HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1999-04-21
I
I
.
.
"
(.
Q
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for April 21, 1999
District 1 - Brian Brown
District 2 - John Larson
District 3 - Len Cutuli
District 4 - David Hood
District 5 - Thomas Lyon
Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Maryann DeHaven, Planner, Willdan & Associates
Q
City Hall office hours are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday
and Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Closed noon to 1 :00 p.m.
Q
The City of Seal Beach complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
If you need assistance to attend this meeting please telephone the City
Clerk's Office at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting (562) 431-2527.
Q
Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Seal Beach TV3.
They are rebroadcast on Sunday evenings, Channel 3 at 4'00 p.m.
Q
Videotapes of Planning Commission meetings may be purchased from
Seal Beach TV3 at a cost of $20 per tape. Telephone: (562) 596-1404.
Copies of staff reports and/or written materials on each agenda item are
on file on the Department of Development Services and City libraries for
public inspection.
p
.
~\
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission' Agenda of April 21, 1999
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
The following is a brief explanation of the Planning Commission agenda
structure:
AGENDA APPROVAL: The Planning Commission may wish to change the order
of the items on the agenda.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Anyone wishing to address the Planning
Commission, only on items not on tonight's agenda, may do so during this time
period. No action can be taken by the Planning Commission on these
communications on this date, unless agendized.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Public Hearings allow citizens the opportunity to
speak in favor of or against agendized items. More detailed information IS found
in the actual agenda attached. If you have documents to distribute, you should
have enough copies for all Planning Commissioners, City staff and the public
Please give one to the secretary for the City files. The documents become part
of the public record and will not be returned.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent Calendar items are considered routine items
that normally do not require separate consideration. The Planning CommisSion
may make one motion for approval of all the items listed on the Consent
Calendar.
SCHEDULED MATTERS: These items are considered by the Planning
Commission separately and require separate motions. These transactions are
considered administrative and public testimony is not heard.
STAFF CONCERNS: Updates and reports from the Director of Development
Services (Planning and Building Departments) are presented for Information to
the Planning Commission and the public.
COMMISSION CONCERNS: Items of concern are presented by the Planning
Commissioners and discussed with staff.
All proceedings are recorded.
2
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of April 21, 1999
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
April 21, 1999 Agenda
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ROLL CALL
III. AGENDA APPROVAL
By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to:
(a) Notify the public of any changes to the Agenda;
(b) Re-arrange 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 is 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 the
Planning Commission may undertake no action or discussion 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 a specific item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate
action.
1. Plan Review 99-1 (rescheduled from the April 7, 1999 meeting)
Address:
ApplicanVOwner:
Request:
235 8th Street
Bruce Boehm
To construct a 400 square foot addition to an existing
non-conforming (based on density and parking) four-unit
building.
Approval subject to conditions of Resolution No. 99-2
Recommendation:
2. Site Plan Review 98-1 - Revised
Address:
Applicant:
Owner:
Request:
Northeast comer of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud
Kitchell Development Company
Bixby Ranch Company
To revise and reduce a previously approved site plan
from a maximum 299,000 square foot commercial
shopping center to a maximum 286,967 square feet on a
26-acre parcel located on property at the northeast
comer of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud
Approval subject to conditions of Resolution No 99-11
Recommendation:
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of April 21, 1999
VI.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
3. Conditional Use Pennit 99-3
Resolution of Denial
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
VII. PUBUC HEARINGS
4. Height Variation 99-1
47-A Surfside
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
5.
O'Malley's on Main/Brian Kyle
Request to pennit a fully enclosed, uncovered outdoor
dining area of 300 square feet at the rear of the existing
restaurant structure between the restaurant and an
existing detached two-car garage/apartment above
structure.
Adopt Resolution No. 99-7 denying the request
Eugene and Sue DiLuigi
Construction of a covered roof access structure for a
covered roof access stairwell in 4'Yz feet in excess of the
maximum height limit allowed of 35 feet.
Approval of the covered roof access structure subject to
conditions of Resolution No. 99-9.
Eucalyptus Tree Pennlt 99-1 (continued from April 7, 1999 meeting)
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Applicant:
Request:
Recommendation:
Bixby Ranch Company
Remove of all eucalyptus trees greater than 12-inches in
diameter, measured 4.5 feet above grade, in conjunction
with the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Project. The areas where the trees will be removed
include the entire project area, except for the histone
eucalyptus grove area along Seal Beach Boulevard and
the golf course area.
