HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2001-07-18
..... ...._ -..9
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for July 18, 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 July 18, 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 July 18, 2001
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for July 18, 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. 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.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
1. Selection of Interview Panel Participants - Environmental Impact AnalysIs Consultants
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
2.Variance 01-2 - Continued from July 11,2001
316 Eleventh Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Jim McCoy Ilnge Wagner
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
Recommendation'
Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 01-23.
3. CondItional Use Permit 01-7
320 Central Avenue
Applicant/Owner'
Brent Sears / Dan Mundy
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission' Agenda of July 18, 2001
Request:
Recommendation:
To perform a major addition/remodel to a nonconforming single family
dwelling located at 320 Central Avenue. The property is nonconforming
due to inadequate side and rear yard setbacks of an existing detached
garage.
Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 01-31.
4. Conditional Use Permit 01-8
209% Main Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Recommendation:
VIII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X. ADJOURNMENT
Julie Beck / Flora Trostler
The ability to operate a personal training fitness studio on Main Street
The use IS not currently defined on Main Street.
Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 01-32
4
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of July 18, 2001
2001 AQenda Forecast
Aug 08
Aug 22
CUP 98-6 at 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard (Yucatan Gnll) Review
Sept 05
Sept 19
Oct 03
Oct 17
Nav 07
Nav 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 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
.~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of July 18, 2001
Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 18, 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
Terence Boga, Assistant City Attorney
Mac Cummins, Assistant Planner
Absent:
None
AGENDA APPROVAL
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Agenda as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Hood opened oral communications.
Mr. Reg Clewley expressed his concern that the public was not notified regarding
Item No. 1 under Scheduled Matters to allow for public comment on this item. He
stated that the consultants under contract to the City during the past 3 years have
done a great disservice to the community. He questioned the City's methods for
selection of the consulting firm to prepare the Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs).
He stated that the selection panel should consist of individuals who will defend the
people and the quality of the environment.
1 These Minutes were transcrrbed from audiotape of the meeting.
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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
.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed oral
communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
None.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
1. Selection of Interview Panel Participants - Environmental Impact Analysis
Consultants
Mr. Whittenberg stated that in 1997 City Council conducted a selection process that
included members of the Planning Commission, Environmental Quality Control
Board (EQCB), and City Council in interviewing consulting firms providing
environmental impact assessment services. They then made a recommendation
that the City on a rotating basis use 2 of the firms for 3 years to prepare
environmental documents. He said that these contracts have expired and City
Council has determined that they wish to utilize the same process for the selection of
EIR consultants. City Council and EQCB have selected 2 individuals from their
respective groups to serve on the panel, and the Planning Commission needs to
make its selection of the Commissioners that will serve on the interview panel. The
Director of Development Services reported that the Request For Qualifications
(RFQs) was sent out and proposals were received from 16 consulting firms. Staff is
recommending that the interviews be conducted on Thursday, August 2, 2001. He
stated that nine firms would be invited to interview. He noted that the interviews
would run all day beginning at 8:00 a.m. and ending at approximately 5:00 p.m.
After the interviews, the panel will forward their recommendation to City Council.
The contract will be for 4 years.
Commissioner Sharp nominated Commissioner Ladner be one of the participants.
Commissioner Cutuli nominated Chairperson Hood.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Cutuli that nominations be closed and that
Commissioner Ladner and Chairperson Hood be designated for participation on the
interview panel for selection of environmental impact services consultants.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of July 18, 2001
Mr. Whittenberg reported that the packet of the consultant proposals would be
delivered to Commissioner Ladner and Chairperson Hood for their review prior to the
interview date.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Variance 01-2 (Continued from July 11,2001)
316 Eleventh Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Jim McCoy/lnge Wagner
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.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of
Resolution 01-23.
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 the applicant proposed to construct a garage with a 6-foot setback from
the rear property line.
He described the surrounding land uses as follows:
SOUTH & EAST:
Residential housing in a Residential Medium Density (RMD)
and Residential High Density (RHD) Zone.
NORTH:
Residential housing in a Residential Medium Density (RMD)
Zone and Zoeter Field in a Public Land Use (PLU/R) Zone.
WEST:
Residential housing in a Residential High Density (RHD)
Zone.
Mr. Cummins noted that in order to grant this variance, the Planning Commission
must look closely at the following items.
