HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2001-01-17
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for January 17, 2001
7:30 p.m.
District 1 - Brian Brown
District 2 - Jim Sharp
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 January 17, 2001
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 January 17, 2001
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for January 17, 2001
7:30 p.m.
I.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II.
ROLL CALL
AGENDA APPROVAL
III.
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 December 6, 2000.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
2. Adopt Resolution No. 00-42 for Oakwood Apartments, 133 First Street, approving Conditional
Use Permit 00-13 for Planned Sign Program 00-1.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Zone Text Amendment 01-1
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
City of Seal Beach
To consider an amendment to the Code of the City of Seal Beach to
reduce the required front yard setback for those properties with existing
2nd floor decks in the District V Residential Low Density (RLD) Housing
Zone. The request is to reduce the front setback for the 2nd floor to allow
residents with existing 2nd floor decks that extend into the setback area to
enclose those decks to create habitable livin~ space. The front setback
requirement is currently 18 feet (for both 15 and 2nd floors) for a front
entry garage.
Recommendation: Approval to City Council.
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of January 17, 2001
4. Tentative Tract Map 15832
321 Seal Beach Blvd., Shore Shop Property
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Avalon Homes
To subdivide the subject property for the future construction of eight (8)
detached single-family residences; with three parcels having twenty-six-
foot frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine-foot frontages, and two
parcels having thirty-foot frontages. The proposed subdivision request is
consistent with General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2,
approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-02.
VIII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X. ADJOURNMENT
4
.
Feb 07
Feb 21
Mar 07
Mar 21
Apr 04
Apr 18
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of January 17, 2001
2001 Aaenda Forecast
Study Session - Housing Element
Study Session - Retaining Walls
Public Hearing - Housing Element
CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan Grill) Review
ADA Handicapped-accessible Restrooms
May 09
May 23
Jun 06
Jun 20
.
July 04 HOUDA Y - No Meeting Scheduled
July 18
Aug 08
Aug 22
Sept 05
Sept 19
Oct 03
Oct 17
Nav 07
Nav 21
Dee 05
Dec 19
.
5
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of January 17, 2001
TO BE SCHEDULED:
o Study Session:
o Study Session:
o Study Session:
o 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
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
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of January 17, 2001
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, January 17, 2001. The meeting
was held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1
ROLL CALL
Present: 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: Chairperson Hood
Mr. Whittenberg noted that two meetings ago Chairperson Hood had reported that
he would not be present for tonight's meeting and stated that it would be appropriate
to excuse his absence.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Brown to excuse Chairperson Hood.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
AGENDA APPROVAL
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve the Agenda as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli opened oral communications.
None.
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli closed oral communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 6, 2000.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Brown to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
SCHEDULED MATTERS
2. Adopt Resolution No. 00-42 for Oakwood Apartments, 133 First Street,
approving Conditional Use Permit 00-13 for Planned Sign Program 00-1 .
Mr. Whittenberg reported that this request had been presented at the meeting of
December 6, 2000 and the Planning Commission (PC) had determined to approve
portions of the request and to deny without prejudice other portions. He confirmed
that Resolution 00-42 sets forth these findings and that it would be appropriate to
approve this resolution as presented unless there were revisions or corrections.
Commissioner Sharp asked if the appeal period begins after the date a resolution is
formally adopted. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Brown to approve Conditional Use Permit 00-13
and adopt Resolution 00-42 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
Mr. Whittenberg advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 00-42 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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
Meeting Mmutes of January 17, 2001
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Zone Text Amendment 01-1
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
City of Seal Beach
To consider an amendment to the Code of the City of
Seal Beach to reduce the required front yard setback for
those properties with existing 2nd floor decks in the
District V Residential Low Density (RLD) Housing Zone.
The request is to reduce the front setback for the 2nd floor
to allow residents with existing 2nd floor decks that extend
into the setback area to enclose those decks to create
habitable living space. The front setback requirement is
currently 18 feet (for both 1 sl and 2nd floors) for a front
entry garage.
Recommendation:
Approval to City Council.