Approval, subject to conditions of Resolution No. 99-6
6. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 1 ~797
Seal Beach Boulevard and Rossmoor Center Way - Bixby Old Ranch Properties
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
VIII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X.
ADJOURNMENT
Bixby Ranch Company
To approve a 75-lot residential subdivision with
recreation facilities and private roadways in conjunction
with the approved Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Project. This pennit request has been analyzed as a
component of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR
Approval subject to conditions of Resolution 99-10
4
.
.
.
city of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of April 21, 1999
1999 Aaenda Forecast
MAY 05 CUP 98-8 (renewal) at 12161 Seal Beach Boulevard for Champs. Request is for a
12-month of the CUP issued in April 1998.
CUP 99-4 at 500 E. Pacific Coast Highway. Suite 104 for Patty's Place. Request is
for an outdoor patio area.
VAR 99-1 at 4128 Ironwood Avenue for Mr. Jason Nour. Request is for a reduced
rear yard setback.
MAY 19
JUN 09
JUN 23
JUL 07
JUL 21
AUG 04
AUG18
SEP 08
SEP 22
OCT 06
OCT 20
NOV 03
NOV17
DEC 08
DEC 22
TO BE SCHEDULED:
Calendar:
Cl Study Session: Permitted Uses and Development Standards in CommerCial
Zones (5/6/98)
Cl Study Session: Seal Beach Boulevard (1017/98)
Cl Study Session: Anaheim Bay Villas (1017/98)
Cl Staff Report: Undergrounding of Utilities
And Beyond
CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan GrilQ Review (April 2001)
ADA handicapped-accessible restrooms (April 2001)
5
,
.1
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of April 21, 1999
Chairman Brown called the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of April
21, 1999 to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the City Council Chambers and
began with the Salute to the Flag.1
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chairman Brown
Commissioners Cutuli, Larson, Lyon and Hood
Also
Present:
Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Maryann DeHaven, Planner
Absent:
None
AGENDA APPROVAL
Mr. Whittenberg stated that after further review by staff, it was determined that item
number 1 was noticed correctly, and that it is proper for the item to be on this evening's
agenda.
Mr. Steele stated that additional handouts had been provided in reference to item
number 2.
A request was made from the audience to remove item number 2 from the consent
calendar.
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Larson to approve the Agenda with the requested
changes.
MOTION CARRIED'
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Larson, Lyon and Hood
1 These Minutes were transcnbed from an audiotape of the meeting
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 MeetIng
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Brown opened oral communications.
1. Plan Review 99-1 (rescheduled from April 7, 1999 meeting)
235 8th Street
ApplicanUOwner:
Request:
Bruce Boehm
To construct a 400 square foot addition to an existing non-
conforming (based on density and parking) four-unit building.
Bruce Boehm · 131 14th Street. #A
Mr. Boehm introduced himself as the owner of 235 8th Street. Mr. Boehm described the
existing unit configuration of the fourplex and the intended improvements to the
property. Mr. Boehm requested that project be approved with changes to the condition
per a letter to Mr. Whittenberg dated March 18, 1999. A copy of the letter was
presented to Chairman Brown and the items in the letter were explained.
Mr. Boehm expressed his concern for condition number 8. He stated that the washer
and dryer in question belonged to a current tenant who plans on vacating the property
at the end of the month. The tenant has assured Mr. Boehm that the washer and dryer
will be removed and Mr. Boehm stated that he would ensure that the appliances were
removed once the tenant left.
Mr. Boehm then described the current parking situation and asked for clarification of the
current parking requirements of the Code.
Mr. Boehm explained that the conditions of approval as outlined in the staff report have
been met. Mr. Boehm then spoke regarding the covenant prepared by him and
presented a copy to Chairman Brown. Mr. Boehm presented a letter to Chairman
Brown from the United States Postal Service that stating that the notices had been
delivered and Mr. Boehm felt that the noticing of the application has been properly
done.
Mr. Boehm asked if the Commissioner's had any questions and no questions were
presented.
Chairman Brown stated for the record that Mr. Boehm's explanation of his application as
a request to remove the item from the consent calendar. Chairman Brown then made a
decision to continue discussion of the item out of order and return to Oral
Communications later in the meeting.
