Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2006-06-07 City of Seal Beach Planning CommISSion' Agenda of June 7, 2006 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Agenda for June 7, 2006 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II ROLL CALL 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. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one motion unless pnor 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 May 17, 2006. 2 Minor Plan Review 06-5 3580 Aster Street Applicant/Owner: Wanda and Dan Crowley Request. To construct a BBQ and counter structure up to 48 inches in height to be located approximately 1 foot from the side property line, where the Code requires a 5-foot side setback, and approximately 8 feet 5 Inches from the rear property line, where the Code requires a 10-foot rear setback, 1 City of Seal Beach Planmng Commission. Agenda of June 7, 2006 Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-20. VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS VII PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 Conditional Use Permit 06-4 132 - 13th Street Applicant/Owner Scott L. Levitt I Bollen Family Trust Request: Approval of a parcel map to legally combine two lots into one parcel for the purpose of creating two airspace condominiums. The proposal conforms to the density requirements of 7 units per 2,500 square feet of lot area in District 1, Residential High Density (RHO) Zone A Conditional Use Permit is required for condominiums Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-21 and 06-22, respectively. VIII STAFF CONCERNS IX COMMISSION CONCERNS X. ADJOURNMENT Jun 21 Jul05 Jul19 Aug 09 Aug 23 Sep 06 Sep 20 Oct 04 Oct 18 Noy 08 Noy 22 Dee 06 Dee 20 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission. Agenda of June 7, 2006 2006 Aaenda Forecast Minor Plan Review 06-6 - 921 Blue Heron Minor Plan Review 06-7 - 4564 Dogwood Avenue CUP 05-6 (Indefinite Extension) - 148-F Main Street (Fysicly Fit) 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 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 Minutes of June 7,2006 Acting Chairperson Deaton called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7'30 p m on Wednesday, June 7, 2006 The meeting was held In the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag 1 ROLL CALL Present Acting Chairperson Deaton, Commissioners Ladner and Roberts Also Present Deoartment of Develooment Services Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Christy Teague, Senior Planner Alexander Abbe, ASSistant City Attorney Absent Commissioner O'Malley Mr Whittenberg Indicated that Commissioner O'Malley had reported that he would not be present at tOnight's meeting due to Illness, and It would be appropriate to make a motion to excuse hiS absence MOTION by Roberts, SECOND by Ladner to excuse Commissioner O'Malley from tonight's meeting MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-0-1 Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None O'Malley AGENDA APPROVAL Commissioner Roberts requested that Item No 2 be removed from the Consent Calendar for further diSCUSSion MOTION by Deaton, SECOND by Roberts to approve the Agenda as presented MOTION CARRIED: 3 - 0 - 1 AYES: Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts 1 These Minutes were transcnbed from audiotape of the meeting Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 NOES: ABSENT: None O'Malley ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Acting Chairperson Deaton opened oral commUnications David Rosenman expressed his concern regarding the 13th Street project and the appearance of any undue Influence, as the applicant, Scott Levitt, his father, Councilman Michael Levitt, and Commissioner Ladner conducted a conversation tonight In the presence of the public within Council Chambers and could give the appearance of an Impropriety MitZI Morton agreed with Mr Rosenman comments She said having council members present at a Planning CommiSSion public hearing has never taken place before Joyce parque displayed a copy of a flyer taped to mailboxes up and down the street and stated that this IS a violation of a person's right to come before the Planning Commission (PC) She stated that If residents wish to have the City Code changed, they should follow the proper channels There being no one else wishing to speak, Acting Chairperson Deaton closed oral commUnicatIons. