HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Res 1332 - 1984-07-18
. .
RESOLUTION NO. 1332
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST TO ALLOW
A NON-HABITABLE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE TO
DEVIATE FROM THE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT
(MHV-2-84) IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SECOND
STORY ADDITION (101 MAIN STREET)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
WHEREAS, an application was duly filed by James Watson, 101 Main Street,
Seal Beach, California 90740; and
WHEREAS, the property is described as Lots 7, B, 9, and 10, Block 8,
Bay City Tract, filed in the Office of the Recorder, Orange
County; and
l~HEREAS, the subject property contai ns approximate,ly 11,007 sq. ft..
located at the northwest corner of Main Street and Ocean Avenue
(101 Main Street; and
WHEREAS, the subject property has approximately 100 feet of frontage
on Ocean Avenue and 110 feet of frontage on Main Street; and
WHEREAS, the subject property contains a two-story office and retail
commercial building; and
WHEREAS, surrounding land use and zoning are as follows:
North - Commercial retail uses in the C-l (Service Commercial) zone
and a mixture of single-family and multi-family residences
in the R-3 (High Density Residential) zone.
East - Commercial retail uses in the C-l (Service Commercial) zone.
South - Eisenhower Park and the beach in the PLU (Public Land Use)
zone.
West - Office uses in the C-l (Service Commercial) zone and a mixture
of single-family and multi-family residences in the R-3 (High
Density Residential) zone; and
WHEREAS, on April 7, 1976, the Planning Commission approved Variance
V-5-76 for the construction of a 7,000 sq. ft. two-story general
retail and office building. At that time, the proposal contained
25 parking spaces, two greater than that required; and
WHEREAS, That on February 15, 1984, the Planning Commission requested,
after review of a survey of other coastal cities, that staff
draft a code amendment dealing with architectural features and
exceptions to the height limits; and
WHEREAS, That on March 7, 1984, staff presented to the Commission such
a code amendment. It was their concensus to accept the code
amendment and bring it back for publiC hearing in April, 1984;
and
WHEREAS, That on April 4, 1984, the Planning Co~mission held a publiC
hearing on Zoning Text Amendment 1-84 (Negative Declaration
3-84) Building Heieht Limits. At that time, three persons spoke
for the amendment and none in opposition. The Commission then
moved to continue the public hearing until the next meeting
so that staff could modify the proposed amendment taking into
account the Commission's comments and the input from the public
hearing; and
I
1- _
r'
.
.
WHEREAS, That on May 2, 1984, the P1annine Commission held a public hearing
on the continued item. Staff presented a survey of exceptions
to height limitations of selected coastal cities and the revised
Zoning Text Amendment. Two persons spoke in favor of the amendment
and none in opposition. Commission then moved to adopt Negative
Declaration 4-84 and Resolution No. 1321 (ZTA 1-84); and
WHEREAS, That on May 29, 1984, the City Council held a public hearing
on Zoning Text Amendment 1-84. At that time two persons spoke
for the amendment and none in opposition. The Council then
unanimously moved that Zoning Text Amendment 1-84 be adopted
as corrected by City Attorney; and
WHEREAS, That on June 11, 1984, the City Council unanimously moved adoption
of the second reading of Ordinance 1168 (ZTA 1-84). The Ordinance
became effective July 11, 1984; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a Minor Height Variation Permit
under the effective Ordinance 1168
WHEREAS, Specifically, the applicant requested a Minor Height Variation
described as follows:
A cupola dome made of copper to extend four feet above the 30
foot high limit within the C-1 (Service Commercial) zone. This
cupola dome is proposed in conjunction with a 347 sq. ft. second-
story addition between two existing offices which front onto
Ocean Avenue. This addition will be used as a lobby area; and
~JHEREAS, the proposal was exempt for envi ronmenta 1 review; and
WHEREAS, on July 18, 1984, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
on Minor Height Variation Permit 2-84; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding
Minor Heiaht Variation Permit 2-84:
1. That the height variation is for a non-habitable architectural
feature.
2. That the height variation is appropriate for the character
and integrity of the neighborhood.
3. That the height variation is appropriate for the architectural
style of the building.
4. That the height variation does not significantly impair
the primary view from any property located with 300 feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City
of Seal Beach does hereby approve Minor Height Variation Permit 2-84.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Sea 1 Beach at a meeting thereof he 1 d on the 18th day of Jul y
1984 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Goldenberg. Covington. Jessner. Hunt
NOES: Commissioners None
ABSENT: Commissioners Perri.n
~~~
Chairman of the P a g Commission