Consideration of Consent Calendar Item and not Oral Communications
Chairman Brown clarified that Mr. Boehm was presenting minor changes to the
resolution. Mr. Boehm responded that was correct. Chairman Brown asked if the
Page 2
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
changes were acceptable with staff and Mr. Whittenberg replied that they were,
however asked the Commission to not consider changing the wording for condition
number 7 and leave it as prepared by staff. Chairman Brown suggested that the
wording of the condition be changed to state that the door shall be made to be self-
closing. Staff agreed that the change could be made to the resolution.
Rea Clewlev · 945 Catalina Avenue
Mr. Clewley presented photographs of the subject property. Mr. Clewley stated his
concern as to why the application was not renoticed and did not agree with the
reasoning of Mr. Whittenberg's decision not to renotice for a third time. Mr. Clewley
suggested additional conditions for the proposed project. Mr. Clewley suggested the
following be incorporated as conditions of approval:
1. require a dumpster onsite during construction.
2. no construction allowed on Sundays.
3. placement of a portable toilet on the site for construction workers.
4. cars of construction workers or owner not allowed to block alley or neighboring
properties.
5. construction workers and owner not be allowed to dispose of products in the
alley.
6. permit approvals for this application need to be for proposed construction, not
foreseeable construction.
Mr. Clewley also described what he has understood to be other proposed improvements
to the property by the owner and also described other potential violations of the Code by
the owner. Mr. Clewley also stated his disagreement of the code sections that staff is
applying to the property. The supplemental staff report as prepared by staff is
erroneous according to Mr. Clewley and that more review should be completed by both
staff and the Commission prior to a decision being made.
Mr. Boehm asked if he could address the Commission again and Chairman Brown
agreed to let him provided it was brief. Mr. Boehm stated that he had invited Mr.
Clewley to review the plans. In addition, Mr. Boehm rebutted the comments made by
Mr. Clewley.
Chairman Brown asked a question about the exception of allOWing for density versus for
parking and asked for clarification from staff. Mr. Whittenberg explained the basis of the
code section as being applied to the application by staff. Mr. Steele further clarified that
the Code has provisions for nonconforming uses and this section specifically applies to
properties that are nonconforming based on parking as this property is Chairman
Brown also had a question regarding the construction conditions and where they were
located within the Code. Mr. Whittenberg stated that these items are typically at the
discretion of the building inspector but could be added as conditions of approval by
Commission is desired.
Page 3
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
.
City of Seal Beach Planning CommiSSion - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
Commissioner Cutuli had a question about the assurance that additional bedrooms are
not created. Mr. Whittenberg responded that staff reviews applications that are not
required to be reviewed by Commission and explained the different review processes
for applications. Commissioner Cutuli clarified his question further and Mr. Whittenberg
stated that the resolution is prepared in such a way so that the Commission knows
exactly what they are approving and is some cases work is completed without permits.
It would be difficult for staff to enforce all potential violations if it does not change the
exterior appearance of the structure. Complaints of non-permitted construction are
typically handled on a complaint basis only.
Commissioner Hood asked if final inspections of this type of construction came under
the Building Department. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the inspectors do review the
construction, however, there are instances where even after final construction, and
additional work is completed. It is difficult for staff to conduct enforcement of these
changes unless a complaint is filed or City officials notice the construction.
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Larson to approve Plan Review 99-1 through
Resolution No. 99-2 with a change to the wording of condition number 7 and other
wording as previously discussed
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Larson, Lyon and Hood
Mr. Steele advised there is a ten-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action is final tonight and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
Oral Communications was reopened by Chairman Brown
Bruce Boehm · 131 14th Street. #A
Mr. Boehm had a further comment regarding the trash dumpster at the site.
Rea Clewlev · 945 Catalina Avenue
Mr. Clewley presented a picture of a photograph of 1505 Crestview Avenue Mr.
Clewley expressed his disappointment of Planning staff's presentation regarding Zone
Text Amendment 96-1. Mr. Clewley explained that the photograph shows a 13-foot high
permitted fence and discussed Section 28-2316(2)( d) of the Code as it relates to
retaining walls. Section 28-2316(8) relating to properties abutting the Hellman
properties and abutting Gum Grove Park. Mr. Clewley then expressed his concern for
the regulations currently in the Code.
Chairman Brown closed Oral Communications.
