HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1995-02-22
f
.
.
.
ii'
CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA of February 22, 1995
7:30 P.M. * City Council Chambers
211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA
Next Resolution: #95-3
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL 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.
V.
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 February 8, 1995
2. Receive and File: Staff Rep0l1 re Status Report and Letters on the Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP).
The City of Seal Beach complIes with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. If you require special assistance
to attend or participate In this meetll1g, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours prior
to the meeting.
Page 2 - City of Seal Beach PlallnUlg ConulllsslOn Agenda . 2/22/95
'~
VI.
v
3.
Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re Bolsa Chica EIR - Provision of
Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate.
4.
Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re Conditional Use Permit #94-1
600 Marina Drive * Radisson Hotel
Twelve Month Review Postponed and Rescheduled
5.
Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re El Burrito, Jr.
909 Ocean A venue *
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. Review of Draft Development Agreement
Address: 322 Main Street
Applicant: Ron Bennett
Prope11y Ownel': Ron Bennett
Request: Recommend City Council approval of
Development Agreement.
Resolution No. 95- Recommend City Council approval of Development
Agreement Between City and Ron Bennett re: 322 Main Street.
7.
Conditional Use Permit 92-13
Address: 143 Main
Business: Papillon's Restaurant
Applicant: Nader Tahvildari
Property Owner: Dorothy Nescher
Request: Approval of indefinite extension of entertainment
cafe.
Resolution No. 95- Approve CUP 92-13 for indefinite extension of
ente11ainment cafe, subject to Conditions of Approval.
The City of Seal Beach compIles with the Amencans With DIsabilIties Act of 1990. If you require special assistance
to attend or participate m this meetmg, please telephone the City Clerk's Oftice at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours prior
to the meeting.
'-.:::>
.
.
.
Page 3 - City of SeIIl Belich Plannmg ConullI,slOn Agenda · 2/22/95
VII.
VIII.
IX.
8. Conditional Use Permit 92-25
Address: 1400 Pacific Coast Highway
Business: Glider Inn
Applicant: Karla Benzl
Property Owner': Donald A. Watts
Request: Approval of indefinite extension of entertainment
cafe.
Resolution No. 95- Approve CUP 92-25 for indefinite extension of
entertainment cafe, subject to Conditions of Approval.
STAFF CONCERNS
COMMISSION CONCERNS
9.
Consideration of Public Hearing on Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course
Development Plan at North Seal Beach Community Center (Commissioner
Campbell). [Continued from 2-8-95 meeting]
ADJOURNMENT
The City of Seal Beach complies with the Americans With DisabilIties Act of 1990. If you require special assistance
to attend or participate 111 this meeting, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at lea~t 48 hours prior
to the meeting.
.
Page 4 - City of Seal Beach Plannmg COllUlIlsslon Agenda. 2/22/95
1995 AGENDA FORECAST
MAR 08
MAR 22 Bixby EIR review (tenative)
APR 05 CUP 95-111013 PCH @ PIETRO'S PIZZA KITCHEN/ABC
APR 19
MA Y 03
MAY 17
JUN 07
JUN 21
JUL 05 Election of Chairman & Vice Chairman
JUL 19
AUG 09
A UG 23
. SEP 06
SEP 20
OCT 04
OCT 18
NOV 08
NOV 22
DEC 06
DEC 20
1996:
JAN
FEB
MAR CUP #94-1/600 Marina/Radisson 12 mos. ABC
.
The City of Seal Beach complies with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. If you require special assistance
to attend or participate in this meeting, please telephone the City Clerk's Office at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 hours prior
to the meeting.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES of February 22, 1995
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, Brown, Sharp, Law
Also
Present:
Department of Development Services:
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney
Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant
Joan FiHmann, Executive Secretary
AFFROV AL OF AGENDA
MOTION by Law; SECOND by Dahlman to approve the Agenda with item #5 extracted
for separate consideration.
.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Dahlman, Sharp, Campbell, Brown, Law
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications from the public.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve the Consent Calendar consisting of the
following items:
1. Approve Minutes of February 8, 1995
2. Receive and File: Staff Report re Status Report and Letters on the Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP).
3. Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re Bolsa Chica EIR - Provision of
Amended Petition fOl' 'Vrit of Mandate.
4. Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re Conditional Use Permit #94-1 for
600 Marina Drive * Radisson Hotel
Twelve Month Review Postponed and Rescheduled
.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Campbell, Brown
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES of February 22, 1995
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, Brown, Sharp, Law
Also
Presen t:
Department of Development Services:
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Craig Steele, ASSIstant City Attorney
Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant
Joan FiHmann, Executive Secretary
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION by Law; SECOND by Dahlman to approve the Agenda with item #5 extracted
for separate consideration.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Dahlman, Shal'p, Campbell, Bl'own, Law
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications from the public.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION by Sharp; SEC01\T{) by Law to approve the Consent Calendar consisting of the
following items:
1. Approve Minutes of Febl'Ual'Y 8, 1995
2. Receive and File: Staff Report re Status Report and Letters on the Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP).
3. Receive and File: Staff Memorandum I'e Bolsa Chiea EIR - Provision of
Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate.
4. Receive and File: Staff Memorandum I'e Conditional Use Permit #94-1 for
600 Marina Drive :I: Radisson Hotel
Twelve Month Review Postponed and Rescheduled
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Shal'p, Law, Dahlman, Campbell, Brown
.
.
.
Page 2 - City of Seal Beach Planlllllg COlllllll"'OIl MlIlllt", of h'h, "'''y 22. I YY1
The Commission discussed item #5 separately:
5. Receive and File: Staff Memorandum re EI Burrito, Jr.
909 Ocean A venue :I: Status of License Issuance
The question was raised on whether there would be two ABC licenses for 909 Ocean Avenue.
Mr. Whittenberg explained the whereabouts of the prior owner of the ABC license for 909
Ocean Avenue is not known and therefore the present owner was forced to obtain a new ABC
license as he could not transfer the existing license. An owner of an ABC license must agree
in writing to transfer his ABC license to another person and the absence of the prior owner
prohibited a transfer. The City granted 909 Ocean A venue an alcohol-related land use
entitlement through its approval of CUP 92-1. A license can transfer from location to location
through ABC easily but a person cannot establish a new alcohol sales business within the City
of Seal Beach without appearing before the Planning Commission for a public hearing.
Commissioner Brown asked if the ABC automatically denies new alcohol licenses in the City?
Mr. Whittenberg said no. He explained the State passed legislation which mandates the ABC
to automatically deny any requests for new ABC licenses when that city is defined as over
concentrated by the number of ABC licenses in the city. The City of Seal Beach uses the
criteria within a census tract as its basis to determine over concentration. Commissioner Brown
asked if the City requested that ABC deny new licenses within this census tract area? Mr.
Whittenberg said the State law did not give the City the authority to make that type of request
to ABC. Seal Beach is not over concentrated in ABC licenses City-wide and the State legislation
does not apply to Seal Beach.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Law to approve item #5 on the Consent Calendar.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Campbell, Brown
.
.
.
Page 3 - CIty of Seal Beach Plmmlllg COlllllmslOll MlI1l1lt., of Pdl1l1ary 22. Iqq~
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. Review of Draft Development Agreement
Address: 322 Main Street
Applicant: Ron Bennett
Property Owner: Ron Bennett
Request: Recommend City Council approval of
Development Agreement.
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg presented the staff report on this Development Agreement [on file in the
Planning Department]. The applicant, Ron Bennett, requested approval of the Development
Agreement for the conversion of a portion of an existing structure from retail sales (off-premise
liquor) to a restaurant use on a commercially zoned lot. The Development Agreement is an
implementing action based on the Planning Commission's determination to grant Variance 94-7
for parking. This Development Agreement is a standard form which the City uses for all its
Development Agreements. The basic difference from one Development Agreement to another
is in the dollar amount of the in-lieu parking fees. Every property is evaluated on its own set
of circumstances, which are the assessed value of the property prior to acquisition by the new
owner, the reassessed valuation and the increase in property tax revenues based on the new
valuation. The City Council, in previous approvals, has given a credit for five years for an
anticipated increase in sales tax revenue for the new business as opposed to the prior business.
Under State law, the Planning Commission is required to review this Development Agreement
and make a recommendation to the Council to consider the Agreement. The Planning
Commission does not have the authority to change these fees as that is a City Council
determination.
Commission Comments on Staff Report
Chairman Dahlman asked if this applicant, Ron Bennett, is related to William Bennett? He had
previous dealings with William Bennett and would want to disclose that fact. Mr. Bennett said
there is no family relationship.
The Commission questioned the in-lieu parking fees and off-setting credits given by the City.
