HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2001-06-06
..
"
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of June 6, 2001
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for June 6, 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 Junsdiction 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
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.
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 9, 2001.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
2. Presentation by City Manager, John Bahorsky
City Council Objectives
3. Determination of Proper Zoning - Massage Establishments
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
City of Seal Beach
Recommend that businesses which primanly conduct massage
treatments require a Conditional Use Permit, and massage as an
accessory use to another business establishment be permitted by right,
subject to compliance with Chapter 12 of the Code.
Recommendation:
Make determination and provide Staff with direction
VII
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. Conditional Use Permit 01-5
1190 Pacific Coast Highway, Unit B
3
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of June 6, 2001
.
Applicant/Owner'
Request:
Recommendation.
Alice B. Collier
To perform massage therapy and operate a "flotation tank" in a General
Commercial (C-2) Zone.
Approval, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff and as may
further be revised by the Commission after considering public testimony.
Adoption of Resolution 01-27.
5. Variance 01-3
Conditional Use Permit 01-6
500 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 0-107
Applicant/Owner' Thong R. Tran
Request: To intensify the land use In a shopping center which IS underparked by
allowing an outdoor seating area at an eXisting donut shop,
Recommendation:
6 Variance 01-2
316 Eleventh Street
Applicant/Owner'
Request:
.
Recommendation'
7, Vanance 01-4
350 Ocean Avenue
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation'
VIII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
. X. ADJOURNMENT
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolutions 01-24 and
01-28
Jim McCoy
To encroach into the rear yard (alley) setback area. Specifically, the
applicant proposes to construct a garage that would be approximately 6
feet from the rear property line, The current setback for that area IS 9
feet.
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-23
William Lansdale
Addition of approximately 618 square feet to legal non-conforming
resIdence. Specifically, the applicant IS requesting to add a new
sunroom, bath, and closet. In addition, the eXisting residence
encroaches into the required side yard setback on the east side and a
variance IS needed to add building space to that side of the structure.
The proposed structure would be set back 3 feet instead of 4 feet from
the easterly property line.
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 01-26.
4
.
"
.
Jun 20
July 04
July 18
Aug 08
Aug 22
Sept 05
Sept 19
Oct 03
Oct 17
Nov 07
. Nov 21
Dee 05
Dee 19
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of June 6, 2001
2001 Aaenda Forecast
CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan Grill) Review
Study Session - Housing Element
HOLIDAY - No Meeting Scheduled
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 June 6, 2001
Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Plannirm
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 6, 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 Brown, Cutuli, Ladner, and Sharp
Also
Present:
Department of Development Services
Lee Whittenberg, Director
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Absent:
Terence Boga, Assistant City Attorney
AGENDA APPROVAL
Mr. Quinn Barrow noted that Staff would like to add the Staff Report regarding
"Determination of Appropriate Development Standards Residential Low Density
Zone, Planning District /I (Bridgeport/Suburbia." Mr. Barrow stated that this matter
had come up after the posting of the Agenda and Staff is requesting an
interpretation. He stated that a copy of the memorandum on this item had been
distributed to the Commissioners and that a 4/5ths vote would be required to add this
matter to the Agenda.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Ladner to add the Staff Report regarding
"Determination of Appropriate Development Standards Residential Low Density
Zone, Planning District /I (Bridgeport/Suburbia."
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Whittenberg reported that a request was received from the applicant for Item No.
6, Variance (VAR) 01-2 regarding 316 Eleventh Street requesting that the matter be
1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
Q IPC Mlnutes\2001106-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 1
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
continued. Staff recommends that this item be tabled and re-advertised once the
applicant provides information on the new plans for the proposed construction.
Chairperson Hood inquired about Item No.7, VAR 01-4. Mr. Whittenberg stated that
Staff is recommending that this item be tabled as Staff has questions related to the
plans submitted by the applicant. He reported that the architect for this project is
unavailable as he is out of the country for approximately 3 weeks.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Agenda as amended.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:-
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Hood opened oral communications.
There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed oral
communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 9, 2001.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Sharp to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
SCHEDULED MATTERS
2. Presentation by City Manager, John Bahorski
City Council Objectives
Mr. John Bahorski presented the 4 City Council Goals and their respective
objectives as follows:
Q \PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 2
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
\.45
\ 46
\
\
\
\
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
o Creating Sustainable Revenues For Essential City Services
o Deliver Responsive, User-Friendly Customer Service
o Improve Quality of Life For All Residents
o Adopt A Proactive, Constructive Approach To Land Use Issues
He briefly reviewed the related objectives for each City Council Goal and discussed
options for working toward accomplishing these objectives. (Goals are on file for
inspection in the City Manager's Office.)
Commissioner Cutuli asked if the Water Quality issues to be addressed were related
to drinking water or ocean water. Mr. Bahorski responded that this was in reference
to the ocean water. He emphasized that water quality was becoming more of a
planning issue as opposed to a public works issue.
Chairperson Hood asked about the procedure used to determine the order of the
objectives within each goal. Mr. Bahorski stated that the objectives are not ordered
but the timing was set by the City Manager through edict in order to "raise the bar"
for Staff to work harder. Chairperson Hood said that he was having difficulty figuring
out the order. Mr. Bahorski responded that a facilitator had put the objectives
together and Mr. Bahorski had filled in the dates. He stated that he was less
concerned with the order of the objectives than he was with the intent and how fast
the process would progress.