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2006 MOTION by Roberts, SECOND by Ladner to approve the Consent Calendar as amended MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-0-1 Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None O'Malley 2 Minor Plan Review 06-5 3580 Aster Street AppllcanUOwner Wanda and Dan Crowley Request To construct a BBQ and counter structure up to 48 Inches In height to be located approximately 1 foot from the side property line, where the Code requires a 5-foot side setback, Page 2 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 CIty of Seal Beach Planmng CommIssion Meetmg MInutes of June 7, 2006 and approximately 8 feet 5 Inches from the rear property line, where the Code requires a 10-foot rear setback, Recommendation Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-20 Commissioner Roberts asked If the BBQ IS to be 5 feet high or 48 Inches high Mr Whittenberg stated that Resolution 06-20 should reflect 48 Inches as the height of the BBQ Commissioner Roberts then asked which of the two sets of plans submitted IS the correct one. Ms Teague stated that the plan that IS separate from the Staff Report IS the correct one MOTION by Roberts, SECOND by Ladner to approve Minor Plan Review 06-5 and adopt of Resolution 06-20 as presented MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-0-1 Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None O'Malley Mr Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No 06-20 begins a 10-day calendar appeal penod to the City Council The Commissioner action tOnight IS final and the appeal penod begins tomorrow morning SCHEDULED MATTERS None PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 Conditional Use Permit 06-4 132 - 13th Street AppllcanUOwner Scott L Levitt I Bollen Family Trust Request Approval of a parcel map to legally combine two lots Into one parcel for the purpose of creating two airspace condominiums The proposal conforms to the density reqUirements of 1 Unit per 2,178 square feet of lot area and the minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet per Unit In the Dlstnct 1, ReSidential High Density (RHD) Zone A Conditional Use Permit IS required for condominiums Page 3 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Planmng Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 Recommendation Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-21 and 06-22, respectively Staff Report Ms Teague delivered the staff report (Staff Report IS on file for inspection In the Planning Department) She provided some background Information on this Item and stated that the proposed development meets all zOning standards for denSity, setbacks, and height for the construction on the two-lot property under single ownership She said that the applicant proposes to create one lot, In thiS case to construct two condominiums for separate ownership, which requires approval of a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) and condominiums require approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) by the Planning CommiSSion (PC) She noted that the two applications must be considered together The Senior Planner then reViewed the height limits for the Residentral HIgh DenSity (RHD) Zone, noting that In Dlstnct 1, when a lot IS up to 37 5 feet Wide the height limit IS 2 stones, 25 feet maXimum, and for lots greater than 37 5 feet Wide the height limit IS 2 stones, 25 feet maximum In the front half of the Jot, and the rear half IS permitted to be 3 stones, 35 feet maximum She noted that the Code does not specify height limits based on the number of dwelling Units She said that With the ability to construct 3 stones on a 50-foot Wide property, more bUilding square footage could be constructed than bUilding one Unit on each 25-foot Wide property She said that Staff has researched Similar properties In that area of Old Town and found 48 properties that are 50 feet or Wider Of these only 6 lots have three-story structures, and each of these structures was granted a Vanance She noted that the pnmary Issue In thiS case IS neighborhood compatibility, and since there have been no Similar condominiums constructed In the Old Town Dlstnct 1, the matter of consistency should be considered, as thiS IS becoming more of a community concern Within thiS dlstnct She indicated that due to these concerns, the PC has denied four Height Vanatlons (HV) for Covered Roof Access Structure(s) (CRAS) In the last 2 years, and on Apn119, 2006, a study session on manSIOnlZatlon was conducted by the PC With reSidents of Old Town expressing their opposition to three-story structures Within Dlstnct 1 Ms Teague noted that City Code does allow three-story structures on lots of thiS size She stated that the TPM as submitted does conform to the City's General Plan (GP) She then explained some of the modifications to the plans that the PC could recommend In order to deem thiS project acceptable The Senior Planner reiterated that the main Issue With CUP 06-4 would be compatibility, and since there has