Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2004-08-18 .. . . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA for August 18, 2004 7:30 p.m. District 1 - Ellery Deaton District 2 - Jim Sharp District 3 - Gordon Shanks District 4 - Gary Roberts District 5 - Phil Ladner Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attomey Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary [J 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. [J 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. [J Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Seal Beach TV3. They are rebroadcast on Sunday evenings, Channel 3 at 4:00 p m. [J Videotapes of Planning Commission meetings may be purchased from Seal Beach TV3 at a cost of $20 per tape. Telephone: (562) 596-1404. lJ 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. Page 1 of 7 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of August 18, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET The following is a brief explanation of the Planning Commission agenda structure: AGENDA APPROVAL: The Planning Commission may wish to change the order of the items on the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, only on items not on tonight's agenda, may do so during this time period. No action can be taken by the Planning Commission on these communications on this date, unless agendized. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Public Hearings allow citizens the opportunity to speak in favor of or against agendized items. More detailed information is found in the actual agenda attached. If you have documents to distribute, you should have enough copies for all Planning Commissioners, City staff and the public. Please give one to the secretary for the City files. The documents become part of the public record and will not be returned. CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent Calendar items are considered routine items that normally do not require separate consideration. The Planning Commission may make one motion for approval of all the items listed on the Consent Calendar. SCHEDULED MATTERS: These items are considered by the Planning Commission separately and require separate motions. These transactions are considered administrative and public testimony is not heard. STAFF CONCERNS: Updates and reports from the Director of Development Services (Planning and Building Departments) are presented for information to the Planning Commission and the public. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Items of concern are presented by the Planning Commissioners and discussed with staff. All fJroceedinas are recorded. Page 2 of 7 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Agenda for August 18, 2004 7:30 p.m. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL II. 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 be 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 ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON VI. 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 July 21, 2004. 2. Minor Plan Review 04-9 1713 Crestview Avenue Applicant/Owner: Request: R. S. Lewis / Matt Murphree To construct two 6-foot high retaining walls and one 3'-4' retaining wall on and adjacent to the rear Page 3 of 7 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of August 18, 2004 Recommendation: VII SCHEDULED MATTERS property line. Total height of the requested retaining walls is 15 feet 4 inches. Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-41. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 04-35 Approving Minor Plan Review 04-7 for 105 Surf Place. VIII PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Conditional Use Permit 01-14 (Indefinite Extension) 12420 Seal Beach Blvd. (Daphne's Greek Cafe) Applicant/Owner: Request: Carl Garlick! George Katakalidis To continue to serve beer and wine for on sale consumption and to have approximately 16 outdoor seats at the existing restaurant. Recommendation: Continue to meeting of September 22, 2004. 5. Height Variation 04-4 and Minor Plan Review 04-8 250 Ocean Avenue Applicant/Owner: Request: Recommendation: James R. Watson To construct a non-habitable architectural feature to house an elevator. Such structure would exceed the height limit within the zone in which the subject property is located by approximately 7 feet. The applicant also requests to construct a deck that would extend into the required setback area on the street level, as well as the upper level. Under the provisions of Section 28-401, applicants may apply for a deck to extend up to 10 feet into the required rear yard setback area subject to the Minor Plan Review process. Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-39 and 04-38 6. Conditional Use Permit 04-5 3850 Lampson Avenue (Sunrise Senior Living and Ayes Hotel) Page 4 of 7 City of Seal Beach Planning CommIssIon · Agenda of August 18, 2004 . Applicant/Owner: Request: Sunrise Senior living and Ayres Group To approve a Planned Sign Program for freeway identification signs for Sunrise Senior Living and The Ayres Hotel. Recommendation: Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-42 7. Zone Text Amendment 04-3 & Zone Change 04-1 Bridgeport Applicant/Owner: Request: City of Seal Beach To consider amendments to certain portions of the Chapter 28, Zoning, of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, to: . D Establish a new residential development zone, Residential Low Density - 3000 (RLD-3000), proposed Sections 28-450 through 28-456, that will establish development standards for the Bridgeport area of the community that are consistent with the provisions of "Precise Plans" approved for development in this area in the late 1960's and with the recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the three subdivisions that comprise the Bridgeport area (Tract 6345,6346 and 9814). D Revise the current Residential Low Density (RLD) zoning provisions (Section 28-400 through 28-407) to a new Residential Low Density - 5000 (RLD-5000) zone that will maintain the same development standards for the areas of the City located in such zone (Le., the Gold Coast, the Hill, College Park East and College Park West). Only the name designation of this zoning district is proposed to be changed. D Revise the Zoning Map of the City to indicate the