3. Determination of Proper Zoning - Massage Establishments
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
City of Seal Beach
Recommend that businesses which primarily conduct
massage treatments require a Conditional Use Permit,
and massage as an accessory use to another business
establishment be permitted by right, subject to
compliance with Chapter 12 of the Code.
Recommendation:
Make determination and provide Staff with direction.
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg 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 Staff was requesting direction on how to deal with Land Use issues
regarding both massage technicians and massage establishments. He noted that
the current City Zoning Ordinance does not have provisions to allow this type of use.
He said that the City has adopted a chapter in the Municipal Code that has a
thorough review process managed by the Police Chief that has been in effect for a
number of years to license massage technicians within the community. He reported
that Staff had recently received an application for a massage technician that came in
Q \PC M1nutes\2001\06-06-01 pc Minutes doc
Page 3
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
CIty of Seal Beach Planning CommissIon
Meeting Mmutes of June 6, 2001
for review under business license processes normally completed by the City. He
said that Staff initially determined that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) would be
most appropriate, but after reviewing the City Code they found nothing related to
massage establishments. He noted that the applicant already has a license from the
Seal Beach Police Chief allowing the operation of their business. He reviewed the
contents of the Staff Report and noted that Staff had found a CUP from 1988 that
allowed a massage establishment on Main Street subject to the CUP. He stated that
in viewing the Staff Report and Resolution for CUP 4-88 it appears that the
application was structured as a determination that this was an allowable use on Main
Street with a CUP. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is recommending that the
Planning Commission direct Staff to schedule a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA)
process to require the CUP process for a massage establishment in any of the
commercial zones in town. The Director of Development Services also
recommended that Staff prepare a set of criteria and standards for this type of use
for review by the Planning Commission in granting such a CUP. He also
recommended that the Planning Commission direct Staff to prepare a ZT A to allow a
massage technician as an "accessory use" to an existing business, which might
normally occur with the hair and nail salons and day spas. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that while this process is going on, and because currently there are 15-20 licenses in
town for massage technicians, he recommends that Resolution 01-29 be adopted
this evening determining that a massage technician that is not the primary use of the
business is authorized as long as he or she has the proper license approvals
through Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD).
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Sharp stated that he recalled that several years ago the Planning
Commission had held extensive meetings regarding the massage establishments on
Main Street.
Commissioner Brown commented that he was not in agreement with Staff and that
he did not believe it was a good idea to have a CUP for these types of activities
because it would be difficult to create regulations that define what an accessory use
is. He said that he felt it was too difficult for the Planning Commission to look at a
business and say "this one is good," "that one is bad," and for Staff to attempt to
codify this would be difficult. Commissioner Brown said that his preference was to
let these uses remain subject to a CUP. He noted that the Main Street Specific Plan
(MSSP) does not allow for massage facilities on Main Street, as this street should be
a retail area. He also stated that one of the topics discussed regarding the MSSP
was to limit the number of nail and beauty salons because of the lack of sales taxes
generated by these types of businesses.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is concerned with the massage technicians that
have already been licensed by SBPD and are operating within the City. He noted
that if the CUP process is now to be required, Staff is going to have to tell these
licensed technicians that they now have to return and go through an after-the-fact
Q \PC M1nutes\2001\06-06-01 pc Minutes doc Page 4
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meetmg Minutes of June 6, 2001
CUP process. He said that Staff would have to take a look at this issue in relation to
state laws that control massage establishments and licensing of massage
technicians. Commissioner Brown stated that for those existing businesses and
technicians that are functioning under good faith they could probably be
"grandfathered in" as a group. He noted that future businesses of this type should
be expected to go through the CUP process. Mr. Whittenberg asked if
Commissioner Brown had any objection to Resolution 01-29 being structured to
recognize only allow those previously licensed technicians. Commissioner Brown
stated that it appeared that the Director of Development Services was "confusing the
person with the business." He said that he was not sure that a "blanket approval"
could be given to businesses. Commissioner Brown stated that simply because a
massage technician is licensed by SPBD, this should not mean that he or she can
practice their trade anywhere in town. Chairperson Hood asked if Commissioner
Brown were objecting to massage technicians on Main Street or just anywhere in
town. Commissioner Brown responded that he was objecting to a massage
technician on Main Street. He said that he had no objection to a massage
technician coming into an existing business, but he still believes this is something
that the Planning Commission should hold a hearing about, whether or not it is on
Main Street.
Mr. Barrow recommended polling the Commission to provide more clarity on this
issue. He stated that currently there are 3 categories of massage technicians:
1. The people actually operating
2. Those who have already received a license from SBPD
3. Future applicants
He recommended that the Commission focus on massage establishments 'first and
then move on to the other related issues.