previously been no Similar project submitted, Staff makes no recommendations on the determination of the PC She then Indicated that Staff received two letters In OppOSition to thiS application and copies were proVided to the PC Ms Teague then prOVided a bnef PowerPolnt presentation of photographs of the lots along and surrounding 13th Street that could bUild up to 35 feet on the rear portion of the lot (Presentation IS on file for inspection In the Planning Department) CommiSSioner Roberts asked that Ms Teague prOVide a definition of "airspace condominium" Mr Whittenberg explained that With airspace condominiums, the ownership that a person has of hiS or her Unit IS most tYPically of the Intenor walls of the Page 4 of 13 CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 Unit from ceiling to floor, with the outside walls, the roof, and the yard areas owned 2 under a homeowners association with common maintenance responsibilities to ensure 3 consistent maintenance of the extenor appearance He noted that he had explained to 4 the applicant that with a PC of 4 members, a 2-2 vote would constitute a denial He 5 explained that at one time City ordinances had required 3 affirmative votes by the PC 6 for approval of any action, but this IS no longer the case 7 8 Commissioner Deaton inqUired about the public noticing Ms Teague stated that public 9 notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the 10 project site, and the notice was also published In the Sun Newspaper 11 12 Commissioner Ladner asked If there IS a separation between the two condominiums 13 Ms Teague stated that the two Units are slde-by-slde and are under the same roof 14 She added that the RHD Zone requires a 5-foot side setback for the 50-foot wide lots 15 16 Commissioner Roberts asked what the front and rear setbacks are Ms Teague stated 17 that the front setback for the RHD Zone IS a 12 foot average and the rear setback IS 9 18 feet 19 20 Public Hearina 21 22 Acting Chairperson Deaton opened the public heanng 23 24 Scott Levitt, stated that he represents the Limited Liability Company (LLC) that IS the 25 applicant for this project He questioned why Staff just Included a small section of Old 26 Town In their visual presentation, and In all fairness, all of Old Town should be 27 considered, as he IS certain not every person present tOnight lives Within the boundanes 28 of the areas presented He c1anfled that he IS not seeking a Vanance of any kind He 29 stated that he read the ZOning Code and had the plans specifically tailored to these 30 requirements He noted that were he bUilding a duplex With the same archItectural 31 plans, he would not have required any discretionary approval He said that he Wishes to 32 bUild a project where he can live In one Unit and sell the other, and In this respect he will 33 be able to afford to live In Seal Beach He noted that If he chose, he could construct a 34 10,000 square foot single-family residence (SFR) on this site or two, 2-story slngle- 35 family residences (SFR) on 7,549 square feet, Without any review by the PC He 36 provided a spreadsheet listing similar projects throughout Old Town and calculated the 37 ratio between livable square feet versus lot Size, and noted that most of these structures 38 were bUilt In the 1960's and early 70's He stated that hiS project would have 5-foot side 39 setbacks With a lot coverage ratio under 66%, which IS less than the 75% ratio allowed 40 He noted that there are approximately 13 other condominium projects recently sold 41 Within Seal Beach and cited several examples of this He then read Into the record 42 comments made by the Director of Development Services as they appear on Pages 9- 43 10 of the minutes of Apnl 19, 2006 from the study session on the tOpiC of 44 Manslonlzatlon as follows 45 Page 5 of 13 CIty of Seal Beach Planmng CommIssIon MeetIng Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 " . m the opimon of Staff. the pattern of existing development, lot sizes 2 and related setback and lot coverage reqUirements are sufficient enough 3 that the perceIVed impacts of new home construction is substantially 4 reduced Modlftcatlons to roof style provIsions for the front of the 5 structure, even within the Old Town RMO and RHO zones, would have 6 some slgmftcant Impacts on reducing the perceIVed bulk along the street 7 frontage" 8 9 "Commissioner Ladner asked If the lot coverage ratio would change If a 1 0 property were made up of two lots Mr. Whittenberg stated that you 11 cannot bUild across a property Ime unless you apply for a parcel map to 12 create one lot, m which case, the reqUirements for Side yard setbacks 13 increase in size " 14 15 Mr LeVitt stated that increasing the setbacks to 5 feet helps