Page 4
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes ofthe Apn121, 1999 Meeting
CONSENT CALENDAR
Both items listed on the consent calendar were removed and discussed separately.
Item number 1 was discussed under Oral Communications and item number 2 IS
discussed below.
i
2. Site Plan Review 9;-1 - Revised
Northeast corner of Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud
Applicant:
Owner:
Request:
Kitchell Development Company
Bixby Ranch Company
To revise and reduce a previously approved site plan from a
maximum 299,000 square foot commercial shopping center
to a maximum 286,967 square feet on a 26-acre parcel
located on property at the northeast corner of Seal Beach
Boulevard and St. Cloud.
Mr. Whittenberg explained that a staff report has been provided in the packet that
explains the request and contains a revised resolution. Mr. Steele stated that the
reason the item is before the Commission is to clear up inconsistencies between this
plan and one previously approved. The purpose is to reduce the square footage as
originally approved since the Council's intent was to approve a 286,967 square foot
development. In addition, the traffic data for the reduction of the square footage is
provided and the conclusion by the traffic engineer is that the traffic rate change is
negligible and will in some cases improve. The two choices are to leave the project as
previously approved, or to approve this modification and allow for a reduction of the
square footage. Mr. Whittenberg added that approval of this revised plan will not affect
the other discretionary permits such as conditional use permits and height variations.
Mr. Steele clarified for the public's benefit that the plan found in the packet is the revised
site plan with the reduced square footage.
Commission Questions to Staff
Commissioner Cutull asked where the reduced square footage was located on the
previous plan. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the square footage of each building will
be reduced and that it was not one building that was removed. The basic design is the
same; the buildings are just slightly smaller.
Commissioner Hood asked a question to Mr. Steele regarding the traffic engineer's
report and the reduced number of trips. Mr. Steele stated that in Table 4 of the traffic
engineer's report there are pluses and minuses at different intersections, but there will a
slight improvement of trips overall as stated by the letter from the traffic engineer
MOTION by Lyon to approve the item as written.
Page 5
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning CommissIon - Minutes of the Aprrl21, 1999 Meeting
Chairman Brown asked for public comment and Mr. Steele stated that this was not a
public hearing item.
SECOND by Larson.
Chairman Brown clarified that there is a motion to approve Site Plan Review 98-1
(revised) through Resolution No. 98-11.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
4-1
Brown, Cutuli, Larson and Lyon
Hood
Mr. Steele advised there is a ten-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action is final tonight and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning
SCHEDULED MATTERS
3. Conditional Use Permit 99-3 Resolution of Denial
140 Main Street
Business:
Owner:
Request:
O'Malley's on Main
Brian Kyle
Request to permit a fully enclosed, uncovered outdoor dining
area of 300 square feet at the rear of the eXisting restaurant
structure between the restaurant and an eXisting detached
two-car garage/apartment above structure.
Mr. Whittenberg reminded the Commission that the request was denied at the last
meeting and it was the desire of the Commission to have staff prepare a resolution of
denial. The findings contained in the resolution reflect the desires of the Commission
regarding the parking.
Mr. Steele informed Chairman Brown that the applicant, Mr. Brian Kyle, wished to speak
regarding the application.
Brian Kyle · 140 Main Street
Mr. Kyle summarized the events of the last meeting in that he had applied for a 300
square foot patio and that staff had recommended approval and that things were in
place to collect the fees of $10,500 in accordance with the provisions of AB 1600 Mr.
Kyle requested that the Commission do one of two things: 1) change their vote, or 2)
request a new hearing and postpone making a decision until he can provide the three
parking spaces as required by the construction of the patio.
Chairman Brown asked if Mr. Kyle was requesting to pull his request. Mr. Kyle
responded that he would like the item reheard at a future meeting and Chairman Brown
Page 6
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
asked Mr. Steele that if the item was pulled, would the notices need to be sent out
again.
Mr. Steele responded that no final action had been taken as of yet and that Mr. Kyle did
not need to pull his request. A motion could be made to continue the item and renotica
the public hearing if a new information will be presented.
MOTION by Larson to approve the item as written.
Mr. Kyle suggested that a motion to approve be made requiring that he provide the
three deficient parking spaces. Chairman Brown stated that the option of requiring
spaces was discussed at the last meeting and Mr. Kyle disagreed. Mr. Steele
suggested that since there is no evidence in the record showing such, the best course
of action would be to continue the item in anticipation that more information will be
provided.
