Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1995-09-20 '" . . . '. . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA of SEPTEMBER 20, 1995 7 30 P.M. * City Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA Next Resolution: #95-24 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGL\NCE n. ROLL CALL m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA By Motion of the Planmng Commission, this IS the time to: (a) (b) (c) NotIfy the publIc of any changes to the agenda; Rearrange the order of the agenda; and/or Provide an opportumty 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 Planmng Commission regardmg 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 routme 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. Minutes of September 6, 1995 The City or Seal Beach Compllcs With 1hc Amenc8I11 Wllh DlSoIbll111CS Act of 1991 If you need lIlIIl.tance ID aUendmg lh11 meetmg, please telephone lhe City CIedt'I Officc at (310) 431-2527 at lealt 48 hours m advance of 1hc meetmg . . . -. hae 2 - Cdy of SaIl Beach Plannmg ComnUSSIOII Agenda for September 20, 1995 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS vu. STAFF CONCERNS 2. Approve Resolution No. 95-22 A Resolution of the Planmng ComrmsSJon of the Ory of Seal Beach Recommending to the Cry CounCIl Approval of Zoning Text Amendment 95-2, Amending Sections 28-2407 b 1, 28-2705 and 28-2757 to Requ,re Heanng Notices be Mmled to Occupants as Well As Property Owners. VITI. COMMISSION CONCERNS 3. Draft Main Street Specific Plan - Planning CommiSSIOn Concerns of August 28, 1995 meetmg [Continued from 9-6-95 meetmg] IX. ADJOURNMENT The City of SaIl Beach Compbes With !be AmenclIDs With Dlsablbbes Act of 1991 If you need I188lstance m altelldmg thiS meetmg, please telephone !be City Clerk's Offiee at (310) 431-2527 at least 48 houn m advance of !be meebllg .. Pago 3 - CIty of Seal Beacb Plannmc ConunaSSIOII Agenda for Septembor 20. 1995 1995 AGENDA FORECAST OCT 04 . CUP 94-8/327 Main/NIp 'n Stuff @ 3 mos. OCT 18 NOV 08 . Zoning Text Amendment 95-1 [ContInued from 9-6-95] To estabhsh City-wIde standards for the temporary display of advertismg banners in commercial/mdustrial zones. . Main Street Specific Plan (tentatIve) NOV 22 DEC 06 DEC 20 1996: JAN . FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC . DWP Specific Plan (tentative) . CUP 94-8/327 Main/Nip 'n Stuff @ 6 mos. CUP 95-111013 PCR/Pietro's 12 mos. hours. CUP 94-11600 MarinalRadisson 12 mos. ABC CUP 92-11909 Ocean/EI Burrito 12 mos. ABC CUP 94-8/327 Main/Nip 'n Stuff 6 mos. 2nd revIew . Tbll City of Seal Beach Complills With lhll AlIIllnCllll8 With Dlsablbllll8 Act of 1991 If YOll ollCd assistance m aUcndmc thiS mlllllmc. plllasll tc1epbOlllllhll City ClllJt's Office at (310) 431-2527 at1east 48 bOllrs m advance of lhll mccllog . . . " CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES of SEPTEMBER 20, 1995 The City of Seal Beach Planning Commission met in regular session at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, with Chairperson Campbell calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Campbell Commissioners Sharp, Law, Brown Also Present: Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney Joan Flllmann, Executive Secretary Absent: CommIssioner Dahlman Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant Commissioner Sharp arrived at 7:40 p.m. AGENDA APPROVAL Commissioner Brown requested item #7, approval of Resolution No. 95-22, be continued to the October 4, 1995 meeting due to the lack of Planning Commissioners present. 2. ResolutIon 95-22, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the CIty of Seal Beach Recommendmg to the City Council Approval of Zone Text Amendment 95- 2, Amending Sectlon 28-2407.b.l, 28-2705 and 28-2757 to Require Heanng Notices be Mailed to Occupants as Well As Property Owners MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Campbell to continue consideration of Resolution No. 95-22 to October 4, 1995 Planning Commiqion meeting. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: ABSENT: 3-0-2 Brown, Campbell, Law Sharp, Dahlman *** PBge 2 - CdJ of Seal Beach I'Iamunc CclaumIIKlD Mmutel for September 20, 1995 . MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Law to approve the Planning Commission Agenda for September 20, 1995 with item #7 being continued to October 4th. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: ABSENT: 3-0-2 Brown, Campbell, Law Sharp, Dahlman *** ORAL COMMUNICATIONS . Bruce Stark * Seal Beach 1N0 Address Given] Mr. Stark suggested the manner m which Public Hearings are conducted be changed. He explained hiS view that City staff engages in a long rebuttal after the public testimony and the public has no opportunity to respond. He said staff's role is to give their staff report and suggested that if staff wishes to testify they should come to the podIUm to give their comments so other members of the public could respond to their comments. He said that, for example, when the property at 715 Electric Avenue was bemg considered, he raised the quesnon of why this property was being treated differently than his property on Central Avenue. At