Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1987-08-05 ~L BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AC OA Clty Council Chambers 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, California -e The Seal Beach Planning Commission meets in session every first and third Wednesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. If you wish to address the Commission on any particular public hearing item, the Chairman will call for public testimony first for those in favor of the project, and second, for those who are not in favor. When you see that the speaker's posi tion in the center of the room is unoccupied, step up to the microphone and when recognized by the Chairman, speak directly into the microphone by first stating your name and address clearly and distinctly for the records. State your business as clearly and succinctly as possible and then wait a moment to see if the Commissioners have any questions in regard to your comments or questions. If there are no other questions or comments, return to your seat so that the next person may address the Commission. If you wish to address the Commission on matters other than public hearings, the agenda provides for that time when the Chairman asks for comments from the public. Address the Commission in the same manner as stated for public hearings, always stating your name and address first. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA August 5, 1987 Next Resolution #1468 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Consent Calendar A. Mlnutes of March 18, 1987 B. Plan Review 12-87 311 Ocean C. Resolution Number 1465 326 12th Street e 4. Public Hearings A. Condltlonal Use Permit 8-87 12309 Seal Beach Boulevard (Chang's Gourmet) A request to permit live entertainment and dancing in conjunction with an existing Chinese restaurant. Resolution #1466 Code Sections: 28-1300; 28-1400; 28-2503; 28-2504 Environmental Review: This project exempt from CEQA review (Section Administrative Code) Applicant: Chai Te Chang is ca tegori ca lly 15301, California Owner: Century National Properties, Inc. B. Zoning Text Amendment 5-86 Nonconforming Disaster Clause A request to consider an amendment to Section 28-2406 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach to establish new regulations for the reconstruction of nonconforming buildings partially destroyed. Code Sections: 28-2406; 28-2600 . Environmental Review: Negative been prepared in lieu of an Report. Applicant: City of Seal Beach Zoning Text Amendment 1-87 Resolution #1467 Landscape Requirements for Commercial Centers Declaration 10-86 has Environmental Impact C. . Planning Commission Agenda August 5, 1987 Page 2 A request to amend Chapter 28 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach to revise the landscape requirements for commercial centers, and to provide for the incremental upgrading of landscaping in nonconforming commercial centers. Code Sections: 28-1302; 28-1402; 28-2408; 28-2600; 28- 2601 Environmental Review: Negative Declaration 1-87 has been prepared in lieu of an Environmental Impact Report Applicant: City of Seal Beach 5. Scheduled Matters A. Plan ReVlew 13-87 38 Welcome Lane 6. Oral Communications from the Audience At thlS tlme, members of the public may address the Commission regarding any item within the subject matter of the Commission provided that no action may be taken on off- agenda items unless authorized by law. 7. Staff Concerns 8. Commission Concerns . 9. Adjournment Agenda Forecast: Aueust 19, 1987 - UP 7-87 Ruby's Diner - Variance 7-87 12147 Seal Beach Boulevard Se~tember 2& 1987 - C 3-87, .P.A. 2a-87 345 10th Street - CUP 9-87 941 P.C.H. - Hellman Ranch Specific Plan e e SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 5, 1987 The Seal Beach Planning Commission met in regular session on Wednesday, August 5, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Suggs led the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Covington Commissioners Sharp, Suggs Excused Absence: Commissioners Jessner, Rullo Also Present: Edward Knight, Director of Development Services Ginger Bennington, Secretary to City Manager CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the consent calendar were as follows: a) Minutes of Planning Commission meeting of March 18, 1987 b) Plan Review 12-87, 311 Ocean Avenue c) Resolution #1465, 326 12th Street Commissioner Sharp moved to approve the consent calendar as presented with Commissioner Suggs seconding that motion. e AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Sharp, Suggs None Jessner, Rullo Motion Carried PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8-87 - 12309 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD - CHANG'S GOURMET RESTAURANT - ROSSMOOR SHOPPING CENTER The Secretary, Mr. Knight, explained this permit was a request for live entertainment and dancing in conjunction with an existing Chinese restaurant located in the Rossmoor Shopping Center. Knight indicated there was a long history of live entertainment at that site since 1961 through the late 1970's and again in 1984-85 with the Sly Fox Restaurant. Staff had considered that history and the nature of the surrounding land uses in making a determination on this mater. Two previous businesses had offered live music, one with a dance floor. It was also pointed out that the surrounding land uses are commercial tenants of the Rossmoor Center and an apartment development within 100 feet of the restaurant. Staff's recommendation was for approval of CUP 8-87 with eight conditions as noted in the staff report to minimize any possibility of disturbance to surrounding properties. Those conditions included limiting the live entertainment to the bar area, limiting dancing/bands or disc jockeys to Wednesday through Saturday nights only with solo musicians permitted on all evenings and limiting entertainment hours of operation to 6 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. -e Chairman Covington declared the public hearing open. Joseph Steinberg, 12200 Montecito, spoke in opposition to the e conditional use permit on the basis of noise disturbance to the apartment complex behind the restaurant. Steinberg pointed out that when the doors of the bowling alley are left open, the residents can