1. That the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan.
2. Whether special circumstances applicable to the property somehow deprive the
property owner from enjoying the same privileges enjoyed by other property
owners within the same vicinity and zone.
\\sCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
3. Whether granting of such variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege.
Mr. Cummins reported that although the application was to receive approval to make
an addition to an existing garage, Staff has recently learned that since the drafting of
the Staff Report, the garage has actually been demolished. He stated that Staff is
still recommending approval based upon the fact that the property sits along two
alleys and the current side yard setback requirements are 15% of the lot width,
making for a fairly narrow setback. There is also a 9-foot mandatory rear-yard
setback. He noted that the applicant is proposing to have a 6-foot rear yard setback
and a 9-foot setback on the side, with entry to the garage from the side. He stated
that this configuration would yield a greater turning site line radius around the corner
than if the applicant were to build the garage strictly to Code.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Ladner asked why the existing garage had been removed. Mr.
Cummins stated that Staff just learned today that the garage had been removed and
he does not know why it was demolished. He suggested that the applicant respond
to this question.
Public Hearinq
Chairperson Hood opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Jim McCoy stated that regarding the 6-foot rear yard setback, the property at
311 10th Street has the same setback and that the property at 314 10th Street has a
4-foot rear yard setback. He noted that there would be no special privilege involved
in granting this variance. With regard to the demolition of the garage, he stated that
the property owner was insisting that the work begin so the garage was torn down.
He said that he had no excuse for the demolition work proceeding prior to approval
of this application.
Mr. Reg Clewley stated that the property owner at 118 1 ih Street was previously
denied a similar application. He expressed his vehement opposition to granting
Variance 01-2. He read his letter of opposition into the record. (Mr. Clewley's letter
is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.)
Mr. Cummins noted for the record that Staff had received a copy of Mr. Clewley's
letter of opposition.
There being no other member of the public wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood
closed the Public Hearing.
Chairperson Hood stated that although he rarely speaks on issues of this nature, he
does not like the idea of impugning the integrity of City Staff. He noted that at times
Staff may be misled or incorrect, and he has himself disagreed with Staff on more
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07 -18-01 PC Minutes.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 Planmng Commission
Meeting Minutes of July 18, 2001
than one occasion, but he has no reason to question Staffs personal or professional
integrity and he wanted to be very clear about this issue.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Cutuli asked for clarification regarding the proposed construction of
the garage. Mr. Cummins explained that the current side yard setback restrictions
allow for a smaller side yard setback than what the applicant is proposing to have in
the rear. Commissioner Cutuli asked what the side yard setback requirement is. Mr.
Cummins reported that it was 15% of the lot width. He said that this trapezoidal lot
measures 21 feet on one side and 40 feet at the other to make an average of 30
feet. Fifteen percent of this average would equal a 4.5-foot side yard setback. He
stated that the applicant is proposing to have a 6-foot rear yard setback and 9-foot
side yard setback. Mr. Cummins referred to the plans and noted that it would be
very difficult for the applicant to construct a front entry garage with the necessary
depth and a 9-foot rear setback, based on where the existing house is located.
Commissioner Brown stated that cases like these where full application of City Code
doesn't really make sense is why applications for a Variance are allowed. He said
that approving V AR 01-2 would provide more off street parking and a larger garage
and would benefit the City. He stated that he would vote to approve VAR 01-2.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to approve the Variance 01-2 and adopt
Resolution 01-23
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
Mr. Boga advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 01-23 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
3. Conditional Use Permit 01-7
320 Central Avenue
Applicant/Owner:
Req uest:
Brent Sears / Dan Mundy
To perform a major addition/remodel to a nonconforming
single family dwelling located at 320 Central Avenue.
The property is nonconforming due to inadequate side
and rear yard setbacks of an existing detached garage.
Recommendation:
Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of
Resolution 01-31.
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18'{)1 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
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 this application was first presented to the Planning Commission in 1997.
