HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1997-09-08 8-25-97 / 9-8-97 I named as supporters of her election, names she was not familiar with. She acknowledged that there have been discussions regarding strategic planning, architectural review, what is going to be done in the CPE area, if the tennis courts are obtained then what is going to be done with them, that is a process that all of College Park East should be involved in, the discussion group met for months, those meetings were not for naught, there were many good, creative ideas, one was zone swapping. Councilmember Campbell said her preference is to see people work together, the recall effort takes away from the time that should be devoted to things that are good for College Park East. Councilman Brown noted that the meeting scheduled to discuss flood concerns in the downtown area had been changed, to which the Director of Public Works stated there is no specific meeting date thus far, possibly the second or third week after school opens. Mayor Hastings reported receipt of a complaint relating to the placement of real estate signs on public property, examples being the greenbelt, parkways, utility poles, stop signs, etc., when confronted a local realtor stated he was entitled to do so, and the Police Department was contacted. She noted that without complaint the signs are often overlooked for an entire weekend even though they are not permitted to be there, and inquired if the volunteers could possibly be used to gather the signs and take them to the Public Works Department where they could be picked up at another time, pointing out that the C~ty is liable should someone be hurt as a result of their presence. Mayor Hastings welcomed Chief Sellers, the Recreation Director, and other staff attending the meeting. I ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting until Monday, September 8th at 6:30 p.m. to meet in Closed Session if deemed necessary. By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 10:18 p.m. \ Attest: clerk Approved: ..,.. . I Seal Beach, California September 8, 1997 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:32 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. 9-8-97 ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Hastings Councilmembers Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton Absent: None Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk I APPROVAL OF AGENDA Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to approve the order of the agenda as presented. AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton, Hastings None Motion carried ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session to receive a report from the City Manager pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.A as identified on the agenda relating to negotiations conducted by the City's negotiator, Mr. William Avery, with the Confidential, Supervisory, Technical, and Professional Employees, and the Orange County Employees Association. The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:34 p.m. and reconvened at 6:49 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported that the Council had received a status report with regard to negotiations from the City Manager. I ADJOURNMENT By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m. Attest: ~ ex-offi io clerk Seal Beach Approved: I Seal Beach, California September 8, 1997 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:06 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. 9-8-97 ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Hastings Councilmembers Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton Absent: None I Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Chief Sellers, Police Department Ms. Beard, Director of Parks and Recreation Ms. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Brown moved, second by Fulton, to approve the order of the agenda as presented. AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton, Hastings None Motion carried PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Hastings Living Month." proclaimed October, 1997 as "Independent The Mayor also proclaimed October, 1997 as "Toastmasters Month." I I ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Chi Kredell, 1633 Seal Way, directed his comments to the recent Blade Jam event. He reported having met with the Manager and Recreation Director prior to the event pointing out what he perceived as problems as a result of a similar event last year, he said he had been informed that the City would not be enforcing the noise decibel ordinance, and to that he questioned who gave them the right to not enforce an ordinance, that ordinance was enacted just for things like this. He also read excerpts from an August 31st L. A. Times article relating to Extreme events. Mr. Kredell said saw horses and police tape were the means used to keep people out of the garages of his apartment units, that made it difficult for his tenants to use their garages, trucks, cars, and other vehicles were parked on the street in no-parking zones and driveways, there was no enforcement, there was no response back from a call to the Police Department, he complained that people used the carports as bathrooms, cars parked there, there were beverage cans, tenants complained about noise during the day and at night, to which he asked where was the