Commissioner Sharp asked if in order to be licensed by SBPD, a massage
technician must be licensed by the State. Mr. Barrow referred the Commission to
Attachment 1, Page 2701 Section (f) and to Page 2703 under Massaqe
Establishments: Permit Applications. Commissioner Sharp clarified that SBPD was
essentially providing verification that the massage technician is in compliance with
all conditions of the ordinance. Commissioner Sharp stated that he would not be in
favor of expecting those currently licensed by SBPD to have to go through the CUP
process after the fact.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there had been any problems with the existing
massage establishments. Mr. Barrow reported that 5-6 years ago a business
located on Pacific Coast Highway had been closed down, but currently there are at
least 3 or 4 other massage establishments or technicians and there have been no
problems with them. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the Section 12 Ordinance that now
regulates the licensing of these establishments was created after the location on
Pacific Coast Highway had to be closed. Commissioner Cutuli asked if the
Q \PC M1nutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 5
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
regulations included under Section 12 were compiled from information from other
cities or whether Staff had composed the regulations. Mr. Barrow responded that
the Model Ordinance through the County of Orange was used as well as a Model
Ordinance from the City Attorney's office, which is based upon ordinances from 6 or
7 different cities. He stated that other cities have had a significantly larger amount of
applications for this type of use, so the Section 12 Ordinance has developed over
time. Mr. Barrow said that the regulations had been "tightened up" after having gone
to court over the closing of the Pacific Coast Highway massage establishment.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there was a "perceived need" for a vehicle to close up
loopholes, or if Resolution 01-29 would be sufficient to do this. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that the "perceived need" from Staffs viewpoint was that currently there is
nothing in the Zoning Ordinance that provides direction for where this type of use
can be located in town, and from a land use standpoint, this should be done. He
commented that in deference to Commissioner Brown he believes that between
Staff, the City Attorney, and the Police Chief, an understandable definition of what is
an accessory or primary use of a property can be created.
Commissioner Brown said that he did not mean to imply that a CUP process would
be required for massage technicians, but for massage establishments only.
Chairperson Hood asked if Commissioner Brown was speaking in opposition or in
favor of Resolution 01-29. Commissioner Brown said that Res. 01-29 refers to
businesses. Mr. Whittenberg corrected that Res. 01-29 refers only to massage
technicians, and Staff is recommending that massage establishments be required to
go through the CUP process. He stated that the Planning Commission could make
a determination that the MSSP does not allow massage establishments on Main
Street and that massage technicians wishing to practice on Main Street must go
through the CUP process.
Chairperson Hood asked if Commissioner Brown was satisfied with the text of
Resolution 01-29. Commissioner Brown stated that he did not believe that all of the
facts regarding this issue were clear to everyone. He said that he wanted to see
more detailed information like the number of technicians currently practicing and the
locations where they are operating and the names of the massage establishments
within the city.
MOTION by Sharp to approve the Resolution 01-29 as presented.
Motion dies for lack of a second.
Mr. Barrow suggested making a motion that Staff return with an Ordinance requiring
a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for all massage establishments.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to direct Staff to return with an Ordinance
requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for all primary use massage
establishments
Q'\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 pc Minutes doc Page 6
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Commissioner Brown stated that he had no objections to massage technicians and
he did not believe a vote was necessary on this. He said that he would like to see
more information on how accessory uses within a business were to be handled. Mr.
Barrow asked how the Commission would want to handle the case of a person who
has been licensed by SBPD to practice in the City, but has not yet established his or
her business. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the case referred to by Mr. Barrow would
be for a massage establishment on Main Street. Commissioner Sharp asked if this
was an accessory use like those currently operating. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that
this was the case. Mr. Barrow explained that this applicant went through the
process of getting licensed by SPBD and had established a business and this
application was flagged when it came through the Planning Department where the
question was raised as to whether or not this was an approved use. Mr. Barrow
asked if Staff knew the number of technicians who have received their license from
SBPD but have not yet established their businesses. Mr. Cummins reported that
they were aware of one person in this category. Mr. Barrow stated that this case
could be grandfathered in, or they could be required to go through the CUP process.
Commissioner Brown asked where this person wanted to be an accessory business
and whether this business already had people doing massages. Mr. Whittenberg
reported that this person would be going into an already established business, and
the business might have other licensed technicians doing massage, but there would
not be more massage technicians than other uses at the business location._
Commissioner Brown said that he preferred to be certain of this before voting on this
item.
Commissioner Sharp said that if there were already several of these technicians
operating in established businesses, he could see no problem in approving
Resolution 01-29. Mr. Whittenberg suggested that the item be continued to the next
regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission for further review.
Public Comment
Ms. Megan Tracy, the applicant, stated that she had begun the process of getting
licensed in January 2001, had gone through SBPD, and was approved, but the day
she was to receive her license, she received a telephone call informing her that she
would require a CUP. She said there is nothing in the licensing requirements stating
that she must do this. She stated that she has been renting a space in a beauty
salon for six months and cannot afford to wait another two months before she can be
licensed. Commissioner Sharp asked if there were another masseuse working in
this beauty salon. Ms. Tracy responded that there was not. Commissioner Sharp
asked if there had been a masseuse working there before Ms. Tracy. Ms. Tracy
Q \PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 7
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
said that she had been told that there had been. She noted that the women's fitness
studio right across the hall offers massage service, as does the nail salon. She also
noted that the hair salon around the corner advertises that they offer massage
services. Mr. Whittenberg asked how many beauty shop operators were in the
same location as Ms. Tracy. She responded that she believed there were three.
Commissioner Brown commented that the Planning Commission should not be in
the position of "creating government on the fly." He said he is surprised that he is
"still astounded" by the rules and regulations that City government comes up with.