change in zoning designations as described above. Recommendation: Approval and adoption of Resolutions 04-43 and 04-44 . IX STAFF CONCERNS Page 5 of 7 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of August 18, 2004 x COMMISSION CONCERNS XI ADJOURNMENT Page 6 of 7 . . . Sep 08 Sep 22 Oct 06 Oct 20 Noy 03 Noy 17 Dec 08 Dec 22 Cdy of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission · Agenda of August 18, 2004 2004 Aaenda Forecast CUP 01-14 (Indefinite Extension) Daphne's Greek Cafe CUP 03-2 (Indefinite Extension) Slice of New York Pizza TO BE SCHEDULED: o Study Session: o o o o Staff Report: Study Session: Study Session: Study Session: Permitted Uses & Development Standards in Commercial Zones (5/6/98 ) Undergrounding of Utilities ADA Handicapped-Accessible Restrooms Parking Issues In Old Town MSSP Parking Requirements Page 7 of 7 ~ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 i 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of August 18, 2004 Chairperson Sharp called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 18, 2004. The meeting was held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1 ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Sharp, Commissioners Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks Also Present: Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Quinn Barrow, City Attorney Absent: AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Whittenberg requested that Item No. 2 be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. He noted that an addendum Staff Report was prepared to reflect a slight change to one of the Conditions of Approval. MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Agenda as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Sharp opened oral communications. There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Sharp closed oral communications 1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting Page 1 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON Mr. Whittenberg opened for nominations for Planning Commission Chairperson. He noted that no second is needed for a nomination. Commissioner Shanks nominated Commissioner Ladner for Chairperson. Chairperson Sharp seconded the motion. There being no other nominations, Mr. Whittenberg closed nominations for Chairperson. MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Sharp to elect Commissioner Ladner as the Planning Commission Chairperson. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None Commissioner Sharp asked if Chairperson Ladner wished to chair the remainder of the meeting. Chairperson Ladner declined and stated that he would preside at the next meeting. Mr. Whittenberg then opened for nominations for Vice-Chairperson. Commissioner Deaton nominated Commissioner Shanks for Vice-Chairperson. Commissioner Ladner nominated Commissioner Deaton for Vice-Chairperson. There being no other nominations, Mr. Whittenberg closed nominations for Vice- Chairperson. MOTION by Sharp to elect Commissioner Shanks as the Planning Commission Vice- Chairperson. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-2-0 Sharp, Deaton, and Shanks Ladner and Roberts None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 21, 2004. MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Roberts to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Page 2 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None 2. Minor Plan Review 04-9 1713 Crestview Avenue Applicant/Owner: Request: R. S. Lewis / Matt Murphree To construct two 6-foot high retaining walls and one 3'_4' retaining wall on and adjacent to the rear property line. Total height of the requested retaining walls IS 15 feet 4 inches. Recommendation: Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-41. Staff Reoort Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff has provided a Supplemental Staff Report with revised language to Condition No.5, which clarifies that if the applicant wishes to use Gum Grove Nature Park (GGNP) as an access point for any work, he must apply for a permit from the City and the California Coastal Commission (CCC). He noted that should the applicant decide not to apply for the permit, he must provide a demarcation line between the private and public property so that the City can ensure that the GGNP area is not disturbed during construction of the retaining walls. He said that Staff is recommending approval, subject to the revision in the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Deaton asked that the Director of Development Services confirm the height of the retaining wall. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the wall is to measure 15 feet 4 inches from the base of the first step of the retaining wall. Commissioner Deaton asked if the applicant could then construct a fence on top of the retaining wall. Mr Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct. Commissioner Deaton asked if the fence could be up to 6 feet high. Mr. Whittenberg stated that for those properties that back up to GGNP, the fence could be as high as 10 feet above the grade Commissioner Deaton stated that the retaining wall with a fence could be as high as 25 feet. Mr Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct. Commissioner Deaton asked if a fence this high would impact any of the neighbors. Mr. Whittenberg stated that one of the neighboring properties already has retaining walls that are fairly similar to those proposed for construction at 1713 Crestview Avenue. He noted that those walls were constructed prior to the current standards being implemented. He said that the other neighboring property has no retaining walls and there may be some blockage of the view off to the side, which would not be a direct view to GGNP. Commissioner Deaton Page 3 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 asked if the wall would not cast a shadow or create any other issues. Mr. Whittenberg explained that generally on these lots that measure 125-140 feet deep, with the last 15- 30 feet being a slope going down to the grade of GGNP, retaining walls are constructed along the rear of the property to help level off the grade in the rear yards. MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Shanks to approve Minor Plan Review 04-9 and adopt Resolution 04-41 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None Mr. Barrow advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 04-41 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. SCHEDULED MATTERS Commissioner Shanks inquired whether he should leave Council Chambers during the vote on this item as he resides within 300 feet of 105 Surf Place. Mr. Barrow stated that the conflict of interest laws were changed in 2002 and he advised that Commissioner Shanks leave Council Chambers during the vote. Commissioner Shanks left Council Chambers. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 04-35 Approving Minor Plan Review 04-7 for 105 Surf Place. Mr. Whittenberg noted that this item appeared on the Agenda of July 21, 2004, however, Staff had not prepared a resolution as the determination had been left to the pleasure of the Planning Commission. He stated that the motion at that meeting was to approve Minor Plan Review 04-7 and return with Resolution 04-35 for adoption this evening. MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Ladner to approve Minor Plan Review 04-7 and adopt Resolution 04-35 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 4-0-1 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None Shanks Mr. Barrow advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 04-35 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. Page 4 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 Commissioner Shanks returned to Council Chambers. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. CondItional Use Permit 01-14 (Indefinite Extension) 12420 Seal Beach Blvd. (Daphne's Greek Cafe) Applicant/Owner: Request: Recommendation: Staff Report Carl Garlick! George Katakalidis To continue to serve beer and wine for on sale consumption and to have approximately 16 outdoor seats at the existing restaurant. Continue to meeting of September 22, 2004. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this morning Staff met at the site with representatives of Daphne's Greek Cafe and discussed a number of alternatives to bring them into compliance and improve the appearance of the outdoor patio area. He said they will be submitting revised plans to the City with the anticipation of scheduling the hearing for the September 22, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Sharp asked if the public hearing should be opened. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this item is to be re- noticed because the configuration of the patio area is to be slightly changed from what was previously approved. 5. Height Variation 04-4 and Minor Plan Review 04-8 250 Ocean Avenue Applicant/Owner: Request: Recommendation: Staff Report James R. Watson To construct a non-habitable architectural feature to house an elevator. Such structure would exceed the height limit within the zone in which the subject property is located by approximately 7 feet. The applicant also requests to construct a deck that would extend into the required setback area on the street level, as well as the upper level. Under the provisions of Section 28-401, applicants may apply for a deck to extend up to 10 feet into the required rear yard setback area subject to the Minor Plan Review process. Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-39 and 04-38 Page 5 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Planmng CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Mr. Whittenberg introduced Ms. Jennifer Frisk, the summer intern for the City of Seal Beach Planning Department, who would be presenting the staff report for this item. (Staff Report IS on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He noted that depending upon the nature of the questions the Commissioners might have, he would assist with the responses. Ms. Frisk provided some background information on this item and stated that the architectural feature is in keeping with the design and materials to be used in conjunction with the remainder of the house. She said that currently there is no standard for architectural features, and this one is to house an elevator; however, as it is a means of access, it should be subject to similar standards as a Covered Roof Access Structure(s) (CRAS). She noted that using an elevator as a means of access actually decreases the size of the non-habitable architectural feature, as no landing is required at the top of the stairwell. Ms. Frisk stated that due to the smaller horizontal dimensions there IS less chance of significantly Impairing the view of neighboring residents. She said that a similar project was approved at 101 Electric Avenue. She reported that one letter in opposition to this project was received on August 17, 2004, from DWight A. Steffenson, property owner at 308 Ocean Avenue; however, Staff is recommending approval subject to conditions. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Deaton asked what the actual square footage of the Covered Roof Access Structure (CRAS) would be. Ms. Frisk stated that the non-habitable architectural feature would measure approximately 18 square feet, which would be half the size of the smallest current standard, which is 38 square feet. She noted that a maximum of up to 52.25 square feet is allowed. Commissioner Deaton asked if the Haley House exceeds the 25-foot height limit. Ms. Frisk stated that there are other CRAS along Ocean Avenue and photos of these are provided in the Staff Report. She said that she is not certain whether a photo of the Haley House is included, but pictures of a neighboring home east of 250 Ocean Avenue with a CRAS exceeding the 25-foot height limit is provided. Commissioner Deaton noted that the plans indicate a penthouse, but it is her understanding that there will be no penthouse, and the non- habitable architectural feature is the only thing that will exceed the height limit. Ms. Frisk confirmed that this was correct. Public Hearina Commissioner Sharp opened the public hearing. Mr. James Watson requested approval of the elevator. He emphasized that it would be one-third the size of the maximum CRAS allowed. He provided two photographs of other homes With CRAS exceeding the height limit and noted that several other homes in the City had been approved for CRAS exceeding 25-feet. Mr. Watson noted that because the elevator is to be located near the center of the home, it would be very