enforcement, a bicycle was stolen from the second story balcony of his building, none of which is listed on the police blotter. Mr. Kredell said he telephoned the Mayor, she offered to refer his noise complaint to the Manager, even event personnel could not understand the City allowing such an event, asked why the City wants such an event, what kind of image is wanted, and kids were dropped off without supervision. To his question as to how much the City made from the event, the Manager responded $38,000. Mr. Kredell countered that if it is thought the City made money, it did not, money was lost from the parking lots, one was closed for over two weeks, questioned why the City got rid of pro volleyball, that event helped the businesses, the Blade event did not, and requested a breakdown of City costs relating to 9-8-97 the Blade event. Ms. Mary Michaelian, Aster Street, read her communication relating to the Sunday takeoff .of six C-141 aircraft from the Los Alamitos Air Station, flying over her home. She inquired if when Bixby had the noise contours changed they managed to make sure that no planes flew over their property that was once in the crash zone, and now fly over the end of College Park East, stated this is more than a noise issue, there are safety issues as well. Ms. Michaelian said it is understood that one of the City's airport consultants has said the pullback of the crash zone was done improperly, this hurts College Park East and it is now under the flight paths, it was not like that when the area was built, and asked how this can be corrected. She said it is also understood that the City is trying to have the noise contours removed from over College Park East, stated certainty that if Bixby ever were to build housing the contours would never be changed. Ms. Michaelian stated she did not want aircraft over her home and wanted the noise contours removed. Councilmember Forsythe noted having observed some of those aircraft flying low over the Hill area and McGaugh Elementary School, stated there is open space for them to take off over the ocean, not over residential areas, therefore it may be time to send the Base another letter. Mr. Dave Dunton, First Street, stated he is the owner of the Seal Beach Cycle Shop on Main Street, his future depends on the possibility that Main Street will continue to support his business, however other merchants have reported over a forty percent drop per year in their revenue, that will result in a turnover of merchants in just a few years if that trend continues. He said the impression he got from the last meeting was that the project has support but assurances were needed that available money goes to the right place, and encouraged the Council to support the recommendation to bid the project to determine what the actual costs will be, then look at what phases of the plan is desired first. To a question of Council, Mr. Dunton responded that his opinion does not represent the entire of the Main Street merchants, he had spoken to approximately twenty merchants, however noted that the president of the Main Street Business Association was present and could likely respond further, priority to him would be the renovation of the pier restrooms. Mr. Roger West, Electric Avenue, recognized this Council as the best during his thirty year residency. He stated his concern however as there is confusion between improvement and development of Main Street, the three block area, including the pier and beach, is already over- developed, it has never paid its way and does not now, it contributes no more than two percent of the sales tax revenue to the City while it requires fifteen to twenty percent of City services, the property owners are paying the difference, money is one thing, over-crowding is another, if forty percent of revenue is being lost per year what are all the people doing here because the town is clogged with traffic. He claimed the three blocks can not take any more business, intensification by confusing improvement with development is exacerbating a rapidly deteriorating condition, the residents are being crowded out, most people do not want Seal Beach on the map, nor degrading sports spectaculars on the beach to pack the town on every holiday, nor more tourist busses bring people here, too many have found it already, the residents that have paid considerable sums to live here do not mind paying to beautify Main Street but will not tolerate using the residents taxes to convert the City into another Venice Beach. Mr. West said leave Main Street alone. Mr. Charles Antos, Seal Beach, inquired why, when an event like the I I I 9-8-97 I Blades is not invited back to larger cities, Seal Beach then invites them in. He made a comparison to St. patrick's Day festivities in years past, no longer held as a result of problems due to too many people becoming aware of that celebration, to the more recent events, now being broadcast by ESPN, he reported having received complaints of fights at night and noise, and stated that the noise ordinance, without specific provision, can not be overridden by anyone. Mr. Antos said if this is considered to be allowed again, asked that his comments be taken as a protest, a complaint, and consideration should be given to who is being invited into the City. Mr. Ray Williams, College Park East, directed his comments to people who remove the fliers of others from