compensate for the shadow 16 from higher structures He then referred to new plans prepared with a 30 percent 17 reduction In the 3rd floor and In the overall square footage so that the condominiums 18 would be more compatible with the surrounding homes He then presented photos of a 19 Similar Unit at 329 10th Street, constructed within the last 6 months, and others at 122 20 11th Street, and 112 8th Street He noted that all of approximately 100 owners of 21 properties In Old Town measunng 37 5 feet Wide are able to construct a three-story 22 structure on the rear 50 percent of the property 23 24 Joe SCibelli spoke In favor of replaCing SIX rental Units With two Single-family reSidences 25 and redUCing parking Impacts He stated that property owners Within Seal Beach would 26 rather have an owner as a neighbor than a renter 27 28 Joyce Parque stated that she is the real estate agent for the seller She said that the 29 proposed project conforms to City Code and should be granted approval 30 31 Bruce Boehm, 131 14th Street, stated that hiS home IS directly across the alley from the 32 proposed proJect. He stated that a three-story, monolithiC condominium complex In the 33 middle of the block, surrounded by one and two-story small reSidential income 34 properties would be incompatible With the neighborhood He noted that thiS represents 35 another case of a developer attempting to change the character of the neighborhood In 36 order to maXimize hiS profit at the expense of nelghbonng property owners He stated 37 that the City needs to change the Code to limit construction of homes Within Old Town 38 to two-stones With a maximum height of 25 feet regardless of the lot Size, or limit three- 39 story structures to the avenues or Main Street, and livable square footage should also 40 be limited Mr Boehm also Indicated that the City should require 4 garage parking 41 spaces that open to the alley for lots that are 5,500 square feet or larger He noted that 42 Mr LeVitt's proposal limits parking to one, 448-square foot two-car garage He stated 43 that a tandem garage IS no substItute for the current 4-car garages that each open to 44 the alley. He said he would have no problem With thiS plan If It were for two-story 45 homes He recommended denial of Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 2006-160 and 46 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 06-4 Page 6 of 13 City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meelmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 Nancy Smith, 127 13th Street, saId that she has two 50-foot wide lots and will be 2 presenting plans to the Planning Commission (PC) for adding on to her home She 3 explained that she has an approximate 1,500 square foot home that has gotten too 4 small for her family She noted that several architects attempted to convince her to 5 construct a large, three story home, but she does not feel that she can agree to this and 6 continue to live In this neighborhood She said that her new home will measure 2,800 7 square feet and will be 25 feet high She discouraged the granting of any kind of 8 Variance and recommended denial of TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4 Commissioner 9 Deaton clarified that the PC IS considering approval of a CUP and not a Variance 10 11 Jim Cavlola, 1117 Ocean Avenue, expressed his Opposition to the CUP process and to 12 thIs application He said that all that IS happening IS that the applicant IS trying to make 13 a profit He stated that homes no longer have 15-foot front setbacks and the new 14 homes are being bUilt to cover the entire lot He noted that only after a person's name 15 is offiCially on the property deed, should he or she be allowed to submit an application of 16 thiS kind 17 18 Bill Ayres, 707 Central Avenue, recommended denial of TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4 19 as thiS would set a bad precedent He said that thiS type of project belongs In 20 Huntington Beach and IS really all about money and would set a precedent that would 21 rUin the uniqueness of Seal Beach 22 23 David Rosenman stated hiS concerns over the precedent thiS would set, and said thiS 24 would lead to manSIOnlZatlon of many properties In Old Town He said that perhaps 25 City Council should review the Issue of manSIOnlZatlon more directly prior to making a 26 deCISion on a project of thiS type He cautioned that allOWing the loss of many of the 27 moderate Income homes In town would eliminate an Important cross section of the 28 community that keeps Seal Beach what It IS He recommended denial of thiS 29 application Mr Rosenman then commented that the City would be lOSing a very 30 valuable employee With Christy Teague leaVing the City to accept