HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2000-07-19
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for July 19, 2000
7:30 p.m.
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
Terence Boga, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary
o
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.
o
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.
o
Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Seal Beach TV3. They are
rebroadcast on Sunday evenings, Channel 3 at 4:00 p.m.
o
Videotapes of Planning Commission meetings may be purchased from Seal Beach
TV3 at a cost of $20 per tape. Telephone: (562) 596-1404.
o
Copies of staff reports and/or written materials on each agenda item are on file in
the Department of Development Services and City libraries for public inspection.
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of July 19, 2000
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 July 19, 2000
. City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
July 19, 2000 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. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2000.
2. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2000.
3. Receive And File: Response Letter to Notice of Preparation of Draft EIR - Long Beach
Desalination Project - City of Long Beach.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
4. Adopt Resolution No. 00-14 for Variance 00-3,220 7th Street
(Denied without prejudice at Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 2000.)
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5. Conditional Use Permit 00-3 (Continued from Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 2000)
615 Ocean Avenue
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Patrick Cronin
To create tandem parking and add 853 square feet to an existing house.
.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 00-20.
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of July 19, 2000
6. Conditional Use Permit 00-2 (Continued from Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 2000)
770 Pacific Coast Highway
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Tom Lao, TI Planning
To permit a drive-through coffeehouse where a drive-in restaurant currently
resides.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 00-18.
VIII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X. ADJOURNMENT
4
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of July 19, 2000
2000 Aaenda Forecast
AUG 09
Conditional Use Permit 00-6, 308 & 310 Ocean Avenue
Conditional Use Permit 00-8, Seal Beach Blvd. & Lampson - Islands Restaurant
Site Plan Review 00-3, Seal Beach Blvd. & Lampson - Islands Restaurant
AUG 23
Conditional Use Permit 00-7,141 Main Street
SEP 06
SEP 20
CUP 99-9 Faith Christian Assembly - 12-Month Review
OCT 04
OCT 18
NOV 08
NOV 22
DEC 06
DEC 20
TO BE SCHEDULED:
o
o
o
o
Study Session:
Study Session:
Study Session:
Staff Report:
Permitted Uses and Development Standards in Commercial Zones (5/6/98)
Seal Beach Boulevard (10/7/98)
Anaheim Bay Villas (10/7/98)
Undergrounding of Utilities
And Beyond
Calendar: CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan Grill) Review (April 2001)
ADA Handicapped-accessible Restrooms (April 2001 )
5
.~
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
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of July 19, 2000
Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 19, 2000. The meeting was
held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Hood
Commissioners Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
Also
Present: Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Terence Boga, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Absent: None
Chairperson Hood welcomed Commissioner Sharp as a returning member of the
Planning Commission.
AGENDA APPROVAL
Regarding Item No.6, Conditional Use Permit 00-2 for Starbucks, Mr. Whittenberg
reported that at the last Planning Commission meeting the Commission had
requested that a traffic analysis be completed. He stated that the City Traffic
Engineer and Staff have reviewed the study and have determined that there were
items that were not appropriately addressed in this report. Staff has requested that
Starbucks revise the report to provide this additional information. Mr. Whittenberg
then requested that Item NO.6 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of
August 9, 2000.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Brown to approve the Agenda as amended.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Lyon, and Sharp
None
None
1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
1
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Hood opened oral communications.
Mr. Walt Miller stated that he had written a letter to the Planning Commission on
July 5, 2000, and he assumed that the Commissioners had received a copy of this
letter. He commented that the owner of a neighboring property, who had originally
purchased the land to set up a dental office, subsequently discovered that this would
not be a permitted use and, as a result, has left the property unattended. He said
that now this property owner has been told that with the proper permits and his
neighbors' approval, he can build 3 single-family homes on this property. He stated
that he has strong objections to this, noting that his neighbor is now upset with him,
because Mr. Miller will not approve this plan. He said that this is another example of
"spot zoning." Mr. Miller noted that it appears that the City has no plan for zoning in
Seal Beach. He requested that the Planning Commission direct Staff to discontinue
the authorization of land uses that are not in the best interest of the City. Mr. Miller
stated that he would present his objections to the housing development proposed for
the Shore Shop property when that project comes back for review.
Mr. Riley Forsythe apologized to the Planning Commission for speaking on an issue
that concerns the City Council. He stated that it was important that he take
advantage of this public forum to express his outrage at the firing of the City
Manager, Keith Till by 3 City Council Members. He described this action as a siege
or hostile takeover. He stated that Mr. Till's accomplishments as City Manager
outshone the performance of any other city manager in the history of Seal Beach,
and to replace him would be impossible. He encouraged residents opposed to Mr.