He reported that it was unanimously approved at that time, however, the applicant
did not build and the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) expired after one year. He
stated that the applicant is requesting re-approval to build. Mr. Cummins reported
that the applicant would like to add approximately 188 square feet on the ground
floor and 1,307 feet to the second floor. He said that Staff is continuing to
recommend approval subject to conditions. Mr. Cummins noted for the record that
Staff had received a letter from Mr. Reg Clewley in opposition of CUP 01-7.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Cutuli noted that when reviewing the plans it appeared that there is
only 1.5-foot side yard setback on the side of the garage. Mr. Cummins stated that
this was correct. Commissioner Cutuli stated that this would be dangerous in case
of a fire, as the space would be too small to accommodate a fireman with a firehose.
Mr. Cummins noted that he had not measured this side yard setback, but that is how
it appears on the plans.
Public Hearin~
Chairperson Hood opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Dan Mundy stated that he has owned both the properties at 320 Central and 318
Central, which are right next door to each other, for over 30 years. He said there is
no fence between the properties, nor will there ever be and there are 7 feet between
the garages. He reported that every garage along the alley except for one is like his
garage. He stated that he was constructing a small home in which to live when he
retires. He noted that when the roundabout at 4th Street and Central Avenue was
constructed, he gave up more of his property than anyone on the four comers
surrounding the roundabout. He said that the lots are short making it difficult to
move the garage up and still build an adequate home. He stated that he has
conformed with all of the conditions of approval, but he would like to leave the
garage where it is currently located.
Mr. Reg Clewley read into the record his letter expressing his opposition to approval
of CUP 01-7. (Mr. Clewley's letter is on file for inspection in the Planning
Department. )
There being no other member of the public wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood
closed the Public Hearing.
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07 -18-01 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Cutuli stated that even though Mr. Mundy states that he will never
build a fence on the area between the properties, he would like to see a report from
the Fire Department that states that it would be safe to construct a fence between
these garages. Commissioner Cutuli noted that Mr. Mundy may not own these
properties forever, and he would like to have a report of this kind before voting on
this item. Mr. Whittenberg interjected to clarify that what Commissioner Cutuli was
asking was to continue this item until a review by the fire department could be
obtained. Commissioner Cutuli stated that this was correct. Mr. Whittenberg
explained that another option was that the Planning Commission could request that
a Affidavit of Non-Severance to be recorded on the property, which would prevent
Mr. Mundy from selling either property without first notifying the City and having the
Affidavit voided. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he was concerned with having to deal
with the Fire Department on this issue because the Building Department generally
handles fence permits by over-the-counter permit approval. Another alternative he
suggested was having the issue taken before the Orange County Fire Authority for
review and they might require additional sprinkler systems in the structure because
of the closeness on that particular side of the property. He explained that because
this is a 25-foot wide lot it is physically impossible to place a 2-car garage on the
property and meet the side yard setback requirements on both sides of the garage.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that the Affidavit of Non-Severance would be a
tremendous burden to the property owner to change the garage if he were to sell
one of the properties. He said that he preferred to continue this item pending
approval from the Fire Department as if these two lots were to always be separate
lots. He noted that when he had lived in Surfside on a 25-foot lot it was still able to
accommodate an 18-foot wide two-car garage with 3-foot side yard setbacks.
Commissioner Sharp stated that he was not speaking in favor of or against CUP
01-7, but he commented that while living in the Seal Beach Trailer Park, the problem
of properties being too close was handled by ensuring that the property had
adequate sprinkler systems to provide for more fire safety. Mr. Whittenberg
interjected that City policy is that whenever a 2-story structure is built in the trailer
park, the entire structure has to be sprinklered because the buildings are so close
together. He offered another alternative of requiring that the garage area and the
area above it be sprinklered. Commissioner Cutuli stated that this was not really a
solution, as it does not protect the adjoining properties.
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Brown to continue Conditional Use Permit 01-7 to
the next scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission pending review and
approval by the Fire Department.
MOTION CARRIED: 5 - 0
AYES: Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
NOES: None
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-1S-Q1 PC Minutes.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
.~
CIty of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Mtnutes of July 18, 2001
Mr. Whittenberg reported that the date of the next scheduled meeting of the
Planning Commission is August 8,2001.
4. Conditional Use Permit 01-8
209~ Main Street
Applicant/Owner:
Request:
Julie Beck / Flora Trostler
The ability to operate a personal training fitness studio on
Main Street. The use is not currently defined on Main
Street.
Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions and adoption of
Resolution 01-32.