Staff Report
Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
Planning Department.) He stated that Mr. & Mrs. Farrell, property owners at 3671
Fuschia Street in College Park East, had approached Staff requesting the ability to
enclose a 2nd story deck that protrudes over the garage at the front of their house.
He said that when Staff did an initial inspection of the request, they noted that the
garage was located at the required 18-foot setback for a front-entry garage. He
stated that at that time Staff informed the Farrells that a Variance would be required
in order to enclose this space. The Farrells then informed Staff that several other
homes in their neighborhood had very similar situations and had been allowed to
build without a Variance. Mr. Cummins noted that when Staff researched past
permit records, they found that the City had issued a number of permits during the
late 70s and early 80s to do substantially the same thing. He said that Staff then
recommended that the Farrells make application for a Zone Text Amendment (ZT A).
He stated that ZT A 01-1 will allow property owners with existing 2nd floor decks that
protrude over the garage to enclose the deck to create habitable living space. He
noted that several homes with this model type had been constructed in this
neighborhood and the decks protrude over the garage anywhere from1 to 5 feet,
depending upon the model type. Mr. Cummins stated that Staff had provided the
following alternatives:
· To decrease the required front yard setback within the Residential Low Density
(RLD) District V Zone for those properties with pre-existing decks which
currently protrude into the required setback area.
· No change. Leave the current front yard setback at 18 feet and keep all of the
pre-existing conditions in "legal, non-conforming" status.
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-G1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
He stated that Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution
recommending approval of ZTA 01-1 to the City Council.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were a maximum allowance for "overhang" over
the garage. Mr. Cummins presented photographs of the Farrell's residence and
noted the protruding deck. He also presented photographs of other properties within
the College Park East neighborhood with similar structures. Commissioner Cutuli
noted that there would probably be future requests of the same kind and if this were
to be made a retroactive ZT A allowing only the existing enclosed decks, other
residents would most likely complain that they were not being allowed the same
privilege. Mr. Cummins stated that the existing enclosed decks are legal non-
conforming, and the current reading of the Code reflects that this is not permitted by
right, and either a Variance would need to be granted or a Zone Text Amendment
(ZT A) would have to be approved. Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were a limit
to the size of the enclosed decks. Mr. Cummins stated that as the ZT A is written
now, it would apply to any pre-existing decks prior to January 1, 2001, regardless of
the size of the deck. Mr. Whittenberg interjected that the intent was to prevent
someone from applying to extend their existing deck further out than it already is,
and then apply to enclose the deck and receive two advantages. He said that the
intent was to state that an existing deck could be enclosed to create habitable
space, but the deck cannot be moved further out toward the street than it already is.
Commissioner Sharp questioned whether this were a very limited area. Mr.
Cummins stated that this included the Residential Low Density (RLD) Zone, which
includes College Park East and "The Hill" area. He stated that he was not aware of
any homes on The Hill that have the same situation. Commissioner Sharp asked if
all of the homes in College Park East are built in this style. Mr. Cummins responded
that only one model type within this track has this style. Commissioner Brown asked
for the total number of homes with this design. Mr. Cummins responded that he did
not have an exact number, but that from his observation it appeared that there could
be "a handful," but that this was enough to create a series of variance applications if
the residents decided they wanted to do this. Commissioner Brown noted that there
were at least 2,000 homes in College Park East. Mr. Whittenberg stated that as he
recalled, there are 5 different models in this tract of homes, and noted that there
were approximately 1,300 homes altogether. Commissioner Brown stated that this
meant that approximately 260 homes could have this deck style. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that many of the homes with this deck design are back far enough within the
setback requirement, so to assume that 1 in every 5 homes could have this situation
would not be entirely accurate. He stated that Staff believes that since the City had
previously issued permits for the enclosure of these balconies, there must not have
been a problem in doing so in this area of town. He said that to his knowledge there
had never been any complaints regarding issuing permits to allow this.
Commissioner Sharp stated that he could not see how enclosing these decks could
create serious access problems for emergency vehicles. He said that since the
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-01 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
decking and the height and the setback were already out there, he could not see any
reason to deny this request. Mr. Whittenberg stated that it was a question of
whether or not the Planning Commission wants these balconies to remain as they
are or whether it would be appropriate to allow the owners of this particular model of
home the option of enclosing that area to create habitable living space.
