt it has been proved the existing Specific Plan is not consistent with the General Plan and there are other objections to the Specific Plan. He asked how that Specific Plan could continue to be in existence? Mr. Whittenberg replied it has never been amended or modified by the City Council. The last set of amendments for the 329 single family home project was to amend the current designation of the 660 condo project to something different. This was ultimately not approved by the City, so the previously existing plan is still in effect. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to receive and file this Orange County Superior Court decision. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Law, Fife, Dahlman, Orsini 3. Minor Plan Review #8-91 125 Cottonwood Lane Staff Report Mr. Curtis presented the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. The applicant, Ken Williams, requested Commission permission to amend his previously approved plans to allow (1) the stairway to be located in its original location, (2) the front door to remain a sliding glass door that would serve an enclosed balcony and (3) the roof be a hip roof over the front portion of the trailer and a flat roof surrounded by a parapet for the remainder. Commission Comments Commissioner Law indicated the architect had not drawn the plans with the stairway on them; the stairway was drawn in afterward. The Commission agreed the plans were hard to understand and were reluctant to vote on a . . . Page 3 - Planning COM~ission Minutes of September 9, 1992 project that was not properly presented. Mr. Curtis explained the architect forgot to draw in the stairway and later drew the stairway on the plans at the counter in the Planning Department. Mr. Curtis explained the drawings. MOTION by Dahlman, SECOND by Sharp to allow the applicant to speak to the Commission. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Dahlman, Sharp, Fife, Orsini, Law Ken Williams * 125 Cottonwood Lane. Seal Beach Mr. Williams drew a sketch of the stairway on the chalk board and explained how his new proposal would make it more difficult to convert this trailer to a duplex. Commissioner Orsini said he had previously telephoned the State on this trailer and was advised that if this trailer were to become a duplex or an apartment it would have to have additional parking. There is no room for additional parking. Mr. Whittenberg said staff feels the present proposal is better than what the Planning Commission previously approved and that's why staff is recommending approval. By elevating and enclosing the deck area it precludes the trailer from easily being converted to a duplex. The exterior deck would make it easy to see if a stairway was cut into the deck area. Mr. Whittenberg said the previously approved plan had an entry where the proposed deck is now and it also had an entry at the opposite end of the trailer. This proposal eliminates one entry by creating the raised deck Commissioner Sharp asked staff if a duplex would meet the City's zoning laws? Mr. Whittenberg said no; the City allows one unit for each space in the Trailer Park and the definition is determined by the number of kitchens in the trailer. Chairman Fife said the 42" rail referenced in the staff report is really a half stucco wall, not a railing. Commissioner Dahlman noted this plan would save the applicant removmg plumbing to relocate the stairs. MOTION by Dahlman; SECOND by Orsini to approve the amended plans for Minor Plan Review #8-91 on the express condition that the plans be updated before any construction begins. Sp~ifically the stairwell be shown in the . . . Page 4 - Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 first floor location and the enclosure around the patio be indicated as a parapet with stucco siding. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Dahlman, Orsini, Fde, Law, Sharp 4. Conditional Use Permit #92-2 [Request to Modify Hours] 101 Main Street, Suite .0. SeaSide Grill Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. The applicant, Jim Watson, wrote to the Planning Commission on behalf of the owners of the SeaSide Grill, requesting modification of hours from 10:00 p.m. closing to 1:00 a.m. closing seven days a week. Commission Comments Commissioner Sharp said applicants are not informed the initial hours they initially request are "cast in iron" when granted and are not changed until the review period. The applicants can voluntarily reduce their hours but they cannot extend their hours; they should request maximum hours initially. Commissioner Orsini asked what hours ABC placed on the applicant? Mr. Whittenberg didn't have the file to research that question. MonON by Sharp; SECOND by Dahlman to allow the applicant to speak to the Commission. MonON CARRIES: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Fife, Law, Orsini, Dahlman Ron Sesler * 101 Main Street. Suite .0. Mr. Sesler introduced himself as the owner of the SeaSide Grill. He said that when he initially came before the Commission he then requested to remain open to midnight but the Commission's response was that after one year that request would be reconsidered. He added the ABC put rules and regulations on him based on what the City did with his CUP; the CUP limited his hours and ABC followed suit. The State of California says you can be . . . Page 5 PlannIng Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 open from 6 AM to 2 AM if you so choose. If the Commission would allow his current request he would have to take a letter to ABC and II... they would go along with whatever you sayll. He