Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1995-02-08 . . .. CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA of February 8, 1995 7:30 P.M. * City Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKSHOP AGENDA 7:45 P.M. * City Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA ' Next Resolution: #95-2 1. FLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. AFFROV AL OF AGENDA By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to: (a) Notify the public of any changes to the agenda; (b) Rearrange the order of the agenda; and/or (c) Provide an opportunity for any member of the Planning Commission, staff, or public to request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning commission, provided that NO action or discussion may be undertaken by the Planning Commission unless otherwise authorized by law. The City of Seal Beach compliea with the AmenCll1lB With Disabilities Act of 1990, If you reqUIre special a8sisl.:u1ce to attend or pllJ1Jclpate U\ this meeting, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting, It . . /, ~ v. Page 2 - City of SeaJ Beacb Planning Conullwion Agenda · 2/8/95 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one motion unless prior to enactment, a member of the Planning commission, staff or the public requests that a specific item be removed from Consent Calendar for separate action. 1. Approve Minutes of January 18, 1994 2. Approve Resolution No. 92-5, approving Variance 94-7 at 322 Main Street JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKSHOP A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL - City Council 3. PUBLIC WORKSHOP re: "BACKGROUND STUDIES FOR THE MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN" - City Staff, Zucker Systems Recommendation: Receive presentation by City Staff and Zucker Systems re: "Background Studies for the Main Street Specific Plan", receive public comments and provide comments regarding the issues of concern for staff/consultant preparation of a "Draft Main Street Specific Plan". Receive and File the above referenced document. Instruct staff to schedule for further consideration at a future Council/Commission meeting, if determined appropriate by the Council/Commission. VIT. CITY COUNCIL - ADJOURN to February 13. 1995 at: 6:00 pm or 6:15 pm qr 6:30 pm VIT. STAFF CONCERNS 1be city of SeaJ Beacb COOlplies witb tbe AmericllllS Witb Disabilities Act of 1990. If you require special as"slnuce to attend or parucipnte in tb,S meetmg, please te1epbooe the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. . . .' " , Page 3 - City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Agenda · 2/8/95 IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS 4. Consideration of Public Hearing on Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course Development Plan at North Seal Beach Community Center (Commissioner Campbell) x. ADJOURNMENT 1be City of Seal Beach complies with the Americlllls With DISllbihties Act of 1990, If you require special assistance to attend or partIcIpate in thIS meetmg, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours pnor to the meetIng ) Page 4 - City of Seal Beach P1aw1ing Conunission Agenda · 2/8/95 . FEB 22 MAR 08 MAR 22 APR 05 APR 19 MA Y 03 MAY 17 JUN 07 JUN 21 JUL 05 . JUL 19 AUG 09 AUG 23 SEP 06 SEP 20 OCT 04 OCT 18 NOV 08 NOV 22 DEC 06 DEC 20 1995 AGENDA FORECAST CUP 92-13/Papillon's 12 mos. review/entertainment CUP 92-25/Glider Inn indefinite extension/entertainment DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 322 Main Street (Ron Bennett) CUP #94-1/600 MarinalRadisson 12 mos. ABC Bixby EIR review (tentative) Bixby EIR review (tentative) Election of Chairman & Vice Chairman . The City of Seal Beach comphes with the Americlll1ll With Disabilities Act of 1990. If you require special asslstnnce to attend or participate in thiS mectmg, p1cosc telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at lenst 48 hours pnor to the meeting , , , " . . " '4 .~ CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES of February 8, 1995 JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKSHOP AGENDA The Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:35 p.m. with Chairman Dahlman calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Dahlman Commissioners Campbell, Sharp, Law, Brown Also Present: Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant Joan Fillmann, Executive Secretary APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairman Dahlman requested agenda item #2 be extracted for separate consideration. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Campbell to approve the agenda as presented with the extraction of item #2 from the Consent Calendar. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Campbell, Law, Dahlman, Brown ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Dahlman declared Oral Communications open. No members of the public wished to address the Planning Commission. . . Page 2 - CIty of Seal Beach Plmming Coomllssion Minutes · 2/8/95 _ CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve the following Consent Calendar item: 1. Approve Minutes of January 18, 1994 MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Campbell, Law, Dahlman, Brown 2. Approve Resolution No. 95-2, approving Variance 94-7 at 322 Main Street Mr. Steele said the following sentence must be removed from Resolution No. 92-5, Section 6, Condition 3 because it's a stray sentence from a previous draft: 3. Variance 94-7 shall become effective only after the City's approval of a Development Agreement between the City and the applicant governing the use of the subject property. The variance approved with eOFlditions herein shull confer no entitlements or rights upon the applicants. Nor shall the City be obliged to issue any permits or approvals until such time as the Development Agreement has been approved, without the prior written consent of the City. , MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve Resolution No. 95-2 with the above- referenced deletion. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Campbell, Law, Dahlman, Brown Director Whittenberg suggested the Planning Commission deal with Commission Concerns at this time as it is ahead of schedule this evening. Mr. Steele said that because this is an action item, it's a discussion item and it could appropriately be considered now if the Commission wishes. MOTION by Dahlman; SECOND by Law to reorder the Agenda and consider Commission Concerns at this time. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Campbell, Law, Dahlman, Brown , Poge 3 - City of Seal Beach Plannmg ConUlIISS'OIl MUlIIles · 2/8/95 , COMMISSION CONCERNS 4. Consideration of Public Hearing on Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course Development Plan at N0l1h Seal Beach Community Center (Commissioner Campbell) Commissioner Campbell said there are lot of people in the area of the North Seal Beach Community Center who don't get down to the City Hall area. She would like to bring the government to the people. She said last week she got a call from one lady who said she has problems driving at night and can't get down to City Hall. This lady lives in the Montecito townhomes. Commissioner Campbell felt that holding at least one Planning Commission meeting at the North Seal Beach Community Center would make it more convenient for the residents in College Park East, Montecito townhomes and Leisure World to attend. , Director Whittenberg noted the agenda packet contained a memo regarding this request. Com cast has indicated they will not be able to provide a live broadcast of any meeting at North Seal Beach Community Center. They would make a tape and play it on a delayed basis. Additionally, Comcast would charge the City $1000 to tape the meeting at the Community Center; this would include their staff, equipment and preparation times. The City does not have monies budgeted for that type of an activity. If the Commission feels it is appropriate to schedule a meeting at the North Seal Beach Community Center, he suggested the Commission forward the request on to the Council, requesting authorization for $1250 to cover the costs of renting public address equipment and Comcast charges. Commissioner Campbell said she could tape the meeting for free with her video camera and tripod. Mr. Whittenberg said the purpose in having Comcast tape the meeting would be to have it replayed through their system for rebroadcast. If rebroadcast is not desired then Comcast would not need to be there. Commissioner Campbell said she has purchased tapes from Comcast and they are the same tapes she uses in her video camera. Chairman Dahlman said $1,000 does sound like a lot of money. He suggested that the applicant may want to share some of this cost. The Chairman suggested the Commission defer this issue to a future meeting for further consideration. Mr. Whittenberg said if the matter is deferred, staff will have time to research the options further. Staff does not anticipate any Bixby proposal items coming before the Planning Commission until late March. Commissioner Sharp said he has no objections to having a meeting at the North Seal Beach Center but questioned whether a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting should be broadcast on a delayed basis. He noted that residents will be watching the broadcast and decide to come down to City Hall to testify. , , , , . . . .- Page 4 - City of S~l Beach PlllImUlg ComllllSSlOn Mmulcs · 2/8/95 Mr. Steele pointed out that the municipal Code provides that the Planning Commission's regular meetings often will be held in the City Hall Council Chambers. A special or an adjourned meeting could be held at a different time in a different location. Commissioner Campbell said it was her understanding that this request is not precedent setting, that City meetings have been held away from City Hall. Mr. Steele said "Absolutely. It's not an unusual request. The only thing I want to point out is that if you're going to have a Wednesday night meeting, it's got to be scheduled here and then you can schedule a special meeting for another one". Commissioner Campbell said that regularly scheduled Planning Commission meetings have been held at the North Seal Beach Community Center. Mr. Steele clarified that while that may have been the case before he was working with the City, his review of the City's municipal Code does state the meetings must be held at City Hall. Director Whittenberg said that if the Planning Commission wants to continue this matter to the February 22nd meeting for further discussion that would be appropriate. The Commission agreed. JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKSHOP 3. PUBLIC WORKSHOP re: "BACKGROUND STUDIES FOR THE MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN" - City Staff, Zucker Systems Mayor Brown called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. The City Clerk called the roll. The Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop began. Zucker Systems provided a slide and overhead presentation. Public testimony was taken. The Council and Commission members provided comments regarding the issues of concern for staff/consultant preparation of a "Draft Main Street Specific Plan". The Background Document for the Main Street Specific Plan was Received and Filed. The City Clerk took the Minutes of that meeting. They will be attached to these Minutes when they are available for future reference. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Dahlman adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 7:45 p.m. Mayor Brown adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:00 p. m. Respectfully Submitted, ~~ar--~ Joan Fillmann Recording Secretary . . Seal Beach, California February 8, 1995 The city council of the city of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 7:48 p.m. to conduct a joint public information workshop with the Planning commission relating to the Main Street Specific Plan Background Studies. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Brown Councilmembers Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo Absent: None Also present: Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Steele, Assistant to the City Attorney Commission Chairman Dahlman Planning Commissioners Brown, Campbell, Law, Sharp Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk I JOINT WORKSHOP - MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN BACKGROUND STUDIES The Director of Development Services explained that the purpose of the joint meeting was to receive a presentation from the consultant and staff relating to the Background Studies for the eventual preparation of a Main Street Specific Plan, the Study being the first of a three step process. Based upon input from the council, the Commission, and the public, a draft Specific Plan will then be prepared by the staff and consultant which will be the subject of a future joint public workshop, any changes will then be made to the Draft and thereafter public hearings will be held by the Planning commission and City Council. The Background Study is a summary of public input received by the consultant through interviews with the Commission and Council, property owners and business operators on Main Street, and interested residents of the area, in addition a survey document was sent to all residential and business property owners, and all residents and business owners between 5th and 12th Streets from Ocean Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway, to which more than six hundred responses were returned, the results were compiled and are contained within the Background Study document. He advised that notice of this joint meeting had been published in the local newspaper, notice was also hand delivered to all Main Street businesses and residents of 8th and 10th Streets. The Director introduced Mr. Paul Zucker, Zucker Systems, the City's selected Main Street Specific Plan consultant. . . Mr. Zucker noted that the Specific Plan process has been somewhat slow to this point, that partially due to the survey and the desire to conduct traffic and parking counts during certain periods of the year, the next phase likely to move more rapidly to the conclusion of this project. Mr. Zucker mentioned having received several telephone calls from citizens who took offense to certain survey comments contained in the document, to which he extended an apology and in retrospect said it may have been better to not have included them. Mr. Zucker commended the response to the survey, fifty percent being an amazing percentage for this type of survey, which indicates the interest in the Plan and Main Street. Page Two - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 . . Mr. Zucker commenced a slide presentation depicting the downtown area: * I . . * a considerable mix of uses, city hall, the beach, the pier, the parks at the pier and along Electric Avenue, facilities related thereto, the library, Red Car, fire station, a playground, the transit system route, a series of churches and pre-school all adding to the flavor and mix of the small town feeling; residential fitting tight into downtown which is typical of older downtowns; an eclectic series of architecture, that of having no particular order or significance; some persons surveyed were quite critical of certain buildings while others were very positive on the same buildings, which is typical in this type of town and can be seen as a positive rather than a negative; there was considerable comment in the survey as to the number of hair salons and nail shops; one of the things that makes Main Street is the landscape - there is a problem with the trees, many will eventually need to be replaced; there are some significantly wide gaps in the landscaping, between the 200 and 300 blocks as an example, that could be improved substantially with the continuation of street trees; some of the side streets likewise lack landscaping; Ocean Avenue lacking of street trees, first thought is that the addition of trees would be an enhancement, alternatively it is nice to have the open view of the ocean; none of the parking lots in the commercial area are well landscaped, asphalt butting to the sidewalk tends to destroy the pedestrian atmosphere that is of such value; landscape improvements could be resolved quite easily and not very expensive; for future building improvements on Main Street it should be kept in mind that one should be able to look into the buildings, the market, medical office and bars as examples; for pedestrian atmosphere it would generally be recommended that deep setbacks not be usedj a setback with a stairway as well breaks the pedestrian flow as does planter boxes away from the building face, small fronting landscaped areas, changes of elevation and sloped sidewalks, these points made for the purpose of design guidelines that could be included in a specific plan; building scale does not always deal with dimensions, rather how dimensions are used, as an example many Main Street buildings are twenty-five feet wide, which is a pedestrian scale, anything over fifty feet loses the feel, an illustration of an attempt to break the scale with the use of vertical divisions was not accomplished, and it would be hoped that the use of such a facade would not be allowed by any design guidelines, rather that another method be used; building heights of three stories would tend to pose a problem with the Main Street type of atmosphere, overwhelming the scale that is reflective of the street; there are few problems with utilities, undergrounding may not be a high priority as most poles and lines are run in the alleys and not immediately visible; the street furniture is as eclectic as the buildings to which there is uncertainty as to whether or not the furniture should be unified or left as is, which is a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ Page Three - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 . . * fairly good mix; it is understood that a newsrack ordinance is being worked on, the recommendation in that regard would be that the numbers thereof be reduced; the beach parking lots are a tremendous resource that are being under utilized, as are the Main street, Electric Avenue, and Fire station lots. * I Mr. Zucker displayed overhead diagrams and graphs of: * a summary of where the survey responses came from _ spread throughout the survey area; * vision statement for Main street - the response was positive - a basic agreement of the community as to its image; * vision on land use from interview opinions, survey opinions, and consultant comments - everyone feels that care needs to be taken with alcohol serving businesses - the meaning of that will need to be interpreted in the Specific Plan; concern with amplified music - that could be difficult as