Chairman Dahlman noted the interi m in-lieu parking fees are $17,500 and the various City
credits bring the monies owned down to $6,362.40. At the Commission level Chairman
Dahlman said he is interested in land use issues, but since this is a one-time fee to help fund the
City's parking deficit he felt these figures should be looked at carefully. Mr. Whittenberg
explained the City Council has applied a specific formula in determining Development
Agreement fees and when that formula is applied to this applicant these are the resultant figures.
Mr. Steele said it is not quite accurate to say this is a one rime fee because ~12.2 of the
Development Agreement provides that if and when the City actually creates a parking program,
this applicant may have to pay additional amounts or may be refunded monies. If the amounts
.
.
.
Page 4 - CIty of Seal Beach Plalll1l11g COl1l1ll""Ol1 MlIllltc' of Fdllll.lI} 22. 1 q9~
he was going to be required to pay exceed the amount charged in the Development Agreement
then he'll be responsible for an additional amount. He will be refunded monies if it's less than
this amount.
Commissioner Brown questioned ~12.2:
12.2 City Parking Pror::ram. Developer hereby agrees to participate in any such in-lieu
parking program as has been or shall be estahlished by the City Council applicable to
business tenants and/or property oIVners in the Old Town-Main Street area for an amount
equal to five (5) spaces. Any changes to the total parking requirement for the site shall
cause the mod{fication of the rate of participate in the in-lieu program, subject to
Planning Commission approval. The Developer shall execute and cause a covenant to
be recorded on the title (d'the property which stipulates that nine (9) parkin!? spaces are
required for the restaurant on the property, pursuant to the Code of the City of Seal
Beach, ~28-1203 and ~28-1304. In the event that future action by the City Council
results in further costs per .\f)(ICe, Developer shall be entitled to a credit of$17~500, or
that portion paid thereof, paid under this Agreement pursuant to Section 1 ].3.
He questioned why the Developer is entitled to a credit of $17 ,500 when he paid $6,362.40?
Mr. Steele said the City Council's formula used to determine how the per-space charge and
credits are to be calculated takes a second step which says, once the per-space charge is
calculated you subtract the credits for the amount of the check the Developer is going to write.
But for the purposes of determining what fee he will be required to pay under the parking
program you look at the higher amount. The Council is saying that with the benefits to the City
in terms of increased tax revenue or property improvements and the actual check being written
by the Developer, the City is getting $17,500 from this project. If there is an additional amount
to be paid once the program is developed then that amount will come in.
Commissioner Brown suggested the City came up with an amount of, for example, $10 per
space that you lacked per month. Then that implies that you would get credit for your additional
sales and property taxes by the way this is calculated. This is saying you are going to give them
a credit of $17,000 towards whatever his fee is assessed and yet he has really only paid $6,000
because you've lowered the amount he must pay by the anticipated tax increases. The $17,000
would be an amount that he would owe based on what is presumed to be a per-space per-month
formula with no allowances.
Mr. Whittenberg explained the City Council has instructed staff to structure Development
Agreements in a specific manner. The anticipation is that there will be a program in place prior
to the five year period of time coming into play. Commissioner Brown said he understood this.
If an agreement takes effect within one year, they will not be getting credits for the sales and
property taxes in years two thru five.
Commissioner Brown said, for the sake of argument, the City tells the applicant you owe
$10,000 per year, or $2,000 per space; this is done one year from now. The applicant has paid
.
.
.
Page 5 - City of Seal Beach PJnlllllOg COlllllllSSlll1l MIIl"It', or Frill "nlY 22, 144)
the entire amount, the $6000. Then he would get a $17 ,000 credit. So the City would now owe
him $7,500 when his assessed fee is $10,000 and he only paid in $6,000. Mr. Whittenberg said
this is not necessarily true because this property's additional deficient parking spaces over-and-
above for this one use. Commissioner Brown said he did not understand why he would get
credit for the full assessed amount against a future assessment which wouldn't be based on that.
Mr. Whittenberg said he would not get credit for the full amount unless it takes the City five
years to get an in-lieu parking program in place. Secondly, this format has been approved by
the Council and staff does not feel comfortable changing that formula unless the Council so
instructs. The Commission can forward a recommendation to the Council that you feel that
perhaps the formula needs to be reviewed.
Mr. Steele said the only way this applicant could be credited with $17,500 is in reading ~12.2:
II In the event thatfuture action hy the City Council results infurther costs per !'pace... "
meaning costs above the $17,500, will credit that $17,500 and then charge him the extra
amounts or the portion paid.