Chairman Brown clarified this with Mr. Steele and asked Mr. Kyle how long he needed.
Mr. Kyle responded that the next Planning Commission meeting would be sufficient. It
was determined by the Commission and staff that this would not give adequate time for
renoticing the project and that May 19 would be the next available meeting date.
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Cutuli to continue the item to the May 19, 1999
Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Larson stated that he is voting for the request since the applicant has
requested it as he voted to approve the original request.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Larson, Lyon and Hood
Chairman Brown stated that the item would be renoticed and reheard on May 19, 1999.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. Height Variation 99-1
47 -A Surfside
Owner:
Request:
Eugene and Sue DiLuigi
Construction of a covered roof access structure for a covered roof
access stairwell 4~ feet in excess of the maximum height allowed
of 35 feet.
Staff Report
Ms. DeHaven delivered the staff report. (Staff report on file in the Planning Department
for inspection.) The applicant is requesting to construct a non-habitable architectural
Page 7
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apn121, 1999 Meeting
feature that would cover a roof access stairwell and would exceed the maximum height
limit for the Surfside area by 4~ feet. Notices were sent out to the neighbors for the
continued hearing as the applicant had proposed to redesign the non-habitable
architectural as the 49 square foot storage area was removed. The proposed structure
exceeds the City's guideline for covered roof access stairwells, but the archItect has
designed the structure to minimum building code requirements. Staff feels that if the
structure were reduced further it would not be architecturally compatible with the
residence. Staff is recommended that the Commission approve the application based
on the conditions listed in Resolution 99-9.
Commission Questions to Staff
Chairman Brown asked if a covered roof access exceeding the maximum size guideline
had been approved recently. Mr. Whittenberg responded that there was one on the Hill
where the circular staircase exceeded the maximum. Mr. Whittenberg explained that
this one is larger due to the architectural design of the residence. He also stated that
one was approved on 3rd Street in the past.
Ms. DeHaven noted Attachment 5 that shows a listing of other height variations
approved in the Surfside area.
Chairman Brown stated that the Commission has been consistent in the past in
approving height variations, but did not recall a situation in the past where the applicant
was allowed to exceed the maximum size guideline.
Commissioner Cutuli commented that he had lived previously in the Surfside area and
understood the need for as much space as possible, but also felt that Chairman Brown
is correct is stating that all applications need to be reviewed in a similar manner and the
same regulations applied.
Chairman Brown asked to hold discussion of the applicatIon until after the public
hearing was completed.
Public Hearina
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing.
John Chipman · Chipman Architects. Corona del Mar
Mr. Chipman explained the background the designing the residence and how it was
designed to be sensitive to the neighborhood. Mr. Chipman stated that he observed
similar structures on other properties in Surfside and that they look best when it appears
as if they are part of the overall architecture of the structure and not something that was
added at a later date. Mr. Chipman stated that it appears as if the volume is the pnmary
concern for the maximum size guideline and that the proposed structure is substantially
less. In addition, he stated that the height of the structure is less than the maximum
allowed for these types of structures which is seven feet. Mr. Chipman also explained
how the stairway was designed with the overall design of the structure and presented a
Page 8
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
city of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the April 21, 1999 Meeting
colored rendering of the proposed residence. Mr. Chipman also mentioned that it would
be difficult to maintain the architectural design of the structure if it is required that the
covered roof access be reduced in square footage.
Chairman Brown closed the public hearing.
Commission Deliberation
Commissioner Lyon asked how many structures there were in Seal Beach that
exceeded the maximum height limit. Mr. Whittenberg stated there were between 130
and 140 structures that have the covered roof access structure that exceeds the
maximum height limit and a majority of them are located in Old Town or Surfside. He
also indicated that it is not uncommon for requests for these types in structures in these
areas as the roof decks essentially become the yards for narrow beach properties.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that it appears that the directional notations on the plans
were incorrect. Mr. Chipman explained that there is no true north on the plans and the
directions listed are similar. Commissioner Cutuli stated that he felt that the side of the
residence facing the "B" Row does block a lot of a roof view from properties along "B"
Rowand that the proposed covered roof access is substantially greater than others in
the area.
Commissioner Hood had no comment.