homes. He reported distributing fliers on the prior Friday on Ironwood Avenue in support of his Council representative, a neighbor observed a person in support of the recall taking the fliers, wadding them up and throwing them away, to which Mr. Williams said that is not nice or fair for either side of the issues and it is time for all to stop doing so. Mr. Gordon Shanks, Surf Place, said as Main Street goes, so goes Seal Beach, it is unfortunate that too much time is spent in this Chamber talking about Main Street, yet it will always be that way as it is the heart and soul of Seal Beach. Mr. Shanks noted that the City of Stanton is requesting that their name be changed because Mr. Stanton only spent a short period in their City, Mr. Stanton started Seal Beach as Bay City and at one time made a major effort to have this City moved to Los Angeles County because Santa Ana would pay him no attention or provide moni~s for infrastructure. He noted that some time back he had complained that Seal Beach does not get the respect it deserves, people do not know what is going on, and made reference to newspaper listings of upcoming Council agenda items, to which he said that seems to indicate that either the City is not informing the newspapers or it is the papers themselves. Ms. Kim Masoner, ABC Services, resident, and president of the Seal Beach Business Association, said although she could not speak for all of the one hundred fifty members, she spoke with merchants, business and property owners on Main Street this date, some thirty- five signed a petition encouraging the Council to adopt and implement the Main Street Improvement Plan as soon as possible, all of Seal Beach deserves an improved downtown area that encourages tourism, attracts consumers, and is a true reflection of the community's pride. Ms. Jane vineyard, president, College Park East Neighborhood Association, announced a Concert in the Park to be held on Sunday, September 14th, an upcoming paper drive to help fund Bluebell Park improvements, and the spookiest yet Halloween festivities on October 25th. Mr. Stan Anderson, resident and business owner, announced that the United Martial Arts Studio and interested individuals will be hosting a golf tournament I barbecue on Sunday, September 21st, this year the Community Services Foundation chosen to be the recipient of the proceeds. Mr. Anderson spoke favorably of seeking bids for the Main Street pilot project, as a result more accurate and possibly lower costs may be realized, in the past the Business Association recognized the need for restroom improvements, lighting as a safety factor, and through a Business Association subcommittee some research was done as to how other cities accomplish improvements, a nearby area funds improvements by means of an assessment on businesses through their association, some use parking monies, a suggestion as a result of the subcommittee was that the beach lots be metered to encourage use, the feeling was that money could be made to fund Main Street improvements. He noted I I 9-8-97 that when Main Street businesses are losing forty percent of their profits per year there needs to be a boost, that could be helped by tourists, it is important to find other means of bringing revenue into the City, especially to support Main Street. With regard to the golf tournament, Mayor Hastings noted the availability of raffle tickets at the Martial Arts Studio and at the Volunteer substation, possibly the Rossmoor substation as well, and Mr. Anderson said he would be seeking hole sponsors. Dr. David Rosenman, Seal Beach, said he felt the Main Street improvements should be considered in phases given possible unresolved issues regarding Ruby's and parking, with the limited resources it would seem that pier area improvements.would not be considered at this time, expressed support for the tree committee, and with regard to signage suggested that a citizens panel be established from which there may be some good ideas, also avoid negative comments after the fact. Dr. Rosenman alerted the Council that the Environmental Quality Control Board will soon be reviewing the Hellman EIR, and since that body was told nothing would be finalized by the Planning Commission until the EQCB review was complete, the findings may be somewhat different than the Commission. Councilman Brown reminded the Manager of the request that a status report be agendized for the next meeting relating to vehicles on the pier and Ruby's. Mr. Erin Weiner, owner of 330 Main Street, expressed pleasure at seeing the Main Street improvement plans come to fruition. Mr. weiner said when he built his building he did so by using a more creative architectural statement, a heightened retail atmosphere, with the belief that a quality building and signage attracts a higher quality merchant, who in turn know how to create success. He said he is pleased to be a building owner on Main Street. Mr. Ron Bennett, Seal Beach, encouraged approval of the Improvement Plan. He described Seal Beach as a mid-western town dropped on the coast of Southern California, it happened over a period of time, was not designed in this eclectic way. Mr. Bennett offered that the plan is the result of numerous meetings involving City staff, architects, citizens, ideas were put forward, during which RRM realized that the community did not want to change the town, just improve it. Mr. Bennett