He said that although he had no objection to issuing a permit to Ms. Tracy, for her to
begin performing massage in an establishment, this should require that the business
acquire a CUP. Mr. Whittenberg interjected that unless something in placed within
the Code that deals with massage technicians from a Zoning standpoint, this issue
will continue to come up every time someone applies for a business license, as the
business owner would have to go through the CUP process before being approved
for a business license. Commissioner Brown asked if a separate business license
was required for the massage technician to operate as a part of another business.
Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct. Commissioner Brown asked if each
beauty operator in a beauty parlor is also required to have a separate business
license. Mr. Whittenberg responded that because the beauty operators rent space
within the beauty parlor and essentially work as independent contractors, they are
required to have a separate business license. Commissioner Brown stated that he
did not agree with this policy. Chairperson Hood interjected that perhaps what
Commissioner Brown was attempting to discern was what businesses are
appropriate to have massage technicians as a part of the business use.
Commissioner Sharp stated that with everything that is currently on the books, the
Planning Commission is "completely out of line" in delaying Ms. Tracy's request for
licensing. He stated that he had no objection to changing the rules if they need to be
changed, but he does not think the Planning Commission has a right to do it in the
"middle of the stream." He said that Ms. Tracy's request should be granted and the
Planning Commission can then proceed to amend the rules as necessary.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that he was in agreement with Commissioner Sharp.
He noted that Ms. Tracy has gone through all of the proper channels and there have
been no problems with having massage technicians in established businesses. He
said that Ms. Tracy's application could be granted and then the Planning
Commission could begin the process of setting up the rules and regulations for
massage establishments.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that he believed Commissioners Sharp and Cutuli were
saying that the Commission should give direction to Staff that given the current
licensing regulations of the City, this particular license application can be approved
by Staff, with no new additional massage technician applications to be approved by
SBPD until the Planning Commission has gone through the Zone Text Amendment
(ZT A) process to determine how to deal with both massage establishments and
massage technicians as an accessory use.
Q \PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 8
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Mmutes of June 6, 2001
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Cutuli to direct Staff to return with an Ordinance for
requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for all primary use massage
establishments
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-1
Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
Brown
None
Mr. Barrow confirmed that Staff would return with a public hearing to consider CUPs
for massage establishments and for massage technicians as accessory uses. He
noted that those massage technicians currently operating as accessory uses in
existing businesses would be grandfathered in.
Commissioner Cutuli added that the massage establishments would be
grandfathered in for the massage technicians that they already have and not for
additional new technicians.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. Conditional Use Permit 01-5
1190 Pacific Coast Highway, Unit B
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Alice B. Collier
To perform massage therapy and operate a "flotation
tank" in a General Commercial (C-2) Zone.
Approval, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff
and as may further be revised by the Commission after
considering public testimony. Adoption of Resolution 01-
27.
Recommendation:
Staff Report
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 when Staff received this application, they were not certain what a flotation
tank was. He noted that several discussions with the applicant were held and Staff
has provided informational materials for the Commission with the Staff Report. Mr.
Cummins stated that because this is not a use that is defined in the General
Commercial Zoning Code, Staff has brought this application before the Planning
Commission to make a determination of use, to show that this use is acceptable
subject to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) within the C-2 Zone.
He described the surrounding land uses as follows:
NORTH:
Commercial businesses in both the C-1 and C-2 Zone.
Q \PC Minutes\2001\06-06-01 pc Minutes doc Page 9
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning CommissIon
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
SOUTH & EAST:
Zoeter Field and residential housing in a Residential High
Density (RHO) Zone.
WEST:
The Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP) area.
Mr. Cummins described the flotation tank as an enclosure containing highly
saturated salt water this causes the body to float when a person lies down inside it.
Music is piped in while the client lies in the flotation tank. He stated that Staff does
not foresee a problem with this type of use in the C-2 Zone along Pacific Coast
Highway as there are several other massage-type establishments within this zone.
Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 01-5, as it is consistent with
the Land Use Element, which provides a General Commercial Zoning designation
for the property. Mr. Cummins noted that the proposed use is consistent with the
surrounding uses, and the building and property are adequate in size, shape, and
topography to meet the proposed use.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Sharp stated that for the record, he wanted to note that he had
received a letter from the applicant offering him a free visit to use the flotation tank.
He said that he had called Ms. Collier to let her know that this was not permissible,
as it would be viewed as influencing the Commission. She stated that she was not
aware of this and sent a letter of apology for making the offer.
Commissioner Brown asked if the application for this CUP was for a massage
establishment. Mr. Cummins responded that this would also include use of the
flotation tank. Commissioner Brown asked why the Staff was insisting on including
the flotation tank in this public hearing. Mr. Cummins stated that the flotation tank
was included so that the Planning Commission could make a determination as to
whether or not it would be appropriate. Chairperson Hood recommended opening
the public hearing to allow the applicant to respond to questions. Commissioner
Brown stated that he did not understand Staff concern about the flotation tank. He
stated that what a business uses is not significant as long as the City knows what
kind of business it is. He used examples of items used in different businesses such
as a tanning bed, a juicer, or acupuncture needles and noted that none of these
items were scrutinized in this manner. Mr. Whittenberg responded that a number of
medical practitioner-type facilities in operation are licensed through medical boards,
making them acceptable by the provisions of the Zoning Code. He stated that Staff
felt that the use of a flotation tank was unusual enough that the Planning
Commission might want to look at it to determine whether it was an appropriate use
in conjunction with the massage therapy at this business location. Also, because
massage therapy is not specifically permitted under the Zoning Code, and because
the City has granted previous CUPs where this use was found to be appropriate,
Staff felt this application should come before the Planning Commission for review.
