Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2006-09-06 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Agenda for September 6, 2006 7:30 p.m. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. AGENDA APPROVAL By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to: (a) Notify the public of any changes to the Agenda; (b) Re-arrange the order of the Agenda; and/or (c) Provide an opportunity for any member of the Planning Commission, staff, or public to request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, provided that the Planning Commission may undertake no action or discussion unless otherwise authorized by law. V. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one motion unless prior to enactment, a member of the Planning Commission, staff, or the public requests a specific item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2006. 2. Minor Plan Review 06-11 928 Blue Heron Applicant/Owner: Robert & Victoria Lienau Request: Approval to construct a 42-inch high barbeque .and counter structure and a 48-inch high waterfall within the 15-foot rear setback area. The barbeque and waterfall structures will maintain a distance of 5 feet and 4 feet, respectively, to the rear fence. 1 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of September 6, 2006 . Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-40. VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS 3. Determination of Proper Zoning Automotive Tow Business Recommendation: Consider request of proper Zoning for automotive tow businesses within the City of Seal Beach. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 06-42, as proposed by Staff, or as amended by the determination of the Planning Commission. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS VIII. STUDY SESSION 4. Development Standards for 3-Story Residences I n Old Town . IX. STAFF CONCERNS X. COMMISSION CONCERNS XI. ADJOURNMENT . 2 . . . Sep 20 Oct 04 Oct 18 Nov 08 Nov 22 Dec 06 Dec 20 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of September 6, 2006 2006 Aaenda Forecast CUP 06-5 - 320 Main St (Three Twenty Main Restaurant) 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of September 6, 2006 Chairperson Deaton called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2006. The meeting was held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.1 ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Deaton, Commissioners Bello, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts. Also Present: Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Paul DaVeiga, Senior Planner Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney Absent: None AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Ladner to approve the Agenda as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Deaton, Bello, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts None None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Deaton opened oral communications. There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Deaton closed oral communications. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2006. 1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting. 1 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 2. Minor Plan Review 06-11 928 Blue Heron Applicant/Owner: Robert & Victoria Lienau Request: Approval to construct a 42-inch high barbeque and counter structure and a 48-inch high waterfall within the 15-ft. rear setback area. The barbeque and waterfall structures will maintain a distance of 5 feet and 4 feet, respectively, to the rear fence. Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 06-40. MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by O'Malley to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Deaton, Bello, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts None None Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 06-40 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commission action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. SCHEDULED MATTERS 3. Determination of Proper Zoning Automotive Tow Business Recommendation: Consider request of proper Zoning for automotive tow businesses within the City of Seal Beach. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 06-42, as proposed by Staff, or as amended by the determination of the Planning Commission. Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He provided some background information on this item and noted that this discussion is the result of complaints received within the past month regarding a longstanding tow business that recently relocated from the former Union 76 service station location at Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and Main Street to the corner of 10th Street and PCH. He indicated that after doing some research, Staff found that the City has no requirements for tow businesses, and in fact, does not allow them, although 2 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 they have been doing business within the City for years. As a result, Staff proposes that 2 the Planning Commission (PC) recommend that City Council (CC) adopt a Policy 3 Statement during the interim period until Staff can prepare a Zone Text Amendment 4 (ZTA) to allow tow businesses within the C-2 Zone of Seal Beach subject to the 5 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. He explained that the C-2 Zone is the most 6 intense commercial zone designation that the City has, and the large majority of 7 properties along PCH and Rossmoor Center and a few other shopping centers fall 8 within this zoning classification. He noted that historically most tow businesses in town 9 have worked in conjunction with a service station location, but when the Union 76 10 station was demolished, the tow operator moved to an existing auto repair business on 11 10th Street. He indicated that some of the concerns conveyed by residents were related 12 to tow trucks towing vehicles needing repair and dropping them off at this location either 13 very early in the morning or late at night, creating noise disturbances. He stated that 14 the policy statement attempts to provide some guidance in following a good neighbor 15 policy with regard to this issue, in particular for outside tow operators, like AAA, bringing 16 cars in for repair. 