HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2001-09-05
..
.
.
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for September 5, 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 September 5, 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 September 5, 2001
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Agenda for September 5, 2001
7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ROLL CALL
III. AGENDA APPROVAL
By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to.
(a) Notify the public of any changes to the Agenda;
(b) Re-arrange the order of the Agenda; and/or
(c) Provide an opportUnity for any member of the Planning CommisSion, staff, or public to
request an Item IS removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission regarding any items
within the subject matter JUrisdiction of the Planning Commission, provided that the Planning
Commission may undertake no action or discussion unless otherwise authorized by law.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one motion unless
prior to enactment, a member of the Planning Commission, staff, or the public requests a specific
item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2001.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
2. Adopt Resolution 01-37 denYing Conditional Use Permit 01-10 for fitness training studio at 220
Main Street.
3. NPDES Permit No. CAS 618030 (Order No. 01-20) Permit Conditions Requiring City Actions
4. Study Session - Shared Parking for Commercial Shopping Centers
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
VIII STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X. ADJOURNMENT
3
J
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of September 5, 2001
2001 Aaenda Forecast
Sept 19
Conditional Use Permit 98-6 (Indefinite Extension) Yucatan Gnll
Conditional Use Permit 01-11 & Site Plan Review 01-2 - Sunrise Development
Conditional Use Permit 01-12 & Site Plan Review 01-3 -Islands Restaurant
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)
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
.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of September 5, 2001
Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, September 5, 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 Sharp 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.
Ms. Judy Fabrizio, the owner of Bella Forma at 220 Main Street, expressed her
concerns regarding the decision of the Planning Commission at the meeting of
August 22, 2001 to deny Conditional Use Permit 01-10. She requested that the
Planning Commission reconsider its decision. She said that based upon what Staff
had told her she had acted in good faith. Ms. Fabrizio stated that although she
respected Commissioner Brown's decision and his vision for Main Street, she asked
that the Planning Commission advise her of what she would need to do in order to
1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting.
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
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of September 5, 2001
keep her business operating. She said that when she approached the City in March
there was no discussion whatsoever, either verbal or written, regarding the need for
a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). She stated that she respects the desire to maintain
the small town atmosphere in Seal Beach and this was the reason that she decided
upon this city as a good place for her business. Ms. Fabrizio emphasized that she
did not want to create a problem and would respect the final decision of the Planning
Commission. She said that after receiving verbal approval from several Staff
members who told her that coming before the Planning Commission was merely a
formality, she had in good faith spent her money in this community. (Ms. Fabrizio
noted that these Staff members would be legally deposed.) She stated that a CUP
for another similar business was being considered at that- time and her business was
not the problem. She said that she now finds that after five months of successfully
running her business she has been denied the privilege to operate on Main Street.
Ms. Fabrizio again requested that the Planning Commission reconsider rather than
her having to appeal the decision before City Council. She said that her business
would bring in revenues but if the Planning Commission so desired, she could
expand the retail section of her business to help create more revenues for the City.
She emphasized that she wanted to find a workable solution for the City and for her
business. She stated that she was told that she would be issued a business license
and she could not believe that the City would ask a successful business to leave, in
particular after she was told by the Assistant Planner that there would be no problem
in having her application approved.
There being no other members of the public wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood
closed oral communications.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 22,2001.
MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Brown to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Ladner, and Sharp
None
None
SCHEDULED MA TIERS
2. Adopt Resolution 01-37 denying Conditional Use Permit 01-10 for fitness
training studio at 220 Main Street.
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 Mmutes of September 5, 2001
Mr. Whittenberg stated that Resolution 01-37 is presented tonight for consideration
based upon the determination at the Planning Commission meeting of August 22,
2001. He said that if the Planning Commission wished to make any changes to the
text of Resolution 01-37, these changes should be included in the motion to approve
or deny.
Commissioner Sharp stated that due to the nature of the issue and the discussion at
this time, two of the representatives of the Planning Commission feel that this
decision should be made by City Council. He said that he did not agree with this
determination, and he felt that the Councilperson for District 1 should file the appeal
rather than having the applicant pay additional fees to appeal this decision.
