HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2001-05-09
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for May 9, 2001
7:30 p.m.
District 1 - Brian Brown
District 2 - Jim Sharp
District 3 - Len Cutuli
District 4 - David Hood
District 5 - Phil Ladner
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 May 9, 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 MA TIERS: 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 May 9, 2001
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for May 9~ 2001
7:30 p.m.
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. SPECIAL PRESENTATION
1. Presentation of Resolution 01-21 Hononng Tom Lyon.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one motion unless
pnor 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.
2. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Apnl 18, 2001.
3. RECEIVE AND FILE: Amicus Curiae Briefs by the American Planning Association re:
"Anthony Palazzolo v. State of Rhode Island," and "City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at
Monterey, Ltd. And Monterey-Del Monte Dunes Corporation."
4. Minor Plan Review 01-6
229 Seal Beach Boulevard
Applicant/Owner:
Request.
Walter F. Miller
Architectural Review of a proposal to construct a new mixed-use
development at 229 Seal Beach Boulevard The proposed development
consists of a one-story commercial building at the front of the lot with a
three- (3) story, two-unit residential structure at the rear of the lot.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-22.
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of May 9, 2001
VII. SCHEDULED MATTERS
5. Memo to Planning Commission re: Review of Policy Statement for Covered Roof Access
Structures.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. Height Variation 01-2 (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2001)
1205 Crestview
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
Brent Sears / John & Neysa Erlandson
To construct a non-habitable covered roof access structure to extend
above the height limit within the zone in which the subject property is
located by approximately 5 Y2 feet.
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-17.
7. Height Variation 01-3 (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2001)
110 Ocean Avenue
Applicant/Owner:
Request.
Recommendation'
IX. STAFF CONCERNS
X. COMMISSION CONCERNS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Vance & Carol Ann Caesar
To construct a non-habitable architectural feature In excess of the
25-foot height limit. Specifically, the applicant proposes to construct a
covered roof access structure to exceed the height limit by approximately
6 feet
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-18.
4
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of May 9, 2001
2001 Aaenda Forecast
May 23
Jun 06
CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan Grill) Review
Study Session - Housing Element
Jun 20
Public Heanng - Housing Element
July 04
July 18
HOLIDAY - No Meeting Scheduled
Aug 08
Aug 22
Sept 05
Sept 19
Oct 03
Oct 17
Nay 07
Nay 21
Dee 05
Dee 19
TO BE SCHEDULED:
o Study Session. Permitted Uses and Development Standards in Commercial Zones (5/6/98)
o Study Session: Seal Beach Boulevard (10/7/98)
o Study Session: Anaheim Bay VIllas (10/7/98)
o Staff Report: Undergrounding of Utilities
o Study Session: Retaining Walls
o Study Session. ADA Handicapped-Accessible Restrooms
o Tentative Parcel Map 2000-134 (Boeing Company)
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
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of May 9, 2001
Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 2001. The meeting was
held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Hood, Commissioners Cutuli, Ladner, and Sharp
Also
Present: Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Terence Boga, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Absent: Brown
AGENDA APPROVAL
Mr. Whittenberg asked that Item No. 1 be removed from the agenda. He reported
that Mr. Lyon had been admitted to the hospital and would not be present tonight to
receive Resolution 01-21 honoring his service to the City. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that Staff would be checking on Mr. Lyon's status and would reschedule the
presentation when Mr. Lyon is well enough to participate.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Sharp to approve the Agenda as amended.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
Brown
Commissioner Brown arrived at the meeting.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Hood opened oral communications.
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
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of May 9, 2001
There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed oral
communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2001.
3. RECEIVE AND FILE: Amicus Curiae Briefs by the American Planning
Association re: "Anthony Palazzolo v. State of Rhode Island," and "City of
Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. And Monterey-Del Monte
Dunes Corporation."
4. Minor Plan Review 01-6
229 Seal Beach Boulevard
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Walter F. Miller
Architectural Review of a proposal to construct a new
mixed-use development at 229 Seal Beach Boulevard.
The proposed development consists of a one-story
commercial building at the front of the lot with a three- (3)
story, two-unit residential structure at the rear of the lot.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 01-22.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Boga advised that approval of Minor Plan Review 01-6 and adoption of
Resolution No. 01-22 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council.
The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow
morning.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
5. Memo to Planning Commission re: Review of Policy Statement for Covered
Roof Access Structures.