He noted that the Commission could approve this application as a massage therapy
Q \PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 10
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
CJty of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
location and direct Staff that any future applications for a flotation tank in a business
location not require a CUP. Commissioner Brown asked if a CUP was to be
required for flotation tanks. Mr. Whittenberg stated that if the Commission felt a
CUP was not necessary, given the licensing and other procedures involved in
approving these applications, they could elect to forego the requirement for a CUP.
Cha,irperson Hood asked that if the application were for the flotation tank only, would
Staff had brought this application before the Planning Commission. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that Staff probably would have because of the massage therapy business.
Commissioner Brown asked if an application were made to operate a flotation tank
business without massage, would a CUP be necessary. Mr. Whittenberg stated that
at this time Staff would have to classify this as a non-permitted use because there is
nothing in City Code that deals with this issue.
Public Hearinq
Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing.
Ms. Alice Collier stated that she is waiting to sign a lease on the property and
reported that she has completed 1,250 hours of structural integration training, which
she said in this discussion had being referred to as massage. She said that she was
also purchasing a flotation tank for this facility. She noted that she had provided
information on the flotation tank and structural integration to the Commissioners and
she would respond to any questions the Commission might have.
Chairperson Hood stated that this was not a question/answer period but a time for
her to make a presentation regarding her application.
Ms. Collier stated that the flotation tank holds approximately 18 inches of super-
saturated salt water. She said that a client would get into the water and the inside of
the tank is very quiet and dark. Ms. Collier noted that if the client requests piped in
music that could be provided. She stated that this provides a complete relaxation
experience. She said that the flotation tank complements the body work because
afterwards it is good to have someone completely relax into the lengthened muscles
and take all of the pressure of the joints. Ms. Collier said that her intention is to link
the massage and flotation tank together to create a body/mind experience. She
stated that several of her clients were present to speak about their experience in
using the flotation tank.
Commissioner Ladner asked how the client would stand up and rinse the water off
the body while inside the tank. Ms. Collier responded that clients would rinse off in a
shower after exiting the tank.
Mr. Mike Mendelsohn stated that he has been using flotation tanks since 1981 and
finds it to be the most relaxing thing that he has ever done. He said that after using
the flotation tank for approximately 1 hour, the relaxation effect last for 3-4 days. He
said that last October he purchased a tank for his home, and everyone who saw it
Q IPC M1nutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc Page 11
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
City of Seal Beach Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
wanted to use it. Because he did not want to share his tank, he began looking for
businesses that might want to install a flotation tank. He said that he felt the
Hellerworks people appeared to be a good match for integrating this service. He
stated that after using his tank, Alice Collier decided that she would like to begin her
own massage business to include a flotation tank. Mr. Mendelsohn said that he
highly recommends this procedure and that Ms. Collier is a very astute
businesswoman and would be an asset to the community.
Dr. James Dawn, a chiropractor, stated that he had begun his career as a massage
therapist and went on to study Hellerworks Structural Integration. He said that in
1984 he had worked for Dr. John Lamont of Seal Beach who recognized that
Hellerworks therapy was one of the best procedures for supporting the body's
structural health.
Mr. Travis Pelton stated that he has experienced the therapy provided by Ms. Collier
and stated that he "feels like a million dollars" after every visit. He said that he
notices the changes in his posture and joints and that the therapy goes much deeper
than regular massage therapy. He noted that Ms. Collier is a knowledgeable
businesswoman and would be an asset to the community.
Ms. Helen Pelton stated that she had experienced problems with her shoulder and
after 10 treatments by Ms. Collier, she says it has done wonders for her. Ms. Pelton
stated that she will go back for treatments once a week for as long as she lives.
Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Ladner asked how long the therapy lasts. Ms. Collier stated that the
therapy involves approximately 1 hour in the flotation tank and 1 hours of structural
integration. Commissioner Ladner asked what the cost of the therapy is. Ms. Collier
stated that use of the flotation tank cost approximately $70 per hour and the
structural integration is $60 per hour.
Commissioner Brown stated that this is the reason that a CUP should be required
because this provides an opportunity for the Planning Commission to learn more
about the business prior to making a determination. He said that he feels that
flotation tanks can be added wherever there are tanning booths without requiring a
CUP. He stated that for massage establishments it is appropriate to require a CUP.
Mr. Whittenberg noted that approval of CUP 01-5 does impose conditions on the use
of the flotation tank. He stated that if the Planning Commission feels this is a use
that does not require a CUP, then it might be appropriate to revise Resolution 01-27
to remove those conditions. He then proceeded to read the conditions.