employment With the 31 City of Dana POint Commissioner Roberts stated that the PC was In agreement With 32 thiS 33 34 Melinda Howell VOiced her opposition to TPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4 She said that 35 she loves Seal Beach because It IS stili a beach community and big homes do not 36 belong here She said that when recently vIsiting Balboa Island, she spoke With a real 37 estate agent who has lived there for 40 years, who commented about a time when you 38 could open the doors and Windows to your home and fresh air would blow through the 39 house, but now more homes are reqUiring the Installation of air conditioning because 40 neighbOring homes are so big and so high that air IS not Circulating between them Ms 41 Howell questioned how a CUP could be granted to a project like thiS when once It IS 42 constructed It cannot be changed 43 44 MitZI Morton, 153 13th Street, stated that her family moved to Seal Beach In 1958 and 45 owns a 50-foot Wide lot She said that they constructed a triplex on half of the lot, as 46 thiS was then the trend She said that they had the option to add another triplex, but Page 7 of 13 CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 chose not to do so and now have 25 feet of open space, which turned out to be a good 2 decIsion, as her neIghbor has constructed a "monstrous" two-story house that has 3 rUined her 25-foot lot She Indicated that after receiving notice of thiS project and 4 discovering that these were to be three-story structures, she and other 13 h Street 5 residents canvassed the neighborhood and found that no one was aware that these 6 condominiums were to be three stories high She noted that 95 percent of those 7 canvassed were opposed to having three story structures on thiS street She stated that 8 on 13th Street alone there are seven 50-foot wide lots, and approval of such a project 9 would have a serious Impact upon thiS neighborhood and would set an undesirable 10 precedent She recommended denial ofTPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4 11 12 Carla Watson, 1635 Catalina Avenue, stated she IS a 44-year resident of Seal Beach 13 and has been Involved with many community causes throughout the years and now 14 wants to speak regarding preserving Old Town She indicated that what has happened 15 with Seal Beach IS an embarrassment as the Old Town atmosphere IS being eroded 16 She noted that developers and incomIng resIdents are not taking a look at the 17 neighborhood and conSidering the compatibility and preservation of the community 18 enVIronment She said she believes rental properties are Important In Seal Beach 19 because they are a part of the commUnity climate and provide a diversity of residents 20 She encouraged the PC to deny thiS request 21 22 Richard Moody, 312 13th Street, spoke In opposition to thiS application noting that he 23 lives on a large lot In a 900 square foot house with a nice back yard He noted that next 24 door there IS a three-story "mansion" so that all he sees from his lot IS house, and he 25 now has to Install air conditioning since he no longer gets any air circulation as the large 26 structure blocks the wind He recommended denial 27 28 Commissioner Deaton paused to request a show of hands of those present In favor and 29 In opposition ofTPM 2006-160 and CUP 06-4 30 31 VIC Grgas, 211 15th Street, spoke In OppOSition He stated that hiS 37 5-foot wide lot 32 prOVides 3 garages for a single-family residence (SFR) and the City should conSider 33 increasing the parking requirements for these larger homes He noted that the 13th 34 Street LLC Includes Councilman Michael LeVitt as a member, and he would have to 35 recuse himself from taking any action at the Council level on thiS application He 36 Indicated that allOWing a third story on the rear of 37 5-foot Wide lots was Intended to 37 prOVide additional living space for only one SFR per lot He stated If the applicant wants 38 to construct one SFR on a 37 5-wlde lot, he would encourage the PC to require 39 additional parking, otherwise the applicant should construct two, 25-foot high Units and 40 prOVide adequate parking for each unit 41 42 Gem West, 1301 ElectriC Avenue, presented petitions with 87 signatures In OppOSition 43 to thIS project She referred to Government Code (GC) 66424 and the diSCUSSion 44 regarding TPMs on Page 2 of the Staff Report She asked that someone show her 45 where GC 66424 states that two parcels can be JOined together to create one Mr Abbe 46 stated that there IS a pre-existing building spanning two lots, and when such a case Page 8 of 13 CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg MInutes of June 7, 2006 1 predates the enactment of the SubdivIsion Map Act, the