Staff Report
Mr. Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the
Planning Department.) He stated that the purpose of this hearing tonight was for
CUP 01-8 and also for the Planning Commission to make a Determination of Zoning
that the proposed use is appropriate within the scope of the Main Street Specific
Plan (MSSP). He reported that the proposed location is approximately 700 square
feet and is located above BJ's Pizza Restaurant. He said that Staff believes this to
be a different land use than a gymnasium, which is defined in the General
Commercial C-2 Zone. He noted that neither use is defined on Main Street. He
stated that the applicant is proposing to operate 7 days a week from 6:00 a.m. to
8:00 p.m. and will have some music. Mr. Cummins said that Staff is aware that this
may be a concern, but noted that every business in the City is subject to noise
restrictions, which place a certain decibel level restriction on any business activity.
He stated that parking might also be an issue, particularly with a newly defined land
use. He said that Staff sees this use as somewhat similar to a retail land use as the
fitness center will provide only one-on-one training and will not offer classes for large
groups. He stated the Staff is recommending that the parking ratio be the same as
that for a retail land use of 1 space per 500 square feet. He noted that the previous
business at this location had been a retail store and the parking need would be the
same. Mr. Cummins stated that Staff is recommending approval of CUP 01-8 and
that the Planning Commission make the determination that a personal fitness studio
would be an appropriate land us along Main Street by right and direct Staff to
prepare the Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) to do this. Mr. Cummins noted t~at
another application for a similar use is pending.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Cutuli asked how Staff would determine whether this fitness center
was creating too much noise for the business underneath it (BJ's). Mr. Whittenberg
stated that this issue would be outside the purview of the Planning Commission. He
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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
Meetmg Minutes of July 18, 2001
reported that the property owner determines the appropriate mix of tenants to which
the property would be leased. He stated that Staff's concern is that there would be
nothing up there, like a heavy weight, that might endanger the structural stability of
the supports for the second floor area. He stated that if the Planning Commission
feels that this is a valid concern, Staff would recommend denial of CUP 01-8 and
make the determination that these types of business are not permitted above an
existing business within the community.
Commissioner Sharp stated that his concern was whether this older structure could
support the use of very heavy weight training equipment.
Commissioner Ladner questioned the hours of operation and asked about the
parking situation. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is concerned that fitness training
patrons arriving between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 a.m. not park in the alley but on
Main Street so as to not disturb the residents living opposite the alley.
Commissioner Ladner inquired whether the fitness center would be for women or
men only. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the applicant would have to respond to this
question.
Chairperson Hood asked if Staff had looked at the parking issue with regard to
intensification of use. Mr. Cummins responded that because this use has not yet
been defined, the parking requirements would be up to the determination of the
Planning Commission.
Public Hearing
Chairperson Hood opened the Public Hearing.
Ms. Julie Beck stated that she would be the only trainer in the studio. She said that
several of her clients live in Seal Beach and are present tonight. She reported that
she has been servicing clients from Long Beach, Seal Beach, and Huntington Beach
since October 1997. Ms. Beck clarified that she was not proposing to have a gym
but a fitness studio where clients can come for one-on-one attention. She said that
she was proposing to use 300 square feet of the 700 square foot site for an office
and lobby area, and the remainder of the area for the workout area. She reported
that she would service both male and female clients with short sessions lasting 60
minutes. Ms. Beck stated that she would be the only trainer and that the music she
would use would not be disruptive to the restaurant below. She described some of
the equipment that she would use, including special rubber flooring to help minimize
the noise from weights being dropped. She said that the maximum size weights that
she would use would be 30 pounds.
Mr. David Rosenman spoke on behalf of himself and his neighbor, Brent Matthews,
in opposition to CUP 01-8. He stated that the main issue here is a land use issue
that once granted is there forever. He noted that he is in disagreement with
responses on the application that reflect that no Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
\\SCULL y\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
would be necessary. He stated that there were potential problems with noise,
parking, transportation, and circulation. Mr. Rosenman said that this use is not
compatible with the Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP). He cautioned that the
Commissioners carefully consider their determination on this application. He said
that there were other more appropriate locations in Seal Beach for this type of use.