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 12
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Mmutes of June 6, 2001
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Cutuli to approve Conditional Use Permit 01-5 with
the deletion of the Condition NO.3 and adopt Resolution 01-27 as amended.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Whittenberg advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 01-27 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
5. Variance 01-3
Conditional Use Permit 01-6
500 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite D-107
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Thong R. Tran
To intensify the land use in a shopping center which is
underparked by allowing an outdoor seating area at an
existing donut shop.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of
Resolutions 01-24 and 01-28.
Staff Report
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 because the Bay City Center where the shop is located is underparked,
the request for a CUP also requires a Variance (V AR). He described the
surrounding land uses as follows:
NORTH & WEST:
Residential housing in a Residential Low Density (RLD)
Zone.
SOUTH:
Residential housing in a Residential High Density (RHD)
Zone.
EAST:
Commercial businesses in a General Commercial Zone.
Mr. Cummins explained that the V AR is required because the applicant is proposing
to add an approximately 230 square foot outdoor dining area. Under the current
Zoning Code, the ratio for parking required for the donut shop is 1 space for each
100 square feet. The additional 230 square feet would require 3 new parking
spaces. Mr. Cummins stated that at a previous meeting when reviewing VAR 01-1
\\SCULL Y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 13
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
for Skin Essentials, Staff found that there was a deficiency of approximately 25
parking spaces. He reported that the Planning Commission at that time had made
the finding that the incremental demand for parking was minimal and would not
create an overall problem for the shopping center. Staff sees this application as very
similar to VAR 01-1 in terms of the parking variance for 3 parking spaces and
recommends approval of VAR 01-3. He noted that Section 28-2504 sets forth the
criteria for the Planning Commission to find for approval of CUP 01-6. He reported
that there are other restaurants in this shopping center with outdoor seating and that
Staff is recommending approval of CUP 01-6.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Ladner asked what the hours of operation were for Oster's Donuts.
Mr. Cummins reported that by right businesses are permitted to open at 6:00 a.m.
and he was not certain if this business has a CUP to open earlier than this. He
stated that the Commission could approve an earlier opening time with this CUP.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that it had only been a couple of months since
approving the Variance for Skin Essentials and he was curious if there had been any
problems with parking since then. He said that with each business at the center
making application for a variance on parking, at some point the Planning
Commission would have to draw the line on further approvals. Mr. Whittenberg
reported that Staff has not done an evaluation of the parking in the shopping center
since the information presented on April 18, 2001, which indicated that the use of
parking varied from about 32-50%. He said that Staff felt that this particular use
whose primary business is during the early morning, would be compatible with the
other uses i.n the shopping center whose primary use is in the mid-morning and
afternoon.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that a parking analysis should be completed before
each request like this, otherwise there will be no way of knowing how parking is
being affected. Mr. Whittenberg suggested continuing this item until a parking
analysis could be completed. Commissioner Cutuli stated that he would be in favor
of this.
Chairperson Hood questioned at what point the limited parking would begin to
impact the success of the businesses in this shopping center if the Planning
Commission were to continue to approve requests of this kind. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that this was the purpose of the public hearing for CUPs to make this kind of
determination. He said that based on the Planning Commission's previous
determination Staff felt that this use was substantially similar and fairly minor in
nature compared to the overall size and operations of the different businesses in the
shopping center. He reminded the Commission that Staff had recommend denial of
VAR 01-1, yet the Planning Commission had voted to approve. He said that Staff
has taken this into consideration when evaluating this application.
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Mrnutes doc
Page 14
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon
Meetmg Minutes of June 6, 2001
Commissioner Brown confirmed that City Code does require a certain number of
parking spaces for each business establishment, and if this formula were applied to
the shopping center, there would be 344 required. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that
this was correct. Commissioner Brown continued by noting that in 1977 the City
determined that the shopping center was a mixed-use center with both day and night
uses and reduced the parking requirement by 15% to equal 292 spaces. He noted
that the shopping center actually contains only 267 spaces, making it short 25
parking spaces. He then asked how Staff could recommend approval. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that Staff is attempting to represent previous actions of the City
to make their recommendations consistent with these actions. He said that he did
not believe that Staff could make an automatic denial of a particular application
without taking previous actions by the Planning Commission into consideration.
Commissioner Brown asked whether Staff believes the City parking requirements
are too stringent - or that the parking requirement should be modified. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that for certain uses and/or combinations of uses in town he
believes that the shared parking concept is reasonable. He stated that he is aware
of some cities that allow a 30% parking reduction for mixed-use shopping centers,
but in order to make these determinations it would be necessary to go through a
more detailed analysis than what is currently available. Commissioner Brown stated
that he felt it would make more sense to do this through City Code rather than
through the Variance process. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this was a policy issue to
be determined by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Public Hearinq
Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing.