in this day almost anyone in music will be amplified to some extent; * retail use - everyone would like more retail - the problem is how to do that; * design issues - most people were into the eclectic architecture; in the survey there were people who wanted most every style that one could think of _ colonial village, seaside village, however the eclectic look was most preferred; * whether there should be design guidelines for future buildings/remodelings, the survey was positive, the interviews were about fifty/fifty, and the consultant opinion is mixed, however the recommendation would likely be to prepare design guidelines whether or not a design review process is established; * an arch over Main Street - had very little support; * many people wanted the sidewalks repaired; * a number of people wanted the lights in the trees year- round; * some wanted undergrounding of utilities; * is there a parking problem - some maybe's _ comments were that maybe that is what one must live with in a city like this; * decking of beach lots - very little support; * better utilization of the beach lots - absolutely; * decking the 8th Street lot - not much support in the parking survey; * parking meters - some maybe, some no; * in-lieu fees - consultant opinion is that that is probably the positive way to go; * utilization of the alleys for customers - consultant opinion tends to be that it would not be appropriate to expand as is done in some communities - there is some customer utilization now, however, mostly used for loading and employees - with the close proximity of residential the recommendation/inclination would be to not press the alley utilization; * shuttle bus system - the opinion survey pro and con _ feeling is that it will not do much for the parking problem and tends to be difficult in a beach atmosphere; * who pays - the merchants said the City should pay; all others said the merchants should pay; * where does the village charm come from - the eclectic mix of architecture; the constrained area of three blocks works to the advantage; the relation to the ocean; the mix of the uses - commercial, civic, . . ~ . . I Page Four - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 * churches and residential - the churches and civic uses mixed throughout the area; land use - determining what is a visitor serving use versus a resident serving use - that is difficult _ feeling is that there is presently about a fifty/fifty situation - all uses probably serve some residents and some visitors; had the benefit of the survey of land use done about ten years ago - the beauty salons went from fifteen then to fourteen today, some locations changed but the numbers basically did not - home improvement businesses had gone from four to one - food and beverage use has gone from fifteen to twenty- three - about fifty-seven percent of the businesses today are the same as they were in 1985; what makes the community special - very often the same factors that cause pressure for change - how good do you want to become and how fast - the natural pressures are going to continue to change this community _ question is how do you deal with those pressures so that the pressures themselves do not destroy what people are coming here to find - the more charming the town, the more pressure for change; to the economy - "tourist uses and chain stores outbid local uses, driving up the rents and driving out the uses" - an economic study was not done in conjunction with the Main street Specific Plan - the speculation being that this phenomena is not as far along in Seal Beach as it is in many communities that are being destroyed, yet that is the kind of issue that one will see more and more of here; the one-of-a-kind stores that bring charm to the area have trouble competing with the big retailers and chain stores; how would you deal with this situation in preparing a Specific Plan - determine what businesses you want to retain, the hardware store and mom-and-pop stores as examples; the regulations for those businesses then need to be very pro-active; for those kinds of uses that may come into a town like this that are not desirable, there should be much tighter regulations _ Berkeley as an example has restricted the number of uses by type that can come into their sub-commercial zone; design - facade continuity - there is a good pedestrian feeling in the 100 and 200 block which starts to deteriorate in the 300 block; on the westerly 300 block only forty-three percent of the block face is in store frontage, which impacts pedestrian traffic; diagram shows where there should be additional trees, another shows building heights. * * * * Mr. Jack Greenspan of Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, expressed appreciation to City staff for their assistance in compiling the existing parking space counts and usage, and presented an overview of data relating to the issue of parking. . . * the opinion survey presented some interesting information, an amazing confluence of things relating to parking; does Main Street have a parking problem - basically seventy percent of the respondents said yes; comments were that we are a beach town, people come here, we have a parking problem, and that is the price we pay for living here; those that agreed with that comment were about half; those that did not agree and felt that something should be done were about forty-two percent for the Main street respondents and about a third for all others; that indicates that about half of * * ~ . . I . . Page Five - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 * the citizens are willing to live with the problem; parking meters - again a strong confluence about sixty- nine percent of Main Street and sixty-eight percent of the other respondents; solution to parking problems - validated parking - seventy-six percent favored; reducing the charge for short term parking on the beach - seventy percent favored; opening the beach for nighttime use - sixty-nine percent; use of a shuttle bus from remote lots - fifty-two percent - consultant does not feel use of shuttle bus for Seal Beach is appropriate at this particular time; in-lieu parking fee program - the spotty use and enforcement of this program reflect in the survey _ fifty percent of Main Street and sixty-two