that time staff commented, after the Public Hearing, that a CUP was required for his Central Avenue property because he was adding square footage. He said "Staff knew, to an absolute certainty, that that was a lie as evidenced by the fact that no school taxes were paid because of an expansion of square footage. There was no square footage added to that property. Therefore, a CUP should not have been required. Or, if it was required, there should have been one for Electric certainly". He felt this is a serious fault in the conduct of the Commission's business. Mr. Stark pointed out that at the last Planning Commission meeting the Chair commented on the fact that there seemed to be some problems in the Planning Department staff. "A great deal of time was spent discussing the Banner Boy and how we were going to control banners. I would suggest that when we have a Planning Director who is costing the City over $100,000 a year m salary and benefits we're entitled to somethmg better". He said a few weeks ago, the public parking lot at First Street and Ocean A venue was sealed off at 4:00 p.m. and devoted to a private party. A tent was erected on the public beach in excess of twenty-four hours; it took three or four days to put it up and take it down. This required a California Coastal Commission permit but none was obtained. On September 15th, the Coastal Commission sent the Planning Director a copy of their guidelines on what is required. The event on the beach caused many calls to the City's Police Department because it was creating a public nuisance. Amplified music was going until after midmght and it could be heard from blocks away. Nothing was done about it. He said this is the purpose of the Coastal Commission and the reason for obtaining their permits. . Chairperson Campbell asked the City Attorney if she could make a comment to Mr. Stark's remarks? Mr. Steele advised the Brown Act will allow her to provide general information to P8go 3 - CJl:y of Seal Beach PIaIum!c CommwIClII Mmutea for Septanbor 20, 1995 . persons who are speaking at public comment or she may direct her comment(s) to the proper staff person for information but, if the subject is not agendized it needs to be agendized to allow for further discussion among the Commissioners. Chairperson Campbell commented on the conduct of the September 6th Planning Commission meeting, explaining that prior to the close of the Public Hearing Mr. Stark raised several Issues. Mr. Whittenberg said he would answer the questions after he was finished speaking. Mr. Stark did not object at that orne. FOR THE RECORD: Commissioner Sharp arrived at 7:40 p.m. MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to excuse Commissioner Dahlman's absence. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: ABSENT: 4-0-1 Brown, Sharp, Law, Campbell Dahlman CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of September 6, 1995 . The following corrections were made to the Minutes: Page 3, LIne 31: Change sentence to: "Chairperson Campbell announced the Public Hearing remained open from the pnor meeting II . Change "far" to "for"; Change "Start" to "Stark"; Break into two sentences. Page 7, Line 20: Page 5, Line 14: Page 13, Lines 3 - 5: MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve the September 6, 1995 Planning Commi~ion Minutes with the changes as noted above. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: ABSENT: 4-0-1 Sharp, Law, Campbell, Brown Dahlman *** PUBLIC HEARINGS No Public Hearings were agendized. . 1'180 4 - CIty of Seal Beach PJamuoc CclmouI8ICJD Mmutcs for September 20, 1995 . STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Steele indicated a letter was received by the City on September 20th from MIchelle Brendel, dated September 20, 1995, and addressed to Chairperson Campbell. The subject of this letter was 715 Electric Avenue, Seal Beach. A copy of this letter was provided to the CommIssioners along with a memorandum from the City Attorney's Office which responds to certain legal issues. COMMISSION CONCERNS 3. Draft Main Street Specific Plan - Planning Commission Concerns of August 28, 1995 meeting [Continued from 9-6-95 meeting] Verbatim at Director Whittenberg's request: CAMPBELL On the Draft Main Street Specific Plan, does anyone have any comments? . LAW I still would like to see each issue come up separately and not say there can be nine restaurants, or whatever. I think they should come up individually. SHARP I feel the same way on that issue. I think we could try to establish hours but I think we have to consider each one on its own baSIS at the time. Because if we could go back and correct the ones that are in there that would be a different matter. But we can't do that because until they commit something so we can cancel them out we just can't do anything about It. CAMPBELL Well, we have separate issues here. We've got --- besIde the hours, we're looking at a cap for the number of estabhshments and we have different types of establishments. We have on-site sales and off-SIte sales. Off-site sales are the number of liquor stores and we have an over- concentration of those. So, I think that's