Mr. Gordon Shanks spoke in opposition to CUP 01-8. He stated that in reviewing
this item the considerations should be:
1. Is it advisable?
2. Is it going to work?
3. Can it be controlled?
He quoted from the Staff Report, which states, liAs such, the personal fitness studio
will realistically not have any greater impact on the community than any other retail
use." Mr. Shanks noted that typically there have been office type businesses on the
second stories along Main Street. He stated that because fitness training always
involves some kind of music, his concern is that the volume of the music will create
noise problems, particularly during the early morning hours. Mr. Shanks also cited
potential problems with having more than one trainer on site at the same time and
with parking for clients. He emphasized that this was not a use that belongs on Main
Street.
Ms. Rhonda Finby, a client of Ms. Beck's, spoke in support of CUP 01-8. She said
that Ms. Beck comes to her home where she has a studio where her workouts are
conducted. She said that her workouts take place at 5:00 a.m. and music is played
to accompany these workouts. She noted that her husband is asleep on the second
floor at this time and does not hear the music. She explained that because the
training is one-on-one, the music cannot be so loud that she cannot hear Ms. Beck's
instructions. Ms. Finby stated that were Ms. Beck to propose training more than 1
person at a time, she would no longer avail herself of Ms. Beck's seNices. She said
that parking would is not a problem, as she would walk to Main Street for her
appointments.
Ms. Nancy Flag spoke in favor of CUP 01-8. She said that she has been a client of
Ms. Beck's for 4 years and stated that she would not participate in group training, as
she prefers the one-on-one attention. She noted that many times her workout is
done without music. She stated that there is usually a lot of activity on Main Street
during the early morning hours and once BJ's opens for business, it can get quite
noisy. She said that parking for a one-on-one fitness center should not be an issue.
Ms. Judy Fabrizio, the owner of Bella Forma fitness, spoke in favor of CUP 01-8.
She said that she is also applying for a business license. She said that when she
had originally applied for a license, she was told that there would be no problem with
this use. She said that she went ahead with the remodel and opened for business
and did not receive a response on her application. Ms. Fabrizio stated that because
\\sCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
the remodel was such an improvement, the City never challenged her. She said that
her business has plenty of parking in the rear, she is not near residences, and her
workout is more of a meditative, Zen, rehab type of workout. Ms. Fabrizio reported
that she had circulated a petition to the surrounding businesses soliciting their
support and asking them to express any concerns about her business. She noted
that her business also provides one-on-one training starting at 7:00 a.m. and there is
only one instructor at a time at Bella Forma. She said that the responses to her
petition were very positive. She encouraged the support of female-owned
businesses and invited the Commissioners to visit her studio before making a
determination.
Ms. Julie Quinn, a client of Ms. Beck's, spoke in support of CUP 01-8. She stated
that she would like to be able to come to Ms. Beck's fitness center to make use of
the special equipment she will have available. She noted that there are more dogs
in this community making noise at 6:00 a.m. than any gym would ever create. She
also encouraged support of female-owned businesses. She said that she would be
walking to her appointments.
Ms. Flora Tostler, owner of the property at 209 % Main, stated that initially she was
concerned about the noise issue, as she is more concerned about BJ's than she is
about Ms. Beck's fitness center. She said that she is confident that the noise level
will not interfere with business at BJ's. She said that the former retail use had
generated more traffic than she believes the fitness studio would. She stated that if
the Planning Commission carefully assigns conditions for this use, this would help to
alleviate the .concerns expressed regarding noise and parking.
Mr. Reg Clewley stated his concern about neighborhood compatibility with having a
fitness center surrounded by eating and drinking establishments. He wondered
whether this might not create animosity between the businesses with fitness clients
ending their appointments by eating pizza. He recommended that Condition No. 3
be stricken from the Conditions of Approval, as it is unenforceable. He noted an
error on Condition No.9, Line 2, which states "the new restaurant," and should read
"personal training fitness studio."
Mr. Mark Finby stated that his wife has worked out with Ms. Beck for a long time. He
stated that he always sleeps through the entire workout period without hearing any
noise from downstairs. With regard to parking, Mr. Finby noted that there is no alley
entrance to the property making it more convenient to park on Main Street. He said
that this particular use is already being done by Tru-To-Form on Main Street, and
Ms. Beck's training is strictly one-on-one, rather than in groups like Tru- To-Form.
He stated that even if Ms. Beck were to have another trainer on site with another
client, this would still only comprise 4 people total. He recommended approval of
CUP 01-8.