percent of the other respondents said they did not know; who should fund the parking - fifty percent of Main Street responses said from the City's General Fund, others said it should be funded by the City and the businesses; there are two types of residences - those with fewer cars and more parking spaces and those with more cars than they have parking spaces - within the survey area there is a shortage of two hundred twenty-nine parking spaces for local residences, two hundred twenty-nine vehicles that should be parked off-street yet are parked on-street; the parking spaces were counted - parking usage was looked at on two occasions, once on a Saturday in April, which is a typical month, and once on July 4th weekend - the weather on last July 4th was very nice but utilization of the beach parking lots was very low - in terms of numbers, the April survey in the middle of the day in the area bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, 10th Street, Ocean Avenue, and 8th Street, excluding the beach lots, four hundred fifty-five cars in the afternoon, four hundred seventy-four in the evening; if that were divided by the total square footage in the downtown area the blended parking rate is about 2.1 spaces per thousand square feet; on Saturday, July 2nd, the count was seven hundred forty- five cars in the afternoon and seven hundred thirty-one cars in the evening, nearly a sixty percent increase, and the blended rate was about 3.33; for comparison purposes, if downtown Seal Beach were a shopping center the rate would be 4.5 to 5.0; the parking system here is finely tuned, even though some would disagree; one rarely has to circle a block more than once to find a parking space; there is more of a management problem than a parking space problem; the management problem focuses on the beach lots; again, the beach lots are an under-utilized resource; decking of those facilities is unacceptable; what is positive is that the downtown is relatively small; there are really no major traffic or physical impediments between the beach lots and the downtown except for the elevation; there are a number of opportunities that bear consideration - possibly a variable parking fee to enable people to use the beach lots in a effective way, both cost effective and attractive; provide free parking in the beach lots in the evenings, however that would require installation of modern revenue controls, improved lighting, and improved pedestrian access; * * * * * * * * * . . I Page Six - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 * those that come to downtown are one of two types, those that want to park exactly where they want to go, circling the block until they can park in front of that business, or those that will park where a space is available and walk to their destination; there are things that can be done physically _ property that may become available on the corner of Central and 10th, expensive property, about $46,000 per space, would not produce much parking, yet if the community says they need more parking without tearing down buildings, this could be a solution - it is an opportunity - it is not recommended at this time; another option would be to deck the existing employee parking lot, it too is expensive, however the potential is to add about thirty spaces; a negative is that it is adjacent to residential, to minimize that impact the facility could be sunk into the ground thus the deck that cars park on would be about five feet above ground level, and there are engineering means to cope with the water table; the cost of this opportunity about $16,000 per space; the best opportunity would be to take the existing employee lot and utilize it for public parking on weekends and after hours, clearly marking those spaces used by employees at night and on weekends, making the remaining spaces available to the public; a problem for visitors to the community is the uncertainty as to when parking is not legal, particularly during evening hours, the twenty-four minute zones being one example where some of those could be freed for public use during evening hours. * * Mayor Brown invited members of the audience to presented their comments to the Main Street Background Study. Dr. David Rosenman, 8th Street, said he believed that what was behind the Main street Specific Plan to some degree was the feelings of some persons that felt decisions were being made on a very ad hoc basis rather than looking at what should be done in a rational way. He said in terms of who should pay one category was left out, that being the absentee landlords that live elsewhere, collect the rent, put nothing back into the community. He said that is a major issue that should be addressed as this moves forward, the development agreements for BJ's and the Masonic Lodge a step towards addressing that, yet it should not be the businesses that bear the full responsibility. Dr. Rosenman said there may not be a parking problem just yet, however with intensification or conversion of use there is once again a change of balance, and it would be his desire to have some provision of the Plan that would cope with that on an on-going basis. Mayor Brown invited members of the audience to submit written comments on the forms provided if so desired. Mr. Brian Kyle, 7th Street, Main Street property owner, member of the 1984 Main Street Task Force, and as a lifelong resident said he knows Main Street well. Mr. Kyle stated he has always contended that there is no parking problem, as was said in 1984 and 1976, however during the summertime people are going to come to the beach, during the winter the stores and streets are not busy, the more parking is provided, the more people will come. He said he did not believe in an arch over Main Street, to a desire for sidewalk repair, said he put in seventy-five feet of decorative sidewalk in the 100 and 300 blocks, to undergrounding, which he believed would never be done, said he bought and placed the same lighting fixtures as exists on the pier in the 100 and 300 blocks, and put the same furniture on Main Street as exists on the pier. Mr. Kyle spoke for the undergrounding of utilities; questioned the logic of visitors paying to park in the beach lots to go to Ruby's for a hamburger, the cost of each being nearly equal; spoke