HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2009-01-12 #VAGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 12, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: DETERMINATION REGARDING REFERENDUM ON
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1576 -TITLE 11, ZONING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
City Council to provide direction to Staff regarding actions relative to Title 11,
Zoning. The City Council has the following options to consider:
1. Repeal Ordinance Number 1576, which would repeal Title 11, Zoning;
or
2. Call for and set the date for an election regarding approval of
Ordinance Number 1576; or
3. Continue consideration of this matter to a future City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
On August 11, 2008 the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 1576 amending
the Seal Beach Municipal Code by deleting Chapter 28, Zoning, in its entirety
and adopting a new Title 11, Zoning. The group "Save Our Seal Beach, Inc."
("SOSB") was opposed to the ordinance and circulated a referendum petition
protesting the adoption of Ordinance Number 1576. The petitions were
submitted to the City Clerk on September 10, 2008. The required number of
signatures on the petitions was verified and certified by the Orange County
Registrar of Voters. At the October 13, 2008 City Council meeting the council
continued the matter until after the November 4, 2008 General Municipal
Election.
Approximately 7 years ago, the City Council directed staff to re-codify the entire
Municipal Code to: (1) make the Code a "user friendly" document; (2) eliminate
outdated or superseded provisions; and (3) amend the Code to be consistent
with applicable laws adopted after the last recodification. As of 2008, the Council
has adopted the entire new Municipal Code, with the exception of Title 11,
Zoning.
Agenda Item V
Page 2
Title 11 is a complete revision of the City's Zoning Code and is intended to reflect
the most appropriate and best available development regulations and standards
to meet the desires of the community regarding future development within the
City. Such a comprehensive revision has not been adopted since 1974. There
have been significant changes to the law and the community since 1974.
In addition to the above-stated goals regarding the recodification of the Municipal
Code (creating auser-friendly document, modernizing the Code and adapting to
new laws), the Council directed staff to streamline the Zoning Code and, in
particular, streamline the development review process. As the Council is aware,
the Coastal Commission adds an additional layer of review for coastal
communities. The Coastal Permit application process can add considerable
expense and time to the process. Accordingly, Title 11 includes significant
procedural and development regulation standards that do not currently exist in
the present Zoning Code. Such standards are designed to accommodate the
needs of the community. For instance, the new Title 11 includes an
"Administrative Use Permit" approval process that would allow the Director of
Development Services to review and approve several types of discretionary land
use approvals that are currently reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission. Having the Director approve certain entitlements rather than the
Planning Commission significantly reduces the length of time between
application submittal and approval, and the costs associated with an application.
There are other changes developed to respond to the needs of the Seal Beach
community and to a world that has changed since 1974.
Title 11 does not propose any amendments to the basic lot size, density and
building intensity, setback, lot coverage, height, parking, and sign regulations of
the current zoning Code, except as noted below. Likewise, there are no changes
to allowable and discretionary land uses within the City, other than minor uses
such a news stands and kiosks.
1. A 15-foot rear yard setback is proposed for the RLD-9 district for 2-
story portions of residential structures, and a 10-foot rear yard setback
for a single story portion of a residence may be allowed by
Administrative Use Permit. Currently a 10-foot rear yard setback is
required, and the residential structure can be 2-stories in height up to
the 10-foot rear yard setback line (see Section 11.2.015.F, RLD-9
District -Minimum Rear Yards).
2. A 75% and 80% ratio of second story building area to first floor building
area is established for the RLD-0 and RMD-18 districts, respectively,
that does not currently exist (see Table 11.2.05.015, Development
Standards for Residential Districts);
3. Increases required off-street parking for residences having more than 5
bedrooms by requiring 1 additional off-street parking space for each
additional bedroom over 5 bedrooms. Currently all residential uses are
Page 3
required to provide 2 parking spaces, irrespective of the number of
bedrooms (see Table 11.4.20.015.A.1, Required Parking),
Title 11 does not contain:
1. Any residential "floor area ratio" provisions, except for existing
provisions in the "Limited Commercial/Residential Medium Density"
zoning district, a mixed use district that allows for residential and
commercial developments on the same property;
2. Any residential "building envelope" provisions, except for existing
provisions in the "Limited Commercial/Residential Medium Density"
zoning district, a mixed use district that allows for residential and
commercial developments on the same property;
3. The new uniform maximum height limit of 25 feet for residential
development in "Old Town" adopted by the voters at the November
election.