Mr. James Watson stated that when the shopping center was approved in 1977 he
had dedicated the park area behind Finbar's Restaurant, which would have
accommodated 1,5-20 parking spaces. He said that from the time that the shopping
center was approved Bonadonna's had a restaurant that included all of what is now
Patty's Place and Casey's Card Shop. He also noted that the Red Lobster
Restaurant was reduced by approximately 1,000 square feet when it was
reconstructed after a fire had destroyed the building. He said that additional parking
was added at that time. Mr. Watson stated that over the life of the shopping center
there has actually been a deintensification of parking and an increase of parking. He
said that because the outside patio has been used for dining since the center
opened, they are not adding a dining area, but simply protecting the existing dining
area. He stated that 75% of the business at Oster's is done in the morning before
9:00 a.m. He spoke on the benefits of mixed-use developments and how they make
the best use of parking. He noted that Oster's is the only business in the center that
is open between the hours of 4:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. He stated that he was
hopeful that Oster's could increase their lunch business by having an enclosed patio
area. Regarding Commissioner Cutuli's remark about Skin Essentials, Mr. Watson
said that they had simply substituted an area that had a requirement for ~ parking
space for one nail salon, creating no change in the parking requirements. He stated
\\SCULL Y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 15
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of June 6, 2001
that he was a concerned landlord and wanted to be sure that his tenants are happy,
that business flows, and that parking needs are met. Mr. Watson reported that he
would be covering the expense of having the patio area enclosed. He spoke highly
of the owner and his family and encouraged approval of VAR 01-3 and CUP 01-6.
Commissioner Ladner asked to confirm when the majority of Oster's business was
done. Mr. Watson stated that approximately 70% of business is complete during the
hours of 4:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
Mr. David Rosenman stated that he shared the concerns of Commissioner Cutuli, in
particular the fact that Variances and Conditional Use Permits run with the property.
He asked what would happen if the donut business should move to another location
and another business with different peak hours is established at this location. He
stated that no matter how deserving this applicant might be, further study should be
done on the parking analysis for this underparked shopping center.
Commissioner Sharp asked if the donut business were to move and a massage
establishment were to move to this location would the CUP for Oster's Donuts stay
with the massage parlor. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the CUP is for an outdoor
eating area. Commissioner Sharp confirmed that a CUP does not always run with a
property. Mr. Whittenberg stated that in this case the CUP would be allowed only for
a different type of restaurant use at that location.
Commissioner Sharp asked the applicant what percentage of business during the
early hours is take-out and how much is dine in. Mr. Throng Tran, the owner of
Oster's Donuts, stated that approximately 60% of his business is take out and 20%
of the customers eat there. He again emphasized that most of his business takes
place between the hours of 4:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and the majority of it is take out.
He stated that the only employee parking used is for he and his wife.
Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Sharp stated that he has participated in the review of several
applications for the Bay City Center during the past 12 years. He noted that this is a
busy shopping center, but most of the parking survey results have shown that there
are no major problems with parking. Mr. Whittenberg noted for the record that Mr.
Tran has indicated that Oster's opens for business at 4:00 a.m. and City Code
requires a CUP for businesses that operate between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00
a.m. He stated that this provision was added a number of years ago and this
business may have been operating previous to that and may have been
grandfathered to where it would not require the CUP. He stated that this issue
would have to be researched to determine the status of the property. He
recommended that this matter be re-noticed and continued to a future meeting. He
stated that action could be taken tonight on this application and Staff could go back
and research the hours of operation issue and if it is determined that a CUP is
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 16
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meetmg Minutes of June 6, 2001
necessary the applicant would be asked to make a separate application. He noted
that this would involve additional fees for the applicant.
Commissioner Cutuli commented on the statements by the applicant that the
outdoor eating area had been used for customers. He asked the Director of
Development Services whether he had an awareness of this. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that he has observed people sitting at the table and eating, but technically
under Zoning provisions you need to have a CUP for this type of use.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if a parking study could also be included. Mr.
Whittenberg responded that this would be done as part of the research on this item.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Ladner to table Variance 01-3 and Conditional Use
Permit 01-6 and re-schedule when further research has been completed on the
hours of operation.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
8. Determination of Appropriate Development Standards Residential Low Density
Zone, Planning District II (Bridgeport/Suburbia).
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in
the Planning Department.) He provided some background information and stated
that this item was brought forward based upon an inquiry by a person who is in the
process of purchasing property in Bridgeport. The request is to make an addition to
a residence in that area that under the current Zoning requirements exceeds the
maximum lot coverage provisions. Mr. Whittenberg reviewed the Zoning for Seal
Beach as described on Pages 2 and 3 of the Staff Report. He stated that this
property is located in Planning District II and the development standards for
Bridgeport are the same as those that apply for homes on The Hill. He said that this
issue has not come before Staff during his tenure as the Director of Development
Services for the City of Seal Beach. He explained that the Zoning Ordinance
Provision allows for 45% lot coverage for this area. He said that the standards do
not match anything that exists in Bridgeport. He stated that the lots measure 3,000
square feet with a zero lot line on one side of each property and do not have
garages off the front of the property, which are required in the District II Zoning. Mr.