against parking meters on Main Street and for them in the . . Page Seven - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 . . beach lots; objected to any consideration of decking the beach or 8th street parking lots, citing that as not in the character of this town; spoke of having downzoned a property on Main street yet was penalized by the in-lieu parking fee; utilization of the alleys behind Main Street for whatever purpose will result in resident complaints; no particular concern with a shuttle bus; with regard to a design review board he mentioned that of the top ten buildings that the survey respondents liked he remodeled five, no one told him the type of design, rather they reflect his feelings as to this town's diversiveness, he would object to a governmental body dictating how and what to do; as to intensification, he said if the Coastal Commission does not grant its approval, nothing can be done, Main Street is what it is going to be, and if more parking is provided, that opens up the door for intensification. Ms. Mitzi Morton, Seal Beach, expressed support for the landscaped front setbacks of Main Street businesses as lending an open space air. With regard to building heights, she recalled that the 1984 Task Force wanted it made clear that Main Street would be limited to two stories; said she did not think the sidewalks on Main Street were bad, nor would changing them improve business; expressed disappointment that one hour parking has not been implemented at the beach as was discussed a couple of years ago, which she said should have been done before this study was authorized; also that no sign has been placed on 8th Street advising people of that parking area at night and on weekends. Ms. Morton said for ten years she has been trying to get the City to negotiate with Mr. Curtis for first rights to the property at Central and lOth street, such an effort should commence once again, and claimed that the site is not suitable for residential use as it backs to the grocery and Hennessy's, thus the value is not $1 million. Mr. John Baker, resident, Main Street business owner, and member of the 1984 Task Force, reported that parking was an issue then, before and after that, utilization of beach parking and a validated parking program have been discussed as being advantageous to businesses, questioned why this has not been implemented, and stated that now the City doesn't even want the business people to use the beach lots, yet the business community needs the parking and the parking rate needs to be lowered. Mr. Baker expressed his opinion that the sidewalks do need repair, the trees have damaged the sidewalks therefore possibly a different type of tree is needed, even though an archway across Main Street may not be desirable, there is no signage to announce Main street, the pier or the beach. Mr. Woody Woodruff, Main Street business owner, said the City seems to be going towards the low end, there will never be enough parking to patronize all of the businesses, there needs to be encouragement for high dollar, not large, businesses, and mentioned as an example open houses that are held in San Pedro for real estate people specializing in leases to show the uniqueness of the area. With high dollar there is less crime, less mess, and it helps other businesses, low dollar doesn't make it. Mr. Woodruff offered that if parking is a problem it is because the businesses and their employees use Main Street for their parking rather than for parking of their clients, there needs to be more consistent parking enforcement on Main Street, and the 8th Street lot should be used by the employees of Main Street businesses. Mr. Woodruff encouraged a look at the business mix, not the number of businesses, rather the need for a higher dollar mix. Ms. Corbin, Seal Beach, asked if the previous speaker would be willing to pay a special tax, similar to a sales tax, as a hairdresser. Mr. Woodruff responded that sales tax is paid on the taxable sale of products, clients are also referred to other local businesses. Mr. Shanks, 215 Surf, said the report points out why people like living in Seal Beach. He agreed that Main Street employees should be using the employee parking lot, parking is one problem in the summer, another in the winter, and use of the beach lots should be encouraged. He also commended I . . . . Page Eight - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 I the Council and Planning commission in that to open a business in recent years the in-lieu program was used when there has been inadequate available parking, where in the past businesses could open with a disregard for the number of parking spaces, thus the problem now of trying to correct a past existing situation. Mr. Shanks suggestion was that the Commission and Council just try to slow the changes that are going to come and keep the community as it is as best one can. Mr. Charles Antos, 17th Street, said he read the Study this evening, hoped it was a draft as there were errors in it. He said any discussion of Noels restaurant needs to be taken out as they sought parking mitigation therefore should not be a credit to Main Street parking, discussion of in- lieu parking should be modified because it is illegal since the City does not have an adopted parking plan, at the time of such plan there needs to be a determination if the money collected to date can be used or if it needs to be returned to those from whom it was collected, it is unknown if and where parking would be provided, how it would be paid for, etc. Mr. Antos offered that some of the goals and objectives of the Study are correct because they point out the uniqueness of the downtown/Main Street area, that people do like the eclectic nature and mixes, however not only parking but the proliferation of night uses, extended hours, food and alcohol uses in close proximity to residents needs to be looked at. Mr. Roger West, Electric Avenue, said there is one dimension totally missing from the Study, that being that the downtown business people are a liability to the citizens/property owners of Seal Beach in that they are subsidized extensively, their sales tax revenue as most recently reported only amounted to 1.5 percent of the sales tax generated in Seal Beach, 98.5 percent of the sales