Ms. Casey Riley, an employee of Ms. Beck's spoke in favor of CUP 01-8. She
explained that fitness workouts have evolved from what the standard image of an
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-1S-D1 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 July 18, 2001
aerobics gym setting would be. She stated that the loud music with a thumping beat
is not what is used with this type of workout. She said that the music used is very
relaxing. Ms. Riley stated that she very often refers out-of-town clients to the
restaurants and nail salons in Seal Beach.
Ms. Julie Beck stated that she would be in agreement with the Code and Conditions
of Approval as they are written. She recommended that a distinction be made
between an aerobics studio and a personal training fitness center. She stated that
her biggest concern is to help clients who come to her for help. She said that she
would be happy to provide any information needed to write the determination of use.
There being no other member of the public wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood
closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Sharp stated that Leisure World has a fitness studio of about the
same dimensions as the proposed property. He stated that when he has had
occasion to walk through this facility, it is quiet and the patrons are busy doing their
individual workouts.
Commissioner Brown stated that he was not concerned about the noise issue, but
he has always viewed Main Street as a mall, with the City as the mall manager. He
said that the Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP) is very specific in stating that Main
Street would be a retail environment. He stated that this would not be the type of
use you would want in a retail mall. Commissioner Brown noted that he had no
objection to this type of use in other areas of the City. He said he disagreed with
Staffs comment that this would be the same as any other retail establishment, since
it is not a retail but a service establishment that would not generate sales ~evenues.
He commented that due to good zoning and businesses Main Street has gone from
being a "ghost town" to being a very vibrant street, and he would not want to see this
change. He said that with regard to parking, should the Planning Commission
approve this application, he believes the appropriate number of parking spaces
should be determined more along the lines of what would be required of a beauty
salon rather than a retail establishment. Commissioner Brown stated that he did not
believe the fitness studio would create any more noise than BJ's. He emphasized
that he would prefer to have more retail businesses on Main Street.
Commissioner Ladner asked for more information on what the total weight of the
free weights would be.
Chairperson Hood re-opened the Public Hearing.
Ms. Julie Beck reported that she would have on site a 4-foot dumbbell rack that will
hold 3 pairs of 3-lb. dumbbells, 2 pairs of 5- lb. dumbbells, 2 pairs of 8- lb., 1 set of
10- lb., 1 set of 12- lb., 1 set of 15- lb., 1 set of 20- lb., 1 set of 25- lb., and 1 set of
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.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 July 18, 2001
30- lb. dumbbells. She also noted that she has purchased a 17.5-lb. bar for use with
bicep curls and a set of 4 2.5-lb. weight plates, a set of 5-lb. weight plates, a set of
10-lb. weight plates, and a set of 25-lb. weight plates. Commissioner Ladner asked
if she had attempted dropping a weight on the floor above BJ's to test the noise
level. Ms. Beck stated that at this time this would not provide an accurate measure,
as she has not had the special cushioned rubber flooring installed.
Ms. Flora Trostler stated that although she understood that the City would like to
promote more retail business on Main Street, this property was formerly a small
accounting firm for several years. She said that this business would create revenue
as clients would stop and shop or eat after visiting the fitness center. She stated
that this would be a better use than some other businesses proposed.
Chairperson Hood closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that he disagreed with Commissioner Brown regarding
Main Street being like a mall, because most of the second-story areas are not
conducive to retail sales. He noted that as society changes, the City must stay
aware of what interests the public. He said that weight training and personal fitness
are very popular today. He stated that if this CUP is approved the Planning
Commission does have the option of revoking in the future if this use presents any
problems.
Commissioner Sharp stated that this use is the same as a beauty shop, and he does
not feel that the Planning Commission has the right to dictate to landlords regarding
whether the businesses on their properties are generating sales tax. He said that he
could not see that this use would be a problem.
Commissioner Brown confirmed the Director of Development Services' statement
that approval of this CUP would allow these businesses "by right." Mr. Whittenberg
stated that the CUP process was utilized to bring this use before the Planning
Commission for consideration. He continued by stating that Staff would then request
separate direction regarding whether the Planning Commission would want to review
similar applications through the CUP process or through a definition that limits this
use. Commissioner Brown stated that he disagreed with Commissioner Sharp and
that the Planning Commission does have the right to determine the types of
businesses that would operate on Main Street. Commissioner Sharp interjected that
the Planning Commission can do so based on use and not based on whether or not
the business will generate sales tax. Commissioner Brown responded that in
accordance with the MSSP the Planning Commission should create a retail
environment, which in turn does generate sales tax.