hear the bowling activities. Commissioner Sharp suggested a condition which would prevent the doors of the restaurant from remaining open during entertainment. Edwin Burnett, 12200 Montecito, also objected to the granting of this permit due to the extra traffic that will be generated by a different type of clientele than normally patronized the restaurant. Harry Bernstein, 12200 Montecito, expressed concern over not knowing the type of music that was to be available and requested that no loud music be permitted after 11 p.m. Bernstein explained that approximately 50-60 apartment units were directly adjacent to the restaurant. Knight explained that the applicant was fully aware of the 55 dba noise level ordinance in the City of Seal Beach. Dorothy Phillips, manager of the Rossmoor Center, explained that a dance band with a full orchestra operated nightly in the past. She had not been apprised of the type of band to be utilized, but felt it would be in keeping with the family type atmosphere generated by the existing restaurant. As no others spoke in favor nor in opposition to this matter, Chairman Covington closed the public hearing. e During deliberations, Commissioner Suggs stated the restaurant in located primarily in a business area and the City has a certain obligation to protect both residents and the community as a whole. Mr. Suggs felt entertainment was an appropriate use for the site. Chairman Covington felt that with the existing 55 dBA maximum noise level enforced along with modifying the condition for review of the permit to 6 months rather than 1 year, that the rights of the property owners would be protected. Commissioner Sharp moved to approve Conditional Use Permit 8-87 with two modifications to the conditions as follows: 1) Add a condition that the rear door opening onto the trash area onto the kitchen be closed during live entertainment. 2) Modifying condition #8 to review CUP 8-87 after six months, after which time Planning commission may extend it indefinitely. Commissioner Suggs seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Sharp, Suggs None Jessner, Rullo Motion Carried e At this point, Chairman Covington addressed the audience to explain Commission's policy that any item on the agenda not heard 2 e before 11 p.m. would be rescheduled to another date. e PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 5-86 - DISASTER CLAUSE Mr. Knight presented a detailed staff report explaining the issue of the disaster clause, providing experiences of other communities, offering a range of options and their implications and recommending action. Existing code states that any nonconforming structure destroyed to an extent greater than 50% of its value must be rebuilt to conform with all current building and zoning codes. This means all density, parking, setbacks, laws must be abided. Those structures with the largest impact are nonconforming due to density, those with the least impact are nonconforming due to setback, height or parking problems. The bulk of the problems, according to Knight, existing in the Old Town area due to downzoning which occurred in 1978. In the Old Town area approximately 45% of the properties are directly affected. However citywide the effect of the existing disaster clause can be considered slight. Of the approximately 6000 parcels in the City, approximately 640 are significantly affected by the clause, about 10.6% of the total. The nonconforming property owners concerns centered on financial problems caused by catastrophic loss, removal of nonconforming units as an indirect rate for the City to remove renters and the difficulty with financing/refinancing nonconforming properties. Several lending institutions would not make loans at all, while others had special requirements or restrictions not applied to conforming properties. Staff's position was based on City policy and laws and could not be supportive of any change in the disaster clause that would negatively impact the City's ability to bring structures into conformance with existing codes. Ten coastal communities were surveyed with four of the communities having disaster clauses similar to Seal Beach requiring full conformance with the code if more than 50 percent of the replacement value is destroyed. Two of the communities allow for complete reconstruction as it exists and four allow some reconstruction of nonconforming buildings subject to some review or limitations on the reconstruction. In each of the cases where reconstruction was allowed but subject to certain restrictions, the most crucial aspect was additional parking. e The first option was for the disaster clause to remain as it currently exists. According to Knight this option would support the City's ability to eliminate nonconforming structures but would leave property owners with financing or refinancing hardships. The second alternative offered was to alter the disaster clause to reflect the market value of the structure, as opposed to the current practice of assessed value. This option may undermine the City's efforts to eliminate nonconforming properties, but would aid property owners in obtaining financing. The third option explained was to provide a method whereby existing legal nonconforming structures could be rebuilt that may exceed density or provide less than the required parking, 3 e setbacks, or other standards. This process would apply only to units that can be shown to be legally authorized at some point in time. For property owners, this option should significantly help in obtaining financing and provide a level of rebuilding. Mr. Knight explained the SPRING proposal which would allow replacement in-kind of any legal nonconforming structure regardless of any City zoning or building regulations, although rebuilt structures would be subject to the Uniform Building Code. This option would perpetuate the nonconforming structures in the City making it difficult to eliminate the nonconforming buildings eventually. For property owners, it allows complete reconstruction and improves their financing ability. e Staff recommended Commission consider the detailed staff report and make a determination as to whether the existing disaster clause should be revised, and if so, to what extent. Chairman Covington expressed concern