Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1987-04-01 SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA City Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach. California . I'he Seal Beach Planning Coznznjssion meets in sesdon everll :Lirst and third liednesday 0:L each month at 7:30 1'.111. I:L /IOU wish to address the Commission on any particular public: hearing item, the Chairman will call :Lor public testimony :Lirst :Lor those in :Lavor of the project, a: ~ .ec:;nd, :Lor those who are not in :Lavor. liben IIOU see that the speaker's position in the center 0:L the room is unoc:c:upied, step up to the IIl1cropbone and when recognized by the Chairman, speak directly into the IIl1cropbone bll :Lirst stating your name and address clearlll and distinctly :Lor the records. State your business as clearly and succinctly as possible and then wait a I/IOIJIent to see :i:L the Commissioners have any quest:ions 112 regard to /lOur comments or questions. If there are no other questions or comments, return to your seat so that the next person may address the Commiss10n. If you wish to address the Commission on matters other than publ1c hearings, the agenda prov:ides :Lor that t1me when the Chairlll/Jn asks :Lor comments :Lrom the public. Address the Coznznjssion 112 the same manner as stated :Lor public hearings, always stating your name and address :Lirst. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA April 1. 1987 Next Resolution '1457 1. 2. 3. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Consent Calendar A. Mlnutes of February 4. 1987 Public Hearings 4. A. . Zoning Text Amendment 4-87 Resolution '1456 Fences. Walls. Hedges and Screen Plantings A request to amend Chapter 28 of the Municipal Code to revise the regulations for fences. walls. hedges and screen plantings. Code Sections: 28-2316; 28-2600; 28-2601 Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration has been prepared in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report. Applicant: City of Seal Beach 5. Scheduled Matters Oral Communications from the Audience At this time. members Of the public Commission regarding any item within the the Commission provided that no action may agenda items unless authorized by law. 7. Staff Concerns 6. may address the subject matter of be taken on off- 8. Commission Concerns 9. Adjournment Agenda Forecast: April 15. 1987 -Plan Review 4-87 46 Riversea Rd. . . Planning Commission Meeting of April 1, 1987 The Seal Beach Planning Commission met in regular session on Wednesday, April 1, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Sharp led the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Chairman Jessner Commissioners Sharp, Suggs, Covington (arrived 7:35) Commissioner Rullo Edward Knight, Director of Development Services Pamela Walker, Administrative Aide With the consent of the Commission, Chairman Jessner grants Commissioner Rullo an excused absence. CONSENT CALENDAR Chairman Jessner requested removal of item A, minutes of February 4, 1987 meeting, from the consent calendar. Jessner requested deletion of words "A Commission member" from first paragraph, page 5 to be substituted by the words "Chairman Jessner." Commissioner Sharp moves to approve corrected minutes, Suggs seconds. . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Jessner, Sharp, Suggs None Ru 11 0 Motion Carried . PUBLIC HEARING - A. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 4-87 - FENCES, WALLS, HEDGES AND SCREEN PLANTINGS Ms. Walker reported this zoning text amendment was proposed to modify two aspects of current fence regulations which had been through a revision process in 1985. As a result of receiving a higher rate of variance requests during implementation of this revised regulation, staff brought back this amendment to address the problems. With regard to fences on the side street side of corner lots, staff has found that the 15 foot setback encroaches into usable yard space on a 25 foot lot. Staff is proposing that on corner lots on alley sides, fences, walls, hedges or screen plantings may be located along or within 1 foot of the property line as long as it does not violate front or rear yard setbacks. The other aspect of the current fence regulations proposed for modification deals with fences on rear alleys. Staff has noted several problems due to numerous nonconforming rear fences on rear property lines. As many of these fences are old and in need of repair, property owners often remove portions of the fence prior to applying for a fence permit - only to find that a variance is required (which far exceeds the cost of repairs to the fences). The only alternative, in this case, is to not replace the fence, thereby leaving the homeowners facing a loss of privacy. The proposed modification would allow wall, fences, hedges or screen plantings to be located within the required rear -2- . yard setback for lots greater than 25 feet wide, up to the point that second and third stories may encroach. For lots 25 ft. in width, no fences, walls, hedges or screen plantings may be placed or encroach upon rear yard setback along any alleys. For nonconforming fences, it is proposed that they may be maintained and repaired without applying for a variance. The following points were discussed by Commission and staff: 1) The 15 foot radius provides adequate line of sight when a wider street intersects with a narrower street. This 15 foot distance is established by the Public Works Department. Distances greater than 15 feet would conflict with the structure itself. 