Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1995-10-09 I I I / 10-9-95 Approved: of the Attest: Seal Beach, California October 9, 1995 The City Council of the city of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:25 p.m. with Mayor Hastinqs callinq the meetinq to order. ROLL C'!1IT.T. Present: Mayor Hastinqs Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Laszlo Absent: None Also present: Mr. Barrow, city Attorney Mrs. Yeo, city Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to approve the order of the aqenda as presented. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastinqs, Laszlo None Motion carried ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. CLOSED SESSION The city Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code section 54957 to discuss the item listed on the aqenda, public employee employment/performance evaluation, City Manaqer, Assistant to the City Manaqer, and Director of Parks and Recreation (Community services). It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council to adjourn to Closed Session at 6:27 p.m. The Council reconvened at 7:15 p.m. with Mayor Hastinqs callinq the meetinq to order. The city Attorney announced that the Council had discussed the item listed on the aqenda relatinq to the position of city Manaqer. It was the consensus of the Council to continue the Closed Session until the conclusion of the reqular meetinq, and tentatively adjourned until 9:00 p.m. at 7:18 p.m. Durinq the course of the reqular meetinq of this date, the Council extended, by motion, the adjournment time back to this meetinq to aqain meet in Closed Session until 9:45 p.m., 10:15 p.m., and 10:30 p.m. 10-9-95 The regular adjourned meetinq of this date was reconvened at 10:24 p.m. with Mayor Hastinqs callinq the meetinq to order. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn to Closed Session at that hour. The Council reconvened at 10:52 p.m. with Mayor Hastinqs callinq the meetinq to order. The city Attorney reported that the Council met in Closed Session and qave direction to the city Attorney with respect to I the items identified on the aqenda. ADJOURNMENT The Council directed that the City Clerk cancel the October 23rd regular meetinq and adjourn that meetinq until Monday, October 30th at 6:30 p.m., to commence that meetinq with a Closed Session, the aqenda for October 30th to be minimal, consistinq of warrants, a draft ordinance, etc. By unanimous consent, the meetinq was adjourned at 10:55 Approved: C t~;C~rk and ex-off1c10 Cit~ Seal Beach Attest: I Seal Beach, California October 9, 1995 The City Council of the city of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:18 p.m. with Mayor Hastinqs callinq the meetinq to order with the Salute to the Flaq. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Hastinqs Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Laszlo Absent: None Also present: Mr. Whittenberq, Actinq city Manaqer/Director of Development Services Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Badum, City Enqineer/Director of Public Works Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk I APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Forsythe requested that Item "R" be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration, Mayor Hastinqs requested that Item "K" be removed, and the Director of Development Services requested that Item "V", the Los Cabos appeal matter, be considered prior to Item "T". Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to approve the order of the aqenda as revised. I I I :r' ..:t.;::~. 10-9-95 AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried PRESENTATION - FOUNDERS DAY COMMITTEE UPDATE Ms. Dorothy Whyte requested the opportunity for members of the Committee to report on some of the upcoming events that will be taking place during the month of Octo~er for the Founders Day cele~ration. She pointed out the navy ~lue shirts for 1995 ~earing the red and white seal logo that was designed and donated by Mr. Ervin for the City's use some. five years ago, and expressed appreciation to the Junior Womens Club for their assistance in the tee Shirt/sweatshirt effort. Mr. Stan Anderson announced a nine hole golf tournament to be held Octo~er 18th with after-tournament food and door prizes held at Coach's, cited a need for more hole sponsors, and noted that all proceeds will go to the Recreation Department through the Committee. Ms. Whyte expressed appreciation to the other members of the Committee that have worked diligently on this celebration for many months. Todd Randolph, Gunners First.Mate, Missile First Class, Naval Weapons station, announced that a tour of the station would again be held this year, from 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. on October 28th, a bus tour of the more than five thousand acre facility through the wetlands to the missile production facility for a walking tour, etc., a tour of a guided missile frigate has been arranged, the Station participating in the parade with their color guard and battleship as well. Ms. Whyte noted that other October 28th activities will include a childrens costume contest and matinee at Super Saver cinema, the Masquerade Ball, and a Monster Mash for children at the Marina Center from 5:00 p.m. to midnight, the 29th of Octo~er will feature the Founders Day parade and activities on the greenbelt. Ms. Mary Johnson descri~ed the greenbelt activities which include a ferris wheel and various childrens rides, the fire engine, a concert orchestra and dixieland band, children are encouraged to come in Halloween costumes for a contest, and numerous food and game booths. First Mate Randolph added that the Navy'S greater participation' will include a booth with cotton candy and popcorn, as well as a dunk tank. Ms. Whyte noted that two newspapers are going to publish a special edition of the Founders Day activities, and it is felt the programs are well planned to bring together residents from all areas of the City. She again thanked the members of the Committee for their efforts devoted to the various special events. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications open. Dr. David Rosenman, 8th Street, requested that a staff report be prepared and placed on the next agenda to address a potential safety issue relating to the operation of a number of vehicles upon the pier. He said his understanding is that the businesses at the end of the pier are entitled to one vehicle each, however-he observed at least six over the last weekend, and the concern lies with wear and tear of the pier and safety of those walking on the pier. He added that there is no effective barrier of vehicle access, the police have no means of identifying which vehicles are allowed, to which he suggested some type of identifying permit where, without it, the vehicles can be cited. To a comment that the problem may only be with enforcement in that what is allowed already exists, the City Engineer responded that there are other related issues that are not addressed in the restaurant lease such as the wear and tear on the pier, parking, access, etc. with the exception of the provision to allow only one vehicle therefore it is felt that the lease should be reviewed and pOlicies adopted in order to resolve all issues at once. Mr. Jay Bulmash, 127 Electric Avenue, stated he was addressing the Council on behalf of himself and his 10-9-95 neighbors with regard to the several hundred thousand dollars of damages realized as a result of the January 1994 floods. Having researched this issue, he Claimed that the reason the Electric Avenue/Schooner Way area flooded was because the trash containers are defectively designed and built, they tipped over, spilled trash, which was carried to and blocked the one storm drain, and once the residents proceeded to remove the trash the I area drained within a few minutes. He reported having written to Briggeman Disposal regarding his investigation however that has never been acknowledged nor has his communication to the city, his discussion of the matter with members .of the Council likewise has not resulted in someone contacting him, his intent being to not pursue litigation. He said he could understand the lack of contact from Briggeman as they know there is a serious problem, however he could not understand the attitude of the City, yet Briggeman has a $1 million liability policy just for instances such as this, and to the denial of his and his neighbor's claims by the City, no reason for denial was given, only a statement that the city could in turn sue him, however as an attorney of many years with considerable experience in class actions he felt no threat. Mr. Bulmash expressed his belief that the city should pursue this matter on behalf of its residents, his neighbors are looking to him for assistance and to that said he has prepared a draft class action lawsuit against Briggeman and the City and in accordance with provisions of the Government Code it must be filed in approximately two weeks from this date unless some type of agreement can be reached, proclaiming that he has no desire to sue the City and cause needless litigation expenses, however if the City does not act on behalf of the citizens he will take the action. He claimed that once it is understood that Briggeman is going to be I sued no matter, possibly someone from the city will communicate with him so that the City will do the right thing to protect its residents and have any litigation fees paid at the same time, to which he offered to donate his services to assist the City if it chooses to prosecute this action, concluding that the City will be party to a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff or a defendant. To a question of Council, Mr. Bulmash stated that the new trash containers are cone shaped which makes them top-heavy and prone to tip over in the wind, with no locking top the trash spills out, and in the case of the rains the water carried the trash to and clogged the storm drain. He concluded that the city will be involved in any action as well in that when Briggeman is named they will in turn pursue the City for negligent street design, construction, maintenance, etc. Mr. Bulmash submitted a copy of the draft class action to the City Clerk. Mr. Jack Haley introduced Mr. Larry Lohrke, a local resident who has volunteered his time to the construction of the police substation. Mr. Haley said the goal has been met in that the substation was built in twenty-eight days, there were eighty volunteers, over seventy-seven people have made donations, and specifically recognized members of the media who kept this project before the public eye. He claimed that the concept of this facility started during the last Council election, both candidates in support of, the concept continued, other councilmembers supported, people wrote letters of support to the I Coastal Commission, the Commission approved the project without restriction, a citizens committee was formed and a local architect, Mr. Powers, was chosen. Mr. Haley identified a number of individuals, families, businesses and local community groups that have made donations and held fundraisers to benefit this project, those that have made pledges, numerous others who have volunteered their time, reported the formation of a tax deductible foundation in the name of the community Safety Building Foundation, an upcoming mailing seeking further donations for the project, and commended the PUblic Works Department for new landscaping, pilings, cement work, etc. Mr. I I I t " . I~'~ .' r oft'''; :i ....,. i 10-9-95 Haley announced the official ribbon cuttinq for the Bui1dinq on October 29th at noon and that invitations are beinq forwarded to various federal, state and local officials to attend. Mr. Lohrke said he is a qenera1 contractor, did the cabinets, reception counter and desk tops at the substation, and it has been a pleasure to qive somethinq back to the City in which he has spent the majority of his life. Mr. Haley noted that tables and chairs were purchased today, the computers are cominq, the carpet is expected by mid-week, anticipated that the keys will be turned over to the Police Department by the end of the week, and noted that Officer Gordon, who will be assiqned to the Station, joined with the volunteers workinq on the bui1dinq as well. Mr. Paul Yost, Seal Beach, offered to answer any questions the Council may have with reqard to the three hiqh vo1taqe power lines that loop throuqh the City and serve only as a backup to Rockwell. counci1member Forsythe mentioned her intent to request authorization of the Council to address a letter to Edison relative to concerns with this issue. Mr. Yost said his understandinq is that the EQCB will be discussinq this matter and preparinq a position statement to be forwarded to the city Council. There beinq no further comments, Mayor Hastinqs declared Oral Communications closed. COUNCIL ITEMS Given the time, effort, and contribution by Counci1member Forsythe to the process to seek a new city Manaqer, Mayor Hastinqs requested that she make the public announcement of the selection. Counci1member Forsythe announced the selection of Mr. Xeith Till, current city Manaqer of San Marino who has held that position for five years, was Assistant city Manaqer the three years prior, is forty-two years old, a native Southern Californian, holds a Masters Deqree in public policy and a Bachelors deqree in journalism, is married and has three children. In speakinq with local officials of San Marino and others Mr. Till's financial capabilities were praised, he was able to increase reserves for infrastructure, constructed police and fire facilities, developed the