Commissioner Brown commented that it was extremely unusual for a Councilperson
to appeal a decision of the Planning Commission, but he would talk to the
Councilperson for District 1.
Commissioner Sharp stated that under different circumstances he would not even
consider making this request, however, because two of the Planning Commissioners
had stated that City Council should make the final decision, he felt that completing
this process should not place a financial burden upon the applicant.
Commissioner Brown stated that although he would not pretend to tell a
Councilperson what to do, he would be happy to pass on the suggestion.
An unidentified representative of the applicant requested a point of order and stated
that the applicant wished to request that the Planning Commission go to a "no
finding" because of the position in which Staff has placed the City. He stated that in
this way the actual discussion or the record of this hearing would not taint the
hearing before City Council, not libeling or exposing the City to possible litigation in
the future.
Mr. Boga stated that if this matter is appealed to City Council, that hearing would be
a Denovo hearing, meaning that everything is open, beginning from scratch and City
Council would be free to do as it chooses. Chairperson Hood confirmed that any
action or discussion tonight would have nothing to do with what takes place at the
hearing before City Council. Mr. Boga confirmed that this was correct.
Commissioner Cutuli requested further clarification of Mr. Boga's statement. Mr.
Boga stated that if this decision is appealed to City Council the Council would not be
bound in any way by any Planning Commission action tonight. Commissioner Cutuli
asked if there were some way of presenting this issue before City Council with more
of a neutral bias. Mr. Boga stated that by City Code the Planning Commission is
obligated to make a decision whether to approve or deny.
Ms. Fabrizio's representative interjected that by "Parliamentary Rules and
Procedures" the Planning Commission is able to find a no finding. Chairperson
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
Meetmg Mmutes of September 5, 2001
Hood noted that the Commission follows "Robert's Rules of Order." The
representative stated that this was an acceptable policy of Robert's Rules of Order."
Mr. Boga stated that City Code requires that the Planning Commission make a
decision based upon written findings. He said that the City Attorney's office
interprets this as whether the Planning Commission decides to approve or deny,
there should be findings to support that decision and not simply a mutual
recommendation that City Council consider the matter.
Chairperson Hood stated that the Planning Commission had made findings of fact at
the meeting of August 22, 2001, based upon testimony at that meeting. He noted
that this was now a part of the minutes that had been approved by the Planning
Commission tonight.
MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Ladner to adopt Resolution 01-37 denying
Conditional Use Permit 01-10 as presented.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4-1
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, and Ladner
Sharp
None
Mr. Boga advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 01-37 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. NPDES Permit No. CAS 618030 (Order No. 01-20) Permit Conditions Requiring
City Actions
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in
the Planning Department.) He stated that this item is being presented to apprise the
Planning Commission of this water quality permit currently under final consideration
by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and its effect
on planning actions of both the Planning Commission and City Council over the next
3-4 years. He said that this permit is expected to be finalized in November, and that
specific reviews and actions by the Planning Commission and City Council would be
required if this permit is finalized in its current form. Mr. Whittenberg explained that
this permit is proposed by the SARWQCB, which comprises basically the northern
two-thirds of Orange County. He noted that a San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board (SDRWQCB) covers the southern portion of the county. He stated
that each of these water quality control boards is issuing permits for 5-year cycles for
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). He explained that the
SARWQCB is very different from San Diego or Los Angeles County as the Orange
County process is one of developing processes and programs instead of developing
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 Planmng Commission
Meetmg Mmutes of September 5, 2001
specific numerical discharge criteria as to what can be put into storm water systems,
and ultimately into rivers, streams, and the ocean. He then proceeded to review the
specific procedures as outlined in the Staff Report. He explained that within 120
days after adoption of this NPDES Permit the City would have to review its adopted
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines and revise them to reflect
the issues that this permit will require. The Director of Development Services then
explained that a Public Education Committee must be established by December 1,
2001. This committee must meet twice a year and is to provide oversight and
guidance for the implementation of the public education program and will make
recommendations for any changes to this program. He then continued by reviewing
the specific timelines through December 2005 as outlined in the Staff Report with
regard to compliance with the requirements of this permit. Mr. Whittenberg noted