In the absence of an election, any proposed change to any provision of the
zoning ordinance may be challenged on the basis that the proposed change is
"substantially the same" as Ordinance Number 1576. SOSB has already
questioned one proposed revision to Chapter 28, Zoning, advocated by the
Chamber and businesses, which would relax certain parking standards.
If the Council were to repeal Ordinance Number 1576, the City would have to
wait a full year before reconsidering its adoption. And, at that time, there's no
guarantee that a new referendum petition would not be circulated, which, if it
qualifies, would again postpone adoption and keep the 1974 Zoning Code in
place for another extended period of time.
ANALYSIS OF CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS:
The City Council now has the following options to consider regarding this matter:
1. Repeal Ordinance Number 1576 (Title 11, Zoning);
^ The City Council could not enact the same ordinance for one year
after its repeal.
^ The City Council may adopt other ordinances related to zoning as
long as the new ordinance is not "substantially the same" as
Ordinance Number 1576.
The Council may be aware that a SOSB principal has already challenged a
proposed zoning text amendment to Chapter 28 relaxing parking standards on
the basis that it is "substantially the same" as Ordinance Number 1576.
Page 4
2. Call for and set the date for a Special Election:
^ The City Council may decide to call an election tonight or call the
election at a later City Council meeting.
^ The City Council can call a Special Election and submit the
ordinance to the voters (the earliest date would be 88 days
from the date the Council calls the election; due to
scheduling issues, staff recommends April 14, 2009 if the
City Council wants to set a special election date now).
^ If the State of California determines to hold an election in
2009, the City Council can determine to consolidate with
Orange County as part of the scheduled state election. At
this time is uncertain if the State will call an election, and if
so, if Orange County would have any measures on the ballot
at that time.
^ Please note that if the City Council determines that an
election should be held regarding Ordinance Number 1576,
the Council has the option of adding other measures on the
ballot (for either a special election or potentially at a
consolidated election).
3. Continuation of this matter to a future City Council meeting:
^ The City Council may defer taking any action at this time. Chapter
28, Zoning, of the Seal Beach Municipal Code would continue to be
in effect. Title 11, Zoning, would be stayed from implementation
and enforcement.
POSSIBLE PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAM:
The City has expended an extensive amount of time and effort to update the
Zoning Code of the City. At last count, there were over 16 publicly noticed study
sessions, workshops and hearings, over a two year period, to provide the public
an opportunity to learn about the proposed changes and to participate in the
process. Nevertheless, the Council may want to consider additional public
outreach regarding the zoning code provisions. The purpose of this extended
outreach would be to more fully explain the provisions and respond to community
questions in a workshop format.
If the City Council wishes to proceed with the community workshop concept, it is
suggested that it consist of the following major components:
^ Neighborhood oriented public workshops:
^ Staff to conduct a series of at least 6 public workshops in the Old
Town, Hill, College Park East and College Park West neighborhoods
(3 workshops each for the Old Town/Hill area and for the College park
East/College Park West areas);
Page 5
^ Staff to conduct a series of at least 3 public workshops in Leisure
World;
^ Staff to conduct at least 1 public workshop in Surfside.
^ Staff to conduct at least 2 public workshops
community/Chamber of Commerce.
^ Enhanced public outreach documents:
^ Staff to prepare a series of public outreach documents that review the
basic purpose and intent of updating the Zoning Code oriented to set
forth the differences between the current Zoning Code and proposed
Title 11 regarding residential and commercial development projects.
^ Staff to prepare a series of presentation materials that will be available
on the City's web page for review by interested persons oriented to set
forth the differences between the current Zoning Code and proposed
Title 11 regarding residential and commercial development projects.
If the Council wants to consider additional public workshops, we would then
explore how to conduct such workshops in accordance with applicable law and
propose a format at the next council meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The City Clerk has estimated the costs of a Special Election to be between
$50,000 and $70,000, and said election would be a city-wide, mail-in ballot only
election. If the State holds a special election in 2009, and if the City has the
ability to consolidate as discussed above and the costs may be slightly less.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council has the following options to consider:
1. Repeal Ordinance Number 1576, which repeals Title 11, Zoning; or
2. Call for and set the date for an election regarding approval of
Ordinance Number 1576; or
3. Continue consideration of this matter to a future City Council meeting.
SUBMITTED BY:
e Whitt hberg
Director of Development Services
NOTED AND APPROVED:
19+~ !I
David Carm ny
City Manager