Till's dismissal to contact their respective Councilperson and to attend the next
Council meeting to demand that Mr. Till immediately be reinstated as City Manager.
Chairperson Hood closed oral communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2000.
2. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2000.
3. Receive And File: Response Letter to Notice of Preparation of Draft EIR - Long
Beach Desalination Project - City of Long Beach.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRIED: 4 - 0 - 1
AYES: Brown, Cutull, Hood, and Lyon
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
47
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SCHEDULED MATTERS
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
None
None
Sharp
4. Adopt Resolution No. 00-14 for Variance 00-3,220 7th Street
(Denied without prejudice at Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 2000.)
Mr. Whittenberg reported that Resolution 00-14 had been reviewed by the City
Attorney's office and was now ready for adoption. Chairperson Hood indicated that
Commissioner Sharp would abstain from voting on this resolution, as he had not yet
begun his attendance at Planning Commission meetings when this item was
presented.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to Adopt Resolution 00-14 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, and Lyon
None
None
Sharp
5. Conditional Use Permit 00-3 (Continued from Planning Commission Meeting of
615 Ocean Avenue June 14,2000)
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
Staff Report
Patrick Cronin
To create tandem parking and add 853 square feet to an
existing house.
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
00-20.
Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
Planning Department.) He provided some background information on this item and
stated that the property is nonconforming due to density, as it is zoned for one unit
only and has two units on the property. He stated that Section 28-2407 allows for
one-time major expansions to nonconforming buildings. Mr. Cummins noted that at
the last Planning Commission meeting the Commission had asked Staff if any
similar applications had been presented to the Planning Commission and approved.
He said that research by Staff disclosed a few such applications. He stated that the
3
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
most similar was for a property at 236 - 5th Street where a major addition of 615
square feet was approved. He noted that there were no parking spaces for this
duplex, and the Planning Commission had approved the application with the
requirement that the applicant provide 4 tandem parking spaces on the property.
Mr. Cummins stated that Staff continues to recommend approval of Conditional Use
Permit 00-3 because it is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element,
which provides a Residential High Density (RHO) designation.
Commissioner Questions
Chairperson Hood confirmed that this application was consistent with previous
actions by the Planning Commission. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that it was.
Commissioner Brown asked why Resolution 97-35 was included with the Staff
Report, and what its relevance was to this case. Mr. Whittenberg responded that
Resolution 97-35 was for an application for a major expansion of property located at
308 and 310 Ocean Avenue. Commissioner Brown asked how this was related to
the parking issue for CUP 00-3, as the owners of 308 and 310 had met the parking
requirement without tandem parking. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was
correct. Commissioner Brown asked if the property for Resolution 97 -1 was
nonconforming in terms of parking, and if it was also nonconforming due to density.
Mr. Cummins responded that this was correct. He noted that this property had a
duplex and no parking. He said that 2 tandem spaces were created for a total of 4
parking spaces. Commissioner Brown inquired about the density issue for this
property. Mr. Cummins responded that the duplex still exists on the property.
Commissioner Brown asked if this property was zoned for a duplex or for a single-
family residence. Mr. Cummins responded that it was zoned for a single-family
home and is nonconforming due to density. Commissioner Brown stated that this
information was not included in the resolution. He referred to sub-paragraph (g) of
the Resolution which states ''the subject property is nonconforming due to
insufficient on-site parking and an insufficient side yard setback..." Mr. Whittenberg
referred to sub-paragraph (d) and after doing a quick calculation of the square
footage, confirmed that the property was conforming as far as density is concerned.
Commissioner Brown stated that one of the reasons for requesting that CUP 00-3 be
continued was to review this section of the resolution. He requested that the City
Attorney provide clearer wording for Section 28-2407, Paragraph 4, Pages 8709 and
8710 of the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Brown recommended the following
revision to the last sentence of this paragraph:
"Provided the parcel is nonconforming onlv due to the use of
tandem parking..."