stated he serves hot food up to one hour before closing and cold sandwiches almost up to closing. Commissioner Dahlman indicated he had voted against extending the hours for the last application, Papillion's restaurant, because there appears to be no rationale as to why certain establishments have short hours and certain have long hours. Mr. Sesler agreed there is no rationale. Commissioner Orsini said #41 ABC licenses (beer and wine) seem to close early and #47 (general liquor) ABC licenses are open later. Commissioner Dahlman said he voted against Papillion's because he thought the Commission was approving 10:00 p.m. closings for the most part and then 11 :00 p.m. on a late night for everybody. He said Commissioner Orsim had informed him that people with #47 licenses were getting later hours. Commissioner Orsini agreed everyone should have the same hours but a problem occurs when the Commission can't do anything about an establishment that's already existing. If the Commission could control everyone that would make it fair, but they can't so therefore each case must be considered individually. Chairman Fife said the Commission considers the proximity of the property to residences. Papillion's had one residence at 75' at the other end of the church. SeaSide Grill has one residence at 25'. Chairman Fife said he felt the Commission should not embark on the notion that everyone's going to be treated exactly the same because there are differences in the proximity of residences. With that parameter in mind, he agreed the decisions should be fairly uniform. The Commission agreed a Public Hearing was necessary. Commission Comments MOTION by Orsini; Second by Dahlman to continue Conditional Use Permit #92-2 to the Planning Commission meeting of October 7, 1992. This will be Noticed as a Public Hearing. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Fde, Law, Orsini, Dahlman Page 6 - Planning CommIssion Minutes of September 9, 1992 . PUBUC HEARINGS 5. Conditional Use Permit #92-4 333 First Street * Oakwood Apartments Staff Report Mr. Curtis delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. The applicant, John Abboud, requested approval for an off- sale beer and wine license at an approved convenience store within a residential complex, Oakwood Apartments. . Commission Comments Commissioner Dahlman asked if Rule 27 applies to on-sale? Mr. Curtis said yes. Commissioner Dahlman asked how a country club operates? Mr. Curtis said staff has discussed the matter with ABC and the Old Ranch Country Club. ABC indicated country clubs are technically open to the public. ABC occasionally enforces this and they do have passes and keys to get in so they can walk in unannounced. Mr. Whittenberg said there is a major difference between on-premises and off-premises licenses. On off- premises licenses you have two types of licenses --- (1) beer and wine and (2) general liquor. With the on-premises licenses you have those same types of licenses and in addition, there are many other types of licenses. One of those other licenses is a #51 - On-Sale General - Club. It's a restricted public access license. The club license mandates the alcohol be served within the confines of the club itself. Public Hearing Chairman Fife opened the Public Hearing. Larry Miller. Esq. * Miller & Chernoff * 5850 Canoga Ave.. Suite 302. Woodland Hills. CA 91367 Mr. Miller stated he represents the applicant, John Abboud, and Oakwood Apartments. Mr. Miller said he approached ABC to see if there was some solution. He said he has no solution from the ABC, the requirement that the store be open to the public remains. They discussed the language of the City's municipal code -- "for the specific use and services of the occupants and their guests" and his view that it's "non-exclusive" in that members of the public could purchase items and not violate the City's code. He indicated Oakwood Apartments has national management but each project is individually owned. Two other Oakwood apartments have liquor selling establishments on their grounds --- Toluca Hills and the Marina in Los Angeles. He said experience has shown that about 100% of the patrons of these facilities are occupants and their guests. He asked the Planning . . . . Page 7 - Planning Commission Minutes of Septe.ber 9, 1992 Commission to reconsider their position with the unlikelihood that anyone outside the apartments would use the facility. He suggested a temporary survey, six or twelve months, to determine who used the convenience store. The Commissioners discussed the opposing facts that (1) the ABC Rule 27 mandates this convenience store would have to be open and accessible to the general public to sell beer and wine and (2) the City's municipal code Section 28-800(3)(e) which requires all uses and services designed for the specific convenience of residents and their guests. Chairman Fife clarified the Commission's position, stating it has no knowing concern that citizens in Seal Beach can buy beer at Oakwood Apartments. The problem is squaring the ABC's requirement with a conflicting City zoning requirement. As soon as the public is allowed into Oakwood to buy beer you'd have a commercial use in a residential zone. Mr. Curtis said the residential high density (RHO) zoning allows accessory commercial uses in large complexes. Oakwood Apartments is zoned RHO. Commissioner Orsini discussed how easy it would be for the public to park on First Street and get Into Oakwood Apartments. Helen Evans, Oakwood's manager, said street parking is usually available. Commissioner Sharp said his main concern was the Commission's