that it is likely that a standard list of conditions of approvals will be developed that
will automatically be imposed on developments that will come before the Planning
Commission for review. He discussed development of a Water Quality Management
Plan to determine the need for development of a Water Quality Protection Plan,
noting that the standards for water quality by the year 2003 will be much more
stringent than current requirements. He also pointed out what non-compliance
penalties would involve. Mr. Whittenberg stated that watershed protection principles
and policies would have to be incorporated into the General Plan and any
amendments to the General Plan would be brought before the Planning Commission
for review and recommendations to City Council. He indicated that the City is
already dealing with some of these issues with the Hellman Project, which will have
a bioswale storm water filtration design system incorporated into the project. He
reported that storm water runoff from the streets and yards of these homes will go
into a number of retention basins on the property and will be held in these basins
until sediments settle before the water is allowed to go into the Los Alamitos
Retarding Basin and into the San Gabriel River. He stated that there would be a
number of items that would go before the Environmental Quality Control Board
(EQCB) for review before going to City Council for review. He noted that the
requirements for Los Angeles County and San Diego County are much different than
those of the SAWQCB and will require immediate construction of storm water
drainage facilities over the next five years. He indicated that noncompliance with the
requirements of the permit could lead to having similar standards as those for Los
Angeles and San Diego counties.
Commissioner Questions
Chairperson Hood asked whether the City of Seal Beach is a member of the
SAWQCB. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the City is not a member of the board, but is
located in an area that is under the jurisdiction of the SAWQCB. Chairperson Hood
asked who makes up the board. Mr. Whittenberg responded that the board is made
up of members who are representatives of water districts, local government, or
organizations that have concerns over water quality issues. He stated that the
Governor appoints the board members.
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 Plannmg Commission
Meetmg Minutes of September 5, 2001
4. Study Session - Shared Parking for Commercial Shopping Centers
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 would be a preliminary study session on the issue of shared parking.
He noted that this resulted as an outgrowth of two variance requests for the Bay City
Shopping Center (BCSC) to intensify land uses within the center, although the
center is already underparked. He stated that currently the City uses parking
standards based upon total gross square footage of each land use at the time a
center is under construction, or in the case of an existing center, when there is a
change in land use. Commissioner Brown requested clarification of the terms
"underparked" and "overparked." Mr. Cummins explained that "underparked"
describes a situation where parking demand exceeds the available parking spaces.
Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Cummins if he could use the term "parking
deficiency" to prevent further confusion. Mr. Cummins continued by stating that
when these variances were reviewed Staff was told by a number of people that there
was no parking deficiency at the BCSC although City Code reflects that there is. He
explained that the Planning Commission had directed Staff to look into this matter
and provide recommendations for dealing with parking deficiencies in commercial
shopping centers. He listed the following as important considerations in creating a
Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) for parking:
1. Size of the shopping center - establish minimum size shopping center parking
area that would fall into this category.
2. Nature of the application (Conditional Use Permit) - Staff feels CUP would be the
most effective method for dealing with individual requests.
3. Nature of the parking demand - land uses within the shopping center should be
considered under CUP process.
4. Maximum amount of "shared parking" - maximum cap set with contingency
parking allowed to prevent approval that might reduce demanded parking under
what is actually available.
5. Off-street parking - Staff feels the Planning Commission should not include this
as a consideration, but should consider only on-site parking.
6. Parking surveys - Owners of commercial centers should provide parking surveys
when submitting requests for CUP.
Mr. Cummins stated that Staff recommends additional study sessions to further
define issues and alternatives for basic goals and components of a "shared parking"
program.
Commissioner Questions
Commissioner Brown stated that these were great suggestions. He noted that the
amount of rentable square footage rather than the acreage of the shopping center
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 Plannmg CommissIOn
Meeting Minutes of September 5, 2001
should determine parking standards. He said that is a good idea to require a CUP
for the shared parking. He noted that it might create extra work to attempt to
determine parking demand based upon the nature of each business within the
center. He suggested canvassing various beach cities within the area to acquire
information on how they are handling their parking situation. He stated that the
limitation on off-street parking is a good idea. He also recommended that the
parking survey be more specifically defined as to the times of day that the survey
must be done.