Commissioner Brown stated that as he interprets this paragraph as written, it does
not refer to a property being nonconforming due to density. Mr. Boga concurred
that this section of the Zoning Ordinance was confusing as written. He said that as
he interpreted this paragraph, the first sentence establishes the parameters of when
4
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
you can do the expansion allowed in sub-paragraphs (a), (b), and (c), provided that
all requirements have been met excluding density and parking. He explained that
the problem with this Section was the second sentence in Paragraph 4. He said that
he would not insert the word "only" and then go by the second sentence. He stated
that the first sentence is what controls as the second sentence is vague and leaves
the requirements open to interpretation. Mr. Boga stated that it was perfectly
reasonable to continue to interpret this paragraph as it has been in the past. He
stated that it was his understanding that this was what the Commission had done.
Commissioner Brown stated that Staff had not provided an example of a case where
a property was nonconforming due to density and parking. Mr. Boga responded that
if the Commission is not satisfied with the examples provided by Staff, that it could
treat this as a first time case. . The Commission could then make a determination
that this section of the Zoning Ordinance is not clear, and request that Staff provide
a more clear interpretation.
Commissioner Lyon stated that the Commission is just "pushing the rules around" in
an attempt to satisfy the public. He said that he believes that the public should
satisfy the rules of the City instead of the other way around. He repeated his
comment that the architect should have created his design plan to conform to the
City regulations for the property. He stated that the more the Planning Commission
deviates from City rules, the less control the City would have. He warned that
making an exception for one application creates the possibility of having to make the
same exception for others.
Mr. Boga stated that he did not believe that the City was stretching the rules to
benefit or harm any particular property owner, but the problem is that the rules as
they are written are not clear. He said that a choice has to be made as to how the
rules will be interpreted and applied.
In response to Commissioner Lyon's comments, Mr. Whittenberg stated that as Staff
interprets Section 28-2407, Paragraph 4 of the Zoning Ordinance, it states that
application for a major expansion can be made if the property is nonconforming due
to density 2! parking. He said that as Staff interprets this section of the Code, it
does not state that both of these conditions must exist. He stated that most of the
examples provided with the Staff Report relate to parking issues and not density, as
the research done by Staff did not yield a case that had both parking and density
issues. He said that because the City does allow applications having either one of
these issues, Staff has to accept the application. He stated that Staff feel this
application falls within the guidelines of the criteria.
Mr. Whittenberg noted that if the Planning Commission felt that the language for this
Section of the City Code is unclear, this would be a separate issue. He emphasized
that Staff would not have presented this application to the Commission if Staff felt
that it was not appropriate to begin with.
5
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
Public Hearina
Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing.
Mr. Patrick Cronin stated that he was not exactly sure as to how to proceed, as this
was the first time he had done this. He said that he was aware of two other
properties within the City that are similar to the project for which he is seeking
approval. He stated that one of the properties is a single lot on the 200 block of 2na
Street that has a 4-car garage and a second-story addition. He noted that the
Planning Commission has approved this project. He said that these projects are not
as nice as the structure he plans to construct. He said that he would be investing a
lot of money into the project and feels that it will be an asset to the City. Mr. Cronin
stated that in 1992 he had constructed a home on 15th Street, but found it too large
and had sold the home. He noted that next door to his property are five units with 4
single parking garages, and all the way down the block there are twice as many
units as parking areas. He said that the only thing that would change with his project
is that the property will look better and have 4 off-street parking spaces. He
questioned how the two other properties he had mentioned had been allowed to be
constructed.
Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Brown stated that Mr. Cronin's question was a good one, and asked
how these two other property owners were allowed to construct 2 units on their
properties. He noted that he did not recall these applications coming before the
Planning Commission. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he could not recall the
circumstances of these cases. Commissioner Brown asked if the width and length
of the properties were known. He stated that properties on 2nd Street are 37 feet
wide, and this was probably why this construction was allowed. Mr. Whittenberg
interjected that lot sizes vary throughout Old Town, from lot to lot. He said that
although the lots were originally subdivided as 25-foot wide lots, over the years there
has been a lot of re-subdividing, creating a variety of lot sizes in this area. He stated
that each address would have to be viewed individually to determine what the exact
lot size is.
Commissioner Brown stated that he would like to think that the Planning
Commission is applying the rules fairly and equally to everyone. He said that he had
no major objections to the project, but that his concern is whether City Code was
being adhered to. He stated that he agreed with Commissioner Lyon's comments,
and he likes to follow the Code and not make exceptions. He stated that this
Section of the Code is confusing, and he could see how it might be interpreted
differently. He said that if the City Attorney interprets this Section of the Code as
referring to both density and parking, then Commissioner Brown would go along with
that. He re-emphasized that one of the sentences in Paragraph 4 does not make
6
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
sense. Mr. Boga agreed that the second sentence of Paragraph 4 does not make
sense, but this provision of the Code does allow for this type of expansion when the
property is nonconforming as to density !2! parking. He said that he agreed with Mr.