difficult to see this architectural feature from the street. He stated that because he has two sisters and an aunt who are unable to climb stairs, and a nephew who is confined to a wheelchair who visit him frequently, the elevator would facilitate their movement while Page 6 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 In his home. He then introduced the architect, Mr. Michael Colin, to respond to any questions from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Deaton complimented Mr. Kollin on the beautiful design of the home. There being no one else wishing to speak, Commissioner Sharp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Deaton stated that she had no problem in approving this application as CRAS are permitted for stairs, and should also be permitted for an elevator. Mr. Whittenberg noted that there are two separate Resolutions: Resolution 04-38 for Minor Plan Review 04-8 regarding the decks, and Resolution 04-39 for Height Variation 04-4. He stated that it would be appropriate to have two separate motions to adopt both resolutions. Commissioner Deaton asked that Mr. Whittenberg explain the deck construction. Mr. Whittenberg stated that City Code states that decks may be constructed over a City sewer line easement that runs through the middle of the properties along the "Gold Coast." He said that this type of deck must be approved through the Minor Plan Review process, which allows the deck to extend over the entire width of the easement area. He explained that Minor Plan Review 04-8 requests that the 2nd and 3rd floors decks (2nd floor on the Ocean Avenue level, With 15t floor on the beach level) be allowed to extend across the easement. MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Roberts to approve Minor Plan Review 04-8 and adopt Resolution 04-38 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Shanks to approve Height Variation 04-4 and adopt Resolution 04-39 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: 5 - 0 AYES: Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr. Barrow advised that the adoption of Resolution Nos. 04-38 and 04-39 begins a 10- day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight IS final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. Page 7 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Mr. Whittenberg requested that copies of the additional photographs Mr. Watson had presented tonight be provided to Staff for placement in the case file. 6. Conditional Use Permit 04-5 3850 Lampson Avenue (Sunrise Senior Living and Ayes Hotel) Applicant/Owner: Request: Sunrise Senior Living and Ayres Group To approve a Planned Sign Program for freeway identification signs for Sunrise Senior Living and The Ayres Hotel. Recommendation: Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 04-42 Staff Reoort 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 noted that under the provisions of the Municipal Code an application for a Planned Sign Program (PSP) is considered to be a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) request. This is why this item was noticed as a CUP. He stated that Sunrise Senior Living (SSL) and the Ayres Group (AG) are requesting to place business identification signs for their respective businesses on the freeway sound wall constructed along the SSL facility. He said that the sound wall was required as part of the mitigation measures in the Environmental Review for the Bixby Town Center development approved a number of years ago. He noted that consequently the wall has obstructed the public view along the 405 Freeway allowing for no identification of SSL and the Ayres Hotel. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the request is to mount the business identification signs on the sound wall at the 405 Freeway off ramp to Seal Beach Boulevard. He explained that the PSP allows this and the Staff Report provides the standards to be met to comply with the PSP requirements. He said that Staff is recommending approval subject to conditions. He noted that photos of the developments and the sound wall both from Lampson Avenue and from the 405 Freeway with mock-ups of the identification signs are included with the Staff Report. Commissioner Questions Chairperson Ladner asked if this request had to be approved by CalTrans. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the wall is on SSL property and is their responsibility. Commissioner Deaton said that It appears that the signage IS very large in comparison to the size of the wall. She asked if this fell within the City standards. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the signs could be up to 300 square feet on the 10 x 30 foot wall. He said that the SSL sign measures 88 square feet and the AG sign measures 57 square feet, and these sign faces are not much larger than the banner that currently advertises the Page 8 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 SSL facility. He noted that the freeway landscaping along the wall obscures the bottom 9 feet of the wall. Public Hearina Commissioner Sharp opened the public hearing. Mr. Richard Green, representative for Sunrise Senior Living, stated that after reviewing the Staff Report and Conditions of Approval, they concur with the recommendation of Staff. He said he would be happy to respond to any questions from the Commission. Mr. Richard Christy, sign consultant for Promotional Signs, stated that he had developed the sign plan for SSL and AG. He said he would be happy to respond to any technical questions about the signs. He noted that he also concurs with Staffs recommendations. Commissioner Sharp asked if the signs would be high enough to prevent the trees blocking them. Mr. Christy stated that the signs would be appropriate to the wall, but there is discussion going on with CalTrans to ensure that the vegetation is trimmed on a seasonal basis and kept at a reasonable height. He said that if necessary, the applicant's could return to request that the signs be raised to prevent blockage by the trees. Chairperson Ladner asked if the signs would be lighted. Mr. Christy said that the signs would be internally illuminated, similar to what currently appears on the Ayres Hotel. Chairperson Ladner asked what the hours for lighting would be. Mr. Christy state that the lighting is on a time clock, but Staff has not conditioned for this and currently there are no restrictions from CalTrans. He said that normally they come on at dusk and remain lit until 3:00 or 4:00 a.m. There being no one else wishIng to speak, Commissioner Sharp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments None. MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Deaton to approve Conditional Use Permit 04-5 and adopt Resolution 04-42 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None Page 9 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Mr. Barrow advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 04-42 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. 