Commissioner Brown said then Mr. Steele is saying that with his credits he is paying for that
$17,500. Mr. Whittenberg said he is only given those credits on a year-to-year basis. So if the
City establishes a program in a year and a half, he will only have credit for that period of time
as far as the reduction in his amount based on increased property tax revenue. Commissioner
Brown disagreed, saying he didn't think that's what the Agreement says. He felt the Agreement
says is that he is getting $2 of credit for every $1 he pays. And, in any future in-lieu parking
fee he would get the 2-for-l credit the way this reads. If it takes three years he would get a
portion of it --- 3/5 of the $17,500. Mr. Whittenberg said he would get 3/5 of the reduction
from $17,500 to $6,000. Commissioner Brown said he is still getting credit for money he hasn't
paid. Mr. Whittenberg said the City Council has made a decision to give credit during that
period of time for the increased taxes the City is receiving during that time based on the City's
approval of his establishing a business he could not otherwise put in. Commissioner Brown said
he was not saying anything about the fee that's assessed right now but he is saying that that gives
the applicant a credit based on this formula towards any future fees which probably is not
intended.
Commissioner Campbell asked what will happen if the costs per space are decreased?
Commissioner Brown said to Commissioner Campbell that since the fee payment provision is
not the Planning Commission's decision to make, perhaps the City Attorney will clarify this
concern when it goes to the City Council. Mr. Steele said he was in the difficult position of not
understanding Commissioner Brown's position on this issue and suggested they discuss this issue
after the meeting. Then he would make an attempt to clarify this issue before the City Council.
.
.
.
Page 6 - CIty of Seal Beach PbllllUlg Comilll"'Oil MII\lIle, or r dllll:lI)' 22. 199'i
Chairman Dahlman suggested the Planning Commission approve the Development Agreement
as they do agree with the body of the document. He further suggested that the Planning
Commission recommend the City Council and City Attorney work on the language on ~~11.3
and 12.2. The Commission agreed.
Commissioner Brown said it's the Planning Commission's responsibility to review this document
and they have found a flaw in it, including disagreement between the Commissioners as to what
it actually means. In any legal document an unclear provision should be cleared up. It's the
Commission's responsibility to point this concern out to the City Council. What they choose
to do with it is their business. Commissioner Campbel1 agreed, noting the language needs to
be clear.
Public Hearing
Ron Bennett * 935 Catalina Avenue, Seal Beach
Mr. Bennett gave the Planning Commission his explanation of ~~ 11.3 and 12.2. He said that
normally a property is reassessed when it's sold. On this property the assessment went from
$210,000 to $750,000. Then there was another $220,000 spent on the remodel and there will
be a reassessment this year. There will be a reassessment this year for which he will get no
credit but the City will get the income from the $220,000 remodel. He asked the Commission
if his explanation of the credits clarified the matter on credits? Commissioner Brown said Mr.
Bennett understood the credit situation the exact way he understood it and that's what's wrong
with the document.
Mr. Bennett said he was satisfied with the Development Agreement.
No one wished to speak in favor of or against this application and the Public Hearing was
closed.
Commission Comments
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Campbell to approve Resolution No. 95-3: Recommend
City Council approval of Development Agl'eement Between City and Ron Bennett re: 322
Main Street, with the caveat that the City Attol'l1ey clarify ~ 12.2, stating exactly what that
means to future in-lieu parking charges.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0-0
Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Campbell, Brown
***
.
.
.
Page 7. CIty of Se.11 De.1Ch Plalllllllg (;01111111"'01l MlIllltc, or Pd>JlI:lIY 22,199,
7. Conditional Use Permit 92-13
Address: 143 Main
Business: Papillon's Restaurant
Applicant: Nader Tahvildal'i
Property Owner': Dorothy Nescher
Request: Approval of indefinite extension of entertainment
cafe.
Staff Report
Mr. Curtis delivered the staff report [on file in the Planning Department]. The applicant, Nader
Tahvildari, requests approval of an indefinite extension of CUP 92-13 for an entertainment cafe
at 143 Main Street.
Commission Comments on Staff Report
Commissioner Brown said he had spoken with Lee Whittenberg and asked Lee to clarify for
everyone two questions: (1) upon a transfer, no longer requiring a new CUP at the time of sale
of a business subject to a CUP; (2) what is an entertainment cafe?