. Whittenberg that the and in this sentence should be interpreted to read as or. He
stated that this was not the only possible interpretation, but until it is corrected, Staff
has to make sense of the Code. as it is written, and this is the interpretation that
Staff has assigned.
Commissioner Brown stated that he was happy to accept the City Attorney's
statements and approve the project. He said that he still had concerns with what
follows the first sentence in Section 28-2407, Paragraph 4, and he wants to be clear
on what the Planning Commission is doing.
Chairperson Hood asked if this application is approved, would the Planning
Commission in essence be interpreting "and" to read as "or? Mr. Whittenberg
stated that this would be a separate issue. He stated that in approving this
application, all that would happen would be approval of the application. He said that
Staff could then recommend to the Planning Commission that Staff research the
actual language used when this amendment to the Code was approved. He said
that if it is determined that in the translation from approval by the City Council to
incorporation of the language for the ordinance and there was some clerical error,
then Staff can correct this.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that before the Planning Commission votes on an issue
there should be official clarification about what the Commission is voting on, as this
sets a precedent for future votes. He said that the Commission could be making an
important decision today without really knowing the correct wording of the Code. He
said he was never in favor of tandem parking because it doesn't work, but if the City
Council members feel that this should be allowed, then he would like to have City
Council approve this. Mr. Whittenberg reported that City Code already allows the
use of tandem parking if the Commission can make a finding that there is no other
feasible way to provide parking on a property. He stated that although he
understood the Commission's concerns regarding tandem parking, the City Council
has already adopted the ordinance to set this as an acceptable solution to the
provision of parking. He said that whether or not to approve this application before
further clarification of this Section of the Code has been completed is a policy choice
of the Planning Commission. He said that Staff has continuously interpreted this
Section of the Code to read that if a property is under a major expansion and is
nonconforming due to density or parking, the property owner can apply for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The CUP allows for a discretionary review by the
Commission to either approve or deny applications on a case-by-case basis. He
stated that the Planning Commission was not tied into making the same
determination on a similar project on a different property, because of what has been
done on another application. He said that the Planning Commission had wide
discretion to make a decision based upon the different findings and conditions of
each case. Mr. Whittenberg noted that as witnessed by the examples provided in
7
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
the Staff Report, there were not many instances of this type of application being
made. He explained that the Planning Commission had the choice tonight of
approving or denying the application, and once this is done, the Planning
Commission can direct Staff to research the history of this amendment to the Code
to verify that the language is correct as adopted by the City Council.
Chairperson Hood commented that Staff has interpreted Paragraph 4, of Section 28-
2407 of the City Code in one way, and the Planning Commission interprets it in
another. He noted that Staff has already counseled the applicant, and it is up to the
Planning Commission to resolve this. He related the following points:
1. The applicant has made the application, in good faith based upon advice given
by Staff.
2. The zoning ordinance is unclear to begin with and is subject to ambiguity.
3. Should the Planning Commission approve the application before receiving
clarification on this ordinance, or should the decision be delayed until clarification
is received?
He questioned whether the applicant should be penalized because of unclear
ordinance language, or whether the application should be approved possibly setting
an undesirable precedent.
MOTION by Lyon to Deny Resolution 00-20 as presented.
There being no SECOND, Chairperson Hood reported that Commissioner Lyon's
MOTION was dead.
Commissioner Brown re-stated that the whole purpose in continuing this item was to
discuss clarification of this section of the Zoning Ordinance. He said that the
applicant had been tortured enough, and although there is ambiguity in the
paragraph discussed, the question almost becomes how the Planning Commission
will interpret this paragraph. He questioned whether the situation would be made
better or worse in approving this application. Commissioner Brown said that like
Commissioner Cutuli, he was not in favor of tandem parking, because rather than
storing items in the garage and parking on the street, residents will park in the
garage and store items in the tandem parking spaces. He said that given these
ambiguities, he was still in favor of approving this application. He also added that he
did not believe any research into old records would provide adequate clarification.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approve Conditional Use Permit 00-3 and
adopt Resolution 00-20 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-1-1
Brown, Cutuli, and Hood
Lyon
None
8
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
ABSTAIN:
Sharp
Mr. Boga advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 00-20 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
Commissioner Brown stated that the Planning Commission would like to direct Staff
to research this issue. Mr. Whittenberg reported that Staff would complete research
and have the information available for the August 23, 2000 Planning Commission
meeting.