practice of the City IS to allow 2 another bUilding to span the two lots Ms West stated that the GC refers to subdividing 3 a lot and not consolidating two lots Into one Commissioner Deaton suggested that Mr 4 Abbe research this Information and present his comments after the public hearing 5 6 Warren Morton, 153 13th Street, stated that the residents of Seal Beach do not want 7 these three-story structures He said that air space IS needed and residents don't want 8 Seal Beach to look like Surf side He recommended denral 9 10 Barbara Barton, 415 Ocean Avenue, said that she and her husband have lived In Seal 11 Beach since 1965 She noted that at that time It was a very small, quaint beach 12 communrty, and she does not want this to change She recommended denral and said 13 that residents need to see air, sunrises, sunsets, and hOrizons 14 15 Scott LeVitt, speaking In rebuttal, presented plans showing the elevation views of the 16 proposed condomlnrums and noted the With a 12-foot setback, a 10-foot sidewalk, a 30- 17 foot wide street, and a 10-foot sidewalk across the street, an indiVidual could look up 18 and would stili not see the third floor of the proposed condomlnrums He noted the 19 amount of open space there IS between the condominiums, and said that the alley view 20 could also be shown on the plans He then explained that the project will Include two, 2- 21 car garages, and noted that the number of cars will be reduced from what currently 22 eXists for the slx-unrt apartment structure He reiterated that he IS not requestIng a 23 Variance and Indicated that hiS family moved to Seal Beach when he was 7 years old, 24 and he lived here for 24 years, and comes to Seal Beach every weekend He clarified 25 that this IS a cash-funded project and he is not seeking funding to complete It He 26 added that it IS not the bUSiness of the public or the PC whether the LLC will or will not 27 profit from this project He emphaSized that he IS not seeking any type of Vanance for 28 any option that does not comply With City bUilding standards, and he has reduced the 29 third floor structure by 25 percent He commented that everyone has their own Idea of 30 what a neighborhood should be, and unfortunately, Old Town Seal Beach IS not a 31 homeowners aSSOCiation, and all he wants to do IS bUild what he IS legally allowed to 32 bUIld He added that If people are concerned about the bUIlding of larger homes, they 33 should have spoken up over 3 years ago when the 8,000 square foot homes began 34 gOing up along Ocean Avenue He requested that the PC grant approval to this 35 application Commissioner Roberts stated that In Mr LeVitt's comparison spreadsheet 36 he states that on a 50 x 117 5 foot lot the allowable square feet for the first floor IS 37 3,860, but that the proposed first floor measures only 2, 862 square feet He asked that 38 With the side and rear setbacks, where would the additional 1,000 square feet be Mr 39 LeVitt stated that the architect has computed this and perhaps Ms Teague could 40 respond to this Ms Teague explained that bUilding Within the required setbacks on the 41 first floor would allow 3,860 sq ft Commissioner Roberts asked If the third story were 42 denred, what kind of financial Impact would this create for Mr LeVitt? Mr LeVitt stated 43 that he has not run the numbers on a two-story proJect, as he deSigned the home to be 44 hiS dream house and planned on liVing In a three-story home Commissioner Roberts 45 asked If he were to have the option of selling both unrts, would he stili complete the 46 project Mr LeVitt said that he would not Commissioner Roberts Inquired about the Page 9 of 13 CIty of Seal Beach Planmng CommIssIon MeetIng Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 proposed lot coverage of 70 percent as listed In Mr Levitt's Application for Public 2 Heanng Mr Levitt stated that the project had been scaled down to 66 percent lot 3 coverage Commissioner Roberts noted that with the proposed project qUite a bit of 4 open space IS being traded for bUildings, and the 66 percent does not reflect thiS He 5 said that his position on thiS project IS to proceed without approval of the CUP permitting 6 the third story Mr Levitt stated that he has not seen the petition and has no Idea what 7 these people were told 8 9 There being no one else wishing to speak, Acting Chairperson Deaton closed the public 10 heanng 11 12 Mr Whittenberg noted that the Assistant City Attorney IS ready to respond to the 13 concern expressed by Ms Gem West Mr Abbe referred to Page 2 of the Staff Report, 14 which states that generally parcel maps are used for the creation of additional lots under 15 the SubdivIsion Map Act (SMA), however, In thiS case one lot IS being created