HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Res 736 - 1973-04-04
-'
,
",
fI'
.
RESOLUTION NO.
736
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH REPORTING THE RESULTS OF A STUDY TO
DETERMINE THE DESIRABILITY OF CREATING A SEPARATE
PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE MARINA HILL AREA WHICH
WOULD PERMIT FORTY-FIVE PERCENT LOT COVERAGE FOR
ENCLOSED STRUCTURES AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE CREATION OF DISTRICT V FOR MARINA HILL.
WHEREAS, 1n the matter of the creation of a new planning d1strict for Marina
H111, the Planning Comm1SS10n of the C~ty of Seal Beach does report as follows:
.
l. On February 12, 1973 the C1ty Council directed the Planning Commission
to study the lot coverage provisions for Marina Hill and consider the
addition of provisions Wh1ch would allow a reasonable room addition
at the ground level Which might exceed the forty percent lot coverage
as an alternat1ve to second story additions. The P1annLng Commission
was also directed to consider the possib1l1ty of creat1ng separate
planning distr1cts for Marina H1ll, College Park East and College
Park West.
2. Presently Mar~na Hill, College Park East and College Park West are all
in Planning District II, Which allows a maximum lot coverage of
forty percent for enclosed structures and an add~tional five percent
lot coverage for unenclosed patio covers 1n the R-1 Zone.
3. In their study, the Planning Comm1ssion considered the lot coverage
provisions for District II, the desirability of amending the provis~ons
of the zoning ord1nance to permit a room add1tion on the ground floor
Wh1ch exceeds the forty percent lot coverage maximum for the R-l zone
and the desirability of creating separate planning districts for
Marina Hill, College Park East and College Park West.
4. The Planning Commission invited public comment from res1dents on
Mar1na Hill through news releases in local newspapers.
WHEREAS, the Planning Comm1ssion findings are as follows:
.
1. A number of res1dents from Marina Hill spoke in favor of the concept
of permitting ground level enclosed additions Which would exceed the
maximum permitted lot coverage of forty percent as an a1ternat~ve to
second story add1t~ons.
2. Arguments expressed favoring 1ncreased lot coverage are as follows:
a) Most homes on the Hill were constructed from II to 16 years ago.
There is a des1re by some residents of that area to intens1fy the
use of the1r property rather than to relocate elsewhere.
b) It 1S less expensive to construct an add1tion at the first level
<ground level) than it is to construct a second story addition
above a garage. An addition built over a garage is not always
architecturally compaitb1e with the remainder of the dwelling.
c) Increased land values provide pressure for ~ntensification of
land use.
d) Marina Hill is located in close proxim1ty to the beach Which is
a recreational facility of reg1ona1 significance.
e) Lot sizes on Marina Hill are generally smaller than lot sizes in
the remainder of D1str1ct II.
3. After discussion, the Planning Commission was of the opin1on that the
creation of a new d~strict for Marina H1l1 has merit for the
fo110w1ng reasons:
a) Items stated in #2 above (find~ngs)
b) No changes are proposed, in requ~red m~nimum setbacks.
c) The standards applying to Marina Hill would be essentially the same with
the exception of lot coverage requirements. Permitted lot coverage for
the R-1 zone of ~larina Hill would be established at forty-five
percent. The recent amendment concerning patios would only apply
to District II and therefore would not be applicable on the H1ll
if a separate district were to be formed for that area.
.'
.
.
.
..,-'
'"
-
4. College Park East and College Park West are similiar 1n house
size, lot size, orientation and time of construction and should
be kept in a single planning district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach does hereby report and recommend to the City Council the creat10n of a
new planning district, Distr~ct V, with a maximum permitted lot coverage for
enclosed structures of forty-five percent and this proposed district should
include the R-l zones of Tracts 1817, 2590 and 2591.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 4th day of Apnl, 1973.
Chainnan 0
Commission
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the Plann1ng Commission of the City of Seal Beach which was held
on Wednesday, Apr11 4, 1973, and carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners: Dunn, Hammond, Lanning
Commissioners: Knapp, Ripperdan
Commissioners: 0
Commissioners: 0
~ ~.
Secretary of