6. Conditional Use Permit 00-2
770 Pacific Coast Highway
(Continued from Planning Commission Meeting
of June 14, 2000)
ApplicanVOwner:
Request:
Tom Lao, TI Planning
To permit a drive-through coffeehouse where a drive-in
restaurant currently resides.
Recommendation: Continue to Planning Commission Meeting of August 9,
2000
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg stated that because this was an issue of concern to the community,
the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 00-2 would be re-noticed.
He also reported that a CUP for Islands Restaurant in the Bixby Ranch Old Towne
Center would be coming before the Planning Commission on August 9, 2000.
Mr. Cummins reported that a CUP for 308 & 310 Ocean Avenue would be coming
before the Planning Commission on August 9, 2000. He stated that the time limit for
this CUP had lapsed and the applicant was re-applying for approval.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that the residential component for the Bixby Project, which is
being handled by Centex Homes, would be coming before the Planning Commission
under a Site Plan Review for approval of the final designs for the homes, exterior
elevations, and the lot configurations. He reported that Centex Homes would like to
arrange a field trip for the Planning Commission to visit other Centex Homes
developments to get a better idea of what the homes for the Bixby Project will look
like. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this had been done in the past and had proven to
be quite helpful. He recommended scheduling the visit for Wednesday, August 16,
2000, around 2:00 or 3:00 p.m., and requested that the Commissioners confirm their
attendance as soon as possible so that Centex can make the necessary
arrangements. Commissioner Brown stated that Thursday, August 17, 2000 would
9
.~
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
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
be better. Commissioner Cutuli stated that he would not be able to attend on either
of these dates. He stated that he had previously visited a Centex Homes
development. The other Commissioners confirmed their attendance for Thursday,
August 17, 2000, at 2:00 p.m. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the newspapers would
also be notified in case one of their reporters would like to attend.
Mr. Whittenberg announced the return of James Sharp to the Planning Commission
and welcomed him back.
Mr. Boga reported on Ordinance 1416 as it related to the statements made by Mr.
Reg Clewley at the Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 2000, regarding
statements made by Mr. Boga. Mr. Boga noted that he had brought a copy of
Ordinance 1416 with him and he confirmed that he had been correct in stating that
the ordinance was adopted on May 10, 1999. He stated that this was not an
urgency ordinance, which means it took effect 30 days after the date of adoption.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Sharp requested clarification on the issues on which he would be
eligible to vote. He specifically mentioned the Bixby Project and Conditional Use
Permit 00-2 for Starbucks. Mr. Whittenberg responded that as far as items coming
before the Planning Commission in the future, Commissioner Sharp would be
eligible to participate on items for the Bixby Project. Regarding Starbucks, Mr.
Whittenberg stated that Commissioner Sharp was free to review the videotapes of
the public hearings for this continued item and to review the Staff Reports, in order
to be prepared to participate on this item at the meeting of August 9, 2000.
Commissioner Cutuli asked for a status report on the Hellman Project. Mr.
Whittenberg reported that he had spoken to the Coastal Planner for the California
Coastal Commission, who stated that the Coastal Commission anticipates having
this matter back on their agenda for a permit amendment at the October 2000
meeting. As soon as the permit amendment is approved, a fairly extensive
archaeological testing program must be completed, which will take approximately3-4
months. Once the archaeological testing is completed, site grading and other things
would begin for the home project. Commissioner Cutuli asked if heavy equipment
had been put in place to begin grading. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this heavy
equipment was being used for the construction work on Seal Beach Boulevard and
the Hellman Property was being used as a staging area for this equipment and a
storage area for some of the dirt being removed for the sewer lines that are being
installed. He indicated that the City is also importing dirt for the center median being
constructed along Seal Beach Boulevard. He clarified that currently there is no
activity directly related to the Hellman Project itself.
Chairperson Hood inquired about Mr. K's Restaurant. Mr. Whittenberg reported that
during a recent meeting with the Bixby Ranch Company, it was reported that Mr. K's
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2000
is no longer involved with that property and the Bixby Ranch Company will be
soliciting another use for this building.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
~ ~ AI\JC ^__ ~~ _
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Sec~etary
Planning Department
APPROVAL
The Commission on August 9, 2000 approved ,tQe Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, July 19, 2000. ~
11