said his interest, besides more trees and maintaining the small town atmosphere, is to have a plan that can be implemented, where others have not, this plan allows phased improvements, if approved, and that will give time to develop some innovative financing, some property owners are willing to help implement the plan, there are no additional businesses planned, this merely a means of fixing what has become run down as well as some resolve some existing problems. There being no further comments, Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications closed. I I VOTING DELEGATE - LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE Brown moved, second by Campbell, to designate the Mayor as the voting delegate for the ninety-ninth League of California Cities annual conference, and that Councilmember Campbell be designated as the alternate voting delegate. I AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton, Hastings None Motion carried CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "0" thru "L" Campbell moved, second by Brown, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented. o. Approved the waiver of reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and 9-8-97 that consent to the waiver of reading shall be deemed to be given by all Councilmembers unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. I Received and filed the staff report relating to a proposed lightning protection pole at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. F. Received and filed the staff report relating to the proposed demolition of Buildings 11, 13, 14, and 229 at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, and instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. E. G. Approved regular demands numbered 16973 through 17130 in the amount of $428,915.13, payroll demands numbered 23499 through 23713 in the amount of $263,471.48, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. I H. Approved the minutes of the August 25th, 1997 regular adjourned and regular meetings. 1. Bids were received until September 3, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. for project Number 665, Westminster Avenue Rehabilitation, at which time they were publicly opened as follows: All American Asphalt R. J. Noble Company Sequel Contractors, Inc. Cal Mat Industrial Asphalt Excel Paving $396,106 438,778 443,368 469,307 471,295 Awarded the bid for Project Number 665 to the lowest responsible bidder, All American Asphalt in the amount of $396,106.80 and authorized the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City. J. Approved the Agreement for Employment Services between Westcomm and the City of Cypress, and authorized the City Manager to execute same on behalf of the City. I K. Received and filed the Monthly Investment Report for July, 1997. L. Adopted Resolution Number 4558 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING BUDGETARY AMENDMENTS FOR THE 1997/98 FISCAL YEAR." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4558 was waived. 9-8-97 AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton, Hastings None Motion carried MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS PLAN The City Manager explained that this item proposes seven pilot projects and a signage program as an effort to commence implementing the Main Street Specific Plan, the projects would include improvements to the pier and City Hall restrooms, mid-block crosswalks and trees at the north end of Main Street as well as mid-block near the Off Main Street parking lot, parking meters, renovation and landscaping of the Off-Main lot, a 10th Street beach lot pedestrian walkway and handicapped access, rumble strips, vine grates, screen fences, and vines to make the north portion of Main Street more attractive, in addition, directional signs on Main Street for parking in the beach and 8th Street lots, and street light banners that local business persons could purchase. He noted that the design graphics of the improvements have been on public display for the past couple of weeks. Councilman Fulton said his recommendation would be Option One, to proceed with the bid process, then dependent upon the bids reduce the scope of the project at that time. Councilmember Campbell agreed, stating she did not feel that all seven projects can be done, receiving bids will assist the prioritization process. Councilman Brown expressed his opinion once again that some improvements to Lampson Avenue are necessary for the purpose of safety, he would support Option One however did not feel that all of the bond monies can be spent downtown. The Mayor said it is her understanding that monies were set aside for improvements to Lampson. Councilmember Forsythe praised the aesthetics of the proposed improvements, portions of the projects are mandated such as the ADA upgrade of the restrooms, noted that a portion of the funds must be used for Main Street such as the parking fees, the improvements do not change the personality of Main Street rather will enhance it, replaces trees, fixes sidewalks, keeps the village atmosphere, and since the entire project can not be done at one time, agreed with Option One. Ms. Hagmaier, RRM Design Group, again expressed pleasure to have had the opportunity to work with this City, said she has observed a strong element of community pride, likened to, if not exceeding that of her town, San Luis Obispo. Ms. Hagmaier noted that the staff report presents some means of refining costs even more, spoke in support of seeking bids for the entire project, possibly existing City staff could reduce the cost of landscaping installation as an example. I I Fulton moved, second by Hastings, to adopt Option One, to proceed with the bid process for all projects, however include a list of items that may be deducted from project specifications at the City's option. AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton, Hastings None Motion carried I PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 96-1 - REAR YARD SETBACK / DECKS Mayor Hastings declared the public hearing open to consider Zone Text Amendment 96-1 relating to the rear yard setback for decks along Crestview, Catalina, and Surf Place. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised and mailed as required, and reported receipt of no communications relating to this item. The Director of Development Services noted that the Council considered this 9-8-97 I matter at a public hearing in September, 1996, at that time by motion of the Council referred this item back to staff to prepare an ordinance for consideration that would address the pre-existing decks along Crestview, adjacent to Gum Grove Park and the Hellman property, how they would be dealt with and meet minimum health, safety and welfare considerations. The Director reported that the ordinance proposed would require any pre-existing deck that has been extended to the rear of those properties to come before the Planning Commission for a Conditional Use Permit to legalize those non-permitted structures within a specific period of time. He said it is believed the ordinance follows the intent of the Council direction in 1996, however if it is desired to expand the applicability to pre-existing non-permitted structures and to allow others to apply for new decks in the future that would follow the criteria, the Council has the option to include such provision, however that would not be the recommendation of staff. The Mayor asked if it could be considered special privilege if others are not allowed to make similar requests. The City Attorney responded that some people may perceive that to be so, the safest course would be to allow all properties the opportunity to apply for a deck CUP, however it is felt that to allow just those having an existing deck to apply for a CUP would not be challengeable in court. I Mayor Hastings invited members of the audience wishing to speak to this item to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Mr. Gordon Shanks, Surf Place, stated his position as being basically in favor of this proposal as a reasonable solution to a long standing situation, such decks in this community present somewhat of an unusual circumstance in that the City is basically flat. Mr. Reg Clewley, Catalina Avenue, objected to the proposed ordinance. He stated the structure on Crestview was built in defiance of the existing Building Code, now it is proposed to be grand fathered as a pre-existing deck. He cited Gum Grove Park as a responsibility of the City, a property for all of the citizens, there is an extension of the Park proposed by Hellman, little pieces of property are being juggled, and it is understood that human remains have been found in the Park. Mr. Clewley spoke regarding fence heights, asked if sixteen foot high walls are going to be allowed, and claimed that the fence lines abutting the Hellman property are terrible, that brought about by the passage of ZTA 92-6, most communities allow no more than six foot walls at the property line, if there is a slope on the sideyard it is not unreasonable to allow a trellis, in this case eight feet has been allowed, . but now the eighty-eight houses are allowed a ten foot rear yard fence for security reasons. Mr. Clewley argued that the deck in question is not pre-existing, this deck was cited yet no action has been taken with regard to it for years, no where in the City should a structure be permitted on the property line, in this case he understands that the deck actually extends over the property line. He stated the ordinance needs to address height limits at the property line, in ZTA 92-6 you can go to ten feet, now a fence of fifteen feet six inches is being considered. Mr. Clewley again expressed his objection to the ordinance. Mr. Dave Bartlett, Hellman property representative, said they have reviewed the staff report and attended all hearings relating to this issue, and it is felt the issue of privacy, noise, light, glare, safety, and aesthetics have been well viewed, and it appears that the CUP is the mechanism that assures the Hellman property rights and the rights of those living next I 9-8-97 to the affected units. If approved, Mr. Bartlett suggested that a detailed landscape plan be prepared for each project by a registered, licensed landscape architect that will document and verify existing conditions by the Building Department to assure that the property rights of adjacent properties are meaningfully and appropriately protected. There being no further comments, Mayor Hastings declared the public hearing closed. Councilmember Forsythe noted that the deck being referred to was constructed without permits, the property was then sold, a reason for the delay of time was due somewhat to the number of properties that had similar