granting something that is against ABC's laws. He indicated a person could not get into the gate-guarded community after 9:00 p.m. without going through their security. It's not really open to the public. Mr. Miller said the gates are not locked from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. He discussed this with ABC and without committing themselves, ABC said they would consider it to be open to the public if they had reasonable hours when the gates were unlocked, even though it was not all hours. Chairman Fife said he felt keeping the public away from the store from 6:00 p.m. onward was a significant interference to public access. Chairman Fife said to allow Mr. Abboud to have alcohol in the convenience store, the Commission would have to change code Section 28-800(c)(1) and interpret the word "specific" to mean "primary" because this would be primarily for the benefit of the members of the Oakwood Apartments but would not be exclusively for the benefit given the ABC requirement. Then, Mr. Abboud would have to convince the ABC this store is open and accessible to the public --- even though Oakwood is a gated community with no signage. . . . Page 8 . Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 Mr. Miller said the ABC was most concerned the facility be "available" to the public and they felt 99% of the users of the facility would be the occupants and guests. Chairman Fife asked staff for background information on municipal code Section 28-800. Mr. Whittenberg said Section 28-800 was a specific provision put into the Code about the time of construction of the Oakwood complex to allow for some certain types of retail uses in that establishment. Staff's research does not show a tremendous amount of discussion regarding the term "specific". The City Attorney's Office and staff feel by using the term "specific" it is mean to be used by the residents of the complex only. Additionally, the property is in a residential zone and once you have commercial establishments open to the general public that requires commercial zoning of the property. By State law you cannot approve a use of the property which Is in conflict with the zoning. Gail Olsen * 707 Central Avenue. Seal Beach Ms. Olsen spoke in opposition to this application. She said what is done in Seal Beach should not be based on what is done in Los Angeles because Seal Beach is a small town. There are two liquor stores within walking distance of the Oakwood Apartments. First Street leads directly to a major beach parking lot and there is heavy traffic in the summer. She favors denial. Commission Comments Commissioner Orsini said he had lived at an Oakwood complex when he first moved to California and could think of several good reasons to allow the applicant to have a liquor license at this site. Also the hours of the proposed store would have it closing before all the other liquor stores. But the public access issue was unresolvable and therefore he couldn't go along with this. Commissioner Dahlman said he agreed with the staff report. If Mr. Miller could find out how the other two facilities in Los Angeles County got approved he may find the method to get approved in the future. Commissioner Dahlman suggested the Commission deny this without prejudice. Commissioner Law said she could not see approving this as it stands Commissioner Sharp said he didn't see anything wrong with it except the zoning is in conflict and there is no public access. As it stands he could not vote in favor. . . . Page 9 - Planning Co~~ission Minutes of Septelber 9, 1992 Director Whittenberg indicated a motion to deny without prejudice would allow the applicants to further research the matter with ABC. If they are able to come up with a new type of license that ABC may be willing to create to issue for this particular location, it would allow the application to come back to the Commission in a time period of less than one year. MOTION by Dahlman; SECOND by Orsini to deny Conditional Use Permit #92-4 without prejudice. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Dahlman, Orsini, Sharp, Law, Fife *** RECESS from 8:50 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 6. Zoning Text Amendment #92-6, Item #3 Amend Article II of Chapter 28 of The Code of The City of Seal Beach. CA to establish a definition of -rence-. Staff Report Mr. Curtis delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department] . Commission Comments Chairman Fife asked for the new definition of "fence": ~28-2331. Fence. A physical barrier constructed of wood, mesh, metal, chain, masonry, brick, slate, plastic, louvered glass or other similar material. For the purposes of this section a post or pole of wood, metal or another material, designed for use as a physical barrier, is a fence. Chairman Fife asked when is a property "redeveloped"? Mr. Whittenberg said the point between "mamtaining" and "redeveloping" is when you're adding liveable floor space to the structure over what currently exists. Public Hearing Chairman Fife opened the Public Hearing. No one wished to speak for or against this issue. The Public Hearing was closed. Page 10 Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 . Commission Comments MOTION by Orsini; SECOND by Sharp to approve Zoning Text Amendment #92-6, Item #3. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Orsini, Sharp, Fife, Law, Dahlman Mr. Whittenberg said staff is holding this amendment and the previously approved amendment and based on the Commission's determination regarding accessory structures in the rear yard setback and fence height amendments that may/may not be approved, staff will group all these together for forwarding to the City Council for consideration at one time. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Sol John * 330 12th Street. Seal Beach Mr. John talked about fencing on public property, the need for a boardwalk while the pier is being repaired and removal of vagrants from the City. . STAFF CONCERNS There were no staff concerns. COMMISSION CONCERNS . Penalty on Businesses Operating Without CUPs. Commissioner Law asked why there was no financial penalty leveled against Taco Surf restaurant for not having had a CUP while operatmg? She indicated the are businesses operating without City business licenses too. Mr. Whittenberg said penalty provisions are established in the business license code for not having a business license renewed on an annual basis and City ordinances allow those types of penalties to be imposed. To try to impose a penalty on a CUP would involve going to court and trying to seek a judgement for operating without the appropriate CUP. The primary goal of the City is to try to get the business into compliance with the City's regulations. Most court cases where cities seek compliance end up in very minimal financial penalties against the business. Chairman Fife said he thought the Commission should consider, for the future, making parking impact fees retro-active from the time the business began operating. Commissioner Law said Spaghettini's was fined $500 for not having an entertainment CUP. Mr. Whittenberg said the Commission established a penalty fee that the restaurant agreed to pay. Commissioner Law asked if this same type of penalty fee could be imposed on other non-complying facilities? Mr. Page 11 - PlannIng Commission MInutes of September 9, 1992 . Whittenberg said the Commission could impose a condition and then it's up to the applicant to agree to that condition. If he doesn't agree to the condition, the applicant could then file an appeal to the City Council and let the Council resolve the Issue. Commissioner Law felt strongly that a penalty should have been imposed on Taco Surf and definitely others operating without property City approvals. Staff will bring the issue forth in the staff report. Chairman Fife said it did not seem fair for a business owner to avoid the financial responsibilities of paying in-lieu or parking impact fees for the time he did not have a CUP. . Entertainment Issue Commissioner Sharp indica~ed an entertainment request would soon be before the Planning Commission. He was concerned the overall entertainment discussion had not come back before the Commission. He was concerned on making a decision for one restaurant when the Issue for the whole City has not been discussed. Mr. Whittenberg said, regarding Spaghettini's, the indefinite extension would not be reviewed at this time pending ABC's review. Regarding the on-going study of entertainment, this is still an on-going process in the Planning Department. A number of alternatives are being reviewed and this will be presented to the Commission along with a proposed ordinance or policy statement from the City Manager's Office for special event, live entertainment, one-time basis only. This is anticipated to be presented to the Planning Commission at the end of October. Tootsie's Restaurant * 909 Ocean Commissioner Sharp said the Commission granted a CUP to Tootsie's restaurant a few months ago. The representative was present and agreed to the conditions. One of the conditions was that prior to serving alcohol the City would review their lease to make certain they were the primary lessors as required In checking With staff, this lease has never been submitted and yet they are serving alcohol. He was also told that other conditions have not been taken care of. "They haven't done any of the things we have required, they just went ahead and opened up and operated just as if they hadn't been before us". Another concern is we don't have the staff and time to enforce these things but "... if we don't start enforcing then we might as well close this office up and forget it". Mr. Whittenberg said the Planning Department has been preparing special reports for the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the types of approvals currently in existence for all ABC licenses in the City, looking at the conditions of approval for all and investigating all of those locations to ensure whether or not they are in compliance With the conditions. Staff has sent letters to Tootsie's last week indicating they needed to comply With conditions or their CUP would come before the Planning Commission for possible hearings. Hennessey's is also being pursued in this regard . Page 12 - Planning Commission Minutes of Septeaber 9, 1992 ., Wall at Seal Beach Boulevard Commissioner Sharp asked if something was going to be done about the failing wall? Chairman Fife said he was gOing to write to Orange County. Commissioner Sharp said he would like to sign the letter also Mr. Whittenberg said this property might be in the Rossmoor Community Services District; perhaps a letter should be sent to both. Absence Chairman Fife indicated he would be out of the State and unable to attend the October 7th Planning Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Fife adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p m. Respectfully Submitted, ~ Joan Fillmann Recording Secretary .' Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved by the Planning Commission. Approval: The Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 were approved on September 23, 1992. ~ fill