Chairperson Hood stated that he was in agreement with both Commissioners. He
explained that the Planning Commission does have the right to determine the type of
business mix on Main Street, and to determine what is compatible. He noted that
the subject that has come up tonight is one of primary and secondary uses. He
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.doc 13
.~
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 July 18, 2001
stated that a primary use business would be one generally located in the downstairs
of the building with the secondary use on the second floor. He said that it was the
Planning Commission's job to decide whether the secondary uses are
complimentary, supplemental, or detrimental to the existing businesses. He stated
that this determination should not necessarily be made solely on the ability of the
business to generate sales tax. He noted that the concern was whether or not the
Commission would be allowing uses that might be detrimental.
MOTION by Brown to deny Conditional Use Permit 01-8.
Motion dies for lack of a second.
Mr. Whittenberg noted that Condition NO.9 would be corrected to remove the word
"restaurant" and replace it with "personal training fitness studio."
Commissioner Brown stated that the method for determining the parking
requirements for this type of use had not been settled. The Director of Development
Services stated that Staff sees this type of use not having a demand for parking
greater than that of a normal retail business on Main Street. Commissioner Brown
referred to Commissioner Sharp's comment about this use being similar to a beauty
parlor and asked what the parking requirement would be. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that in order to develop a parking requirement based on the number of parking
spaces per personal trainer, the requirement would be 2 spaces per trainer. He
reported that based on the size of the building the retail parking requirement would
be 2 spaces, and with a similar standard for the trainer, the building would be
restricted to the use of one trainer. Commissioner Brown asked if the Conditions of
Approval stipulate these parking requirements. Mr. Whittenberg stated that if this
use were to be determined to be the same as any other retail use, parking
requirements would not have to be specified. He said that if the Commission were
to determine the parking on some other criterion then this would have to be specified
in the Conditions of Approval.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if the parking restriction would apply to having two
trainers on site during all business hours or one trainer on site per shift. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that Staff would interpret this to be the parking requirement for
one trainer on site at a time. He noted that to rule otherwise would require that one-
time in-lieu parking fees of $3,500 per space to be paid for 2 additional parking
spaces in order to have two trainers on site at a time. Commissioner Cutuli asked
that Staff include the appropriate wording specifying one trainer on site during any
time that the business is open. Commissioner Sharp stated that this might create a
problem with overlap of shifts.
Commissioner Ladner inquired about both a trainer and the business owner being
on site at the same time while the owner performs bookwork. Commissioner Brown
responded that at that time the owner would not be functioning as a trainer.
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.doc 14
.~
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 July 18, 2001
MOTION by Brown as an amendment to the MOTION; SECOND by Cutuli to direct
Staff to include under the Conditions of Approval the parking requirement of 2
parking spaces to be provided for each trainer licensed simultaneously serving
clients at the facility.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Brown Cutuli, Hood, and Ladner
Sharp
None
MOTION by Cutuli; SECOND by Sharp to approve Conditional Use Permit 01-8 and
adopt Resolution 01-32 as amended.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-0-1
Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
Brown
None
Mr. Boga advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 01-32 begins a 10-day
calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final
and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg reported that Staff has received a new application for a Senior
Assisted Care Facility as part of the Bixby project. He stated that the Marriott
Corporation was previously approved as the builder for this facility but has decided
not to proceed and a new provider has submitted a CUP application for a facility on
the same location with a slightly different floor plan. He noted that the application
would come before the Planning Commission sometime in late August or early
September.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Chairperson Hood stated that he visited Hennessey's to check on the patio doors
and reported that the glass on these doors is not double paned.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
\\SCULLy\CARMEN\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Minutes.doc 15
.~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.
.
CIty of Seal Beach Planning CommIssion
Meetmg Minutes of July 18, 2001
Respectfully Submitted,
~\.~~~
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secre~ry
Planning Department
APPROVAL
The Commission on August 8, 2001 approved the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, July 18, 2001. ~ .
Q:\PC Minutes\2001\07-18-01 PC Mmutes.doc
16