decks, it would be difficult to single out one from the others, it is also difficult to require a homeowner to change a deck that may have existed for some ten to thirty years and likely prior to applicable codes. She expressed her belief in homeowners being able to enjoy their property, if there are special circumstances whereby they are mandated to obtain a CUP they should be allowed to do so as long as it does not adversely affect another, the way the land slopes on these particular properties it is unusable and does pose a problem. She offered that it is unlikely that staff will have time to research. all of the decks that currently exist, if the ordinance is adopted, henceforth anyone who wishes to have a similar type deck would need to come to the City for review under the CUP process as a result of special circumstances, however expressed objection to requiring persons who have had decks for years to go through the CUP process at this point in time. It was explained that anyone wishing to construct a deck in the future could do so by obtaining a CUP. Mayor Hastings expressed concern that some of the existing decks may not meet Code, may need reinforcement, etc. The Manager offered that with the adoption of the ordinance proposed the City would send letters to property owners known to have existing decks advising of the new regulations and requiring compliance upon the sale of the home, or before if desired by the home owner. Councilmember Forsythe inquired as to the liability of the City should someone get hurt subsequent to a mailed notice. The City Attorney advised that cities are granted immunities with regard to the issuance of permits, there is a concept when the City is put on notice of a dangerous condition on public property, however in this case it would be private, developed property, and if the City were to be put on notice that a deck is dangerous after going through this process the City could become part of a legal action. Councilmember Forsythe stated again her position that the City should not be involved in the issue of decks, if a deck henceforth adversely affects another property that will be determined through the CUP process, if it has no adverse affect they should be allowed on private property. Councilman Brown noted that properties are not inspected when sold, only when application is made for a building permit for the construction of something, he would have concern with requiring inspection for the sale of property, and if there is no serious risk of liability he would have no problem with the proposal of Councilmember Forsythe. Councilmember Campbell said sometimes people ask to see the building permits when a home is sold to assure that all is legal. Mayor Hastings again noted concern that many of the decks were built without permits and they should meet code requirements for safety purposes. Councilmember Forsythe again expressed her belief that the pre-existing decks should not be required to obtain a CUP, rather, notice the property owner that the City accepts no liability, that liability lies I I I 9-8-97 I with the property owner. The City Manager offered that if those that exist are going to be allowed yet a future deck will require a permit, if there is no inventory how will it be known which is permitted and which is not, therefore suggested that the property owners be put on notice that henceforth a permit is required, then as property ownership changes and additions or remodels are done the issue can be corrected. Councilmember Campbell commented that people having decks that do not meet Code will not make application for the CUP, and if a neighboring property questions the stability of a deck what is the City going to do then. The Mayor emphasized that there needs to be some criteria for decks or any other structure, her preference the CUP process for all. To the question of Councilmember Campbell, the City Attorney advised that under the proposed ordinance if a CUP has not been applied for within the allowed twelve months then a code enforcement action would be commenced, at this point in time all of the decks are nonconforming, and it is believed that this issue was brought to light as a result of a neighboring complaint. with regard to nonconforming driveways and garages, the Director explained that certain exemptions exist in the Code for garages on the Hill and in College Park East inasmuch as the plans did not meet City standards when those dwellings were built. He noted the concern of staff in this case is that there are structures that have been built above ground that have had no inspections by the City, the type of footings, the foundation system, the structural support, whether they are built to Code are all unknown, the recommendation of the Planning Commission had been to not change the Code but to enforce the Code which would require removal of the decks, the Council did not agree and directed that some means be developed to review the structures to ensure they meet at least the basic life safety requirements that would be required for a structure. Question was posed again as to the liability of the City should a deck be inspected, found to meet Code requirements and then for some reason there is structural failure. The City Attorney reminded that that would fall under discretionary immunity for the issuance of permits, by issuing a permit the City is not guaranteeing