first five year capital improvement proqram, San Marino received its first Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reportinq from the National Government Finance Officers Association, and he helped establish an in-house finance system for that city. counci1member Forsythe said it is hoped that Mr. Till can commence his duties sometime the first of November or no later than mid November. APPOINTMENT - CIVIL SERVICE BOARD The District One appointment to fill the vacancy on the Civil Service Board was held over. CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "D" thru "R" Brown moved, second by Laszlo, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except Items "X" and "R", removed for separate consideration. D. Approved the waiver of readinq in full of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent to the waiver of readinq shall be deemed to be qiven by all Counci1members unless specific request is made at that time for the readinq of such ordinance or resolution. E. Denied the claim for damaqes of Robert E. Ramirez and referred same to the City's liability attorney and adjuster. F. Denied the claim for recovery of costs by the Mercury Insurance Group re1atinq to 10-9-95 AYES: NOES: the Ramirez claim, and referred same to the City's liability attorney and adjuster. Denied the claim for damages of Rodney R. Fine and referred same to the City's liability attorney and adjuster. Denied the claim for damages of Brenda and Terry Gray and referred same to the City's liability attorney and adjuster. I. Approved the Agreement for Reimbursement of Archaeological Investigation, Scope of Work, Preparation and Processing and Staff Support Services, Hellman Ranch, Seal Beach, between the city and Hellman Properties. G. I H. J. Approved the Operational Area Agreement in accordance with The Emergency Services Act and the Standardized Emergency Management System Regulations (mandated by SB 1841) between the County of Orange and the city of Seal Beach and authorized the Mayor to execute same on behalf of the city. Adopted Resolution Number 4416 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROPRIATING WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS TO FACILITATE AN EMERGENCY REPAIR TO THE BOLSA CHICA WELL. n By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4416 was waived. L. I M. Approved the Subsequent License Agreement between the city of Seal Beach and the Southern California Edison Company for the use of Edison Park for park purposes for the term commencing September 1, 1995 and ending August 31, 2005. N. Approved regular demands numbered 10403 through 10547 in the amount of $184,562.90, payroll demands numbered 13899 through 13911 in the amount of $264,508.04, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. O. Directed that the October 23rd, 1995 regular meetings of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency be canceled. P. Approved the Non-Standard Improvement Agreement between Mitchell Land and Improvement Company and the City of Seal Beach for permitted improvements in the alley right-of-way and authorized the city Manager to execute same on behalf of the City. Received and filed the Monthly Investment Report as of August 31, 1995. I Q. Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried I I I .. ;. . ~ '''',' " . ..' 10-9-95 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "K" - PROPOSED RESOLUTION - POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION POSITION PAPER - FIREARMS Mayor Hastings expressed concern with this item, stating she felt it is a Constitutional issue and should not be addressed at the local level, the Position Paper appears to be asking people to give up certain rights that have been guaranteed, an invasion of privacy as to registration, etc. Mayor Hastings asked that the Council not support the California Police Chiefs Association Position Paper on Firearms. Counci1member Forsythe expressed support for gun control however stated this may impose control on people who have a need for guns, in other words this will have no effect on the guns that need to be controlled. As to mandatory destruction being one strategy to achieve the ultimate goal to reduce firearm violence, the Mayor noted that there are firearm sanctions around the world which have not worked, those that want those weapons will continue to acquire them. Councilman Laszlo noted that this item is supported by the Police Chiefs Association and suggested that it would have been appropriate to have comments presented by the local Chief as to why it was supported. Councilman Doane mentioned that although he was not present, this issue was discussed at the October 6th League meeting, the Chief was present and has since asked for Council support of this item. Discussion continued with comments focusing on the Constitutional right to bear arms, counter to that, that this Paper does not ban the right to bear arms but seeks legislation for the banning of certain high powered automatic weapons that are not necessary for the general population, this is not a reflection on or at issue with the National Rifle Association, also that this may be a means to enact legislation for the registration and control of firearms. The motion to receive and file was restated by Councilman Brown to provide that if this matter is to be considered at some point in the future that a staff report be prepared with a recommendation or statement from the Police Chief, and that additional information be provided. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hastings. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried ITEM "R" - APPROVAL OF MINUTES Forsythe moved, second by Brown, to approve the minutes of the August 9th regular adjourned meeting, the September 25th regular adjourned meeting, the September 25th regular meeting, the September 26th regular adjourned meeting, and the September 27th regular adjourned meeting with a notation that Counci1member Forsythe was abstaining from the approval of the August 9th meeting and Councilman Laszlo was abstaining from the September 25th meetings as they were absent from those sessions. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to declare a recess at 8:22 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:33 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order. Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to reconsider the order of the agenda and move Item "U" before Item "S". AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried 10-9-95 PUBLIC HEARING I PROPOSED ORDINANCE - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 95-3 - DEFINITION - LOT WIDTH Mayor Hastings declared the public hearing open to consider Zone Text Amendment 95-3 relating to the definition of lot width. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, and reported no communications were received regarding this matter. The I Director of Development Services presented the staff report, explained that the intent of this item is to formalize a Planning Commission policy adopted in 1986 to change the definition of lot width, where, in determining a lot width the dimension is rounded up to the nearest tenth of a foot, and pointed out that the only situation where that makes a significant difference as to what can or can not be developed on a piece of property is in the downtown area on lots that are in the residential medium or high density zone. Current Code provides that a lot of 37.5 feet in width or wider can have a third story on the rear half of the lot where if the lot is less than 37.5 feet it is restricted to a two story structure, as an example under the 1986 Commission policy, if a lot were 37.45 feet in width it would be considered as 37.5 feet and would allow the third story. The Director advised that staff had not been aware of the policy, have not seen an ordinance reflecting that policy, and for a number of years have advised people that a third story was not allowed on the rear half of their lot, these lots are primarily in the Seal Way area with widths of 37.48 or 37.49 feet. The Director confirmed that approximately sixteen lots have been identified as being in this category, half on the beach side of Seal Way the other half on the Ocean Avenue side, the end lots in the vicinity of Tenth to Twelfth or Thirteenth Streets. In the event the Council were to concur I with the rounding up policy, Mayor Hastings inquired if structures on those lots could be restricted to a twenty-five foot height limit as are the smaller lots. The Director responded that current Code provides an automatic right to construct a third story on the rear half of the lot if it is at least 37.5 feet in width, however if the desire of Council were to restrict all residential structures to twenty-five feet in height then an amendment of the Code would be necessary. Councilman Laszlo said his understanding of the concern is with allowing all sixteen lots the opportunity for a third story, and asked if there are any other advantages to round the subject lot widths to 37.5 feet. The Director explained that the Code already allows the third story for 37.5 foot width lots, this issue was a policy of the Commission adopted by resolution, however it would be more appropriate to adopt such policy by ordinance for codification into the Code. The Mayor noted past public concerns with the covered roof access structures impacting views, light, privacy, etc., and questioned the impact of allowing this policy. Mayor Hastings advised of her belief that she resides within three hundred feet of the subject properties, therefore would need to abstain from participating in this matter. Mayor Hastings invited members of the audience wishing to speak to this matter to come to the microphone and state their name I and address for the record. Mr. Brian Brown, 1009 Seal Way, stated he was speaking as a private citizen, not as a member of the Planning Commission, and he too had to abstain on this issue as he resides within three hundred feet of the affected properties. Mr. Brown expressed his opinion that the Planning Commission did not address all of the facts when considering this matter, confirmed that this affects only sixteen properties, half facing the beach and half facing the south side of Ocean, approval of the rounding up would give those properties a special privilege that they have not had previously, and even though a planning Commission resolution I I I J, 'II! \. "t " . '.J . , 10-9-95 existed, it was not enforced, those property owners have been advised that three stories were not allowed and none have been built. He asked that consideration be given as to what the impact would be to have a third story on each of those sixteen properties, there will undoubtedly be complaints from adjacent property owners, it will affect the view, will quite likely not be a desirable look, and noted that existing properties having a third story are on lots of greater width. The city Attorney confirmed the residence of Mayor Hastings as being within the three hundred foot range, advised that she could continue to chair the meeting, however should not participate in any decision on this item. Ms. Wendi Rothman, Seal Beach, noted that the subject sixteen properties are all within a three block area and to build to three stories would have a detrimental effect in terms of light and air, in fact there is already a shadow nearly the width of Seal Way from those properties that have already built to three stories, and further, three story structures would have a significant impact on densities and property values as well. She confirmed ownership of one of the properties, being allowed to build to three stories would likely be a benefit, yet it is also important to look to the betterment of the community and not just self-serving interests. Ms. Rothman suggested that the 1986 action of the Commission be rescinded and/or this matter be referred back to that body. Councilman Brown inquired as to what effect 'no action' would have on the unenforced 1986 Planning commission resolution. The City Attorney advised that he could find no change in the powers of the Planning Commission since 1986 nor their authority to enact such policy, yet the Council does not have the power to rescind the resolution as it was the commission that took the initial action, however the council could adopt language to declare that Resolution Number 1405 shall no longer have any affect, or could refer the matter back to the Commission. Mr. Jim Klisanin, 7th Street, said he owns none of the subject properties however was familiar with them from a real estate standpoint, and cited an example of a potential buyer of one of the properties if there was the possibility of building higher, upon being informed a third story was not permitted, the sale never took place, some of the properties also house more than a single family, a duplex, or fourplex, thus the ability to go to a third story would increase the value of the properties. He suggested that if the intent is to enact this Text"Amendment the property owners should be given the opportunity to address this issue. Councilman Brown clarified that by interpretation these properties do not currently have the right to construct a third story, the 1986 Commission policy required a subsequent action, and if the Planning Commission recommendation were enacted that would constitute granting those sixteen property owners the right to build a third story, a right they do not currently have. Mr. Klisanin said in that case he would likely support no further action on this matter. The City Attorney made reference to section 28-2202 of the Code with regard to clarification of