with a 16 parcel map He explained that In thiS case air space IS being divided Into different lots 17 With regard to Government Code 66424, which IS a part of the SMA and simply defines 18 subdivIsion, and does state that subdivIsion does Include a condominium project, which 19 IS the division of air space He noted that he had spoken to the City Attorney about 20 whether an additional merger were required In thiS Situation, but was told that It IS not a 21 reqUirement, as there IS already a bUilding on the lot 22 23 Mr Whittenberg then provided responses to some of the comments made as follows 24 25 1 Commissioner Roberts questions regarding the percentage of Impervious surface as 26 noted on the Application for Public Heanng - ThiS IS something that the City IS 27 required to have In order to comply With Water Quality Control Board proviSions on 28 water quality and drainage from properties 29 30 2 What IS the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) conditiOning? - TYPically what IS 31 conditioned under a condominium project IS the requirement to provIde for revIew by 32 the City the Covenants, Conditions & Restnctlons (CC&Rs) for the operation and 33 maintenance of a condominium development After approval by the City the CC&Rs 34 are then submitted to the State Department of Real Estate to ensure that they meet 35 the City'S concerns as to how overall maintenance of the property IS to be 36 conducted Also, a specific site development plan for that development must be 37 approved so If In the future the owners Wished to add a room, they would have to 38 apply for approval of a new CUP and seek discretionary approval to revise the 39 previously approved condominium plan 40 41 3 Regarding the public notrce not Including Information on the proposal of a third story, 42 the City does not notice for Items that comply With City ZOning Standards and that 43 require no dlscretronary approval On properties that are 37 5 feet wide, by nght the 44 property owner can construct a third story on the rear half of the lot In thiS case 45 there IS a by nght type of use that IS subject to discretionary approval because of the 46 type of ownership for the property being requested Page 10 of 13 City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 1 4 Why did Staff not look at all of the 37 5 or 50-foot wide lots throughout Old Town? - 2 The CUP process IS one that deals with compatibility to the neighborhood so Staff 3 took an approach that Included only the Immediate neighborhood for 13th Street, 4 which Included the neighborhood bounded by Main Street, Electnc Avenue, Ocean 5 Avenue, and Seal Beach Boulevard He noted that Staff would take thiS same 6 position regarding compatibility for any proposed project beyond the west side of 7 Main Street 8 9 5 Based upon tOnight's discussion Staff would probably have to change some of ItS 10 thinking regarding how to deal With the Issue of manSIOnlzatlon for lots Within Old 11 Town that are wider than 37 5 feet 12 13 Commissioner Comments 14 15 Commissioner Deaton stated that thiS project must comply With the City's General Plan 16 (GP), and In reviewing the GP over and over It refers to the objective of retaining a small 17 town character In Seal Beach She then read from the General Plan as follows 18 19 Introduction on Page 4 20 21 "The City has been perceived as havmg a small town feel With a 22 small town like population ThiS concept shall be preserved and enhanced 23 for the future prosperity of the City as suggested by the General Plan 24 Committee" 25 26 Page LU-36 27 28 "People have been attracted to Seal Beach pnmanly due to ItS 29 umque geographical location, educational opportumty, attractive beaches, 30 Ideal climate, and small town fnendly character. A goal of the City IS to 31 mamtain and promote those social and phYSical qualities that enhance the 32 quality of the community and enVironment m which we live." 33 34 Page LU-37 35 36 "the City Will contmue to provide support for ItS reSidents, maintam ItS 37 infrastructure, and provide jobs and housing balance while stili mamtammg 38 ItS small town atmosphere " 39 40 She continued by stating that the PC IS not concerned WIth profit or fInancing and 41 everyone deserves the nght to "make a buck" She said that what the PC IS concerned 42 With IS maintaining the small town atmosphere With no more shadows and trying to raise 43 plants With no sunlight and having to Install air conditiOning because the ocean breeze 44 IS blocked She stated that thiS IS what happens when three-story homes are 45 constructed, She noted that thiS may be unfortunate timing for the applicant as the PC 46 has been studYing the Issue of manslonization and receiving feedback from residents Page 11 