Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1968-03-06 ~ . . . . . MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 6, 1968 The Seal Beach Planning Commission met in regular session Wednesday, March 6, 1968, in the Council Chamber at City Hall. Present: Absent: Boeger, Crowley, Lanning, Peters Murphy The meeting was called to order by Chairman Crowley at 7:35 p.m. Minutes of February 21, 1968 meeting were approved as presented. I. Public Hearing - Violet McFarland, UV-1-68 Violet McFarland, 530 West Broadway, Long Beach, California, requests approval of a Use Variance for the construction and operation of a Jack-in-the-Box Restaurant in the Cl Service Comme~cial Zone. T~e property is located at the south corner of Pacific Coast Highway and 8th Street, Seal Beach, California, and legally described as Lots 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44, Block 208, Stanton & Lothian's First Addition. No written objections were received. Mr. Ralph Allen, the authorized agent representing Foodmaker Inc. of Los Angeles, presented a colored rendering of the proposed building to the Planning Commission and audience. Mr. Frank Finch, owner of the Garden Motel located on the west corner of 8th Street and Pacific Coast Highway, inquired as to the hours of operation of the business, its policing and trash facilities, and whether it would be owner-operated, or a franchise operation. Mr. Allen stated there would be no exterior walk-up facilities nor outside tables. Trash receptacles would be provided fbr every three parking stalls. If conditions arise where a security guard is necessary, the owner will hire his own guard to police the property as needed. Mr. Finch asked if there would be any objectionable loudspeakers. Mr. Allen stated there would be only one intercom station and that it would be toned down. He also stated the hours of operation normally were from 9~ a.m. until midnight, but during the winter months the hour$ of operation could be shorter and during the summer months possibly longer. It was mentioned that according to the City they could remain open a full 24 hours. Mr. Finch expressed concern over any noise that may emanate from the business and of its effect upon his motel. At the same time expressed that he was in favor of granting the Use Variance. Mr. Finch also inquired if noise became a factor if a wall could be built upon ~heir exterior side property line, or set back three feet. Mr. Allen explained that the restaurant would not add to the existing noise level of the area, and that their firm had received an award from the City of Los Angeles to the effect that their operation was a credit to the community. He also mentioned there would be landscaping along the 8th Street property line. . . . Chairman Crowley asked Mr. Stratford, ,the City Engineer, if the use would create a traffic problem. Mr. Stratford stated there would be an increase in traffic, but this is to be expected with this type use. Chairman Crowley inquired if there was a raised median on Pacific Coast Highway opposite the drive-thru exit, and if not, are left hand turns allowed. The City Engineer said the raised median ended near this exit but left hand turns were illegal because of the painted double lines. Discussion arose concerning the three poles in the planter adjacent to the drive- thru accessway and whether they served a purpose. It..was the concensus that the poles could remain because they served as a visual. indicator to the drive-thru location, but there were to be no signs upon these three poles. Mr. Finch inquired if the applicant would apply for a liquor license. Mr. Allen answered they would not, and have never requested one in the past. Chairman Crowley said that the construction and type of materials in the rear wall should be subject to approval by the City Engineer. Mr. and Mrs. David W. Collier of 321 Main Street, Seal Beach, expressed their approval of the request. Commissioner Boeger read the proposed conditions of approval and Mr. Allen ex- pressed approval of these conditions.. There being no ~othe~ comment the hearing was closed. . A motion was made by Peters and seconded by Mrs. Lanning to approve UV-1-68 subject to the conditions li~ted in the Resolution. Upon a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. Resolution No. 204. II. Plan Review - Mr. Edward Artman, PR-1-68 Mr. Edward Artman, 1009 Seal Way, Seal Beach, requests approval of building plans for a parcel legally described as Lot 14, Block E, Tract 1009. The applicant was not present to discuss the plans. It was noted there is a high pitched roof over a proposed second story apartment extending l2~ feet over the existing structure. The plans indicated this area was to be used as an attic storage room. The Chairman asked the City Building Inspector, Mr. Thurman Earhart, if this space was considered a third story. Mr. Earhart affirmed that it was an attic-story. The Chairman inquired if there were any plans showing plumbing facilities in this attic story. Mr. Earhart said he has not seen the detailed building plans as yet. Considerable discussion ensued as to whether this space could be used as a fourth dwelling unit. The Commission indicated that it could not ascertain the ultimate useage of the attic-story without complete detailed floor plans - not plot plans, of the existing structure together with the proposed addition. . Conditions of Mr. Artman's variance of May 17, 1967 'were discussed as was its expiration date after one year on May 17, 1968. Commissioner Peters stated the basic findings thus far are: 1. The applicant appears to intend to use the property in deviation to the City Codes and of the earlier Variance. - 2 - . . . 2. The high pitched roof will act to cut off view of the water from inland properties while technically serving as storage space. Commissioner Peters moved to continue the hearing until: a. Complete floor plans were submLtted showing the existing building and the proposed addition; and b. The applicant or his representative presented these detailed floor plans at a regular Planning Commission hearing. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Lanning and passed unanimously.. III. Plan Review - Union Federal Savings and Loan Association, PR-2-68 Union Federal Savings and Loan Association, 12531 Los Alamitos Blvd., Seal Beach, requested plan review approval to raise their sign from 31' 6" to 46' 6". The sign is located 150 feet west of the corner of St. Cloud Drive and Los Alamitos Blvd. at the Rossmoor Shopping Center. The Secretary stated the applicant had not turned in a letter of authorization by the property owners and until this .is done, the Plan Review would have to be reset to a later hearing. IV. Plan Review - Richard L. Brown, PR-3-68 . Mr. Richard L. Brown, 406 Marina Drive, Seal Beach, ~equests review of an eight foot high sign to be placed upon the fascia at the center of the Sandwich Tree's store front. The parcel is legally described as Lots.63 and 65, Block 104, Stanton and Lothian's Second Addition. The Commission noted that two signs have been erected ~n this building without Plan Review which is in violation of an earlier variance granted. The Building Inspector stated the sign plans were not drawn by a sign designer or contractor which is required by City Code. He further noted ~hat the wind load upon an eight foot high sign would create a considerable load upon the roof of the building. The Planning Commission found that the plans were not in conformance with Variance No. V-lO-67 and Planning Commission Resolution No. 131 concerning signs upon this parcel. Mr. Boeger moved to deny PR-3-68 based upon insufficient evidence of proper construction and design. Seconded by Mr. Peters and passed unanimously. Resolution No. 205. V. Review of Recreation Area Layout - Suburbia, Inc. A revised layout of the Recreation Area on Lot 42, tentative Tract 6345, was sub~ mitted by Suburbia, Inc., Santa Ana, Cal~fornia. This lot is a part of Precise Plan No. PP-1-66 as approved earlier by the Planning Commission. It was noted that the City of Seal Beach will be constructing a multi-purpose recreation facility adjacent to the Suburbia development. The Commission found that this modification will result in greater open play area for children. It was determined that the modification was in basic conformance-with the Precise Plan as originally approved, and thus does not require are-hearing. . by Mrs. Lanning to approve the reVision, at 9:45 p.m. - 3 -