7. Zone Text Amendment 04-3 & Zone Change 04-1 Bridgeport Applicant/Owner: Request: City of Seal Beach To consider amendments to certain portions of the Chapter 28, Zoning, of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, to: D Establish a new residential development zone, Residential Low Density - 3000 (RLD-3000), proposed Sections 28-450 through 28-456, that will establish development standards for the Bridgeport area of the community that are consistent with the provisions of "Precise Plans" approved for development in this area in the late 1960's and with the recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the three subdivisions that comprise the Bridgeport area (Tract 6345,6346 and 9814). D Revise the current Residential Low Density (RLD) zOning provisions (Section 28-400 through 28-407) to a new Residential Low Density - 5000 (RLD-5000) zone that will maintain the same development standards for the areas of the City located in such zone (Le., the Gold Coast, the Hill, College Park East and College Park West). Only the name designation of this zoning district is proposed to be changed. D Revise the Zoning Map of the City to indicate the change in zoning designations as described above. Recommendation: Approval and adoption of Resolutions 04-43 and 04-44. Commissioner Sharp asked what the notification process had been for this item. Mr. Whittenberg stated that notice was mailed to every property owner within the affected area and a notice was also published in the Sun Newspaper. He noted that he was made aware that one property owner had not received the notice. Staff Reoort Page 10 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planmng Department.) He provided some background information on this item and explained that a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) actually changes the language within the text of the Zoning Ordinance, and a Zone Change (ZC) changes the physical designation on the City Zoning Map of zoning classifications. He stated that what is proposed is to take the City's current Residential Low Density (RLD) Dlstnct Zoning Standards and split them into two different sets of standards. He said that currently the RLD standards apply to College Park East (CPE), College Park West (CPW), The Hill, Old Town, and the BridgeporUSuburbia area. He stated that approximately one and one-half years ago, Staff determined that these standards really didn't apply to Bridgeport. He noted that the RLD standards are for 5,000 minimum square foot lots, and do not allow for alleys or for zero lot lines for homes to be constructed on a side property line. He indicated that when approved, the Bridgeport area was approved with 3,000 square foot lots, zero lot line homes, and alley access for all of the garages, creating a significant difference in the standards in the Zoning Code as to what physically eXists in the Bndgeport area. He noted that this issue was presented approximately one year ago, when in January 2004 City Council (CC) adopted an emergency ordinance to stop all development in the Bridgeport area until such time as Staff could sort out the issues and develop new standards applicable to this area. He stated that between January and this evening, Staff has had three different community meeting with the residents of Bridgeport at which they went over a number of Issues, prepared proposed ordinance language for review, and attempted to ensure that all property owners were comfortable with the proposed ordinance to be presented tonight. The Director of Development Services summarized that what is proposed IS to maintain a RLD 5000 lot size zone that will still apply to CPE, CPW, The Hill, and the Gold Coast Area, and the standards for Bridgeport would be moved over into what is proposed to be a RLD 3000 zone, with a minimum lot size of 3,000 square feet as opposed to a 5,000 square foot lot size. He stated that this would create a separate zoning classification for the Bridgeport areas, which are identified as three different subdivIsion tracts within the City (Tracts 6345, 6346, and 9814). He said that because these projects were all approved in the 1960's with Precise Plans (PP), and each had Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) imposed upon them as part of the development approvals, they have standards that differ from lot to lot. He indicated that some lots have 6-foot minimum and others have 8-foot minimum front yard setbacks, while others have 10- or 12-foot setbacks. He noted that Staff has created a table for each tract that lists the differences in development standards and reflect specifically what IS allowable under the CC&Rs and under the PPs that were approved on a lot-by- lot basis. He stated that this presents the information in a more efficient and clear manner that allows Staff to quickly determine what kind of future building would be permitted in each tract. He emphasized that the main concern of the property owners of Bndgeport was that it remain as it is. He stated that they were satisfied with the CC&Rs and with the PP as approved and had requested that as much of this as possible be incorporated into the new zoning standards. Mr. Whittenberg then noted that another Item that differs for the 3000-foot lot area is a specific provision that states that if an Architectural Review Committee (ARC) exists for a particular tract, then ARC approval must be granted before the City will process an application. He stated that two of the Page 11 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 tracts currently have ARCs, and the third tract is in the process of reconstituting its ARC. He said that when the CC&Rs were approved