Commissioner Larson stated these types of applications point out the defects in the
ordinance. The ordinances allow property owners to construct and improve on their
property and that discretionary permits such as this allow for enhancements that
sometimes do improve the overall appearance of the structure. Commissioner Larson
also stated that it would be better if it was not approved, but others have been approved
in the past. He also stated that the proposal might have an impact on the view of the
adjoining properties; however, no one came to the meeting tonight to speak in
opposition.
Commissioner Brown agreed that the issue of covered roof access structures has been
an issue in the City and that it would be better if applicants were not allowed to build
more than the Code allowed. Some builders have chosen not to propose these types of
structures to avoid hearings such as this one. Chairman Brown stated that he would not
support and increase from the maximum size guideline and that if one were approved,
other- applications may be submitted and it might be difficult to approve others in the
future.
Commissioner Larson asked Chairman Brown if he had a problem With the height of the
structure and Chairman Brown responded that he did not in that others have routinely
been approved exceeding the maximum height limit.
MOTION by Brown.
Page 9
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
Mr. Whittenberg suggested that the wording "not to exceed 42.25 square feet in size" be
added to condition number 1. For clarification purposes, Mr. Steele stated that the
42.25 square feet be added to condition number 2 since this condition relates to plans.
The wording added to the condition should read: "except that the maximum area of the
covered roof access structure shall not exceed 42.25 square feet. n
SECOND by Cutuli.
Chairman Brown clarified that the motion is to approve the height variation and to
reduce the size of the covered roof access structure from 52.50 to 42.25 square feet.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOE:
4-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon and Hood
Larson
Mr. Steele advised there is a ten-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action is final tonight and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
A ten-minute recess was called at 9'20 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
5. Eucalyptus Tree Permit No. 99-1 (continued from April 7, 1999 meeting)
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
ApplicanUOwner:
Request:
Bixby Ranch Company
Remove of all eucalyptus trees greater than 12-inches In
diameter, measured 4.5 feet above grade, in conjunction
with the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project.
The areas where the trees will be removed include the entire
project area, except for the historic eucalyptus grove area
along Seal Beach Boulevard and the golf course area.
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff report on file in the Planning
Department for inspection.) Responses to the issues raised at the previous staff
meeting are addressed in the supplemental staff report. Included in the report is
information from the development agreement relating to the removal of eucalyptus
trees. The tree permit request is a follow-up permit application that is required by City
ordinance specifically regarding eucalyptus trees. For clarification, Mr. Whittenberg
stated that this permit is not for removal of trees along the landscape area along Seal
Beach Boulevard. The arborist for the developer submitted a letter addressing some of
the concerns raised at the last meeting and Mr. Whittenberg discussed some of these
issues.
Page 10
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apn121, 1999 Meeting
Commission Questions to Staff
Commissioner Cutuli asked where the replacement trees would be planted. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that it is unknown at this time and the landscape plans will be
submitted once building permit applications are submitted. Mr. Whittenberg also
mentioned that most of the replacement trees would not be planted in the same location
that they are in now.
Commissioner Cutuli then asked if the trees would be replaced with like for like. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that the eucalyptus trees needed to be replaced with of
eucalyptus and other non-eucalyptus trees could be replaced with different species than
what originally existed. Commissioner Cutuli further explained that his concern that
existing tall eucalyptus trees may be replaced with a eucalyptus species that does not
grow as quickly. Mr. Whittenberg explained that the staff and the arborist were aware of
these concerns, but there is no Code or development agreement requirement that
similar species be replaced.
Commissioner Larson asked if the conditions to the number and type of trees to be
replanted had been decided by a contract with the City through the Council. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that that was correct.
Mr. Whittenberg corrected an item from page 8 from the staff report that the actual
number of trees to 1,220 trees will be replaced, not 1,620. Staff recommends approval
of the proposed tree permit through resolution number 99-6 that is found in the staff
report from April 7, 1999.
Public Hearina
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing.
Ron Bradshaw · Bixby Ranch Company
Mr. Bradshaw stated that the intent was not to avoid coming back with an application for
the area identified as the windrow and that the trees outside of that area were always
contemplated for removal as part of the project. The arborist has gathered the
background information for the removal of trees within the windrow area and that
information will be discussed with Mr. Whittenberg and the City's tree committee. Mr.