of13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 7, 2006 saYing "please allow no more third stones, whether for single-family resIdence, duplexes, or whatever" She said that she personally sent a plea to City Council to begin the process of changing the City Code She stated that Old Town IS beginning to look like a cookie cutter Truman Show style town, and what residents want IS a small town, fnendly atmosphere She noted that the Issue IS not square footage as such, but bulk and Integnty of the community She said she would like to make a motion to approve the condominium concept, but a project that will be In keeping With a small town community She indicated that she believes you can have a lovely home and live In the community Without changing the community In order to do so She moved that the PC direct Staff to prepare a resolution approving thiS project conditioned upon a two-story structure Mr Abbe requested that a condition also be added stating that approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-4 would be contingent upon City CounCil approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160, because If the PC approved CUP 06-4 and City CounCil denies approval of TPM 2006-160, thiS could create "a strange legal limbo" MOTION by Deaton, SECOND by Roberts to approve Conditional Use Permit 06-4 With the condition that the condominium structure be restncted to two-stones Approval would also be contingent upon City CounCil approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-0-1 Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None O'Malley Mr Abbe adVised that the approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-4 IS a final deCISion of the Planning CommiSSion, and the 10-day calendar appeal penod to the City CounCil Will begin after adoption of Resolution 06-22 at the Planning CommiSSion meeting of June 21, 2006 MOTION by Roberts, SECOND by Ladner to recommend approval to City CounCil of Tentative Parcel Map 2006-160 and adopt Resolution 06-21 as presented MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3-0-1 Deaton, Ladner, and Roberts None O'Malley Mr Whittenberg indicated that Staff would return With the formal Resolution Nos 06-21 and 06-22 for adoption at the Planning CommiSSion meeting of June 21, 2006 He adVised that adoption of Resolution No 06-22 would begin a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council and the CommiSSioner action would be final With the appeal penod beginning the morning after adoption Mr Abbe adVised that the publiC heanng on these Items IS closed and there would be no additional public comment taken at the meeting of June 21, 2006 Page 12 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 City of Sea/ Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2006 STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg reported that the Senior Planner, Chnsty Teague, has accepted a position with the City of Dana POint as the Economic Development Manager He noted that she would be present at the meeting of June 21, 2006. He congratulated Ms. Teague and stated that It has been a pleasure to work with her and she Will be missed COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Roberts referred to a letter received by the Planning Commission from Steve and May Smith at 520 Ocean Avenue and noted that a response from the City was forwarded to Mr. & Mrs Smith. He said that the letter related to the issue of landscaping and blockage of neighbonng views. He recommended that this issue be forwarded to City Council for direction on how to address this He said that this Issue has previously come before the PC, but he would like to hear from City CouncIl. Mr. Whittenberg recommended placing this on a future agenda as a discussion item Commissioner Ladner asked if the City had any authonty regarding what residents plant in their yards. Mr Whittenberg stated that this is ultimately a policy deCISion. He said that some cities do have regulations that deal with this. Mr. Abbe added that If shrubbery IS overgrown or is a nUisance it can be abated Commissioner Deaton stated that any policy regarding manSlonlzatlon should reflect elimination of third stones and she also requested that City Council provide direction on how to proceed as far as cleaning up the Code on the issue of third stones Mr. Whittenberg stated that this could also be placed on the next agenda for discussion ADJOURNMENT Acting Chairperson Deaton adjourned the meeting at 9 25 P m. Respectfully Submitted, C\Q_~ \)~~ Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary Planning Department APPROVAL The Commission on June 21, 2006, ap~~ the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, June 7, 2006 . Page 13 of 13