Regarding the first question, Mr. Whittenberg explained that about a year and a half ago staff
came before the Planning Commission and indicated that all future CUPs and Variances would
be granted to the property itsel f and not to the business owner. As future owners come onto that
property they would be bound by the Conditions of Approval placed by the Commission at the
Public Hearing. Prior to that, a new CUP was required to be reviewed and approved upon the
sale or transfer of a business operation. In reviewing that policy with the City Attorney's Office
it was felt that policy was not in conformance with State law requirements for CUPs and
recommended to the City that they cease that process. Some of the older applications and
approvals will show that type of a condition but as they come back for reviews that condition
will no longer be imposed. Regarding the second question on what constitutes an entertainment
cafe, there's a specific definition in the Code. It allows for entertainment at a location based
on approval of a CUP. It doesn't specify the entertainment must be in conjunction with food
sales. It's aimed at controlling the type of entertainment provided at a business.
Chairman Dahlman asked if an entertainment ordinance is pending? Mr. Whittenberg said there
are two separate things happening within the City regarding entertainment. The first is a review
as part of the Main Street Specific Plan. Guidelines will be established to deal with
entertainment in the Main Street area. Secondly, the City Manager's Office and City Attorney's
Office are working on some entertainment provisions for the commercial, non-Main Street areas
--- along Pacific Coast Highway, Rossmoor Center area.
The Commission briefly discussed Conditions #4 and #6.
Chairman Dahlman asked the Commission if they wished to consider the next agendized
application together with this application and the response was negative.
.
.
.
Page 8 - CIty of Senl Ileneh Plnn/llng COJJ1IllI"lOll Mlllll\'" of rd1l11.1JY 22. )44)
Public Hearing
Mr. Tahvildari was present but did not wish to speak. There was no further public input and
Chairman Dahlman closed the Public Hearing.
Commission Comments
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Campbell to appt'ove Resolution No. 95-4, indermitely
extending CUP 92-13, permitting an entertainment cafe in conjunction with an existing
restaurant at 143 Main Street (Papillon's Restaurant) subject to Conditions of Approval.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
5-0-0
Sharp, Campbell, Law, Dahlman, Brown
Mr. Steele indicated the Commission's action is final tonight and the ten calendar day appeal
period begins.
***
8.
Conditional Use Permit 92-25
Address: 1400 Pacific Coast Highway
Business: Glider Inn
Applicant: Kada Benzl
Property Owner: Donald A. Watts
Staff Report
Mr. Curtis delivered the staff report [on file in the Planning Department]. The applicant, Karla
Benzl, requested approval for an indefinite extension of CUP 92-25 for an entertainment cafe
at 1400 Pacific Coast Highway, the Glide 'er Inn restaurant.
Mr. Curtis recommended a change to Condition of Approval #7, making it similar to Condition
of Approval #6 of the Papi110n resolution as the wording is more pertinent since the future ZT A
may no longer be called ZTA 92-2:
From: 7.
This CUP is subject to the City's action on proposed Zoning Text
Amendment 92-2 and the conditional approval herein shall confer no
exemption from the provisions of any subsequently enacted ordinance
governing the establishment and maintenance of entertainment cafes.
To:
6.
This CUP is subject to the City's action on a future zoning text
amendment, including but not limited to the Main Street Specific Plan,
regarding entertainment cafes...
.
.
.
Pnge 9 - CIty of Seal Bench PJannll1g COll1nll~'lOn Mlllll!'" of r,'hlll:Jl) 22, 1995
Commission Comments on Staff Report
The Commission had no comments.
Public Hearing
The applicant was not present. Mr. Steele asked Mr. Curtis if the applicant was aware of
tonight's meeting and had read the staff report? Mr. Curtis said yes. There was no public
testimony and Chairman Dahlman closed the Public Hearing.
Commission Comments
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve Resolution No. 95-5, indefinitely
extending CUP 92-25 for an entertainment cafe at 1400 Pacific Coast Highway (Glide'er Inn
Restaurant), subject to Conditions of Approval and subject to the rewording of Condition
#7 as stated above.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0-0
Brown, Sharp, Law, Campbell, Dahlman
***
STAFF CONCERNS
There were no staff concerns.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
9. Consideration of Public Hearing on Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course
Development Plan at North Seal Beach Community Center (Conmlissioner
Campbell). [Continued from 2-8-95 meeting]
Mr. Whittenberg said staff has provided the Commissioners the hard copy of a FAX from the
City Attorney's Office. This FAX states the necessity to hold the regular Commission meetings
at this location and then adjourn from the City Council Chambers to an alternate location.