ambiguities, whereby the Planning commission can make recommendations to the Council however a City Council action is required, in this case there was a 1986 action by the Commission however no subsequent action by the council has been found, therefore the resolution has no force or effect at this point, and it is within the discretion of the Council to consider the options available at this time. Mayor Hastings declared the public hearing closed. Brown moved, second by Laszlo, to take no action on the proposed ordinance relating to Zone Text Amendment 95-3, definition of lot width, and in doing so it is understood that Planning 10-9-95 Commission Resolution Number 1405 no longer has any force or effect. Councilman Laszlo moved a substitute motion that this item be referred back to the Planning Commission to consider the new information received for a determination if there is any change to their prior decision so that this issue does not resurface in I the future. Councilman Brown pointed out that one member of the Commission will need to abstain from addressing this issue before the Commission. There was no second to the substitute motion. Councilmember Forsythe noted another adverse effect of this issue would be a fire hazard, preference would be to not create another Surfs ide situation, rather, this consideration should be concluded once and for all. The Director said the issue may be whether or not to allow the third story on lots of 37.5 feet or wider, and it would be within the discretion of the Council to refer that issue to the Commission for consideration as a different zone text amendment. With regard to staff having to make discretionary decisions as to an actual lot width, the Director advised that in questionable cases the services of a licensed surveyor is called for. The indicated intent of the Council was to not allow a rounding up of lot widths for any lot under 37.5 feet, also at some point the Commission may wish to readdress the issue of height limits in the downtown area. Vote on the motion to take no action and that Resolution 1405 has no further force or effect: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Laszlo None Hastings Motion carried The City Attorney advised that the record should reflect that the abstention of Mayor Hastings is due to her residing within three hundred feet of one of the subject properties. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION Brown moved, second by Laszlo, to continue the intended adjournment to Closed Session until 9:45 p.m. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried CONTINUED HEARING - APPEAL - TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES I PROGRAMS FEE ADJUSTMENT - MITCHELL PLAZA PROJECT - PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY Mayor Hastings declared the continued hearing open to consider the appeal for adjustment of the Transportation Facilities and Programs Development Fees, noting that the public testimony portion of this hearing was closed on September 11th. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report in response to Council direction relating to the appeal for adjustment of the Transportation Fees as established by ordinance and subsequent resolution. He noted discussion on September 11th with regard to the structure that was previously on the subject property that generated trips onto City streets and consideration of some credit for those trips even though the structure had been demolished and the property sat vacant for several years. Council direction to staff was to establish some criteria to address situations where there was a previous use of a property as well as an alternative fee structure as opposed to the standard fee schedule for property that is vacant and has never been developed. The Director explained that the proposed resolution recognizes that if a property is vacant for a short period of time there is little change to the impact on the City street system as opposed to a property that has been vacant for a longer periOd of time where the impact is greater because there has been no use of the property thus no traffic I . I I I I 10-9-95 generation, .the fee structure proposed imposes a greater fee the longer a property is unused, takes into account some recognition that there were trips in the past, those have dropped, yet there will be new trips which need to be accommodated with either signal improvements at intersections, restriping of intersections, a need for right turn lanes, and in some areas of the community possibly street widenings, the basis for this data provided through the OKS background study of 1989. The Director advised that the appellant has been provided with a copy of the staff report, they may not be in total aqreement with the proposal, and in this particular case the appellant would be responsible for payment of sixty percent of the standard fee based upon the period of time the property has been vacant and time frame of the issuance of the demolition permit and issuance of the building permit, about three and a half years. Mr. Dave Bartlett, representing the appellant, stated that upon review of the staff report they are in agreement with the fee schedule proposed however there is a difference of opinion as to the category in which this development falls in that the Rum Runners Restaurant was demolished May 1st, 1992, the staff report proposes a fee for the previously developed, but vacant property at the time of new development plan submittal, which he stated was March 14th, 1994, about a year and ten months after the demolition of Rum Runners, thus places this project in the twenty percent fee category. Mr. Bartlett recognized that there is a significant permit process for the coastal zone of Seal Beach that delays building and occupancy permits for months if not years, and they were of the understanding at the time the new development plans were submitted, that that was being taken into consideration given the length of time to process through the Coastal Commission rather than basing the criteria on building permit issuance. Mr. Bartlett restated his opinion that their obligation falls within twenty percent category of the fee schedule, and asked that consideration also be given to the fact that this project generates fifty percent less trips than the prior use. He confirmed that no one knows for certain when the Rum Runners actually closed its doors, possibly about May of 1991, and made a comparison to the fee calculation in the staff report relating to the Burger King. It was acknowledged that the lanquage of the staff report referenced by Mr. Bartlett did not appear in the text of the proposed resolution, the reference only being to the time of vacancy of the structure or parcel. The Director confirmed that the demolition date is the reference in this case as the closure date is unknown