Commissioner Sharp said that he felt that it made sense to allow residents needing
more living space to be able to convert these decks as opposed to having to move to
another home.
Commissioner Brown asked if all the decks were built with the same setback. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that in reviewing the records, the decks were built as part of
the initial house when the homes were approved as part of the development of
College Park East. Commissioner Brown asked if the setback is 18 feet, how were
the decks built to encroach into that setback. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff could
not answer this question. He said that the homes were built in the late 1950s to
early 1960s and he said it was possible that the setback standards may have
changed since that time. He said that there had been a number of issues in College
Park East over the years that have resulted in amendments to City Code to allow
things that were initially built in College Park East to remain. He noted a change
made by the City to allow the amount of lot coverage in this neighborhood to be
greater as some of the homes had a covered patio off the back of the homes that
was allowed to be included in the lot coverage requirement. Commissioner Sharp
asked whether it would it be appropriate to continue this item to the next meeting
when Chairperson Hood would be in attendance, since these homes are within his
district. Mr. Whittenberg said the issue had come up because a particular
homeowner in College Park East had come to the City to apply for a permit to
enclose the deck on their home, in accordance with what they had seen as being
allowed in the past by right by the City. He said when Staff first reviewed this
request a recommendation was made that the applicant request a Variance. When
the applicant brought in photographs of other homes with enclosed 2nd story decks,
Staff conducted a review of building permits issued for these structures and found
there were no Variances on any of them. Staff could only assume that the City knew
what it was doing when it had issued these permits. He said that Staff feels that
enclosing these decks does not create a major change in the homes. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that the Planning Commission could elect to continue this item if
the Commissioners felt it preferable to have Chairperson Hood present.
Public Hearing
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli opened the public hearing.
Mrs. Rachel Farrell stated that all she and her husband want to do is to enclose the
2nd story balcony to create habitable space. She said that her neighbors are totally
in support of this request. She noted that they have been attempting to gain
approval of this request since November 2000. She urged the approval of her
request tonight as she said she had already had to wait through 2 cancelled
\\SCULL Y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
Planning Commission meetings. She stated that rather than move to a new
neighborhood, they simply wanted to enlarge their living area.
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Lyon said that he thought this was a good idea as it would not only
increase the living space but would increase the value of the home.
Commissioner Sharp asked the Director of Development Services what the action of
the Planning Commission on this request should be. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the
action of the Planning Commission would be to recommend approval of this ZT A to
City Council who would then schedule a public hearing.
Commissioner Brown stated that although he understood the applicant wanting to
enclose the deck space, and he believed this was more a question of aesthetics and
open space and whether this would be a good thing for the entire look and feel of
College Park East. He said that when he had visited College Park East he had
noted that the homes are crowded on the street. He believes this is because the
setbacks are so close in this neighborhood. He said that by enclosing decks, this
increases the crowding. He said if 200 more homeowners were to decide to do the
same thing, this would create "a stucco jungle." He said that he felt it would be
unfair to vote on this item without Chairperson Hood being present, as he would
have a better feel for the residents of his district. He asked the Director of
Development Services what the setbacks were in the rest of the City. Mr.
Whittenberg reported that for College Park East, College Park West, and The Hill the
setback is 18 feet. He said that in Old Town because there are no driveways
coming in off the street, the average setback is 12 feet with a 6-foot minimum. He
stated that 18 feet is the standard setback for a front drive-in entry garage and can
be 10 feet for a side-entry garage. Commissioner Brown stated that as he drives
through Old Town and College Park East he notes that there is a definite feel to
each area. He said that if a group of residents from College Park East came before
the Planning Commission to state that they were in favor of this Zone Text
Amendment, it would be fine with him. He re-stated that he would still prefer to hear
from Chairperson Hood first.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Lyon to continue this item to the scheduled
meeting of February 7,2001.