tax is generated by those persons who pay for their own parking spaces, maintain the spaces, and pay taxes on that property. Main Street parking is paid for and maintained by the tax payers, then the businesses have weekly or monthly sales promotion activities which requires pOlice, planning assistance, etc. for which the City pays. Mr. West predicted that the City will install parking meters eventually, that being the only way to make money from the parking problem. Ms. Monica Prado, 17th Street, complimented the eclectic look of the downtown community, said she does not really impact the parking as she walks to downtown, however asked that public safety be of foremost concern when anticipated changes are implemented. . . Commissioner Brown complimented the Study, however said he would have liked to have seen some more specific suggestions as to what should be done, also more public input on issues other than parking, possibly how to make Main Street a better place, improving the trees, signage, setbacks, filling in the gaps, etc., the main issue should not necessarily be parking as it is uncertain if that issue can be solved. Councilmember Hastings noted the consultants feeling that a shuttle is not needed at this time, to which she stated her opinion that it would aide the development of Seal Beach, it is attractive to the Coastal Commission as well in that they demand so much parking for beachgoers that it does not allow people to improve/upgrade their buildings and provide the required parking. She mentioned also that the survey pointed out that there is not an anti-business feeling among the residents towards the business community, they favor them, shop in the stores as much as possible, an example of that being the question of who should fund improvements to the downtown area, the residents said it should be the city with the businesses. With regard to parking, the Council previously determined to move to hourly parking in the beach lots, signage was to be installed in the 8th Street lot to allow evening parking, and mentioned her dislike for parking meters as well as they appear to be a deterrent to encouraging visitors and shoppers. Councilmember Hastings commended Mr. Kyle for five of his projects having been selected for their architectural j . . Page N1ne - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 I enhancement, offered that the market will determine the business mix on Main Street and vacancies seem to be minimal. Commissioner Sharp said from a Planning Commission point of view he would have liked to have had downtown loading zones addressed, and the sharing of parking by businesses, such as restaurants, when other businesses are closed. He also expressed his opinion that Main Street businesses would likely benefit if the beach lots were available for use and there was a shuttle service to transport persons to Main Street, this might be of particular interest to those persons getting up in years, to which he noted the mean age of Leisure World residents is seventy-nine years. Councilmember Forsythe mentioned that she felt there was a misunderstanding in that this Study is not the final document, the study is an attempt to attain a consensus in the community between residents and businesses, to which she cited the difficulty when a controversial issue comes before either body to make a decision that is not deemed to be arbitrary because there are no specific guidelines for improvements on the Street. This process allows everyone to participate, will continue through the public hearings and at the conclusion there will be a Plan from which there will be no deviation without a variance or other process. The consensus is that the community wants to protect Main Street, the feelings of all sides are now known, the process has just begun, and this project will be accomplished. Chairman Dahlman mentioned reference to a design review board to which he said the Study does not support implementing that process, rather to have guidelines. He also agreed that the non-business people will likewise benefit from whatever comes from this process and to that extent should share in the payment of improvements and to the extent the business owners benefit they should share that cost. Mayor Brown confirmed that although an arch is not desirable, there is also a feeling that Seal Beach should not be hidden, possibly some substitute identification to let people know where we are. Councilman Laszlo read a lengthy statement from an unidentified Seal Beach resident claiming to have experience and occupation in the design and development of theme parks and entertainment areas involving areas of redevelopment and entertainment zones for municipalities. The statement spoke to the various elements of the Study, the vision, current land use, design, sidewalks, parking, the pier, with personal comments throughout. Commissioner Campbell mentioned certain comments in the Study that caught her attention, better parking management, using the 8th Street lot and street parking after hours, which would only be a matter of signage. She stated she did not see anything dramatic corning out of the Main Street Plan because nothing dramatic is wanted, people do not want the Street to change, said she liked the deep front setbacks as they provide some variety, it is necessary also to look ahead to see what any changes that are made will create, the street only needs a few improvements. Commissioner Law questioned objection to the number of beauty shops, they don't attract a negative element, as to the parking situation she said she has found no one who has left downtown because they could not find a parking space, yet the beach lots could be metered and utilized as needed, the 8th Street lot could be better utilized, the setbacks are acceptable, and the street is liked the way it exists. Councilman Doane questioned a statement that "the more charming the town the more pressure for change" to which he said he has never experienced pressure from anyone he has talked with to change Main Street. He said the cities used as comparisons, Ashland, Oregon as an example has no significance to Seal Beach, nor does Berkeley, if one wants to compare with cities of that size use Santa Barbara, to which Seal Beach favorably compares for