as it could well be with other properties in a similar situation. Mr. Bartlett said their thinking had been based upon the language in the staff report, to which Councilman Brown stated the reference should actually be to the resolution. The Director stated the issue may be with the reference to a new section 5 in the proposed resolution and section 4 of Resolution 4234, that Resolution establishing fees pursuant to the implementing ordinance which states that the fees are to be collected at the time building permits are issued, thus the fees are based upon the date of building permit issuance. He said he understood the comments of Mr. Bartlett in that application for a building permit can be made yet it may not be obtained for a number of months due to the other processes that have to be gone through, however that is the current policy and if there is a desire to change that, the ordinance will need to be amended. Mr. Bartlett expressed appreciation in working with the Council and staff, noting however that their interpretation of the fee schedule had been twenty to forty percent. The Director said of concern is that people would simply make application for a building permit with the understanding that the fees would be based on the application date, an example would be submittal of a totally inappropriate plan with considerable time spent 10-9-95 thereafter to make corrections to develop a plan for which permits can be issued, that likely the reasoninq for the initial determination years aqo to base the fees on the issuance of the permit. Councilmember Forsythe aqreed, yet noted that what this applicant and others must qo throuqh at the Coastal Commission level sometimes causes considerable delay, and why should they then be bumped into the next hiqher percentaqe cateqory. To that, Councilman Brown suqqested the ordinance be left as is and develop a means of qivinq credit back for the time delay at Coastal Commission. Mayor Hastinqs once aqain noted that the fee is based on square footaqe yet the reports make reference to trips qenerated and traffic impacts, and she found it difficult to find the nexus between square footaqe and trips qenerated, this project, as an example, a much less active environment as to trips per day than the previous use, yet there is no credit for qeneratinq less trips. The Director acknowledqed the concern, yet the problem of staff is that the ordinance adopted by the Council does not address that issue, and aqain, staff could readdress that issue if the Council so desires. The Mayor aqain indicated confusion with the justification for the fees based upon trips per day and then the charqe on the basis of square footaqe, statinq that the square footaqe is not always an indication as to how much traffic will be qenerated, possibly the ordinance should be looked at in terms of the types of businesses rather than cateqories. The Director explained that the 1989 analysis was done on the basis of trips per day of certain major types of land uses, retail, office, hotel, sinqle family, multiple family, the consultant then converted the trips per day, particularly for the retail and commercial uses, to a cost per square foot, hotels to a cost per room, residential a cost per unit of new construction, a methodoloqy within that report as to how that calculation is made, as an example, there is a difficulty when someone comes in with a medical office statinq there will be two doctors, a few patients, and qenerate maybe thirty trips a day, yet in six months there may be five doctors qeneratinq two hundred trips a day, therefore the cost per square footaqe basis is a simpler calculation. The trips per day have to be addressed for the environmental analysis, a Coastal Commission requirement for their review, the trips per day aqain necessary for uses that are not specified in the current fee schedule, such as banks in the Burqer Kinq matter, in that banks were not always a specified use in the square footaqe costs and are then calculated on a trips per day basis. He explained further that the current ordinance does not allow credit for what was a previous use, Burqer Kinq was the conversion of an existinq buildinq, where the Mitchell project is new construction on vacant property. To a question of Council, Mr. Bartlett responded that the Coastal Commission process took four months, submitted in November, 1994, the submittal to the City was March 16th, City approval was July, 1994, the qradinq permit was May, 1995, and the buildinq permit was July, 1995. Staff clarified that the Coastal Commission process must be completed before the issuance of a buildinq permit. Councilman Brown stated that based upon those dates it appears this project falls within the forty percent bracket. There beinq no further comments, Mayor Hastinqs declared the hearinq closed. Councilmember Forsythe moved that forty percent of the standard fee be applied to the Mitchell Plaza Project, and that this matter be referred back to the Planninq Commission for further revision. Councilman Brown seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastinqs, Laszlo None Motion carried I I I I I I 10-9-95 Councilman Brown moved that in referring this back to the Planning Commission the issue of some allowance for the time frame to process through the Coastal Commission be addressed as well. Councilmember Forsythe seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to declare a recess at 9:34 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:42 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order. CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT Brown moved, second by Hastings, to continue the intended adjournment to Closed Session until 10:15 p.m. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL - HOURS OF OPERATION - LOS CABOS RESTAURANT - 550 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY Mayor Hastings declared the continued public hearing open to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission condition of approval relating to the hours of operation of the Los Cabos Restaurant, 550 Pacific Coast Highway. The city Clerk certified that notice of the continued public hearing had been posted, readvertised and mailed, and reported that the only communication received was via telephone from Mr. Robert Davis, Galleon Way, in opposition to the extension of hours. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, recalled that the Council held a public hearing on this matter on July 24th, on motion of the council the appeal was denied, on August 28th a resolution reflecting the determination of the council was considered, the resolution was not adopted, and staff was directed to reschedule a public hearing on this matter when the full Council would be present. He noted the request of the appellant relates to hours of operation of his existing business, the current hours are from 8:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m., sunday through Thursday, 8:00 a.m. until midnight on Friday, Saturday and holidays, the initial request of the applicant was to remain open until midnight on weeknights and 1:00 a.m. on weekends, which he subsequently modified verbally during the initial public hearing to 11:00 p.m. and midnight. Mayor Hastings invited members of the public wishing to speak to this matter to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Mr. Steven Scheuer, 255 - 6th Street, made reference to persons having spoken of Seal Beach as a family place, a better place to live, Founders Day, the Police Subst~tion, etc. Mr. Scheuer said he could find no reason to extend the hours of Los Cabos except to promote drinking, the type of place that residents do not want in their neighborhoods, the restaurant is across from his house, speeding cars and other neighborhood annoyances have been experienced, thus extending hours will not help Seal Beach in any way even though it may bring in a limited amount of income, if any, to this city. He predicted this will become a beer bar and urged that the hours not be extended. Dr. David Rosenman, 8th Street, asked that the Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission, noting that this type of request has been dealt with a number of times whether it be on Main Street or other areas of the City. He said there appears to be a potential for conflict of logic as no one could expect a city, with the succession of Council's and Planning Commission's, to do the same thing over a period of time, some permits in the past may have been broader in scope than others, and because something was done in the past does not mean there is a nexus for doing something now, rather, there 10-9-95 needs to be an effort towards common operating hours in the downtown area. Mr. Lawrence pilchman, 253 - 6th street, stated that extending the hours of Los Cabos can only further depress property values in this area as it is known that values have already gone down. He mentioned that this operation is located at the foot of the greenbelt which will be an inviting area to intoxicated persons leaving this facility, there will be noise, trash, etc. He said there is nothing positive about this request and asked that the appeal not be approved. Mr. Gordon Shanks, 215 Surf Place, expressed his support for the action of the Planning commission, these issues dealt with before, the Council has attempted to establish standards, the commission action was in line with those standards, and it seems there needs to be a continual effort to stand up to such requests and compromises. He asked again that the action of the Commission be supported. Mr. David Friedman, 225 - 6th street, agreed with those supporting the decision of the Planning commission as well as uniformity, and expressed concern should this restaurant be sold and turned into a bar given the extended hours. Mr. Jim watson, 101 Main Street, stated the appellant, Mr. Bonadonna, requested that he speak on his behalf, and that he was speaking as the property owner. He indicated his respect for the opinions expressed by others, also his support for establishing standards. Mr. Watson said no other restaurant in Seal Beach having a full liquor license has been required to closed at 10:00 p.m. during the week, the request of the appellant is to be allowed the same hours at Los Cabos as his restaurant next door, Bonadonna's, however as a gesture of cooperation he reduced his request to a 11:00 p.m. closing during the week, which will continue to be a detriment to his business. Mr. Watson stated that the appellant has operated Bonadonna's and Los Cabos for more than seven years, has a fine operation, an asset to the community, that he as landlord has assisted Mr. Bonadonna through adjustment of his rents over the last two years, and he now has a plan to change his menu to provide steak and lobster, which would be an asset. with regard to the rumor that the business may be sold, Mr. Watson suggested that would be the affairs of the restaurant owner, as a landlord he would not want a bar without food service nor does he want another vacancy. He stated that happy hour and racing cars are not relevant to this matter, his feeling is that the City is limiting the hours of this business to 10:00 p.m., which is a detriment to the business and property owners, yet there is no other forty-seven license in the city that has such a restriction, and in other cities it would be unusual to require a forty-seven license to close at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Watson praised Mr. Bonadonna as a person, business owner and citizen, cited the fact that Los Cabos is situated in the neighborhood of a church, liquor store, hotel, and the nearest residence at least three hundred feet away, further than most residences adjacent to Main street, noted there has never been a complaint as to this business, and said he felt it would be unfair to limit this business to 10:00 p.m. Mr. John Baker, resident and liquor store owner, noted his familiarity with hours of operation and other rules and regulations that are limited by a conditional use permit. He recalled a statement of the then Chairman of the Planning Commission that there must be a level playing field, to which he claimed there is not in this case, also stated he did not know the owner of Los Cabos. Mr. Baker pointed out that the appellant operates a restaurant, not a bar, the only bars are the Irisher, clanceys, and Daves, in order to be a restaurant a certain level of food service must be maintained, and if it is not either the City of ABC may close the business. Mr. Ron Bennett, Seal Beach resident, stated that Bonadonnas and Los Cabos are both restaurants, and agreed that there needs to be a level playing field in this case, which there is not, there have been no problems in the past, there are speeding cars on I I I I I I . . 