MOTION CARRIED:
A YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
4. Tentative Tract Map 15832
321 Seal Beach Blvd., Shore Shop Property
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Avalon Homes
To subdivide the subject property for the future
construction of eight (8) detached single-family
residences; with three parcels having twenty-six-foot
frontages, three parcels having twenty-nine-foot
frontages, and two parcels having thirty-foot frontages.
The proposed subdivision request is consistent with
General Plan Amendment 98-2 and Zone Change 98-2,
approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 01-02.
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in
the Planning Department.) He stated that approvals for General Plan Amendments
(GPA) and a Zone Change (ZC) had been received from City Council (CC) in
December 1998 to convert the land use of this area from a Commercial/Retail Use to
a maximum of eight (8) single-family homes on the property. He noted that as part
of the approvals of this project a resolution was adopted that amended the General
Plan (GP) to reflect a residential use on the property, and the second reading of the
Zone Change (ZC) Ordinance was withheld until such time as a subdivision map
was presented to ensure that the map complied with the conditions imposed as far
as minimum lot sizes and lot width requirements are concerned. He said that
Tentative Tract Map 15832 reflects this and Staff recommends approval subject to
58 conditions. He stated that the reason it has taken since 1998 to come before the
Planning Commission for consideration is that in the course of completing due
diligence as a part of the sale of the property, contamination under the property at
the corner of Seal Beach Boulevard (SBB) and Pacific Coast Highway was
discovered. Mr. Whittenberg noted that this corner site, where a liquor store is
currently located, had formerly been a gas station. He stated that investigations had
determined that gasoline tanks still remained underground since the 1960s and still
contained residual gasoline product that had leaked into the ground. He said there
has been a substantial clean-up and monitoring effort to get this site cleared by the
Regional Water auality Control Board (RWaCB). He reported that a letter from the
RWaCB has been included in the Staff Report indicating that clearance has been
given for seven of the eight lots to be created by this subdivision request. He stated
that Staff has conditioned the map approvals to indicate that no grading or
construction activity may take place on the northern most lot until such time as
additional clearance is received from the RWaCB. Mr. Whittenberg also reported
that the City is currently undertaking an improvement project for SBB from Electric
Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway that will result in realignment of the street,
\\SCULL Y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
installation of new curb/gutters/sidewalk, a center landscaped median, bicycle paths,
and other public improvements. He indicated that the curb, gutter, and sidewalk
replacements for the Avalon Homes development would have to conform to the
City's improvement project. He stated that there were a number of other conditions
related to cost sharing of some of the public facilities improvements. The Director of
Development Services stated that when the CC approved the GPA and ZC in 1998
they also approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and this project has
been evaluated in light of the environmental documentation of that project. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that Staff feels that it is in conformance with what was evaluated
under that MND and that there is no additional environmental review necessary. He
said that the 1998 MND actually evaluated up to 9 single-family homes on the
property and found that the impacts of 9 homes were not enough to cause significant
environmental impacts. He indicated that Staff had prepared Resolution 01-02 that
recommends conditional approval and findings.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Sharp commented that when the property on Lyons in Long Beach
was built, they investigated everything and built the project, then discovered that
they still had contaminated areas. He noted that that property has now been vacant
for over 2 years. He stated that he wanted to make sure that the contamination on
the SBB (Shore Shop) property has, in fact, been completely cleared out. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that a clearance letter from the RWQCB had been provided
indicating that 7 of the 8 lots have been cleaned up so as to meet the appropriate
criteria. He continued by stating that the most northerly lot of the property still
requires additional remediation, and Staff has conditioned both the map and building
permit approvals to prevent grading or construction activity on that lot until all
remediation criteria has been met. Commissioner Sharp asked if no tanks other
than the 2 indicated had been identified. Mr. Whittenberg responded that there
actually had been 4 tanks removed from the liquor store property. He said that the
gas station had been demolished in the 1960's, so the tanks had been in the ground
for a long period of time. He stated that the assumption at this point was that there
are no more tanks on the property and the clean up of the additional hydrocarbons in
the soil is now taking place.
Public Hearing
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli opened the public hearing.