Whittenberg explained that in 1966 the City approved the Bridgeport development
and changed the zoning on the property from commercial to residential and
approved a Precise Plan that set forth certain development regulations, which were
adopted by Ordinance 700. He referred to the setback standards on Page 4 of the
Staff Report. Mr. Whittenberg stated that these standards were never brought
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 17
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
forward into the Zoning Ordinance and Staff was unaware of the Precise Plan until
this request was received and Staff researched this issue. He noted that the City
has a Redevelopment Plan that does include Bridgeport with specific provisions that
reflect 67% lot coverage permitted. He stated that when this Redevelopment Plan
was adopted it states that the City shall take all actions necessary to implement the
provisions of this plan. He said that in discussing this issue with the City Attorney
they have found that the City has 3 different ordinances with 2 different sets of
development standards for Bridgeport. He stated that based on the information,
Staff feels that these are the development standards by which Bridgeport was
developed and should be reflected in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that Staff was suggesting that the Planning Commission make a determination and
instruct Staff to prepare a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) to revise the provisions with
the Zoning Ordinance to bring the Precise Plan and Redevelopment Plan regulations
for development into the Zoning Ordinance. He also advised that in the interim until
that ZTA can go through the public hearing process that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution 01-30 that would make the determination that the development
standards for Bridgeport are those that are set forth in the Precise Plan and General
Plan Amendment. He stated that this would prevent the individual wanting to make
the addition to her home from having to wait for 6 months until this process is
completed.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that in the 12 years that he has been with the City this
question has never come up before. He said that after performing weeks of
research to help determine why things were built that do not comply with the Zoning
Ordinance Provisions, the only conclusion that could be made is that directions
given by ordinance were not actually placed into the ordinance. He noted that in ,
previous years there were many things that were done by resolution or by minute
orders at the City Council and Planning Commission levels that were never
incorporated into an ordinance. He stated that unless someone is around that
remembers what took place, Staff has no way of knowing until an issue like this
arises and Staff begins to research its history.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Sharp confirmed that Bridgeport has a governing body. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that there is not a homeowners association, but he said that
there are Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for both of the
subdivisions in that area. He noted that there is also an Architectural Review
Committee to review plans for remodels and additions.
Commissioner Cutuli asked Mr. Whittenberg for a description of the redevelopment
area. Mr. Whittenberg reported that the Riverfront Redevelopment area included the
greenbelt, Bridgeport Community, Bay City Shopping Center, Oakwood Apartment
Complex, Seal Beach Trailer Park, Riverbeach Condominiums, Department of Water
and Power property, a portion of the Hellman Ranch Property on the north side of
Pacific Coast Highway, and the vacant property on First Street near the San Gabriel
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001\06-06-01 pc Minutes doc
Page 18
.1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meetmg Minutes of June 6, 2001
River. Commissioner Cutuli asked what the intent of the redevelopment was. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that the objective was to change land uses to residential and
recreational uses. Commissioner Cutuli asked why the lot coverage was increased
to from 45% to 67%. Mr. Whittenberg responded that in Bridgeport the average lot
size is 3,000 square feet, and the average lots in Seal Beach are 5,000 square feet.
He stated that a 45% lot coverage would only allow for a 1,200 square foot structure.
He said that the 67% lot coverage was incorporated to allow for at least a 1,800
square foot structure in Bridgeport.
Chairperson Hood asked if a public hearing should be held. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that this was not a public hearing item, but that perhaps there were some people
present who would like to speak to this issue.
Commissioner Sharp asked the Director of Development Services to briefly explain
what he was asking of the Planning Commission. Mr. Whittenberg explained that he
was recommending approval of Resolution 01-30 authorizing Staff to initiate a ZTA
to amend the Code to bring previously adopted standards for the Bridgeport Precise
Plan and the Development Plan into the Zoning Ordinance to allow future requests
for additions to the ground floor of homes in Bridgeport.
Commissioner Brown asked if the Precise Plan supercedes the Zoning Ordinance,
why could residents of Bridgeport not complete additions without going through this
process. Mr. Whittenberg stated that an adopted Specific Plan does supercede the
Zoning Ordinance. He said that a Precise Plan simply indicates that the City should
take action to implement the plan, so technically by definition it does not supercede
the Zoning Ordinance.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Ladner to adopt Resolution 01-30 directing Staff to
prepare a Zone Text Amendment to revise the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
for the BridgeporUSuburbia area to conform to those Standards established by City
Council Ordinances 700 and 780.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg provided an update on the health status for former Planning
Commissioner Thomas Lyon. He reported that Mr. Lyon was discharged from the
hospital and is now home.
\\SCULL Y\CARMEN\PC Mlnutes\2001 \06-06-0 1 PC Minutes doc
Page 19
.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
.
City of Seal Beach Planning CommisSIOn
Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2001
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Sharp asked how many stories the Country Inn Suites by the Ayres
Group would have. Mr. Whittenberg reported that this would be a 3-story, 104-room
hotel.
Commissioner Cutuli inquired as to the tenants to occupy the new building on Pacific
Coast Highway and Main Street. Mr. Whittenberg reported that he was aware that
the tenants to this point would be The Coffee Bean and Tea, PacBell Cellular
Phones, and Quizno's Submarine Sandwiches. Commissioner Brown asked how
The Coffee Bean was able to go into this building when Starbucks had required a
CUP. Mr. Whittenberg explained that by right coffee stores are allowed as long as
they are no larger than 1,000 square feet. He stated that Starbucks wanted to use a
facility that measure 1,500 square feet, requiring a CUP. Commissioner Brown
asked if The Coffee Bean would have an outdoor patio since every Coffee Bean
shop he has seen has an outdoor patio. Mr. Whittenberg said they would not.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
~~~~
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secrefury
Planning Department
APPROVAL
The Commission on June 20, 2001, approved ,Jhe Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, June 6, 2001. ~.
\\SCULL Y\CARMENIPC Mlnutes\2001106-06-01 PC Minutes doc
Page 20