that a property is safe. Councilmember Forsythe countered that a permit would be based on an inspection, if the inspection were flawed there would be an exposure for the City, stated that the existing decks are not adversely affecting anyone, let new deck applications go through the CUP process. Councilmember Campbell said the building inspectors could walk Gum Grove and get a feeling as to which decks may meet Code and those that may not, however that was countered with the fact that they would be unable to inspect the foundations, footings, etc. The Director reported that before consideration by the Planning Commission Gum Grove was walked and it was found that there were six maybe seven decks that were closer to the property line than the Code allows, the others, that have permits, are not an issue and are legal under this discussion, the issue is how to deal with the patio decks that were built without a permit, those being six or seven, only those that extend into the ten foot rear yard setback and without a permit. He explained that until 1957 one could build a structure to the rear property line with a permit, they would be legal pre-existing structures, structures built with a permit at any point in the past are not at issue, only those built without a permit. As to the question if decks can in any way be a threat to their neighbors, the Director responded that first of all that would depend on the interpretation of a threat, from the I I 9-8-97 City's standpoint the concern is that a structure meet minimum Building Code requirements, a requirement that is applied throughout the City, any structure requires a building permit, in this case what is being discussed is waiving that requirement for a structure that does not have a permit, and should a structure have been built some years back, without permit, it would be required to meet current Code. The Manager said he believed that zoning and building issues are being confused, this issue was addressed from a zoning consideration, from a building standpoint the residents of the area have a considerable investment in their properties therefore it can be assumed that the decks will meet quality construction standards for the most part, if adopted the ordinance will provide for the CUP process, the issue then becomes what type of landscape screening has been provided, and whether more is necessary to make the structure legal. Councilman Brown said of concern is the change of requirements, where it was once six foot footings it is now eight feet, it may be as sound as another yet the City would be imposing more regulations. The Mayor stated that the City is merely trying to make deck structures legal. Councilmember Forsythe said this may penalize an owner that did not build the structure, this an intrusion into peoples lives, and the City would be taking on a responsibility that it should not be involved with. Question was posed as to how that would jeopardize the person from seeking a CUP. Discussion continued. When seeking a CUP question was raised as to what an inspection entails, the Director responded that there are two different types of inspections, for the CUP process relating to decks, he or the Assistant along with a Building Inspector would make the inspection to verify that the plans submitted are accurate, the deck location in relation to property lines, etc., as part of that process the Inspector would be requested to make recommendations of any upgrades that would need to be made to the structure if it does not comply with Code requirements, in that case it would be submitted to the Planning Commission for additional conditions, the process not different from remodels, conversions, or additions to an existing nonconforming residential structure, assuming Commission approval, building permits are then issued and inspections are made to assure compliance with minimum requirements. It was confirmed that should the ordinance be adopted, six to seven property owners would need to make application for a CUP, a situation similar for comparison sake to the forty some doghouses that were also required to seek a CUP for assurance of Code compliance. To a question as to whether any decks extend beyond the property line, the Director responded that if one were to go by the fence between the residential area and Gum Grove Park the answer is no, however one may not want to depend on that fence as the property line, thus a survey would need to be submitted, at this point it does not appear that any of the decks extend over the property line. Councilmember Forsythe stated her intent to oppose the ordinance, her belief is that there are more than seven properties affected, this is a backyard deck issue that the private property owner should be responsible for, not a governmental body, it is a private property issue. In brief, the City Attorney reviewed the options for consideration, 1) the Planning Commission recommendation for no change to the Code, the structures are illegal, staff would pursue Code enforcement; 2) staff recommendation that a CUP be requested within the next twelve months for existing decks, and there would be no new decks; 3) Councilmember Forsythe's proposal that all existing decks be grandfathered, new decks would require a cUP; and 4) all I I I 9-8-97 I decks, new and old, would require a CUP. As a point of clarification of the reference to CUp's