Mr. Scott Redsun of Avalon Homes stated that the process of gaining approval has
been a long one. He said that Avalon now believes to have total clearance for the
property except for the one northerly lot. He noted that when testing was done, the
findings reflected that 7 of the lots had never had contamination on them. He stated
that Avalon Homes was ready to begin building on these 7 lots and would wait for
final testing and clearance before beginning to build on the lot closest to the liquor
store location. He said that it was his understanding that the process of remediation
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
had begun on the last lot and on the corner property and that within 6 months to a
year and one-half the lot should be remediated. Mr. Redsun stated that the project
of homes would add a lot to the beautification of this section of SBB. He stated that
Avalon Homes was more than happy to contribute their share to the street
improvements. Commissioner Cutuli asked if the floor plans reflected on Tentative
Tract Map (TIM) 15832 were all the same. Mr. Redsun responded that there were 2
different floor plans and 4 different elevations. He said that the homes could be 21 or
26 feet wide, depending upon the width of the model. He said that currently there
are nine 25-foot wide lots and with this extra space Avalon has attempted to create
different variations. Commissioner Sharp asked what the overall height of the
homes was. Mr. Redsun reported that the maximum height was 25 feet. Mr.
Whittenberg interjected that the issues before the Planning Commission tonight is to
approve the land subdivision, as the building designs and elevations had already
been approved by the CC when the GPAs and ZC were approved. He noted that
the last item for approval is re-parceling of the lots to meet the proposals submitted
by the applicant. He said that all of the exterior designs and elevations meet existing
City Code requirements for lot coverage, height, setbacks, and parking.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were anything the Planning Commission could
do with regard to the positioning of the homes in a more streamlined fashion with
equal setbacks. Mr. Whittenberg responded that City Code for this area of town
allows for variation in setbacks, and he noted that the plans do have some offsets on
the sides of the homes. Commissioner Lyon noted that the Staff Report indicates
that Avalon will install one street tree per lot in the parkway along SBB, yet the plans
appear to show the trees between or behind the homes. He also asked the Director
of Development Services if the street area included the sidewalks. Mr. Whittenberg
confirmed that as part of the redesign of SBB the actual parkway width, including the
sidewalk and the City-owned landscaped area, would be from 10-12 feet wide.
Mr. Mario Musso, previous owner of the property, stated that with the approval for
rezoning of the property the Planning Commission had suggested that the density of
the project be reduced from 9 to 8 homes and had also suggested varying the
architectural renderings of the homes to create variety. He said that they have
attempted to do this. He said that the Musso's are looking forward to the removal of
the vacant retail building and the construction of the 7 new homes, and eventually
the eighth. He stated that construction would coincide with the SBB improvement
project. He said that he believes that this long overdue improvement of SBB will
usher in a beautiful new gateway to the City. He thanked the Planning Commission
and Staff for their assistance in helping this plan come together.
Mr. Vic Peterson, 303 Seal Beach Boulevard, spoke in favor of the Avalon Homes
project. He said it is long overdue. He stated that approximately 10 years ago funds
had been allocated for SBB improvements, but these funds were instead used to
improve 12'h Street. He said that he wanted to ensure that the SBB improvement
project has the full support of the City. He said that if the improvements had been
made 10 years ago, many of the commercial retail businesses on that property could
have been saved. He expressed his support of the new homes. He noted that there
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 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 January 17, 2001
were 3 lots north of Landing Street that are zoned for commercial use. He
recommended that these be re-zoned back to residential to conform to the existing
use.