Bradshaw also stated that a landscape architect had been consulted with since the last
meeting for perimeter landscaping. The intent of the developer is to enhance the
windrow area and place trees throughout the rest of the properties. Mr. Bradshaw
anticipates that a landscape plan will be available when additional applications are
submitted for development of the various parts of the project. Mr. Bradshaw mentioned
that Mr. Applegate (the arborist) was available for questions.
Sandra MacSween · 12200 Montecito
Ms. MacSween questioned why items number 5 and 6 were before the Commission is
the project has been approved already. Ms. MacSween stated that she was pleased
that the developer and the City had taken an interest in preserving the trees but was
Page 11
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning CommiSSion - Minutes of the Apn121, 1999 Meeting
concerne,d that the trees were being seen as two different issues and that they should
be considered as one issue. Ms. MacSween stated that in her discussions with Mr.
Whittenberg that the trees between Lampson Avenue and St. Cloud would remain
intact. Mr. Whittenberg clarified that the area is the prime preservation area, but that
the diseased and damaged trees will need to be removed. Ms. MacSween asked that
the Commission do the least amount of damage possible to the trees since the project
has been approved already.
Ms. MacSween made a statement regarding the changing architectural appearance of
Main Street.
Sue Corbin · 240 7th Street
Ms. Corbin had a question about the sufficiency of the environmental impact report
regarding habitats and why the project was not subject to California Coastal Act
requirements.
Rea Clewlev · 940 Catalina Avenue
Mr. Clewley opposes the application and that the discussion regarding the project this
evening is mute. Mr. Clewley stated his observation of heavy equipment along the
windrow.
Commissioner Hood had a question about the removal of trees and their effect on the
windrow. Mr. Applegate explained how groves develop and the effect of wind along the
groves. Mr. Applegate stated that in this particular situation, the proposed irrigation will
assist in making some of the trees less susceptible to wind damage. Commissioner
Hood asked if the presence of heavy equipment could cause root damage to trees. Mr.
Applegate responded that compaction could damage the root system He also stated
that himself, Mr. Bradshaw and the consulting engineers had been at the site today and
did not see any heavy equipment near the windrow.
Chairman Brown closed the public hearing.
Commission Deliberation
Commissioner Lyon had no comments.
Commissioner Cutuli had no comments.
Commissioner Hood commented that he felt embarrassed for delaying the matter since
he was expecting a copy of the windrow plan but did have sufficient information at this
time to evaluate the application. Commissioner Hood remarked that this process is to
inform the public so that it could be understood and reassure them that the project IS
being done the best way possible. Commissioner Hood then made several comments
about development in the Seal Beach area.
Commissioner Larson had no comments.
Page 12
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
Chairman Brown had no comments.
Mr. Steele stated for clarification purposes that the environmental impact report had an
extensive review of biological resources and habitats. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the
Coastal Zone boundary within the City does not exceed north of Westminster Avenue
and the boundary has not changed since the inception of the Coastal Act.
MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Lyon to approve Eucalyptus Tree Permit 99-1 through
Resolution No. 99-6.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
4-0
Brown, Cutuli, Larson and Lyon
Hood
Mr. Steele advised there is a ten-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action is final tonight and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
6. Vesting Tentative Tract Map Number 15797
Seal Beach Boulevard and Rossmoor Center Way - Bixby Old Ranch Properties
ApplicanUOwner:
Request:
Bixby Ranch Company
To approve a 75-lot residential subdivision with recreation
facilities and private roadways in conjunction with the
approved Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project.
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff report on file in the Planning
Department for inspection.) The request is a vesting tentative map application for the
creation of 75 residential lots in conjunction with the Old Bixby Towne Center Project
The project was initially approved by the City Council and this application is for the
specific subdivision design. The vesting map complies with the conditions of approval
of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Changes and the stipulations of the
development agreement that limit the number of residential parcels to 75.
The proposal is to place a 75 lot residential subdivision at the northern portion of the
development near Seal Beach Boulevard and Rossmoor Center Way. The proposed
park exceeds the Cities land dedication by approximately 70%.
The Planning Department and City Engineer have reviewed the vesting map and
conditions of approval are included. The 111 conditions of approval are based on
mitigation measures of the environmental impact report (EIR) and the Planning and
Engineering Departments of the City.