in a little different category than restaurants. And we look at restaurants and we've got a full liquor hcense and we've got the beer and wine licenses. So... SHARP That's the reason. We've go so many diversified things on Main Street that there's no way you can lump the hours and get 'em --- I can't see how you can do it without takmg them on an individual basis. . . . . Pl&c 5 . C1If of SQl Beach PI8nDmB COIIIIIIJ88IOD Muwtea for September 20, 1995 BROWN Well you may be right Commissioner Sharp but I think that really what we're trying to do is give some direction to staff to the consultant to provide us WIth alternatives that can be dIscussed at a future Public Hearing and let's hear what the public has to say about it. It may be that it is unworkable --- but I'd like to see some type of alternatIve brought forth for the consultants, based on what other cities have done and have that at the Public Hearing. We don't need to decide that now. SHARP Lee, where does this stand right now? Have we recommended it go to the Council as its printed or --- '1 WHITTENBERG No. You've had a Joint Session with the Council that reviewed a draft of the Specific Plan and based on the comments that we as staff received and both you and the Council, we've gone back and made revisions to the document. One of the areas that was brought up was the idea of providing some alternative language in some sections of the document where there seem to be some differences of opinion as to how the City mtght approach different issues. The issue of alcohol licenses is one of those major issues that there seemed to be some differences of opinion as to how the City should deal with those issues. We as staff has brought thIS back to you to try to get some further clarification and see how much of a defmition we wanted to see and what alternative diSCUSSIOn of the draft document IS going to --- at thIS point we anticipate that the Public Hearings WIll begin at the Planning Commission level at your meeting on November 8th. We're trying to finalIze the document and the language in it so we can get it ready for printing so we can prepare the Initial Study and Negative Declaration on the environmental impacts of the project so that can be circulated for the required review period prior to the beginnmg of your Public Hearing schedule. From our standpoint, If you wish to give us some direction and alternative language, I think you should keep in mind, as CommiSSIOner Brown has indIcated, that there WIll baSIcally just be language in there in draft form to allow the publIc to provide ... and maybe to try to focus the comments that you, as the Planning Commission, and ultimately the Counctl would received as to how they feel the Issue of alcohol licenses on Main Street should be addressed. Whether of not you feel that would be helpful as part of the Public Hearing process is, I think, what you're really talking about. SHARP I have no objections to taking and letting the publIc have their input into it and making a decision that way. I'll be absent on that one. With the Lord willing and the ship don't sink, I'll be going through the Panama Canal about then. So you'll have to worry about it - I won't be here. PBae 6 - CdJ of Seal Beach PJaonma CclmmJssIClll Mmutea for September 20, 1995 . WHITTENBERG From my experience, I would be surprised if it is concluded in one evening of Public Hearings. So you might have a chance for it when you do return. BROWN CAMPBELL SHARP CAMPBELL . Providing that the ship doesn't sink. If you don't have a hurricane or something like that. I'm glad we're not down there now. Alright. I would go along with what --- the framework With which both Commissioner Brown and Lee Whittenberg have stated. I would like to see put into the draft that we do discuss establishing some sort of parameters for consistent closing hours. I realize we can't change the CUPs that are out there now but this would apply to any future establishments. I think we also need to look at the different types of licenses involved with on-site sales and we need to think in terms of a cap on off-site sales. Because of the concentration. I realize --- when you start playing around with market forces, sometimes than can be dangerous ground to step on. But one thing we need to do is maintain the diversity that we have on Main Street. If we suddenly become very one-sided for one type of establishment, we're going to lose it. So, we've got to protect our diversity. WHITTENBERG What I might suggest to you, and maybe the Commissioners could give us a little feedback, I think what we might suggest is providing some discussion in the document that discusses an alternative way to deal with the issue as far as not having to go through the CUP permit process for new applications if they meet the numerical criteria and the hours of operation. And then we have a standard set of conditions that you and the Council have adopted as a policy statement that talk about security, posting conditions, hours when they can take trash out --- there's about 25 or 30 different conditions. We can include that as an appendix to the Specific Plan so people see that right