Commissioner Sharp stated that if a parking survey is to be completed it should be
at the expense of the applicant. Commissioner Brown asked if there were
consultants that offer this service. Mr. Whittenberg reported that there are a number
of traffic consultants that do complete surveys on a regular basis. He asked that the
Commission provide feedback on other issues they would like to see addressed
when the Assistant Planner returns with a draft of the ordinance on shared parking.
Commissioner Sharp asked if Mr. Whittenberg was already on Staff several years
ago when this issue was last discussed. Mr. Whittenberg indicated that he was on
staff and as he recalled the Planning Commission had decided not to pursue the
issue at that time. Mr. Whittenberg noted that the issue is becoming more prevalent
in cities in the area, and he believes that there is a greater amount of information on
how these cities have developed shared parking programs.
Commissioner Cutuli stated that he highly favors a shared parking program as this
maximizes the use of shopping centers. He said that he would like to see the
ordinance include wording that states that the CUP can be revoked if parking
becomes overcrowded, in particular when the land uses within the center change.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that this suggestion would have to be carefully evaluated, as
he was not certain that the Commission could rescind a use that has already been
approved.
Chairperson Hood noted that because a CUP runs with the land, when a "morning"
business is replaced by an "evening" business, the shared parking program would
have to be reconfigured. He also said that handling this on a policy basis makes this
proposal sound good. He stated that he liked the idea of setting a cap on the
maximum number of parking spaces allocated. He said that although the plan would
require a lot of work, he was pleased with what Staff is proposing.
Commissioner Brown stated that he agreed with Commissioner Cutuli's comments.
He suggested having a CUP for shared parking, but the actual number of spaces
required would be determined on an annual basis by survey.
Commissioner Ladner noted that although the recommendation is made that a
parking survey be completed at the applicant's expense, no mention is made as to
how frequently this would be required. Mr. Cummins stated that the original intent
was to have a parking survey done at the time of application for the CUP. He said
7
.~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.45
46
City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission
Meetmg Minutes of September 5, 2001
that Staff would welcome direction from the Planning Commission with regard to
frequency. Commissioner Ladner stated that he believed an annual parking survey
should be required. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff would work on incorporating
the suggestions made by the Commissioners and return with a draft of the ordinance
for further review and development. He emphasized that creating guidelines for a
shared parking program would over time reduce the Commission's work load,
provide the property owner with information to assist in determining the types of
businesses he can consider leasing to, and help the business operator decide on the
best location for his or her business.
Commissioner Cutuli asked if there is a source of information that provides data on
standard hours of operation for specific types of businesses. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that organizations such as the Urban Land Institute do deal with shared parking
programs and Staff will attempt to acquire some of these documents.
STAFF CONCERNS
Mr. Whittenberg reported that the City had received a copy of a Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEIR) for implementation of diamond lanes on the 22 Freeway
between the 605 and the 55 Freeways. He said that this would also include direct
freeway to freeway diamond lane connector ramps from the 22 to the 405 Freeway,
and from the 405 to the 605 Freeway in all directions. He stated that the DEIR
indicates that six homes in the College Park East area would be required for
acquisition to implement the project. He said that the City has informed the six
residents of the document and the proposed project. He stated that a City Council
Staff Report would be prepared requesting authorization for the City to retain a
consulting firm to assist with review of the DEIR and to prepare a comment letter to
CalTrans and the Orange County Transportation Authority. He noted that the
deadline for comments is October 30, 2001. He said that the document will go
before the Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB) and City Council and Staff
will complete a comprehensive review of the document and provide comments for
EQCB and City Council. He stated that the City would be looking for ways to allow
the project to proceed without these residents having to lose their homes. He
reported that a Community Information Meeting is scheduled for Thursday,
September 18, 2001 at which time Staff will make a presentation regarding the
issues involved with this project. He also provided the dates and times for the
CalTrans public hearings. He said that the City Staff Report would be made
available on the City of Seal Beach website along with a direct link to the CalTrans
District 12 website for those individuals wanting to view or download the actual DEIR
document.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner Sharp stated that he would not be in attendance at the next
scheduled meeting on September 19, 2001, as he will be out of town.
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 Plannmg Commission
Meeting Minutes of September 5, 2001
Commissioner Cutuli requested an update on the Burger King property. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that the building has been vacated and Staff has had no contacts
regarding a new use. He also reported that Starbucks is no longer interested in
pursuing the Conditional Use Permit that was previously approved. Commissioner
Cutuli asked when the new businesses on Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway
are scheduled to open. Mr. Whittenberg said that it would be approximately 6-8
weeks before all tenant improvements are completed and businesses are ready to
open. Commissioner Cutuli asked who the tenants would be. Mr. Whittenberg
reported that the tenants include Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, Quizno's Submarine
Sandwiches, and a Cingular cell phone store. He noted that there are approximately
2,500 square feet of unleased space.
Commissioner Brown reiterated that he would speak with his Councilperson
regarding an appeal of the decision on Conditional Use Permit 01-10, but for the
record he wanted to state that he was not in agreement with a Councilperson
appealing a decision of the Planning Commission. He said he also does not believe
it is a good idea for the Planning Commission to go before City Council and speak
during an appeal. He stated that he feels that the Planning Commission and City
Council are different bodies who base their decisions on different reasons, with City
Council's decisions being discretionary and the Planning Commission's being non-
discretionary. Commissioner Sharp stated that he was in agreement with
Commissioner Brown, however, this case is an unusual one where two
Commissioners felt that if the Commission was unable to make the decision that the
application should be forwarded to City Council for a determination.
Chairperson Hood asked about code enforcement authorization. Mr. Whittenberg
responded that currently City budget does not allow for a Code Enforcement Officer.
He reported that one of the building inspectors would be retiring at the end of the
year. He said that Staff is considering hiring a contract building inspector and
incorporating some code enforcement activities as part of the responsibilities. He
stated that he anticipates a decrease in the workload for the Building Department by
the end of next year when work on the Bixby and Hellman Projects should be
finished. He noted that it would probably not be necessary to have two full-time
building inspectors on staff after these projects are complete.
Chairperson Hood inquired as to the status of Mr. K's Restaurant. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that the property owner had reported that the applicant would be proceeding
with the development of the project. He said that the applicant has not yet applied
for permits, and approximately one week ago Staff notified the property owner by
mail of the need to acquire permits by September 3, 2001 or an abatement would be
imposed against the unfinished portions of the building.
Chairperson Hood asked if there was anything new to report on the Old Ranch
Towne Center. Mr. Whittenberg noted that Bed, Bath and Beyond had opened for
business and Ralph's Market and Sav-On are scheduled for opening between
November 15 and November 30. He reported that the applications for Conditional
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 September 5, 2001
Use Permits for Islands Restaurant and Sunrise Assisted Living are scheduled for
the next Planning Commission meeting. He stated that Country Inn Suites is
expected to open in November with the rest of the businesses in the shopping center
expected to open in November or December.
Chairperson Hood asked whether the Rossmoor Shopping Center had applied for
building permits. Mr. Whittenberg reported that it was his understanding that a major
renovation of the center is scheduled when the leases for the existing businesses
expire in 2003 and 2004. He stated that City engineers have spoken with architects
representing the shopping center regarding sewer and water line locations, but no
formal proposal has been presented to the City.
Commissioner Cutuli inquired about the Hellman Project. The Director of
Development Services reported that the second phase of archaeological
investigations is scheduled to begin next week, and is expected to include two
weeks of fieldwork and 4-6 weeks for preparation of the report. He said that this
report then has to go to the Coastal Commission for review and approval prior to
their issuing the development permit for the homes. He indicated that permits
should be approved in January or February with grading beginning in February or
March of 2002.
Chairperson Hood asked if all of the Centex Homes had sold. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that Centex has received permits for 5 of the 7 phases of homes. He
reported that 54 of the 55 homes available have been sold, with another 20 homes
yet to be constructed.
Commissioner Ladner reported that he also would be absent from the meeting of
September 19, 2001, as he will be out of town.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secre ary
Planning Department
10
.1
2
3
4
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meetmg Minutes of September 5,2001
APPROVAL
The Commission on September 19, 2001 approved the Minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting of Wednesday, September 5, 2001.~~ .
11