Additionally, Com cast telephoned the Planning Department today to say they would now be
willing to tape a one-time only meeting off site at no charge to the City. However, if additional
meetings are desired off-site Comcast would charge $1000 per meeting or they would not
televise a regular Planning Commission or City Council meeting in its stead said off-site taping
would allow for a live broadcast.
Commissioner Sharp said Leisure World has a complete unit that does filming for televised
shows on a volunteer basis; they have all the necessary equipment. He felt they could be talked
into filming off-site Planning Commission meetings. Additionally, if the Commission is going
to hold their meetings outside the City Council Chambers for the convenience of people to attend
he felt Leisure World should be considered as an off-site meeting location because many Leisure
World residents do not like to drive at night. He felt a good crowd of interested citizens would
.
.
.
Page 10 - CIty of Seal Deaeh 1'1.1Il1111lg ('01111111'<'011 MlIllltl' or Fdllu,ny 22. 1495
attend a meeting in Leisure World. He felt people were dependant on seeing Planning
Commission meetings televised and hated to see the meetings not televised. He also felt one
meeting in Rossmoor would be insufficient as there would be a long series of meetings on the
Bixby proposal.
Commissioner Sharp added that the latest storm damage included damage to some buildings in
Leisure World. And there are rumors that some building may be scheduled on the Leisure
World medical center. He asked the City Attorney to find out if he and Commissioner Law will
be allowed to vote on a Leisure World project that comes before the Planning Commission. Mr.
Steele said he would work on this issue.
Commissioner Campbell commented it is her understanding there is no legal requirement to
televise Planning Commission meetings, adding many cities in Orange County don't have their
meetings televised.
Commissioner Sharp said that when the filming issue first came up he opposed it because he felt
it could bring a lot of people out to use the microphone and to be seen. But now the public is
used to the meetings being televised he felt the Commission was obligated to televise them.
Commissioner Campbell said "While that may be the case but I think, in this instance, we need
to bring the government to the people. I'm not advocating this for every time... this affects the
people up there and I think they should have the opportunity to attend meetings up there because
many people find it very difficult to get out at night. And they find it very difficult to navigate
their way down here. And it's just easier to get in and out of the North Seal Beach Community
Center" .
Commissioner Law asked the seating capacity of the North Seal Beach Community Center? Mr.
Whittenberg guessed 200 - 225 people in standard row chair seats; about three times the City
Council Chamber's capacity. Commissioner Sharp said the Leisure Wor1cl facility seats over
300 persons. Commissioner Campbell said that for any meetings held at Leisure World
provisions would have to be made for persons not living there to get inside the gates.
Commissioner Brown said he was in complete agreement with bringing the meeting to the North
Seal Beach Community Center. He clarified that staff is recommending that this be an adjourned
or continued meeting rather than a regularly scheduled meeting because of the City Code.
Mr. Whittenberg said there are two options:
1. Meet here, conduct some business here and adjourn from here that same evening
to North Seal Beach Community Center. City Hall will have to be posted that
the meeting has been adjourned to another location. "We would have to take
everything with us and start over again".
2.
Or, adjourn from a normal Wednesday meeting to an alternate Wednesday and
.
.
.
Pngc 11 - City of Senl Dench PlallllJllg COlllllll"lOll MlIlul, , of hh,u.uy 22. l'l'll
have that adjourned meeting scheduled to meet at that location.
Mr. Steele added there is nothing in the Code which sets the time of the Planning Commission
meetings, the time is set by resolution. The meetings could start at 6:00 p.m. and then begin
again at 7:30 p.m. A quorum would be required to open the meeting at 6:00 p.m. If the
Commission adjourns to a night that is within five (5) calendar days of its regular meeting the
clerk will be happy because she can use the same agenda and she doesn't have to go through the
whole notification process. If the Com mi ssion doesn't have the option to plan ahead a Special
meeting can be called. Under the Brown Act the Special meeting is entirely different than an
Adjourned meeting. A Special meeting is called specially for a single purpose. This is provided
for in both the Brown Act and the City's Code. The Chair or a majority of the members can
call a Special meeting.
Chairman Dahlman said the City Council may have feelings on this issue and he said he would
like to have their input before the Commission makes a decIsion. Mr. Whittenberg said the
Special meeting process is much more involved than the Adjourned meeting and the preparation
of an additional agenda is not that difficult for staff to manage. Staff would recommend the
alternate Wednesday. Commissioner Campbell said her personal preference would be to adjourn
to another meeting. Mr. Steele said the reason he suggested the Commission seek Council
guidance is because the Planning Commission is by law an advisory body on this issue and is
charged with gathering the information the Council wants and making a recommendation to
them. If they have a particular idea on how they would like the Commission to gather that
information and present it to them this might be well set out in advance.
Mr. Whittenberg clarified the intent is at the conclusion of the first night of the Commission's
regular Public Hearing on the Bixby project, which would be held at City Hall, to then adjourn
to the following Wednesday night for a continued Public Hearing at the North Seal Beach
Community Center.
Commissioner Sharp asked how the project proposal will be heard? There will be an initial
Public Hearing meeting at City Hall; anticipated to be the end of March or early April. At the
conclusion of that meeting the Commission will adjourn to the following Wednesday night,
continue the Public Hearing at North Seal Beach Community Center. Mr. Steele said everything
will be heard at one time; the project will be on the table at the same time the ETR is presented.
Commissioner Sharp restated his desire to schedule a meeting in Leisure World if a meeting is
held at North Seal Beach Community Center.
By a consensus of thc Planning Commission to direct staff to prepm'e a consideration item
for the City Council regarding scheduling at least one Planning Commission meeting outside
the City Council Chambers for Public Hearings on the Bixby development project and the
potential fOl' an additional mccting at LeisUl'e World. Council direction to the Planning
Commission is desired on this proposed process.
***
.
Page 12 - CIty of Scalliea"h PI.lI1nll1g C0I1111"'<lOll 1\'llI1u1c' or 1 "hm:u)' 22 I()q~
Regarding the memorandum entitled "Request for document by Commissioner Campbell re:
Bixby Old Ranch Golf Course Development -Preliminary Fault and Liquefaction Assessment"
Commissioner Law asked what the liquefaction potential is for parts of Leisure World,
Rossmoor and Los Alamitos and has there been any damage in those areas? Mr. Whittenberg
said he was not qualified to answer the question but will attempt to find out as much as he can.
Those maps are based on the current type of soil material in the area and what determines
whether an area is in a high or low liquefaction area is based on anticipated future earthquake
activity and how that would impact that type soil. Commissioner Campbell stated the only
earthquake we have had that would have had liquefaction results was the 1933 quake but there
was nothing around here at the time. She advised that the immediate area would be in danger
when the water table is high and there would be a magnitude 6 quake or above.
***
Commissioner Brown said there has been some press critical of the Main Street Specific Plan
and the survey that was done for it. He read a February 19, 1995 Long Beach Press Telegram
editorial which reflects well on the City stall, the Planning Commissioners and City Council
members. Chairman Dahlman agreed.
***
. Commissioner Brown expressed his concerns on municipal Code enforcement and noted he has
spoken to Barry Curtis and Lee Whittenberg on this issue. He said our current enforcement is
to take a violator to court and proposed installation of a citation process. Chairman Dahlman
said this was discussed several years ago but the City's budget doesn't allow for a enforcement
officer. Mr. Whittenberg agreed this was discussed about three years ago and the Commission's
determination, which was forwarded to the Council, was to allow existing staff the authority to
issue citations for Code violations. The Council determined not to take that sort of an action.
If the Commission feels this is an appropriate issue to revisit staff will bring back a staff report
to the Commission for consideration at its next agenda. Staff will provide an updated report
regarding the citation process and which communities are using this type of program.
Commissioner Brown said he would like staff to do that.
***
Chairman Dahlman noted the agenda forecast calls for tentative review of the Bixby ErR and
the entire project on March 22, 1995. Mr. Whittenberg said this date is tentative and won't be
definitely scheduled for hearings until the EQCB has completed their review of the Response to
Comments of the Draft EIR and reviewed the flllal EIR document. Staff hopes that will occur
in early March.
.
.
.
.
Page 13 - City of Seal Deaeh Plannlllg COlllnll''''lll MlIlllll" of r dllll.ll) 22. I qq,
ADJOURNMENT
Without objection Chairman Dahlman adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
QD~~r-
Joan Fillmann
Recording Secretary
APPROY AL: The Minutes of February 22, 1995 were approved on March L, 1995. ~