off the top. And then, I think, what we may want to suggest breaking down for your off-preffilse licenses, a numerical number of licenses, and general closing times for your on- premises that are beer and wine only --- a number and closing hours. And for your General licenses, which is basically hard liquor licenses, a number and hours. Understanding that those will just be numbers we would be putting in the document, we'd make it very clear that those are just numbers for discussion purposes and that really if the CommiSSIOn decides that that's the way to go you would made those ultimate choices once you've concluded your Public Hearing. . . . . Page 7 - CIly of Seal Beach PIlmnuJg CommwlOD Mmutca for September 20, 1995 CAMPBELL I would like the framework to be there for the Public Hearing when it comes for that. WHITIENBERG And again, I think we would want to make it clear that that's an alternative and the Commission has the choice to recommend that or recommend what basically we as staff are recommending in a document that is a little dIfferent approach than what you're talking about at this point. CAMPBELL You mentioned the CUP. What were your earlier remarks, Just now, about the CUP? I thought I heard you say something to the effect of getting rid of the CUP. WHI'ITENBERG Well, one of the comments that Mr. Rosenman brought up at the Ioint Meetmg was the fact that he was under the understandmg that one of the purposes was to get away from the Conditional Use PermIt Public Hearing process for approval of new businesses on Main Street. And the way I was understandmg the discussion from the Planning CommIssIon was that if you put the caps as to the number of licenses on the street and you agreed to certain hours --- I think those are the two major issues that normally you deal with. And my feeling was that if you end up recommending that type of an approach I don't know that you still need to retain the Conditional Use Permit requIrement. That again IS a choice that you would have. Because if you specify the hours that's usually the major issue of concern that you deal with in a Public Hearmg. And then if you get away from that issue I'm not sure what a Public Hearing would accomplish. We might still --- I think we would still need to come up with --- and we'd have to work this out with the City Attorney's Office - -- some sort of a review mechanism because if you approve those types of uses subject to all these conditions that are in the Council policy statement and they do not abide by those conditions, I think we would still want to have some sort of administrative review process back at the Planning Commission level at a Public Hearing if they're not complying with those standard terms and conditions and I think we'd have to work out some sort of a process to do that. But that's basically a mechanical process that we can develop as part of that alterative also. STEELE I think some cities, in the situation you've described, where they've dealt with the two major issues, which are hours and number or concentration or density of whatever. A lot of cities then just adopt an ordinance that has the standard conditions. The ordinance says every alcohol-related business has these 25 conditions attached to its license and then the new business goes through a minor review process that's called various things, but it's something hke Development Plan Review where we attach those PIIcS - CIty of &.J Beach PJannurc CclmmJ8s1Ol1 Mmulea for September 20, 1995 . conditions to the application and then we retain some enforcement authority. If they violate the conditions then they come into the Planning Commission and we figure out how to deal with it. If you've reached a point where you're comfortable with the major issues that you always look at, as far as hours and concentration, it might be possible then to through the Specific Plan, kind of get us away from the full-on Public Hearing process on each application. If that's the pleasure of the Commission and the Council. BROWN Well, I think we want to have that be one of the alternatives. Obviously the alternative in the draft plan, to leave things the way they are, wasn't discussed. You know, this could be a second alternative. And I'd like to make it clear --- not just in an appendix buried on page 93 --- that Alternative A or Alternative B in the draft, be right out in front. WHfITENBERG That would be right in the Plan. The appendix will be that pohcy statement the City already has in place that lists aU those conditions that we normally would impose. Just so the public can see if you were to go to the other alternative, what the normal conditions automatically would be imposed without going through the Pubhc Hearmg process. . CAMPBELL Do we need a motion to ask you to ... '1 WHfITENBERG I would like some direction, it doesn't necessarily have to be by Motion, if it's the consensus of the Commission that would be fine. Or a Motion at the pleasure of the Commission, either one. STEELE The only thing I would question is whether you want to give us any kind of specifics on numbers or hours, those kinds of things. CAMPBELL I think at this point we'd like to hold off on the numbers and hours and let that come out of the Public Hearmgs. But what I would like to see is something drafted for the framework, for us to address the hours and the numbers. BROWN I would suggest, rather than picking a number, that you'd just put a blank line through there. Because if you say any number at all, that, in Itself, will become extremely controversial. STEELE That is why we were asking. BROWN You know --- hours (blank) to (blank), and numbers (blank). . PIce 9 . CIty of Seal Beach PIannm8 Comm188101l MInutes for September 20, 1995 . WHI'ITENBERG I think what we will do, in the cover staff report that will come along with the actual document, is indicate the current number of licenses in those categories and what the ABC criteria is for over-concentration. So you can see those two numbers and that then at least gives you, you know, the parameters that you're working in based on what's already in the community. CAMPBELL Have we given you sufficient direction or do you need more clarification? WHI'ITENBERG I think I understand the position of at least two members of the Commission so far. I'm not sure about the other two. SHARP As far as bringing it to the Public Hearing, whatever they want to put in it is fine. We're going to have a Public Hearing and a decision is going to be made afterwards. LAW I hate to see a number put on there. Oh man, I hate to see a number put on there. . WHI'ITENBERG At this point, based on your comments and all the Commissioners comments, we would not put any numbers in the alternative portion of the document and basically you'd be requesting mput from the public is, first off, is that an alternative that they would prefer as opposed to what we're proposing in the Specific Plan? And if they prefer that alternative, what would be their recommendations from the public as far as numbers and hours. Surveys: Compulsory versus OptIonal Commissioner Law requested the Issue of surveys be agendized for further discussion. She said the City must do something so the Arch's situation at 715 Electric Avenue does not present itself again. Commissioner Law said something has to be done. Commissioner Law referenced a prior case which was supposed to have a 25' lot but in actuality was a 22' lot. ThiS mis- measurement resulted in dire consequences --- the house had to be taken down after being moved twice. She didn't think a survey would cost that much. The easiest way to have built the addition at 715 Electric Avenue would have been to begin with a survey. She said there was one item granted that should not have been granted. . Mr. Whittenberg said this issue could be agendized for discussion at a future meeting. Commissioner Law said she would like to see this agendized. Commissioner Brown said he would be happy to diSCUSS the issue of surveys. Chairperson Campbell said she was very upset with the way things went on that particular application. . r . . ....e 10 - CIty of Seal Beach PIamuJIB CommwIOl1 Mmutca for Septanber 20, 1995 1733 Crestview Avenue! Commissioner Law asked if the property at 1733 Crestview A venue is for sale, noting the subject property has an illegal deck. She asked if the title could be transferred with the illegal deck on the property? Mr. Whittenberg said yes, the property could be sold or transferred, but the disclosure laws would require full disclosure to the buyer that that deck was built without the issuance of a budding permit. Commissioner Law asked if there wasn't something placed on the title saying the deck had to be removed before it could be sold? Mr. Whittenberg said no, because staff was instructed by the Council or the Commission not to proceed with the ~ enforcement until we looked at the issue of setbacks or structures along the rear of the Hellman Ranch because of the vacancy of the property behind it. Staff has not been able to get around to this issue. Commissioner Sharp said he thought if that instruction was given it must have been at the Council level because he didn't tlunk the Commission instructed staff in that manner. Commissioner Law said she would like to see something done about the illegal deck. Mr. Whittenberg S31d this issue would be agendized as information items for the October 18th Comtnlssion meeting. Code Enforcement Commissioner Brown said he would like to discuss the ~ enforcement mechamsm of the City. He felt it puts the Commission in an awkward position, where they are making rules and people are flagrantly violating them. It doesn't seem as though the City has any enforcement mechanism other than taking a violator to court. Mr. Whittenberg said this Issue would be agendized for a November or December meeting. Bixby Ranch Commissioner Sharp asked when the City Council would begin their Public Hearings on the BIxby Ranch Co. proposal. Mr. Whittenberg said November 13th. AD.IilllBNMENI With a consensus of the Commission, Chairperson Campbell adjourned the meeting at 8:07 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, <io~Or\~ Joan Fillmann Recording Secretary APPROVAL: The Planning Commission Minutes of September 20, 1995, were approved on . Ot"~bCLL.. 18~ 1995. ~