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Brown stated that he had been against this conversion from the
outset and had voted against it. He said he has not changed his views, although CC
did decide to approve the Zone Change. He stated that although it would reduce the
density, he believes that the lots should be 30 feet wide. He said that with a 25 to
26-foot wide lot with 6-foot setbacks on each side, you end up with a 19-foot wide
house with an 18-foot width of livable space, which does not make for a great living
environment and makes the neighborhood look like "a house cemetery." He noted
that the current designs were better than the previous ones, but it still looks like "a
row of closely-spaced soldiers." He said that the overall look for the houses was
very similar with only minor variations. He stated that because this was a critical
opening to the City it should present our best face and not our worst face in terms of
the narrow lots. He said he would not be in favor of approving any more 25-foot lots
anywhere within Seal Beach. He stated that he would vote against TIM 15832 and
request that Avalon Homes return with 30-foot wide lot configuration. Commissioner
Brown stated that he also believed it was premature to begin construction when
gasoline fumes or vapors in the soil have not been completely mitigated. He
commented that he could not believe that anyone would want to live on Lot 7 right
next to the vacant Lot 8 that has gasoline fumes. He noted that it would be more
appropriate to clean up Lot 8 before beginning construction, or even constructing
only 7 homes and leaving Lot 8 as open space. Regarding the landscaping for the
SBB improvement project, Commissioner Brown stated that if the project was to be
completed by the same company that did the median landscaping for the SBB
improvements near the Naval Weapons Station, he hoped another company would
be contracted as he had received several complaints about the small trees planted
in the medians. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the project on SBB near the Naval
Weapons Station was funded by grant funds provided by the State of California and
the City had a limited amount of funding to complete the project. He noted that the
trees planted are of varieties that grow very quickly, but it will still take time for them
to reach full maturity. He said that in this area the standard requirement for planting
trees is that 15 gallons tree be provided, so anytime a landscaping program is
completed it will take some time for the plantings to take effect. He noted that a
landscape architect designed the plans for the planting of these trees, but due to the
lack of funds to hire a landscape architect, City crews completed the plantings along
SBB. He said that it had not yet been determined how the final landscaping work
along SBB and Electric Avenue would be undertaken.
Mr. Whittenberg then reminded the Planning Commission that when the CC
approved the GPA and ZC, they specified the width of the lots. He noted that TIM
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 10
.~
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 January 17, 2001
15832 meets the specifications made by CC. Commissioner Brown stated that if
Staff is bringing this TIM back before the Planning Commission for approval, he
believes it is a bad idea. Mr. Whittenberg responded that he understood this, but he
wanted to make sure that it was noted for the record that CC had specified that
certain lot widths were to be provided. He again stated that TIM 15832 was within
the provisions of CC, but the Commissioners at their discretion could vote as they
felt appropriate. Commissioner Brown said that he believed this was why TIMs
were brought back before the Commissioners: to get the opinion of the Planning
Commission. Commissioner Sharp confirmed that the vote would be strictly for the
tract map and had nothing to do with the street improvements or the design of the
homes. Mr. Whittenberg responded that this was correct. Commissioner Sharp
asked if the Coastal Commission had approved the tract map. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that Coastal Commission has not approved the tract map itself, but the land
development proposal that reflects the lot widths with the style of proposed homes
comply with the Coastal Commission and with its previous CC determination as to
how this particular piece of property should be developed. Commissioner Sharp
asked if 25 feet is the normal lot width for most lots within Seal Beach. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that this was the "predominant" width, but the Commission
must keep in mind that the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway in Seal Beach was
subdivided in the early 1900s, and a 25-foot lot was the standard lot size at that time
for land subdivision for many areas of Southern California. He stated that today you
would not see 25-foot wide lots created as it can restrict use of the interior of the
property. He said that in this particular case, the property currently consists of nine
25-foot wide lots. He stated that he did not recall the recommendation made to CC
by the Commissioners when this project first came before them, but at the Council
level they did deal with the issue of lot width. He stated that CC had specified that
there should be a specific number of lots with specific widths. He said that CC had
discussed the same concern expressed by the Planning Commission regarding a
standard 25-foot width, which is a very narrow width, but felt that to go to 30 feet
would decrease the potential building sites from 9 to 7 or even 6, and this would not
have been appropriate. He noted that CC had conditioned the approval of the ZC to
reflect construction of 8 homes with the lot arrangement as it is presented tonight.
CC had also required that they would not implement the zoning until they had
approved the map, to ensure that the new lots meet with the standards.
Commissioner Sharp stated that were the project to be constructed north of Pacific
Coast Highway, he would have a different view on the size of the lots. He said that
he was certain that most people would like to see 40 or 50-foot wide lots, but if this
were done, the houses would not be affordable. He said that since CC had put in
the time to come up with the conditions, he would be in favor of approval.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that he was still concerned about having the homes in a
straight row, and although the designs are nicer than the ones previously submitted,
he still thinks that the spacing of the homes creates a "wall like, straight line effect,"
with few architectural projections. He said he would like to see more variation. He
said that he would like to vote to make changes to create less of a straight line, wall
effect.