for all decks, mention was made that there are only six or seven that would require that process, to that the Director noted that the key language is that the decks were constructed without permits. Campbell moved, second by Forsythe, to approve Option Three, that existing decks be grandfathered, new decks would require a CUP. AYES: NOES: Brown, Campbell, Forsythe, Fulton Hastings Motion carried The Mayor again stated that any deck built without a permit is illegal, and Councilmember Campbell said the concern is with something that was built years ago and it is not known what codes were required then. The City Attorney stated that a revised ordinance would be prepared for consideration. CITY MANAGER REPORTS There were no City Manager reports. I ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Al Kime, College Park East, said while at the Rossmoor Center a comment made by the supporters of the recall effort was overheard while seeking signatures on the petition to the effect 'do you want residential or commercial', to which he raised the question as to what that has to do with the Councilperson, the residential proposal has been voted down twice. He noted also having received complaints from residents with regard to the recall supporters going door to door seeking signatures, refusing to reveal their names, no identification on fliers as well, the fliers contain untrue statements, and urged the residents of College Park East to read carefully everything they have been asked sign, he also provided the name and phone number of persons to contact for information relative to removing a name from a petition, or forward such request to the City Clerk. Councilman Brown reported a neighbor said he was approached to sign, the petition circulator asked that if it were said that George Brown opposes the Councilperson sought to be recalled would that help them to sign, to which Councilman Brown stated for the record that he is not against the Councilperson, they have worked together, and the petitioners are telling incorrect information. Ms. Audrey Kime, College Park East, said she wished clarification regarding the project approval process, noted her surprise upon seeing the Planning Commission vote on the Hellman project, she expected such a project to take at least two meetings, to which she asked if the project will have a second reading before the Commission and if so will there then be a recommendation from the EQCB. The Director of Development Services explained that the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council, Council consideration is scheduled for September 22nd, and recommendations from the EQCB will be forwarded to the Council, final decisions lie with the City Council. Ms. Kime said her questions relate to environmental and archaeological issues of the EIR. She also thanked staff for repair of the Council Chamber drinking fountain. There being no further comments, Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications closed. I 9-8-97 COUNCIL CONCERNS Councilman Fulton noted the earlier comments with regard to noise of outgoing aircraft from the Armed Forces Reserve Center, to which he made reference to the noise and vibration in his area since the Long Beach Airport changed their flight patterns, and it seems they have added more flights. Councilman Brown offered that they have really not changed the flight patterns, rather the planes are taking shortcuts and not following the correct flight path. She noted that school is now in session, and offered a pleading to the community to slow down their vehicles on Bolsa, Seal Beach Boulevard, or near any school area. With regard to the Three B Event, Councilmember Forsythe said the children of the community thought it was wonderful, and on their behalf extended a thank you. She mentioned having observed the C- 141 aircraft on Sunday as well, flying very low, again suggesting that letters be sent to the Long Beach Airport and the Armed Forces Reserve Center as well. Councilmember Campbell said it was actually three aircraft making two passes for the purpose of practicing turn around times, and emphasized that although Seal Beach appreciates the air station, they are a good neighbor, their air flights need to be over the open space. Mayor Hastings announced a meeting to be held on September 11th at the Huntington Beach Library relating to the inlet for the Bolsa Chica wetlands, the State Departments of Fish and Game and State Lands will be present as well as Senator Boxer who has been in the forefront of trying to save the wetlands. With regard to the Three B event Mayor Hastings reported having received two complaint calls, quite negative, yet on the other hand she had received numerous compliments on the event. She mentioned that she had spoken to Mr. Kredell's tenants, they did not feel they had been put out, it was correctly stated that there were many children in attendance at the event however there were many adults present as well. Councilman Fulton mentioned that he too received a call, the lady complained that bikes, boards, and blades are not allowed in Leisure World, then why in downtown. I I CLOSED SESSION No Closed Session was held. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting until September 22nd at 6:30 p.m. to meet in Closed Session if deemed necessary. By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Approved: I Attest: