The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Res 1361 - 1985-02-20 Resolution No. 1361 Missing Approved: February 6 & 20, 1985 Subject: Variance 2-85 Address: Applicant: Request: 1205 & 1205Y2 Seal Way Seymour Pizer Addition to legal nonconforming duplex with required parking, and to use tandem parking w/less than required covering for parking spaces. . . . P1ann1ng Comm1ss10n Meet1ng of 2/6/85 Page 4 an out of control dr1ver to 1nJure h1mse1f. Mr. Jessner declared the pub11c hear1ng closed on Var1ance 1-85. Mr. Cov1ngton stated that he would request a 30 day cont1nuance of th1s matter so as to allow C1ty Eng1neer to reV1ew Lampson Avenue w1th regard to safety 1ssue, to see 1f any areas are un1que1y 1mpacted due to locatIon. After some d1scuss10n, CommIssIoner Cov1ngton moves to deny w1~hout preJud1ce, Mr. R1pperdan seconds, ResolutIon #1360, A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE VARIANCE APPLICATION 1-85, A REQUEST TO ALLOW DEVIATIONS FROM THE MUNICIPAL CODE POOL REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS (4301 Ironwood Avenue). AYES: NOES: Cov1ngton, Hunt, Jessner, Perr1n, Rlpperdan None Mot10n CarrIed Mr. Cov1ngton moves, second by Mr. R1pperdan, to have staff undertake a study of traff1c acc1dent occurrences on Lampson Avenue. AYES: NOES: Cov1ngton, Hunt, Jessner, Perr1n, R1pperdan None Mot10n Carr1ed It was the consent of the Comm1ss10n and so ordered by the Cha1r, to recess at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Jessner reconvened the PlannIng Comm1ss10n meet1ng at 10:12 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE 2-85 - CONDITIONAL USE PEMIT 1-85 - 1205. 1205 1/2 SEAL WAY) Staff report presented by Mr. Baucke IndIcatIng applIcant 1S request1ng maJor add1tlons to a legal non-conform1ng duplex w1th the requIred number of park1ng spaces, the use of tandem park1ng, and w1th less than requ1red coverIng for the parkIng spaces prov1ded. Staff recommendat10n 1S for approval of both the condlt10na1 use permIt and the var1ance subJect to the cond1tlons as out11ned In the staff report and accompanYIng resolutIons. Mr. Jessner declared the pub11c hearIng open for VarIance 2-B5 and CondItIonal Use Perm1t 1-85. Mr. Seymore P1zer, applIcant, stated that after the f1rst pub11c hearIng, he tr1ed to come up w1th a pract1ca1 des1gn, fInally endIng w,th removal of the downstaIrs bedroom and p1ac1ng 1t above the carport. Mr. Cov1ngton 1nd1cated a statement had been rece1ved from Bob Lohrke oppos1ng the removal of the exter10r sta1rway. Mr. P1zer 1nd1cated that the sta1rway would not meet zon1ng and f1re code as 1t 1S. He further 1nd1cated that Mr. Lohrke uses 1t to reach h1s rooftop and another method 1S ava11ab1e to h1m. Comm1ss10ner Jessner ment10ned that ZTA 2-84 would be heard soon by the C1ty Counc11 and 1t d1d not allow add1t10ns of bedrooms and bathrooms tp nonconform1ng property. Mr. Baucke stated the C1ty Attorney 1nd1cated that the Comm1ss10n must not deny app11cant based on future law, but must deal w1th current law. No other persons spoke 1n favor nor 1n Oppos1t10n of th1s matter; therefore, the Cha1rman declared the pub11c hear1ng closed. Mr. Jessner stated he was not 1n favor of act1ng upon th1s matter unt11 the Counc11's act10n on ZTA 2-B4 1S determ1ned. Mr. Perr,n moves to contInue th1s matter unt11 act10n on ZTA 2-B4, second by Mr. Cov1ngton. Mr. Hunt felt 1t seems fa1r and reasonable that the Comm1ss1on deal w1th eX1st1ng laws and regu1at10ns, not w1th what m1ght be. . . . P1ann1ng Comm1ss10n Meet1ng of 2/6/85 Page 5 AYES: NOES: Cov1ngton, Jessner, Perr1n Hunt, Rlpperdan Mot10n Carr1ed PUBLIC HEARING - ZTA 1 -85 Staff report 1nd1cated th1s 1S a request to amend spec1f1c 11m1tat10ns on the placement of 3rd stor1es on lots 37t' or greater 1n the R-3 zone on the rear half of the property along Seal Way. After determ1nat10n by the Comm1ss10n, staff would then prepare a reso1ut10n ref1ect10n the act10n. Mr. Jessner declared the pub11c hear1ng on ZTA 1-85 open. Ch1 Krede11, 1615 Seal Way, spoke 1n favor of the amendment. He felt that by mov1ng the placement of th1rd story forward, 1t would lessen the tunnel effect. He further stated that th1s w111 encourage downzon1ng of property by a110w1ng construct10n of s1ng1e fam11y dwe111ngs to take advantage of ocean V1ew. Mr. Krede11 1nd1cated he w1shed to bU11d on a vacant parcel on Seal Way. Mr. Mueth, 1217 Seal Way, spoke 1n favor of the amendment. He 1nd1cated Seal Way 1S 1n need of redevelopment and th1s amendment w111 g1ve 1ncent1ve for homeowners to rebu11d. Mr. Peter Arnold, 1606 Ocean, stated that 1n order for h1m to bU11d a V1ctor1an home on Seal Way, 1t was necessary to go through a pub11c hear1ng procedure. He wondered why a var1ance would not be app11cab1e 1n th1s part1cu1ar case. Mr. Baucke stated that th1s amendment 1S to the zon1ng code, wh1ch requ1res a 1eg1s1at1ve act. He further 1nd1cated that res1dents were not1f1ed regard1ng th1s hear1ng as a courtesy; that the law requ1res only pub11sh1ng the not1ce 1n a newspaper. He further 1ndlcated the C1ty Attorney felt there was not a s1gn1f1cant d1fference between 1nd1v1dua1 propert1es on Seal Way, as they relate to one another; therefore, a var1ance could not be eranted to Mr. Krede11's property. Mr. Mueth felt that the reason the 37t foot w1de 11m1tat1on was adopted was to allow duplexes to be bU11t. After some d1scuss10n, Mr. Baucke stated that the d1screpanc1es 1n lot S1ze were done de11berate1y so as to prevent some parcels from g01ng to 35 ft. he1ght 11m1t. Mr. Robert Cook, 441 Central Avenue, stated the reason a var1ab1e setback was approved was to av01d the wall effect along the street. He felt th1s amendment was a back door approach to get a spec1a1 pr1v11ege for one street 1n Seal Beach. He felt th1s zonIng text amendment should be c1tyw1de rather than for a s1ng1e street. He felt the var1ance procedure 1S the appropr1ate veh1c1e for an app11cant to request placement of th1rd story on rear half of property. Mr. Matt N1cho1sen, 324 8th Street, agreed that th1s approval should not be g1ven to a s1ng1e street 1n Seal Beach. Helen Russell, property owner on Seal Way, felt 1t was d1scr1m1nat1ng to a110w1ng th1s amendment for one CIty street. She felt there were other propert1es along Ocean who would 11ke to take advantage of the Ocean V1ew. She felt the1r should be a st1pu1at10n as to Just what setback should be. Mr. Walter Berger, 1635 Seal Way, agreed that no one C1ty street should be s1ng1ed out 1n th1s manner. Mr. M1tch She1traw, felt the Comm1ss10n should take 1nto cons1derat10n the shadow1ng effect w1th regard to T1t1e 24 requ1rements. Mr. K., 1635 Seal Way, opposed the amendment. Mr. Robert Cook recommended that the Comm1ss10n not enact th1s amendment, but g1ve P1ann1ng Comm1ss10n Meet1ng of 2/20/85 Page 3 . W1th regard to Var1ance 2-85, the Comm1ss10ners d1scussed the two ava11ab1e opt10ns. Mr. R1pperdan moves to approve V-2-85, w1th the opt10n of perm1tt1ng less than the requ1red coverage for the proposed park1ng spaces, 1eav1ng 6" of the proposed park1ng spaces to rema1n uncovered. He further 1nd1cated that fence requ1red between propert1es be mandated. however, after d1scuss10n the fence requ1rement was w1thdrawn. Mr. Hunt seconds. The reso1ut1on ref1ect1ng th1s act10n w111 come before the P1ann1ng Comm1ss10n on March 6, 1985 at the1r regular meet1ng. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Hunt, Jessner, R1pperdan Perr1n Cov1ngton Mot10n Carr1ed REPORT FROM SECRETARY Mr. 8aucke 1nd1cated that the State Lands Spec1f1c Plan hearIng has been held unt11 staff has drafted add1t10na1 amendments and reV1S10ns and presented to the Comm1ss10n for a study seSS1on. Mr. Perr1n moves to cancel pub11c hear1ng prev10us1y not1ed and to readvert1se when staff has prepared further 1nformat10n. Mr. Hunt seconds. . ~ AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Hunt, Jessner, Perr1n, R1pperdan None Cov1ngton Mot10n Carr1ed . COMMISSION REQUEST There were no Comm1ss10n request. . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Robert Cook, 441 Central, stated he was here to: 1) request that a mot10n be made to recons1der the Comm1ss1on's act10n at the last meet1ng regard1ng ZTA 1-85, and 2) to request a morator1um on all app11cat1ons for 35' bU11d1ng perm1ts unt11 after the study the Comm1ss10n requested has been rece1ved. He sa1d the or1g1na1 1ntent to perm1t 35 ft. he1ght on lots 37t ft. w1dth or greater was to accommodate the loss of f1rst floor land due to p1ac1ng park1ng on the lot. It was not for s1ng1e fam11y lots, 1t was des1gned to accommodate two un1ts on 117 ft. w1de lots. He felt ZTA-1-85 would 1ega11ze an 1nterpretat10n wh1ch says that you can put a 35 ft. h1gh bU11d1ng on the back half of any lot 1n the C1ty that 1S 37t ft. w1de. Mr. Cook p01nted out there were m~ny corner lots that would meet that 37t ft. w1dth, but that were only 50 ft. deep, on wh1ch could then be constructed three stor1es. Mr. Hunt p01nted out that the current law allows anyone w1th a lot 37t w1dth or greater 1n an R- 3 zone to bU11d 35 ft. h1gh bU11d1ngs. He also stated ZTA-1-85 deals w1th placement of the 3rd story only. Mr. Cook asked that the Comm1ss10n deal w1th depth, not Just w1dth. Comm1ss10ner Jessner 1nd1cated that the study request at the last meet1ng dealt w1th the re1at10nsh1p of the he1ght to the depth and s1deyard of a lot. Mr. Baucke felt Cook's concerns were 1eg1t1mate and would take them 1nto account when research1ng the matter. Mr. Perr1n felt that a morator1um should be placed on these matters, 1f the Comm1ss10n dec1ded not to revoke ZTA-1-85. The Comm1ss10ners d1scussed