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-Q1 PC Mlnutes.doc 11
.~
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 January 17, 2001
Commissioner Brown asked if it would be appropriate to make a motion to deny
Tentative Tract Map 15832. Mr. Whittenberg suggested that if the Commissioners
wished to see changes in the map, they might want to recommend denial with
recommendations for modifications.
MOTION by Brown to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832 with modification to create
30-foot wide lots.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if it would be appropriate for the Vice-Chairperson to
second the motion. Mr. Whittenberg stated that it would be appropriate. He began
to state that he understood Commissioner Cutuli's concerns on the design of the
buildings when Commissioner Brown interjected that he did not feel it would be
appropriate for the Director of Development Services to make a comment at this
point. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the Commissioners were discussing an issue
that is not a component of the subdivision itself. Commissioner Brown noted that the
Director of Development Services had already made this point and he resented Mr.
Whittenberg's attempts to influence the vote. Commissioner Brown continued by
stating that the Director of Development Services is there as part of Staff and had
had his chance to talk, and the public had its chance to talk, and when Mr.
Whittenberg tries to influence a vote after this, Commissioner Brown believes him to
be out of line. Commissioner Sharp asked if it would be appropriate to make a
substitute motion at this time. Mr. Boga responded that it would be appropriate.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Sharp to approve Tentative Tract Map 15832 as
presented.
Commissioner Lyon asked for an explanation of what a Substitute Motion was. Mr.
Boga explained that if first there is a motion to deny, it can be appropriate to make a
substitute motion, which if seconded, would then be voted on first and depending
upon whether the substitute motion is denied, then the Commission would vote on
the main motion.
The Substitute Motion dies for lack of a second.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to deny Tentative Tract Map 15832 with
modification to create 30-foot wide lots.
MOTION FAILS:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
2-2-0-1
Brown and Cutuli
Lyon and Sharp
Hood
Mr. Boga stated that a tie vote means that the motion fails. Commissioner Cutuli
asked what the procedure would be. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the
Commission could consider another motion or the public hearing could be re-opened
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 12
.~
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 January 17, 2001
and the matter continued to the next scheduled meeting of February 7, 2001. He
noted that this would allow Chairperson Hood to review the videotape of the meeting
and be present to participate. Commissioner Brown asked if there were another
option. Mr. Boga explained that if the Planning Commission decides not to continue
the public hearing, and is unable to agree on an action, a resolution could be
adopted reflecting no action because of a tied vote. He continued by stating that
alternatively, as a matter of law, the matter could be brought before the Council with
the recommendation that there is a tie vote and the Planning Commission was
unable to make a decision.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Lyon to re-open the public hearing and continue
this item to the next scheduled meeting of February 7, 2001. There will be no
additional public notice given.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
None
Hood
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg reported that on the Agenda Forecast Staff had scheduled a study
session on the Housing Element for February 7, 2001. He noted that this had been
scheduled with the anticipation that there would be no other items for consideration
for that meeting date. He stated that since both of the items on tonight's agenda had
been continued to the meeting of February 7, he recommended re-scheduling the
study session for another future meeting date.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Sharp inquired as to the status of the Starbucks application. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that Staff has not heard from Starbucks in quite some time.
He reported that there had been much discussion regarding what would happen to
this project if Starbucks were to proceed to move the drive-thru window in
accordance with City Council directions. He said that Staff had provided
communications from the City Attorney's office as to what their options would be, but
has had no other communications from Starbucks.
ADJOURNMENT
Vice-Chairperson Cutuli adjourned the meeting at 8:37 p.m.
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\01-17-o1 PC Mlnutes.doc 13
.~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.
.
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2001
Respectfully Submitted,
0~~
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary
Planning Department
APPROVAL
The Commission on February 7, 2001 approved the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, January 17, 2001. ~ .
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001 \01.17..()1 PC Minutes.doc 14