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
Meetmg Mmutes of May 9, 2001
Mr. Cummins noted that at the last Planning Commission meeting the Commission
had directed Staff to present a report on the Covered Roof Access Structure (CRAS)
Policy Statement (PS), and in particular to report on how a spiral staircase might be
designed to incorporate a landing. He stated that when the PS was originally drafted
it only allowed for the spiral staircase and never envisioned including a landing. Mr.
Cummins noted that Staff had contacted Mr. Brent Sears, architect for Height
Variations (HV) 01-2 and 01-3, who provided two options for consideration by the
Planning Commission. He noted that the City Plan Checker had reported that both
options would meet Uniform Building Code (UBC) requirements. He outlined the two
options as described in the memorandum to the Planning Commission and stated
that Staff believed the first option to be the better choice. Mr. Cummins also
reported that when researching this matter, Staff had discovered that although in
1991 the Planning Commission had approved the PS regarding CRAS, the PS had
never been presented before City Council for review. Mr. Cummins stated that at
this point Staff is recommending that the Commission adopt an amendment to the
Planning Commission Policy Statement and draft a memorandum to the City Council
recommending adoption of the entire PS.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Brown asked if Staff were certain that City Council had never adopted
this PS. He stated that he seemed to remember that there had been a lot of
controversy over this issue at that time. He said he found it hard to believe that City
Council had never reviewed this PS. Mr. Whittenberg stated that both Staff and the
City Clerk's office had spent a substantial amount of time going through City Council
minutes for a 12-month period after the Planning Commission recommendation was
made in 1991. He said that they were unable to find any text in the minutes that
discussed this issue. The Director of Development Services stated that he seemed
to recollect that there had been discussion on this issue, but no record of it has been
found.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that regarding the CRAS door situation, it appears that
the Commission should allow for either the side or the end type of door so that it can
accommodate different types of roof access. He said that sometimes the staircase
could go toward the side of the house and other times it might require access to be
on the end. Mr. Cummins stated that Option 1 as he described it is actually the
larger of the two options and would facilitate a door on the side.
Commissioner Sharp stated that he also could not believe that City Council had not
taken any kind of action on this issue.
Commissioner Comments
Chairperson Hood reviewed the options presented by Staff and asked the
Commissioners how they wished to proceed.
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
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of May 9, 2001
Commissioner Sharp stated that currently in his district there is very little problem
with CRAS, so he believes those Commissioners for the districts most affected by
these structures should state their preferences.
Commissioner Cutuli said that Surfside has always had CRAS and the UBC does
allow for them, therefore, as a safety issue, a landing for a spiral staircase leading to
a CRAS should be allowed. He agreed that a memorandum recommending Option
1 should be sent to City Council for review.
Commissioner Brown stated that as long as he has been on the Planning
Commission it has followed the guidelines for CRAS exactly. He noted as he had
stated at the last meeting, this has been a good compromise for those residents
wanting the CRAS and the neighbors that _don't want them to have it. He also
recommended that a memorandum be sent to City Council recommending approval
of this PS. He emphasized that it was important that the Planning Commission is
consistent in following the guidelines.
Commissioner Ladner stated that he did not see any problems with the revised plans
presented tonight by Mr. Sears.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Brown to Authorize the Planning Commission
Chairperson to forward a draft memorandum to the Mayor and Members of City
Council recommending review of the Policy Statement for Covered Roof Access
Structures.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. Height Variation 01-2 (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2001)
1205 Crestview
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Brent Sears / John & Neysa Erlandson
To construct a non-habitable covered roof access
structure to extend above the height limit within the zone
in which the subject property is located by approximately
5 % feet.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 01-17.
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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of May 9, 2001
Staff Report
Mr. Cummins reported that at the last Planning Commission meeting the
Commission had asked to see revised plans for HV 01-2 to show the CRAS in
conformance with the PS. He noted that the revised plans have been provided to
each commissioner.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Sharp asked if the new plans conform to the current Policy Statement
(PS). Mr. Cummins confirmed that they do conform.
Commissioner Brown asked if this conformity were with the present PS or with the
revised PS. Mr. Cummins responded that they conform to both. Mr. Whittenberg
interjected that the plans do not reflect a circular stairway.
Public Hearinq
Chairperson Hood re-opened the public hearing.
Mr. Brent Sears stated that this project is now in conformance with the original PS,
which allows 62.25 square feet of roof access. He noted that the CRAS should not
block anyone's view.
Mr. Jerry Anderson spoke in opposition of HV 01-2. He said that he was involved
with the controversy of "doghouses" back in the early 1990s. He noted that after
viewing the Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2001 he had been quite
disturbed. He said that the Planning Commission needs to recognize that the City
does not need to "rubber stamp" all requests for "doghouses" that exceed the City
height limit simply because a developer makes the request. He said that he
recognizes that the City has allowed CRAS, but he still believes that the absolute
minimum should be the absolute minimum allowed. Mr. Anderson stated that when
people sayan 8' x 15' CRAS will not bother anyone, there would be no need for the
27-foot height limitation. He said that he does not feel they are appropriate on "The
Hi/I." Mr. Anderson said that the City should prepare all of the standards without any
assistance from the developers. He stated that he doesn't believe that a person's
view has to be blocked in order for a CRAS to have a negative impact. He said that
he was also bothered by the information that the changes in the code mean that the
CRAS must be made larger. He stated that maybe the changes in the UBC make it
so that CRAS do not have to be allowed at all. He emphasized that there were
many other people in Seal Beach who want to see the 27-foot height limit adhered
to.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed the public
hearing.
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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of May g, 2001
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Cutuli stated that he has always felt that residents of the City should
be able to maximize their view of the surrounding area. He said that a CRAS does
nothing more than provide the ability to access the roof in order to appreciate the
view from the roof deck. He concurred that the height of CRAS should be kept to
the absolute minimum, but stated that he believes that within reasonable safety
measures believes it is appropriate to approve this application.
Commissioner Sharp commented that in the early 1990s the Planning Commission
spent a lot of time and expertise on CRAS because of problems with these
structures. He said that after looking at all of the angles he believes the Commission
had come up with the best specifications that could be lived with without any
problem. He stated that he had no objections to CRAS as long as they were kept
small and are not used as livable or storage space.
Commissioner Ladner stated that he had not problem with approving HV 01-2.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Ladner to approve Height Variation 01-2 and adopt
Resolution 01-17, subject to conditions.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. 80ga advised that approval of Height Variation 01-2 and adoption of Resolution
No. 01-17 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow
morning.
7. Height Variation 01-3 (Continued from Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2001)
110 Ocean Avenue
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Vance & Carol Ann Caesar
To construct a non-habitable architectural feature in
excess of the 25-foot height limit. Specifically, the
applicant proposes to construct a covered roof access
structure to exceed the height limit by approximately 6
feet.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolution 01-18.
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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of May g, 2001
Mr. Cummins stated that HV 01-3 is for the house where the spiral staircase with a
landing had been proposed. He said that in light of the earlier action regarding the
memo to City Council, Staff recommends approval of this application as it is in
conformance with the policy adopted earlier this evening. He stated that the plans
show an approximately 6' x 10' CRAS with a spiral staircase and a landing at the
top.
Chairperson Hood stated that the Commission had not approved a policy, but had
approved the recommendation of a Policy Statement to City Council. Commissioner
Brown noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of a
modification of the current policy. He stated that it is still Planning Commission
policy. He said that he felt it was important that the memo include a statement that
the Planning Commission has consistently followed those policy guidelines without
exclusion.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Cutuli asked if Planning Commission approves this policy and City
Council does not, would this then indicate that the Planning Commission should not
have approved the Height Variation plans. Mr. Cummins stated that under City
Code the Planning Commission has authority to make a determination that this
CRAS is within the scope of the section of the Code that sets out the areas for
review by the Planning Commission. He noted that if the Planning Commission finds
that this CRAS is substantially similar to others approved in the past and is
consistent with the section of City Code, it is within the purview of the Planning
Commission to approve.
Public Hearing
Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing.
Mr. Brent Sears stated that he has tried to reduce the size of the CRAS to the
minimum square footage possible and to work with Staff in resolving the various
issues involved. He then proceeded to describe the revised design for this CRAS.
He said that although he understood the Commission's hesitation to approve this
application before City Council has reviewed and adopted the Policy Statement, he
believes that the design meets the intent of the proposed policy. Mr. Sears
expressed his desire to have the process proceed so that he might begin to make
application for approval to the California Coastal Commission.
Mr. Jerry Anderson asked if the design referred to by Mr. Sears were the smallest
design possible for this CRAS. Mr. Sears said that it was the smallest possible
design for a spiral staircase. Mr. Anderson stated that if the objective is to provide
access to a deck, it would appear to be a fair trade off if the City gets the smallest
possible structure. He also asked if the City has an obligation to accept spiral
staircases. He again emphasized that his concern was to have the least amount of
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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Mmutes of May 9, 2001
structures above the 27-foot height limit as possible. Mr. Anderson stated that the
resident could still have the CRAS without the spiral staircase. He said the he did
not understand the Planning Commission voting on an issue before getting direction
from City Council on this Policy Statement.
Mr. Sears noted that the Policy Statement allows for various types of staircases. He
stated that the square footage for this spiral staircase is the smallest.
Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing.
Mr. Cummins noted that Staff had received an e-mail from Dr. E. Robert Wassman
and a letter signed by five different people, including Mr. & Mrs. Wassman speaking
in opposition to HV 01-3.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Brown stated that there has been much confusion in the past over
CRAS, and he believes that over the years the City has been able to eliminate a lot
of the confusion by having a policy; however, the City Code does allow for CRAS
and Height Variations to exceed the height limit, and also allows for architectural
features. He said that this is desirable to allow for variation and to prevent all decks
being the exact same height creating a "bread box" look to neighborhoods. As far as
whether or not a CRAS can be categorized as an "architectural feature,"
Commissioner Brown stated that this is something that was dealt with in the early
1990s at which time it was decided to allow CRAS provided they are the minimum
size possible. He noted that the Policy Statement in essence is saying, "This is what
we are in effect going to rubber stamp." He said that as long as the builder meets
these guidelines, the Planning Commission should approve the plans. He noted that
whenever Mr. Sears has presented plans for a CRAS, he has always stayed within
these guidelines. Commissioner Brown stated that he believes the policy has been
fair to all concerned. He said he personally does not like CRAS and many of the
builders in town now prefer to construct open stairwells so that they will not have to
deal with this issue.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve Height Variation 01-3 and adopt
Resolution 01-18, subject to conditions.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Boga advised that approval of Height Variation 01-3 and adoption of Resolution
No. 00-18 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The
Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow
morning.
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 Planmng Commission
Meetmg Minutes of May 9, 2001
STAFF CONCERNS
None.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Brown requested that the memorandum to City Council include the
statement that this is the policy that the Planning Commission has followed for the
last nine years. Mr. Whittenberg recommended adding the following statement:
"Since 1991 the Planning Commission has consistently approved
Covered Roof Access Structures (CRAS) in accordance with the
Policy Statement recommendation forwarded to the City Council in
July 1991."
Commissioner Sharp reported that the driving range at the Old Ranch Country Club
would be a public range as well as a private one. He noted that the public driving
range will be from west to east and the private range will be from east to west. He
said that there must be a street cut and a parking lot constructed to allow access to
the range. He stated that the driving range should be open to the public by August
2001. Chairperson Hood confirmed that the proposed street cut is supposed to be
opposite the street cut and the proposed signal light. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that
this was correct. He said that the Department of Development Services has
received the construction plans for the small building related to the public driving
range and expects to receive approval within 3-4 weeks.
Chairperson Hood commented on the articles in the News Enterprise Newspaper
regarding the City of Los Alamitos adopting different standards for street cuts. He
asked if the City of Seal Beach had adopted similar standards. He noted that when
traveling northbound on Seal Beach Boulevard and turning right onto Lampson
Avenue, the pavement is very uneven and could cause damage to the ball joints in
front drive vehicles. He stated that allowing this unevenness on Lampson Avenue
could expose the City to potential liability. He asked what the City could do about
this situation. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he could not specifically address this
question as the City Engineering Department handles the standards for street work.
He said he could ask the City Engineer to assess the situation to determine what
could be done to correct this problem, and Staff could provide a status update at the
next Planning Commission meeting. Chairperson Hood also asked that Staff review
the standards for the City of Los Alamitos. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the City does
have standards for street work, but he was not familiar with the specific
requirements.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
9
.~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.
.
_City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of May 9, 2001
Respectfully Submitted,
~ c:& Ajd...t ,
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Sek"etary
Planning Department
APPROVAL
The Commission on June 6, 2001 approved the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, May 9,2001. C' LA .
10