Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1992-09-23 . . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 23, 1992 7 30 P.M * CIty Councl] Chambers 211 EIghth Stree~ Seal Beach, CA I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of September 9, 1992 2. Minor Plan Review #92-13 Address: 215% Tenth Street Applicant: Jim & Daisy Funk Request: Remodel IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS 3. City Council Policy Statement re Resolutions. 4. City Council of Approval Licenses. Policy Statement re Standard Conditions for Conditional Use Permits re ABC 5. City Council Ordinance No. 1361 An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach Approving Zone Text Amendment 92-5, Amending Sections 28-210 and 28-2407, Relating to the Expansion of Non-Conforming Structures Within the City of Seal Beach. 6. 1993 Regional Housing Needs Assesment (RHNA) Transmittal by SCAG. 7. Proposed Rule 1402 Control of Toxic Contaminants from Existing Sources; and Proposed Amendments to Rule 1401 - New Source Review of Carcinogenic Air Contaminants, South Coast Air Quality Management District . Page 2 . City of Seal Beach Planning Co..ission Agenda * 9/23/92 8. Proposed Public Notification Procedures Pursuant to the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information Act of 1987(AB 2588), South Coast Air Quality Management District 9. Report of the California Electric and Magnetic Field (EMF) Consensus Group. v. PUBLIC HEARINGS VI. ORAL COMl\1UNICATIONS VII. STAFF CONCERNS VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS IX. ADJOURNMENT . . . . . Page 3 - C1ty of Seal Beach Plann1ng CO..18810n Agenda · 9/23/92 CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Forecast OCT 07 CUP #16-91 (Noel's RestaurantlEntertamment) 1 2 CUP #14-91 (SpaghettlDI Rest IEntertamment) (Delayed - see letter to SpaghettlDI) 3 CUP #92-12 (1 Anderson Street/Jeff Overeem) (Mr Overeem has submItted an applIcatIon for a JIffy lube/qUIck wash operatIon on thIS SIte, ZC #92-1 wIll not be consIdered) 4 CUP's/Covered Roof Access Structures 5 PolIcy Statement SelVlng alcohoVglass contamers/patIo areas 6 Staff report Havmg generIC alcoholIc beverage SIgns m wmdows & on canopIes 7 ZT A #92-6, Item #2 Apphcant CIty of Seal Beach Request To establIsh a speCIfIC setback requlfements for non-habItable, detached accessory structures m resIdentIal zones 8 CondItIOnal Use PermIt #92-2 Address 101 Mam Street, SUIte "a" Apphcant Ronald & PatrICIa Sesler Request ExtenSIOn of hours to 1 00 a m daIly * [Joan FIllmann - excused absence/vacatlOn] OCT 21 1 CUP #92-7 (Unocal/99 Manna/ReactIvate all DehydratIon FaCIlIty) (EnVIronmental work bemg done) Covered Roof Access Structures Staff report ZTA re patIO setbacks along CrestvIew (1733 CrestvIew VIOla hon) CUP #92-13 (PapIllon restaurantlEntertamment) 2 3 4 . . . Page 4 . City of Seal Beach Planning Co..ission Agenda . 9/23/92 NOV 04 1 2 3. CUP #15-91 (Cafe Lafayette/ABC renewal/memo) Covered Roof Access Structures CUP's on BusInesses Open 2-6 AM CUP #92-9 1300 PCH/G&M OIl Co CUP #92-? /Shell OIl CUP #92-? /Chevron all NOV 18 CUP #17-91 (Pasta Grotto/ABC renewal) DEC 09 DEC 23 CUP #12-90 (Bonadonnas/ABC renewal) STAFF REPORTS PENDING, NOT AGENDIZED * ZTA #92-2 for Entertamment Cafes (Pendmg CIty Manager's work Day PermIts) * ReVIew of CUP's for BUSInesses Open 2-6 A M * ReVIew of 12 establIshments sellmg lIquor w/o CIty CUP Staff report to PlannIng CommIssIon re ABC/CUPs * Ordmance re CrestvIew encroachments & walls along major artenals on One . . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23,1992 The regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of September 23, 1992 was called to order by Chairman fife at 7:30 p.m. In City Council Chambers. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Sharp led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Fife Commissioners Dahlman, Sharp, Law, Orsini Staff Present: Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Joan Fillmann, Executive Secretary CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Orsini to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of September 9, 1992 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Orsini, Fife, Dahlman, Law 2. Minor Plan Review #92-13 2151h Tenth Street Staff Report Director Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. The applicants, James and Gladys Funk, requested Commission consideration for a proposed remodel and major addition of 1080 square feet to the front unit of a duplex located at 215 and 215% Tenth Street. The subject property Is nonconforming due to the (previously allowed) tandem parking for the four required parking spaces for the two separate units on the property. The property is 37%' x 117%'. The proposed stairway to the second story apartment unit above the garage encroaches Into the side yard up to the property line. The City's municipal code allows that stairway to encroach to within 2' of the property line. Staff recommends this proposed stairway be relocated out of the required side yard setback, . . . Page 2 - Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 thus providing a minimum side yard setback of 2'. Staff recommended approval subject to four (4) conditions. The proposed CRAS will require a sep21rate applicaton and is not a part of the consideration this evening. Commission Comments Commissioner Law asked for clarification on what the Planning Commission was being asked to approve tonight. Director Whittenberg said the Commission would be considering the stairway with staff's conditions, thus requiring redesign of the stairway. The Commission will not be approving a CRAS, they would be considering for approval an open stairwell to the roof deck. Commissioner Sharp said he was concerned that the plans are incomplete. He said the plans may never come before the Commission the way the Commission wants them and the way they should be. Director Whittenberg said the Commission would be approving the plans at this point for a roof deck with an open stairway, without a CRAS. The Funk's would need to revise their plans to provide for the proper drainage of the open stairway if they wish to proceed with construction Immediately. The Funk's will have to come back before the Planning Commission If they want to have a CRAS. Chairman Fife asked about page two of the plans, asking where the relocated stairway would be. Mr. Whittenberg explained the plans. Chairman Fife asked why this property is not nonconforming due to density? Mr. Whittenberg explained this is a 37%' lot and there is sufficient land area on the lot for the two units. Chairman Fife agreed with Commissioner Sharp, stating he too would like to see on the plans where the relocated stairways are going to be. He said he had an uneasy feeling that when plans leave the Commission the Commission doesn't get to see them again. There have been a number of instances where the Commission has instructed an applicant to build in accordance with the approved plans and the applicants have not done this. Mr. Whittenberg said that as the plans come back to the Building Department the plan check process would review the plans to ensure the stairway meets code requirements for construction and setback requirements. Chairman Fife suggested a condition be added requiring the plans be returned to the Commission for review prior to the issuance of the building permits. Commissioner Sharp liked this idea, adding it would not hold up the applicants' progress. Mr. Whittenberg said if the applicant decides to add a CRAS he could revise his plans to show the relocated stairway as part of the CRAS process. . . . Page 3 Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Fife to approve Minor Plan Review #92-13 with the addition of the following condition: 5. The revised plans are to be revicewedl bW the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of any building permits. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Fife, Dahlman, Law, Orsini SCHEDULED MATTERS 3. City Council Policy Statement re Development Applications Procedures Staff Report Director Whittenberg commented on the purpose and intent of the proposed City Council policy statement regarding the use of resolutions to record Planning Commission actions. Staff has reviewed this issue with the City Attorney's Office, who said it was a policy issue for determination by the Commission. They felt it would probably make it easier years from now to find out what an actual decision was, rather than having to read through past Commission minutes to find an action. This would have to be forwarded to the City Council for adoption. This would then be a policy statement of both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Staff recommended approval and forwarding to City Council. Commission Comments Chairman Fife asked who recommended the twelve categories of information and would it increase staff's workload greatly? Mr. Whittenberg said the City Attorney's Office reviewed what staff prepared and felt they were sufficient. The preparation of resolutions would Involve approximately ten minutes of staff time per resolution. Commissioner Dahlman, in discussing the recommended twelve items of information to be included in any resolution, said that items 1-9 are currently In the staff reports and items 10-12 are in the Minutes; this would be creating more paperwork perhaps unnecessarily. Mr. Whittenberg said the bulk of any resolution is done while preparing the staff report. Again, it takes about ten minutes to reformat the information from a staff report into a resolution. What does take a tremendous amount of time on researching approved actions with no resolution is locating and reading the Minutes of meetings to find the action taken. In previous years the Planning Commission Mmutes . . . Page 4 . Planning Co..ission Minutes of Septe.ber 23, 1992 were not as explicit as they are now. It is difficult to find out what actually was considered, what was approved, if the plans were modified and how they were modified and finally approved. Staff feels it would make their research efforts much easier. Chairman Fife asked if staff could charge a fee, say $15 for a resolution? Mr. Whittenberg said the only charge being applied now is a photocopying charge.The City Manager will be taking amendments to the Council which will revise a number of fees the City charges. One of those proposals will be to charge for the actual staff time in doing the research to provide interested Individuals resolutions, building permits on their property or previous Planning Commission reviews. MonON by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve the forwarding of this policy statement, -Development Applications Procedures-, to the City Council for approval and adoption. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Fife, Orsini Chairman Fife said he would like Director Whittenberg to convey to the City Council that the City should seriously consider charging fees for staff time. With Sacramento shrinking the City's budget, the City could use those fees. Mr. Whittenberg said that has been proposed as part of a comprehensive amendment to the existing fee resolution. They are currently under review by the City Attorney's Office. It will come before the City Council between now and January 1st. Commissioner Dahlman said he read that Orange County's budget was about $3 billion ... more than $1000 per County resident. He said he would rather see the City get a hold on how much work is being done by government bodies and cut down where we can rather than raising fees. Chairman Fife said he could see the wisdom of formalizing the process by which items are approved, noting we live in a litigious society, coupled with the readiness of people to look for somebody to sue if something happens, and the high property values. It would protect the City to have a resolution laying out everything that happens regarding a property. . . . Page 5 - Planning Co.mission Minutes of September 23, 1992 4. City Council Policy Statement re Standard Conditions for Alcoholic Beverage Ucenses. Mr. Whittenberg said this policy statement came about from a number of Planning Commission discussions regarding the uncertainty on how conditions of approval are imposed, variations in conditions from one property to another etc. Staff felt It would make It clear for the Commission, staff and applicants to provide a standard set of conditions that would be applied for all types of ABC licenses. This would serve as a tool to educate an applicant and the public. They would know at the beginning of the process what some of the standard conditions they might be facing are. Commission Comments Commissioner Sharp questioned condition #2: "... The establishment must have availability for ordering food until thirty (30) minutes prior to closing time". He felt forty-five (45) minutes prior to closing might be a better time frame because you could not order, get your food, and eat in thirty minutes and be through by closing time. It would cause a problem in allowing the restaurant time to clean up. Commissioner Orsini asked what food must be served until "X" minutes before closing? A full menu? Snacks? He asked to have this further defined. Commissioner Sharp questioned condition #4: "The interior noise levels generated by the operation of such establishment shall not be audible from outside the buildmg". He felt this was open to much interpretation. He asked to have this further defined and pinned down. Commissioner Orsini requested further clarification. He noted establishments keep their doors open during the summer et cetera. Commissioner Orsini questioned condition #7: "Service and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the outdoor dining area shall be momtored frequently by the restaurant employees to ensure the outdoor dining area does not create a public nuisance contrary to public welfare and morals." . . . Page 6 . Planning Co..ission Minutes of September 23, 1992 [Emphasis added] He said the word "frequently" is ambiguous and asked for further clarification on the time limit "frequently" refers to. He asked staff to research whether an outdoor dining area serving alcohol was required to have a waitress in the area at all times. Commissioner Orsini questioned condition #16: "Utter and trash receptacles shall be located at convenient locations inside and outside establishments, and operators of such establishments shall remove trash and debris on an appropriate basis". [Emphasis added] He indicated most restaurants don't have receptacles behind them. Certain establishments may have one bin serving two or three restaurants. Mr. Whittenberg said staff was aware of this but the condition states only that the bin must be "convenienf'. Commissioner Orsini noted he has seen restaurant workers literally toss the plastic trash bags into a bin from a distance; sometimes the trash doesn't hit the bins. Restaurants have a lot of food waste and trash pick up is not daily. The public health rules mandate emptying trash out of the restaurant daily. Commissioner Dahlman expressed his concern as to exactly who would monitor these conditions and enforce them? He indicated certain applicants have come before the Commission, agreed to conditions and yet have to intention of adhering to the conditions. Commission Orsini said restaurants are supposed to be serving food and open to the public. A family with children should be able to go into a restaurant and eat as long as that restaurant is open. This is not happening. He said he would like this issue clarified --- if it's a restaurant is it going to be open to the public? Mr. Whittenberg said he thought this was an ABC enforcement issue dealing with the types of licenses they have granted for various establishments and whether those establishments are abiding with ABC conditions. ABC is unable to perform their enforcements due to their budget restraints. Mr. Whittenberg said he would review this Issue with the City Attorney's Office to see if staff could condition this. He said the Commission can modify and add conditions over the basic conditions. Another Issue Is will the State . . . Page 7 Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 allow the City to enforce ABC conditions on the City's own volition? Mr. Whittenberg will review this with the City Attorney's Office. Commissioner Orsini questioned condition #6: aNo lighted signs advertising alcoholic beverages shall be placed in the window areas, nor shall any other signs advertising specific brands of alcoholic beverages be permitted in the window areas. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition. [Emphasis added] He felt the condition is too general. He questioned who would decide what is "clearly visible", who would monitor this? He thought the City was getting out of hand when it becomes concerned with an interior. Mr. Whittenberg said this is an existing condition which has been applied to a number of establishments In the past. It primarily pertains to off-premise locations. The condition's wording is such that a sign could not be set back a foot from the window, be visible from the exterior and then they'd still have a lighted neon sign. Commissioner Dahlman said this Is the type of thing the Commission is trying to limit. Commissioner Orsini said he wanted the definition clarified, for example, is it anything visible when you're walking by? Or is it anything that's up against the window? Or a foot from the window? Mrs. Fillmann noted this is a standard ABC condition. Staff will check with ABC to see if they have a guideline they use in the enforcement of this condition. Commissioner Law questioned condition #5: "No video games or similar amusements shall be permitted on the premises". She asked if there are restrictions on jute boxes? Mr. Whittenberg said they are allowed; they are not considered a video game. Commissioner Dahlman questioned condition #9: "This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant, notarized, and returned to the Planning Department II [Emphasis added] . . . Page 8 - Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 He said having a document notarized is another way of adding cost to the CUP process. Mr. Whittenberg said this was discussed with the City Attorney's Office. Their feeling was it should be notarized because the Notary is attesting that the person who signs the document is in fact the person who signed the document. The form is sent to the applicant after the Planning Commission hearing so staff does not see who is signing the form. Staff could reword this condition to state if the applicant came to the Planning Department and signed the form In the presence of a staff member and had proper identification th~ City could get around the notarization. Chairman Fife suggested adding "Or sign under penalty of perjury In the presence of the Planning Director". MOTION by Sharp to refell' Ilhis policy statement back to the Planning Deparbnent for additional work and come back to the Planning Commission at a later date. Chairman Fife questioned condition #17: "The applIcant/lIcensee must bear the cost of modifIcatIons or cease operations if harm or retail related problems are demonstrated ... II. [Emphasis added] He asked what a "retail related problem" was? Mr. Whittenberg said it could be some problem from the licensed premises causing difficulty to other businesses in the area or causing a problem to the business Itself. For example, they are not able to control what's happening at their premises at it's affecting their ability to run their own business. This could be groups of persons hanging out in the parking lot, becoming unruly and discouraging customers from coming into the location. Commissioner Fife requested the following condition be included: "A violation of any of these conditions shall result in --- (layout the City's procedure for NotIcing a Public Hearing to revoke the CUP). MOTION restated by Sharp; SECOND by Dahlman. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Dahlman, Fife, Law, Orsini . . . Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 5. City Council Ordinance No. 1361 An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach Approving Zone Text Amendment #92-5, Amending Section 28-210 and 28-2407, Relating to the Expansion of Non-Conforming Structures Within the City of Seal Beach. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Dahlman to receive and file. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Dahlman, Fife, Law, Orsini 6. 1993 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) 7. Proposed Rule 1402 and Proposed Amendments to Rule 1401 8. Proposed! Public Notification Procedures per Air Toxies .Hot Spots.... 9. Report of the California EMF Consensus Group Items #6 through #9 were considered together, received and filed by the Planning Commission. Chairman Fife, noting RHNA, asked about the State's rote allocation of the required low/moderate income housing to each community regardless of the price of the land in that community and the efficiency of trying to provide that type of housing. Has there been any reaction by the State? Mr. Whittenberg said there hasn't been any direct State response to those arguments. SCAG is now going, as opposed to previous years, to each of the counties directly and requesting population projections and increase in housing unit projections --- rather than SCAG telling the counties what their numbers will be. Seal Beach was heavily involved In this process with the County. The City has been able to convince Orange County that there Is not a great demand for additional housing in the City and there is already a large extent of existing low/moderate income housing provided. The County has responded to this favorably. The County's projections are fmalized. The figures for the City will not be as drastic this time as they were last time. Commissioner Dahlman, noting the EMF Consensus Group, stated Hill, College Park and Old Town residents would like to see undergrounding of utilities. He asked if there were a plan to underground utilities and is there a time frame for this if so? Mr. Whittenberg said SCE is required through the Public Utilities Commission to set aside certain amounts of funds on an annual basis to each city to assist In providing underground service for existing lines. The City has been accumulating some funds Into that account but he was not sure what the next project is anticipated to be. The report before the Commission now deals with radiation that might be generated . . . Page 10 - Planning CO~lission Minutes of Septe.ber 23, 1992 from high power lines. The high power lines will always remain above ground because it is not economical to put them under ground. This group will be working with the Public Utilities Commission to define the reality and probabilities of the risk of getting cancer from living in close proximity to high power lines. The power lines along Bolsa Avenue could be removed If Rockwell reroutes some of their other lines. During the Mola Corporation proposal the lines along Bolsa Avenue were going to be removed because the Mola project was going to require the removal of a portion of that line that comes along the San Gabriel River and down First Street. Once a portion was removed it was not necessary to keep the rest of the line up. At some future time, If there's an application on the Rockwell or Hellman Ranch property, that line may be removed from the City totally. It is no longer necessary to have that lengthy route to provide service to Rockwell. It could be done through a shorter line through the Rockwell property. The line Is an emergency power standby line for some of the Rockwell facilities, it does not provide the main power to Rockwell. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to receive and file items #6 through #9. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Law, Fife, Dahlman, Orsini ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications from the audience. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg Indicated an Informational report entitled "ABC Licenses in the City of Seal Beach" has been distributed to the Planning Commissioner and City Council. This report discusses the Issue of ABC licenses in the City, provides background information which staff felt would helpful to the Commission in the future as it continues to deal with on- and off-premises ABC licenses. Mr. Whittenberg indicated a copy of an article on Lucas v. South Carolina Coast Council has been provided. This case regards the conflict between private property rights and government land use regulation. Many legal viewpoints are presented as to the impact the case may have on land use decisions. . . . Page 11 - Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 COMMISSION CONCERNS Hold Over Entertainment Issues Commissioner Orsini asked if the applications regarding entertainment cafes could be held over until the issue of entertainment cafe has been heard by the Commission? This would include Noel's, Papillons and Spaghettini's restaurants. Mr. Whittenberg said staff has been discussing Spaghettini's application with ABC and this Item will be held over until certain Issues are resolved with ABC. Noel's is also an existing licenses that's already been granted by the City and it's up for Indefinite extension. It's appropriate to proceed with this regardless of what the City might do in the future regarding entertainment. The application by Papillon's is a new application for entertainment. State law mandates processing. Cities must act on applications within certain time periods of the applications are automatically deemed approved with the City being able to condition them. The City needs to proceed on this because the time frame will expire before the application is able to go through both the Planning Commission and City Council Public Hearing Public Hearing process to make any amendments to the City Code. Staff did explain to the applicant that the City is dealing with the issue of entertainment and it might be more appropriate to wait until after final decisions had been made. However, the applicant determined to proceed an file his application. By State law the City must receive the application. The State law says from the time the application is submitted the City has thirty (30) days to tell the applicant the application is complete. After that the City has six (6) months to make a determination. For Papillon's the thirty days has gone by and the City's about two weeks into the six months period. Entering Seal Beach Sign Commissioner Sharp indicated there is a nice new sign at Rossmoor Center by Panda Panda and Parasol restaurants saying you're entering Seal Beach. Bixby Cleanup Commissioner Sharp said the Bixby Co has done a good job cleaning the lot up near the old service station. Dead Palm Trees Chairman Fife noted the palm trees near the Bixby Co. appear to have died. . . . Page 12 . Planning Comlission Minutes of Septelber 23, 1992 ADJOURNMENT Chairman Fife adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: ~o~~" Joan Fillmann, Recording Secretary Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved. Approval: The Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1992 were approved by the Planning Commission on October ~, 1992. *