for all of these tracts, the ARCs had a sunset clause date and if the ARCs were not extended by a vote of the residents of each tract, the ARCs sunsetted. He indicated that of the two sunsetted ARCs one has been re-established and another is in the process of being re-established. He noted that the ARC for Tract 9814 will not sunset until 2008. Mr. Whittenberg then explained that the current Zoning Code has planning district standards folded into each planning zone classification. (There are Planning District 1 standards, Planning Distnct 2 standards, and Planning District 5 standards). He noted that these Planning Distnct could become confused with Council Districts, which are different. He indicated that Staff is proposing to eliminate all of the distnct references in the 5000 Square Foot Zone, as the only zone that is substantially different is the Gold Coast, which has a much larger rear yard setback standard since the homes are on the beach. He noted that Staff has also provided an Addendum Staff Report to the Commissioners that provides some minor corrections that resulted from the discussion at the community meetings. He noted the changes beginning on the Addendum Report as follows: Page 5: Corrects lot coverage standards from 70% to 67% within the Bridgeport/Suburbia Tracts. Page 6: Table 1, Tract 6345 - Revised to conform to CC&R provisions for Maximum Height Limit Page 7: Table 2, Tract 6346 - Revised to conform to CC&R provisions for Maximum Height Limit Mr. Whittenberg then explained that in 1966 when the City adopted the PPs, City Council made a finding that these PP standards would be incorporated Into the Zoning Ordinance, but they never were. He then indicated that an e-mail message from Kurt Whalen was received stating his support for ZTA 04-3 and ZC 04-1. He provided a brief description of the content of Resolutions 04-43 and 04-44. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Sharp clarified that the PC would be recommending approval to City Council (CC) for ZTA 04-3 and ZC 04-1. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct. He noted that for this type of application the PC would serve as a recommending body only. He explained that CC would conduct a public hearing on these items with notices mailed to all residents in Bridgeport and published in the newspaper. He said that CC must have the first and second reading of the ordinance before granting approval and the ordinance would take effect 30 days after the second reading. He noted that upon the effective date of the adoption of the ordinance, the moratorium ordinance would be repealed. Commissioner Roberts asked how much weight the ARC holds. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the ARCs have the right to look at a project for compatibility with adjoining Page 12 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 properties in their particular area. He said that ARCs have broader authority to look at issues than what the City would normally deal with. Commissioner Roberts asked if the ARC did not approve a homeowner project, would he/she have the right to appeal to the City. Mr. Whittenberg stated that if the ARC does not approve the project, the City would not consider it. Public Hearina Commissioner Sharp opened the public hearing. Mr. Carl Irwin, 305 Clipper Way, stated that he had not received notice of tonight's hearing or any of the community meetings that were conducted. He said that he has a 6-foot nonconforming fence in his front yard for which he was granted building permits. He asked if thiS fence would now have to be removed. Mr. Whittenberg stated that if Mr. Irwin has a valid building permit for the fence, it would not have to be removed. Mr. Irwin then stated that he takes exception to the fact that the eXisting 2-story homes are the only ones that will be allowed to have 2 stories. He said that the second stories are at the rear of the properties and do not affect the streetscape. He indicated that everyone should have equal rights on their lots. Mr. Robert Goldberg thanked Mr. Whittenberg and his staff for conducting a truly interactive process with the community. He said that overall, most of the property owners are very happy with the proposed new standards and they support them 100 percent. Regarding the 2-story homes, Mr. Goldberg stated that the CC&Rs for each tract provide a limit to the number of 2-story structures per tract to approximately half the tract. He said the reason for limiting 2-story structures had to do with airflow and privacy concerns. He noted that the original PP, which was supposed to govern this development called for no 2-story homes at all. He noted that when he purchased his home, he was provided a copy of the CC&Rs and was fully aware of the limitation on the number of 2-story homes. He asked that the PC recommend that CC approve these new standards. Mr. John O'Neal also spoke in support of ZTA 04-3 and ZA 04-1. He thanked Staff for the work completed. Mr. Glenn Henzel asked which tract currently does not have an ARC. Mr. Whittenberg reported that Tract 6345 does not have an ARC. Mr. Henzel then asked how the ARC IS formed. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the ARC would have to be reconstituted by a vote of the property owners of the tract in accordance with the terms as outlined in the CC&Rs. Mr. Henzel asked whom he might contact to inquire as to the status of the process. Mr. Whittenberg said the Mr. Henzel could call the Planning Department and Mr. Whittenberg could provide some information. Mr. Henzel said he does not see why the provision prohibiting roof decks in Bridgeport is necessary, as he is not certain that privacy concerns really apply. He noted that many of these constructions are towards the rear of the homes and do not look onto anything that might compromise a resident's privacy. He said that assuming there were privacy concerns, it would seem that a Page 13 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 setback of a few feet would provide an angle to ensure privacy. Mr. Henzel stated that many homes in his tract do have roof decks, and he is confused as to why they are being eliminated. With regard to limiting the number of 2-story homes, he questioned the validity of privacy concerns, as the 2-story homes next to a 1-story home can create privacy