2) Visibility at corners is also assured by a provision of the Code which bars development within a triangular area adjacent to an intersection. 3. The 6-1/2 foot setback was used to allow emergency vehicle access. 4. That 6-1/2 foot setback should be free from obstruction such as trash cans or parked vehicles, however the City has no specific enforcement to leave that area open. . 5. Whether there should be a period of time during which owners of nonconforming fences should be required to bring them up to code. . Mr. Knight indicated staff is looking toward cleaning up the Code and making it more workable to the general public. Chairman Jessner declared the public hearing open. Mr. Randy Jones, representing Erickson Construction, explained this proposed amendment would allow him to put in a pool where yard space is now limited by fence regulations, Mr. Jones was in favor of ZTA 4-87 as it would allow construction to advance to property line. As no others spoke in favor nor in opposition to the matter, Chairman Jessner declared the pUblic hearing closed. Chairman Jessner expressed concern that this modification to regulations could be constructed as defacto widening of the area and be seen and used as a roadway for parking. Chairman Jessner suggested contacting other beach cities to see how they handle this matter. Mr. Knight explained that 24 feet is a standard width to accommodate emergency vehicles. This proposed amendment would only apply to lots greater than 25 foot in width. Covington also expressed concern that the City not take any action to appropriate private land without public hearings. The present ordinance takes away 13 feet of private land and makes it available for public use without the owner's permission. Knight explained that this amendment would give the owner back half of the land that he cannot use currently. The Commissioners discussed changing the 6-1/2 foot setback to 3-1/2 feet which -3- would give the owners 18 feet total yard space. This decreased setback may prevent vehicles from parking in the alley space. It was pOinted out that there is a possibility the power poles may be placed underground, but that is not in the near future, could be 20 years from now. It was felt that even with the decreased width, vehicles will be parked in any manner possible - even to intrude upon the alley itself. Covington proposed that the Commission make the setback from the area 5-1/2 feet, Suggs seconds the motion. . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Jessner, Sharp, Suggs None Rullo Motion Carried With regard to Exhibit A, Commissioner Sharp moved that the fence not be located closer than 8 feet to the property line; Covington seconds. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Jessner, Sharp, Suggs None Rullo Motion Carried Commissioner Covington moved to approve Resolution No. 1456 with changes to the draft ordinance as indicated previously; Sharp seconds. . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Jessner, Sharp, Suggs None Rullo Motion Carried SCHEDULED MATTERS There were none at this time. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Tim Murphy, College Park East resident, spoke to the Commission regarding modifying Planning Department procedures. He expressed frustration at length of time it took to process permit for room addition. Two reviews of plans had to be performed by plan checker who in turn requested modifications to plans and separate blueprint drawings. Consequently, Mr. Murphy's builder was unable to schedule work for 1-1/2 months. Mr. Murphy felt that Huntington Beach and Torrance had more efficient systems wherein drawings are approved at the counter. Mr. Knight indicated that City staff is unable to handle plan checking workload, consequently, a consultant is used. It was pointed out that Mr. Murphy's request was handled on ASAP as he was most anxious to build. Normally, the process takes much longer. Commissioner Covington suggested that a full-time plan checker might be justified with increased building activity. Commissioner Sharp requested information regarding cost of plan checking consultant versus a full-time employee. . STAFF CONCERNS Knight indicated the Armed Forces Reserve Center would be -4- . inviting the Commission to tour their facilities in the latter part of April. It was also noted that a review of Mola Development will be presented at the next meeting. COMMISSION CONCERNS Covington requested staff to gather information regarding nonconforming property in the entire City as it relates to the disaster clause. Covington felt most of the nonconforming properties were located in the Old Town area and were multiple density rather than single family dwellings. Knight indicated that College Park East, College Park West and Leisure World were planned communities, therefore, would be conforming. He also reported the majority of subdivisions would be conforming in the City. Preliminary research in the Old Town area as it relates to the disaster clause show there is a large percentage of single family homes that if destroyed during a disaster could be rebuilt. ADJOURNMENT It was the consensus of the Commission and so ordered by the Chair, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of April 1, 1987 at 9:03 p.m. . THESE MINUTES ARE TENTATIVE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. .