many of the same reasons, setbacks and arcades as examples, which is part of the charm, and planter boxes that restrict window viewing on this Street are businesses that have no window displays. He deemed much of the Study to be a waste of time and not necessarily the . . Page Ten - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 . . opinions of the survey. He spoke favorably of the shuttle, working well in Long Beach, and it is something that should be looked into, he agreed that eventually there will be a need to install parking meters even though the survey showed that people do not favor the idea, and based upon his personal observation he said twenty percent of Main street parking is utilized by beachgoers in the summer, parking meters being the solution to that problem. Councilman Doane agreed also that the market determines the mix, there are the number of beauty salons because the community supports that many, stated that a second hardware store could not be supported, windows are not needed for the grocery store, and suggested that the collected in-lieu fees could be utilized to fund parking meters. Councilman Doane objected to the reading of anonymous statements. He mentioned that while trying to encourage people to shop downtown the comments he has received relate to the problem of parking, they may come once but do not necessarily come back, instead they go to the mall where parking can be found, thus it is believed there is a parking problem. He reported receiving comments from businesses in areas other than Main street that money should not have been spent on a study for just Main Street, that it should have included all of the businesses in Seal Beach, and it was pointed out that there are more businesses on Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard than there are on Main Street, and after taking count, that statement is correct. Mayor Brown expressed appreciation for the comments from the public and noted that more specific recommendations with regard to the Main Street Specific Plan will be forthcoming at a later date. I Mr. Zucker indicated he was somewhat struck by the comment with regard to Main street's position in the City, whether it is a plus, a minus, a drain on the economy or not, to which he related and compared this issue with an option in years past of tearing down or refurbishing the Philadelphia City Hall. He asked that Seal Beach be envisioned without Main Street, that it also be viewed in the broader community context, the Street having a great deal of flavor and an importance beyond itself as a economic factor. Mr. Zucker noted a concern in that the goal appears to be to settle the Main Street planning issue for all time, that not a realistic goal, and as parking management has been discussed, he offered his belief that what is needed long term is downtown management, thus within the recommendations they will try to set forth some criteria for periodic review, as an example if vacancies start to occur downtown there would likely be a need to do something different, if there is a request for several more restaurants that may mean that the controls are not quite right. With regard to the merchants parking program, he noted that there is no question that the merchants and the employees are taking up valuable parking spaces that should be utilized by shoppers, that issue will be looked at further. Not having met with the Coastal Commission with regard to Seal Beach as yet, Mr. Zucker did mention that they have recently worked with the Coastal Commission on parking in beach communities, what the Coastal Commission will or will not allow will be a key issue in that there has been virtually no support for anything other than opening the beach lots for parking, Coastal Commission may be somewhat difficult in that they will most likely view the beach lots as interim until such time as the beach usage demands that parking. He pointed out that if there are no additional parking solutions, over time the City will basically restrict itself to the existing buildings, and that thought may not be all bad, maybe that is the solution to this town, which would mean that parking requirements would virtually be removed from the zoning code, however that would not be acceptable to the Coastal Commission, therefore the issue is something that requires considerably more thought. Mr. Zucker reported the in-lieu program is being studied further with legal staff, stating he . . . . Page Eleven - City Council Minutes - February 8, 1995 questions whether or not the City has violated the state in-lieu requirements, the permits through development agreements are clearly outside the in-lieu program, the others have been done through a variance process, which is much different from an across the board grant, however if the City continues to take in fees eventually a determination needs to be made as to what will be done with them. Councilmember Hastings said it was her understanding that the nexus of the in-lieu fees was that they were to be accumulated for a possible future purchase of property for parking purposes. Mr. Zucker explained that if it is determined that the in-lieu monies fall within the state statute they are required to be committed within five years. He offered that if the shuttle idea is viewed in the broader context, like shuttling from outlying areas, it may have more merit, if it is used as a solution to the parking problem that is a different issue. Mr. Zucker offered that high tech has brought forth means for parking control other than chalking tires and meters, thus a computerized system may be a subject for discussion. He concluded by stating that they are not proposing changes, yet it must be recognized that the community is going to change, downtown will change, the market is the main force that will move the change, however the City can influence change and what needs to be done is learn how to manage it. Mayor Brown thanked Mr. Zucker for his presentation. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the City Council meeting until Monday, February 13th at 6:30 p.m. I The joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:56 p.m. THESE ARE TENTATIVE MINUTES ONLY, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH. Councl1 Mlnutes Approved: . .