issues for the 1-story homes. Mr. Larry Bender stated that he is a member of the ARC and he wished to express his support of ZTA 04-3 and ZC 04-1. He said that many of the residents were very pleased with the process and the resulting zoning standards. Mr. Fred Schreiner stated that he has lived at 245 Electric Avenue for approximately 12 years and up until recently had never heard of the existence of the ARC. He said that when he purchased his home he was not provided a copy of the CC&Rs. He stated that neither he nor his neighbors know who the members of the ARC are, and he has contacted the Director of Development Services to acquire this information. Mr. Schreiner said that whatever the final vote is on the re-zoning, the ARC apparently has a fairly strong influence over evaluating home improvements. He said to move forward with a crisp resolution on zoning and have a fuzzy, undefined ARC structure is not good for the homeowner. He asked if the City could take action to provide information on the ARC status to the homeowners. He stated that he would like to become Involved with the process and meet the members of the ARC. He requested that ARC information be provided to all homeowners in all three tracts. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is in the process of acquiring this information and once it is compiled, will distribute the information to the Bridgeport homeowners. Mr. Schreiner clarified for homeowners that in Bridgeport once the new zoning is passed, if a resident wishes to improve his home, not only will the plans need to comply with the zoning ordinance, but will also require the approval of the ARC. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this has been the situation for almost 40 years for those tracts that have an ARC. Mr. Schreiner stated that in a practical sense the ARC has not been very active, as there have been a number of improvements in his community where homeowners have been unaware of these requirements. Ms. Michaela Stile expressed her concerns over the power that the ARC wields and the affect that this can have on the community. She suggested that an appeal process be included in the proposed ZT A and ZC for Bridgeport. She said that although she would be impacted by construction of a 2-story home across the street from hers, she has no problem with residents wanting to build a second story onto their homes. She stated that at the very least, homeowners should have the option of submitting an application for a permit to construct a second story. Mr. Trevor Evans spoke in favor of ZTA 04-3 and ZC 04-1. He said that his family moved to Seal Beach approximately one year ago and they moved to Bndgeport because of the way the architecture is laid out. He noted that there are no "monster buildings" against a small cottage. He said he likes the neighborhood the way it is. Commissioner Deaton asked Mr. Evans if he owns a one-story or two-story home. Mr. Evans stated that he lives in a one-story home. Page 14 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Ms. Kathy Goldberg expressed her strong support for ZTA 04-3 and ZC 04-1. She said that she is concerned about the roof decks, which can look across the alleys into neighboring courtyards. She stated that she believes it would have a tremendous impact upon the neighborhood. Commissioner Deaton asked if Ms. Goldberg owned a one-story or two-story home. Ms. Goldberg stated that she owns a one-story home. There being no one else wishing to speak, Commissioner Sharp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Shanks stated that from the Planning and City standpoint, when you have a designed development, eventually homeowners do want to make changes, and if one person is allowed to this, then everyone will want to do It. He said that ARCs are dictatorial, but this is what happens when you share a wall and have basically small lots. He noted that there is a house up on The Hill that is now orange and bright green and he is certain the neighboring residents are appalled at this choice of color. He said that when you buy Into a designed development you must accept that you are a part of this neighborhood and subject to the CC&Rs and the ARC. He indicated that ZT A 04-3 and ZC 04-1 represent a good plan to try to get things into standardized conditions so that the City knows what is going on and architects knows how to proceed. He noted that the ARC could provide a standard response to questions from homeowners regarding the types of changes they can make to their homes before the homeowner goes to the expense of hiring an architect. Commissioner Deaton stated that she is concerned about the property rights issues. She asked when the homes were purchased, did the prospective homeowners sign the CC&Rs, or have there been new buyers that were unaware of the CC&Rs. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he could not speak for the real estate agents, whose responsibility it is to provide this information to a new buyer. He said that CC&Rs are recorded documents and have always been enforced. He indicated that the only provisions of the CC&Rs that had a sunset clause are the provisions on ARCs. He said there are a number of other provisions in the CC&Rs and some of those relate to the number of 2-story homes allowed in the tracts. He said that it is assumed that when a home buyer receives all closing documents and signs the escrow papers, that the buyer is provided with a copy of the CC&Rs and a signature form attesting that the buyer has read and understands the CC&Rs. Mr. Whittenberg pointed out that the CC&R documents do not prohibit roof decks. He indicated that during the community meetings the concern over roof decks was discussed and the majority of those in attendance felt that roof decks should no longer be allowed. He stated that the if they choose to do so PC does have the discretion to reinstate the roof decks option or condition the addition of a roof deck to be subject to the Minor Plan Review process. He noted that everything else that IS reflected in the proposed zoning standards is a reflection of either the PP approvals or the CC&R documents. He stated that by a vote of the property owners the provisions of the CC&Rs can be amended. Mr. Whittenberg then added that if the Page 15 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 proposed standards are adopted, a homeowner could still present plans for a roof deck to the ARC for approval, and if approved the City could then issue building permits for the deck. Commissioner Deaton recommended removing the prohibition on roof decks and allowing the homeowners to go through the process of voting to prohibit the roof decks. She said that she did not believe that the City should impose requirements that are not imposed throughout the City, but she has no problem with upholding the CC&Rs. Commissioner Shanks asked if notice would be mailed regarding the City Council hearing. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this was correct, and Staff would ensure that Mr. Irwin receives a notice. Commissioner Roberts asked if there is a homeowners association (HOA) per se for any of the 3 tracts. Mr. Whittenberg stated that there is no HOA for any of the tracts. Commissioner Roberts indicated that there appears to be a communication problem in those 3 tracts and it might be advisable to look into forming a HOA to help deal with some of these problems. He then asked what the formulation of the ARC would be. Mr. Whittenberg explained that ARCs are created pursuant to the CC&Rs for each of these proJects. Commissioner Roberts stated that he was surprised with Mr. Whittenberg actions and involvement in this. He said that it seemed that the homeowners themselves should handle the formation of the ARC. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the ARCs were established by the CC&Rs, and when they expired one of the tracts came to the City to inquire as to how they would proceed to reconstitute the ARC. Commissioner Roberts stated that the homeowners for a specific tract should have conducted a vote for their group. He questioned what the City's involvement would be, other than pointing them back to the CC&Rs. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that this is what had occurred. Commissioner Sharp stated that in the past when dealing with a location subject to CC&Rs the PC has always inquired beforehand to ensure that the projects have received approval from the ARC before the project is reviewed. Commissioner Deaton stated that the Director of Development Services has done some very good work on the ordinance; however, she believes the tracts themselves should show consensus through a vote before bringing this to the City. Commissioner Sharp also complimented Mr. Whittenberg on the work completed, and noted that if changes are needed, there will certainly be sufficient time to do so when the items are heard before City Council. Commissioner Deaton asked if the ban on roof decks could be removed so that the individual tract groups could vote on this issue. Commissioner Shanks stated that he is going by what Mr. Whittenberg had reported, that the consensus at the three community meetings was that homeowners did not want the roof decks Commissioner Shanks asked what the attendance had been. Mr. Page 16 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Minutes of August 18, 2004 Whittenberg stated that attendance at each meeting varied from a minimum of 25 to a maximum of 40 people. Commissioner Shanks stated that he had received notification of the meeting and inquired if this notice was mailed to all residents of Bridgeport/Suburbia. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that notice for each community meeting was mailed to all residents. Commissioner Deaton asked for a percentage of the residents In attendance at the meetings. Mr. Whittenberg estimated approximately 18 percent. He said that if the PC finds it appropriate to remove the restriction on roof decks, they can do so; however, the ban on roof decks was incorporated as a result of the feedback from those homeowners attending the meetings. Commissioner Shanks stated that because of the nature of Bridgeport, decks don't really fit in to this neighborhood design. He said he feels the ordinance should be left as is, in particular because many people are unhappy with the decks that are already there. MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Ladner to adopt Resolution 04-43 recommending approval of Zone Text Amendment 04-3 as presented and as modified by the Addendum Staff Report. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Roberts to adopt Resolution 04-44 recommending approval of Zone Change 04-1 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Sharp, Deaton, Ladner, Roberts, and Shanks None None Mr. Whittenberg noted that he anticipates that the public hearing before City Council would be scheduled for September 13, 2004. He emphasized that notice would be mailed to all residents of Bridgeport. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg stated that the meeting of September 8, 2004, is to be canceled due to a lack of business, and the next scheduled meeting will be held on September 22, 2004 COMMISSION CONCERNS Page 17 of 18 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of August 18, 2004 Commissioner Deaton stated that she has received many phone calls and had many conversations regarding the way that Main Street signs are out of control. She said she would like to conduct a study session on this issue to look at some options for improving this situation. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is currently working on this and should be ready for presentation at the September 22,2004 meeting. Commissioner Shanks inquired if the Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (BIDS) Project had been approved by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). Mr. Whittenberg reported that the pubic hearing was conducted on August 12, 2004 and the project was unanimously approved with minor changes to the City's conditions of approval. Mr. Whittenberg then noted that each Commissioner has been provided with a copy of the City General Plan in its final form. Commissioner Deaton requested a software copy of the General Plan. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Sharp adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ~~~~~ Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary Planning Department APPROVAL The Commission on September 22, 2004, approved~_ Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, August 18, 2004. . Page 18 of 18