that only three members of the Commission were present to hear this matter, therefore requested a continuation of the public hearing to August 19 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Sharp suggested a joint Council/Commission workshop be held in the future. Chairman Covington declared the public hearing open. Richard Lyons, 1315 Seal Way, representing the Seal Way homeowners commended staff on report. Mr. Lyons supported option C which requires one open parking space per unit. Mr. Lyons felt it was more equitable to use market value rather than assessed value for appraisal of the structures. He also felt single family homes be exempt. Art Boynton, 1111 1/2 Seal Way, thanked staff for detailed report and supported option C. Boynton also felt the 60-year clause would cause financing problems to homeowners. As President of the Seal Way Improvement Group, Mr. Boynton offered any assistance to Commission regarding the disaster clause. Joyce Ross, 16655 South Pacific, property owner and former resident of Seal Beach, felt that structures that were legally nonconforming with permits should be replaced in-kind. As no others spoke on this matter, Chairman Covington closed the public hearing. Chairman Covington requested additional information from staff prior to the next hearing on August 19th to include minimum core requirements as compared to present standards, including minimum square footage requirement for condominiums and apartments, rear yard setbacks, existing side yard setbacks, wiring standards, etc. . PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 1-87 - LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL CENTERS Mr. Knight reported this matter was brought to the attention of the Commission in February of this year from a Council action directing staff to review landscape requirements for the City's large commercial centers. This March Council discussed possibility that the landscape requirements for existing centers be reduced to reflect a more realistic balance between the City's goals and economic reality. Staff, therefore, drafted an 4 e ordinance reflecting Council's concerns. The draft ordinance would permit centers with 7% or more of lot area in landscaping to make structural alterations. Centers with less than 7% landscaping would be required to apply for a conditional use permit to establish a landscaping program to achieve a minimum of 7% landscaping. Staff explained the reduction in the percentage of landscaping required from 10% to 7% reflects Council's concerns and is a range to be found in nearby cities. The use of a conditional use permit to establish landscape programs for those centers under 7% landscaping allows for individual requirements and deadlines for each center. Staff recommended approval of the draft ordinance for referral to Council. Knight stated the four commercial centers in the City are: Bay City Center, Safeway Center, Rossmoor Shopping Center and Leisure World Shopping Center. It was pointed out that the owner may apply for the use permit immediately and does not have to wait a tenant's remodeling request. The Chairman declared the public hearing open at this time. Dorothy Phillips, manager of the Rossmoor Shopping Center, explained her Center is currently 5% landscaped and efforts would begin immediately to bring the center up to 7%. As no others spoke on this issue, Chairman Covington closed the public hearing. Commissioner Sharp felt that ZTA 1-87 should be continued to the August 19th Commission meeting when all members would be present to assist in the decision-making process. Chairman Covington requested additional information from staff to include commentary on existing square footage of landscaping at all four centers, what would be required at 7%, the short fall, if any, for each center, a recommendation for a time period for incrementing a landscaping plan for each center and a date by which time any landscaping shortfall in the centers should be corrected. Chairman Covington also requested each center be contacted to attend the August 19th meeting. e e SCHEDULED MATTERS - PLAN REVIEW 13-87 - 38 WELCOME LANE - SEAL BEACH TRAILER PARK - MIKE HUTTON The Secretary indicated this applicant is proposing the construction of a two-story cabana in the Seal Beach Trailer Park by adding 346 sq. ft. of living area, 60 s.f. of storage area and a porch on the first floor. The second floor would contain 840 s.f. of living space and a balcony. The applicant requested a wet bar on the second story which has been denied by staff due to concerns that the cabana could be separated into two units. Recommendation was for approval of the plan review subject to the seven conditions noted in the staff report, one of which stated that no wet bar would be permitted on the second floor. Mike Hutton, the applicant, explained he had no intention of separating his home into two units and wished to keep the wet bar. With regard to the roof treatment which exceeds 25 foot height limit, Mr. Hutton indicated that is expected to be reduced in order to reach compliance. Hutton felt that with the nearness of a fire hydrant to his trailer, than a sprinkler system was not 5 e needed. Staff indicated that the sprinkler regulation was a condition of Title 25, State regulations, which could not be exempted by City. Jane Omar, 117 E. Wilson, Costa Mesa, expressed her belief that no fire sprinkler system condition could be enforced as a hydrant is located within 150 feet of the home. Commissioner Sharp moved to approve Plan Review 13-87 with seven conditions presented in staff report; Suggs seconds. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Covington, Sharp, Suggs None Jessner, Rullo Motion Carried ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none at this time. STAFF CONCERNS There were none at this time. COMMISSION CONCERNS Chairman Covington asked when it was proper to provide additional input on the Hellman Specific Plan. Staff indicated any concerns or comments could be addressed directly to Mr. Knight. e ADJOURNMENT It was the consensus of the Commission and so ordered by the Chair, to adjourn the August 5, 1987 Planning Commission meeting at 10:00 p.m. THESE MINUTES ARE TENTATIVE, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION e 6