10-9-95 Catalina Avenue as well, which has nothing to do with this being a restaurant or bar. He asked why it is assumed that this operator is going to have problems, Bonadonna's is open until 1:00 a.m. and there are no problems there, Los Cabos is just a restaurant that the owner is trying to service. There being no further comments, Mayor Hastings declared Oral Communications closed. Councilman Doane agreed with the speakers that a level playing field is needed, yet what he is hearing is that if the hours requested are granted this restaurant will suddenly become something else, as to the rumor of sale he said that there is nothing that would prevent the owner from selling Bonadonna's now, with its forty-seven license, if the intent was to make it a bar. Councilman Doane urged that the extension of hours be granted, that condition to receive a six month review, and if the operation becomes something other than what is represented, the establishment can be closed. Councilmember Forsythe said she felt what was being overlooked is that the applicant originally asked for hours of 8:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m., it was the Planning commission who compromised to allow the hours that currently exists, and offered that if all of the class forty- seven licenses were merged into what the majority of hours are, there could possibly be a need to reduce the hours of Bonadonna'S, Hennesseys, Pappilions and the Glider Inn. She reminded that Seal Beach is a bedroom community, family oriented, this restaurant is located in a residential area on property that was previously a lumberyard. Councilmember Forsythe stated this use does impact the neighborhood, she was in the opposition to the hours requested by the appeal, and moved to sustain the decision of the Planning commission. Mayor Hastings seconded the motion. AYES: NOES: Brown, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo Doane Motion carried The City Attorney advised that a resolution will be prepared to reflect the action of the Council for a future meeting. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to continue the intended adjournment to Closed Session until 10:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 95-2 - PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION TO OCCUPANTS Mayor Hastings declared the public hearing open to consider Zone Text Amendment 95-2 relating to public hearing notification to occupants. The City Clerk certified that the notice of public hearing had been advertised as required by law and reported no communications received relating to this item. The Director of Development Services explained that this Zone Text Amendment would expand the current noticing requirements to all property owners within three hundred feet of a project to also include the occupants of structures within that area, the cost of the additional noticing to be passed on to the applicant. 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. Brian Brown, speaking as a member of the Planning Commission, favored ZTA 95-2 as a resolution to a problem that primarily exists in the downtown area where the majority of residents are not property owners and are often not aware of upcoming projects, the cost of the additional mailings will be borne by the applicant, the only area where the additional notification may be more difficult and costly may be Leisure World. Councilman Brown advised that in Leisure World 10-9-95 the notices should be sent to the Mutual Presidents for distribution. There beinq no further comments, Mayor Hastinqs declared the public hearinq closed. ORDINANCE NUMBER 1397 - ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 95-2 - NOTIFICATION TO OCCUPANTS Ordinance Number 1397 was presented to Council entitled "AN I ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AMENDMENT CHAPTER 28 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO NOTIFICATION TO OCCUPANTS (ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 95-2)." By unanimous consent, full readinq of Ordinance Number 1397 was waived. Brown moved, second by Forsythe, to approve the introduction of Ordinance Number 1397 as presented and that it be passed on to second readinq. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastinqs, Laszlo None Motion carried CITY MANAGER REPORTS There were no City Manaqer reports. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Brown commended the Miss Seal Beach paqeant and its proqram, and announced the selection of Miss Ashley Eaqle as this years Miss Seal Beach, notinq that Miss Eaqle is the dauqhter of Parks Supervisor, Bob Eaqle. Councilman Laszlo announced the installation of a cellular phone antenna in the vicinity of Almond and Aster behind the Old Ranch tennis courts on the Bixby property. Councilmember Forsythe referred to the comments of Mr. Yost earlier in the meetinq and stated there is considerable community interest in havinq the power lines alonq I Bolsa Avenue removed, especially in the vicinity of schools, this matter upcominq for consideration by the Environmental Quality Control Board and the city Council. In response to letters published in two newspapers relatinq to the stinqray issue, Councilmember Forsythe clarified that at no time did the City Council qive permission for the stinqray fishinq derby to take place, notinq that the niqht prior to this activity considerable time had been spent on the telephone in an attempt to have this activity stopped as it was learned that there were other means to take care of the problem, and stated that she hoped this did not maliqn the reputation of Seal Beach as this community would not intentionally hurt livinq creatures, especially in the festive manner in which it had been proposed. Councilmember Forsythe said she would hope this type of activity will not occur in the future, that proposals such as this issue should be brouqht before the Council prior to release to the press, and aqain, there are other means of control to be looked at. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meetinq at 10:23 p.m. By actions taken durinq this meetinq, the Council adjourned back to the reqular adjourned meetinq of 6:30 p.m. to once aqain meet in Closed Session. The Council directed that the city Clerk cancel the October 23rd reqular meetinq and adjourn that meetinq until Monday, October 30th at 6:30 p.m., the aqenda for October 30th to be minimal, commencinq with a Closed Session and consist of warrants, a draft ordinance, etc. I I I I 10-9-95 / 10/23/95 I 10-30-95 Approved: of the Attest: Seal Beach, California October 23, 1995 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regular city Council meeting of October 23, 1995 is hereby cancelled pursuant to the direction of the City Council and adjourned to Monday, October 30th, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. r);1 Seal Beach, California October 30, 1995 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:30 p.m. with Mayor Hastings calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Hastings Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Laszlo Absent: None Also present: Mr. Whittenberg, Acting City Manager/Director of Development Services Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Acting City Manager requested that Item "0", proposed Ordinance Number 1398 adopting by reference the 1994 Uniform Fire Code, be removed from consideration at this meeting to allow minor modifications by the city Attorney's office. The City Attorney noted that the Council had been provided with a revised copy of Item "F", a second recital having been added to proposed Ordinance Number 1399. Forsythe moved, second by Brown, to approve the order of the agenda as revised.