Staff is recommending two changes to the conditions of approval. The 10-foot
landscape area is created by a recorded easement to ensure that no structures could
be placed in this area and the responsibility of maintenance Will be with the property
Page 13
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
CIty of Seal Beach Planning CommissIon - Minutes of the Apn121, 1999 Meeting
owner. The second condition proposed to be changed is that the specific location of the
emergency tie for the water line be eliminated so that the emergency tie can be placed
in the best location (at the owner's expense) according to the City Engineer.
The request is before the Commission since the project approval by the City Council
identified approval of a residential tract and this vesting map shows the specific location
and layout of the lots and proposed roads and that no map was available during the
previous public hearings on the project.
Staff is recommending approval of the vesting tentative map subject to the conditions of
approval as listed in the resolution of approval.
Commission Questions to Staff
Mr. Steele stated that staff had considered shared access or shared driveways of the
proposed driveways and access points for the residential subdivision and commercial
component that would also provide an entryway for the commercial center. The specific
location was studied by the traffic engineer and City Engineer and it was determined
that from a safety and traffic perspective that a shared accessway would not be a
workable solution and is not included in the documents this evening.
Commissioner Cutuli had a question regarding the size of the proposed lots. Mr.
Whittenberg could not state the actual average, but the average lot is approximately
between 4,800 and 4,900 square feet and the smallest lot is approximately 4,200
square feet. The minimum lot size for this zone is 2,500 square feet so the proposed
lots are much larger than required.
Chairman Brown stated that some conditions of approval listed do not seem to apply to
this application and questioned why they were included. Mr. Whittenberg stated the
conditions approved for the previous church use were not changed by the City Council,
therefore, the conditions are still applicable for the residential development. Chairman
Brown clarified his question that these conditions of approval were taken directly from
the EIR. Mr. Whittenberg stated that they were adopted mitigation measures from the
EIR.
Public Hearina
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing.
Ron Bradshaw · Bixbv Ranch Company
Mr. Bradshaw stated that no formal presentation has been prepared and that the project
engineer is available for questions.
Chairman Brown asked about sidewalks within the tract area. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that the map shows sidewalks on the sides of some streets but not each side of each
street. Chairman Brown asked whose decision it was to place the sidewalks on one
side of the street versus the other. Mr. Whittenberg responded that would be the
Page 14
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apn121, 1999 Meeting
decision of the City Engineer and ensure that the configuration conforms to the
requirements of the American with Disabilities Act. Chairman Brown asked if the
applicant set up the design and Mr. Whittenberg responded that the applicant proposes
a design to the City and the City makes the ultimate decision.
Mr. Bradshaw stated the intent of the developer is to submit an application for a parcel
map with a lot line adjustment at which a builder will be selected who will be very
involved with the preparation of the final map and the types and actual locations of the
sidewalks.
Chairman Brown suggested that lot 31 is very small and strangely configured and it
might be a better use as a tot lot and place the lot somewhere else.
Mr. Bradshaw did not think it would be a major issue to change that at this time.
Chairman Brown closed the public hearing.
Commission Deliberation
Commissioner Lyon had no comments.
Commissioner Cutuli had no comments.
Commissioner Hood had a question about potential danger as identified by the traffic
engineer and City Engineer of a shared access driveway. Mr. Steele stated that from
the safety perspective and traffic perspective that the concept of a shared access
driveway is not the best plan for this project. Commissioner Hood pointed out that there
would be less traffic on this access way than the current traffic patterns for College Park
East. Commissioner Hood also had questions regarding public and private streets. Mr.
Whittenberg and Mr. Steele answered the questions regarding the difference.
Commissioner Larson had no comments.
Chairman Brown had not comments.
MOTION by Larson; SECOND by Lyon to approve Vesting Tentative Map Number
15797 through Resolution No. 99-10 with the changes as proposed by staff.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOE:
4-1
Brown, Cutuli, Larson and Lyon
Hood
Mr. Whittenberg stated that state law requires that the City Council approve the vesting
map so there is no appeal period. The application will automatically be heard by the
City Council.
Page 15
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
.22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission - Minutes of the Apnl21, 1999 Meeting
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg thanked Ms. DeHaven for her time and service to the City. Mr. Steele
introduced Ms. Patricia Oliver who will be transitioning in as Assistant City Attorney.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Brown adjourned the meeting at 10:17 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Maryann DeHaven
Planner
Department of Development Services
APPROVAL
The Planning Commission Minutes of April 21, 1999 were approved by the Commission
on May 5 ,1999. ~
Page 16