17 18 Commissioner Questions 19 20 Commissioner O'Malley asked if there has previously been a distinction between 21 automotive towing business and service vehicles that assist drivers in getting their car 22 started or provide gasoline or other non-repair assistance. Mr. Whittenberg stated that 23 the policy statement is only directed for the business location within a C-2 Zone where 24 vehicles are being towed and dropped off for repair. Commissioner O'Malley referred to 25 Exhibit A, Bullet 3 on Page 10 of the Staff and asked if this would prevent a vehicle 26 owner from having his or her car towed to their residence. Mr. Whittenberg reiterated 27 that this policy statement would only apply to the business location within a C-2 Zone, 28 so if a vehicle owner wants the vehicle towed to his or her residence, these standards 29 would not apply. Commissioner O'Malley suggested adding the text "when being towed 30 to the business." He then referred to Bullet 4 and asked how provision of these 31 guidelines to other tow companies would be accomplished. Mr. Whittenberg stated that 32 Staff has spoken to some of the tow companies and auto repair shops in town and they 33 are aware of a number of other companies within the general area that under contract 34 will drop vehicles off at their locations, and to the best of their ability, they will provide 35 the Operations Guidelines to these business operations. Commissioner O'Malley then 36 referred to the last bullet item and asked what this was about. Mr. Whittenberg stated 37 that this will help generate a list of other types of businesses dropping off vehicles at the 38 auto service location, so that they may provide them with the Operations Guidelines. 39 Mr. Whittenberg noted that Staff did confer with one of the tow operators late this 40 afternoon and recommended the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. as the approved hours 41 of operation, and the tow operator suggested modifying the hours to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 42 p.m. to reflect the hours of normal business operations. 43 44 Chairperson Deaton stated that although some of these repair shops are located very 45 close to residences, limiting the hours of operation could negatively impact this 46 business, particularly when other towing businesses would not be bound by this 3 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 restriction. Mr. Whittenberg again noted that this policy statement is an attempt to deal with the issue of outside tow businesses towing vehicles to local repair shops in the early morning or late at night. Chairperson Deaton stated she would be in favor of changing the hours of operation to begin at 7:00 a.m. and end no later than 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Roberts stated that it appears that the business owner voluntarily imposed some of the guidelines beginning July 21,2006. He asked if Staff has had any feedback with regard to whether the mitigation measures have been effective. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff has received information that outside tow operators continue to drop off vehicles late at night, but with regard to the tow trucks physically located at the business site, there have been no further complaints. Commissioner Roberts stated that his concern is that body work might be taking place at this location, as in driving by he observed two damaged vehicles parked in front of the business, and he wonders if this will become a storage yard for damaged cars. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this can be addressed during the CUP public hearing process. Chairperson Deaton noted that Exhibit A states that service vehicles may be stored on the premises; however, it does not identify these service vehicles. She recommended a more specific description of "service vehicle," to prevent storing of "wrecked" vehicles for indefinite periods. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this would be addressed in the text for the ZT A. Mr. Whittenberg asked for clarification on the preferred hours of operation. Commissioner Roberts stated that the operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. would be acceptable. Mr. Abbe noted that the motion should include Commissioner O'Malley's recommendation to address the issue of not parking towed cars on public streets or alleys other than near the vicinity of the business and also to amend the hours of operation. MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by O'Malley to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 06-42 as amended, and recommend adoption of City Council Policy 600-12, Automotive Tow Business. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Deaton, Bello, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts None None PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 4 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 STAFF CONCERNS 4. Development Standards for three-story Residences In Old Town Staff Report Mr. DaVeiga delivered the staff report with a PowerPoint presentation. (Presentation is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He began by reviewing the issue of "Takings," noting the conditions for determining whether a taking has occurred. Mr. Abbe interjected additional commentary on the various court decisions presented regarding this issue. The Senior Planner then reviewed the history of the current discussion on third story development in Seal Beach beginning with the June 21, 2006 review of a request to construct two, three-story condominiums; and the subsequent approval to construct two, two-story condominiums, followed by the recommendation for a moratorium on third story development in order to study this issue further. City Council (CC) approved a 45-day moratorium on June 26, 2006, and on July 24, 2006 CC denied the request for an extended moratorium and directed Staff to review this issue in conjunction with pending modifications to the Zoning Code (ZC). Mr. DaVeiga then displayed a map of the lots measuring 37.5 ft. or wider within Old Town and reviewed the existing Code requirements. He followed by presenting the following options for consideration by the Planning Commission (PC): Option 1 No change to the Code. Third story development allowed on lots that are 37.5 ft. or greater in width. Option 2 Prohibit third story development in Old Town. Option 3 Amend the Code to include third story development standards that address compatibility issues as either discretionary actions or permitted by right. After presenting photographs of various three-story developments in Old Town, Mr. DaVeiga presented surveys of selected coastal cities on the issue of upper-story development standards. He reviewed methods for addressing neighborhood compatibility issues noting the use of upper story setbacks, upper story floor area ratio, solar access requirements, fac;ade articulation, height limitations, and infill development standards. He ended by presenting a survey of current land use inventory for the 440 properties in Old Town measuring 37.5 ft. or greater. Mr. DaVeiga then noted that Staff had received a total of 31 letters regarding this issue, with 25 letters in favor of eliminating third story development altogether, 4 letters favoring no change, and 2 letters favoring revision to the development standards for third stories. 5 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 Commissioner Questions 2 3 Chairperson Deaton confirmed that out of the 440 properties surveyed, 36 already have 4 a three-story structure on the lot. Mr. DaVeiga confirmed that 36 lots was correct; 5 however, after doing a subsequent check the total number of lots in Old Town Actually 6 came to 430. Chairperson Deaton requested a history of how the determination was 7 made to allow third story construction on the 37.5 ft. wide lots. Mr. Whittenberg 8 interjected that he has worked with the City since 1989, and this standard has been in 9 place since 1974, and Staff has not reviewed the records of that time to determine what 10 was driving the standards developed in 1974 or prior to this date. He added that in 11 1974 the City completed a comprehensive ZC update and adopted a new ZC. He 12 indicated that in talking with people in the community, his understanding is that this 13 standard was in place when this new ZC was adopted, and apparently was developed 14 as an offset for reducing density for the number of units that could have been 15 constructed on lots within Old Town. Chairperson Deaton noted that former members 16 of CC were present in the audience tonight and perhaps they could provide information 17 on this. She indicated that when the downzoning was completed, the ability to have 18 additional units on 25-feet lots was eliminated. She referred to the three-story 19 condominium project mentioned in the visual presentation and stated that for many 20 years after the allowance of three stories on the 37.5 ft. lots there were not many 21 projects presented; however, these projects have become more frequent. She asked 22 the Director of Development Services whether this was the case. Mr. Whittenberg 23 stated that he could not respond to this, as under the ZC no discretionary review is 24 required for construction of a third story on the rear half of a 37.5 ft. wide lot. He said if 25 the projects meet building standards, no special review is required. Chairperson 26 Deaton asked how many of these projects are currently in the "pipeline." Mr. 27 Whittenberg stated that during the moratorium, three projects were approved, and one 28 of them was the two-unit condominium project, and the others were both single-family 29 residences (SFRs). Chairperson Deaton approximated that this would be equal to just 30 under10 percent of the 36 lots in Old Town with three-story structures. Mr. Whittenberg 31 noted that some of these three-story buildings are not SFRs constructed under today's 32 standards, but are legal nonconforming apartment buildings built under the old 33 standards before the downzoning. Chairperson Deaton requested that Mr. Whittenberg 34 indicate when the public notice for this study session was circulated. Mr. Whittenberg 35 stated that the notice was published as an 8th_page display ad in the Sun Newspaper 36 two weeks ago and was also posted on the City's web page along with the Staff Report. 37 Chairperson Deaton asked if there were any other areas of Seal Beach, other than Old 38 Town, where there were changing heights for differing lot sizes. Mr. Whittenberg stated 39 that there were not. 40 41 Commissioner Roberts asked if the ZC as it refers to District 1, which is Old Town, ever 42 imposes a Floor Area Ration (FAR) requirement or a lot coverage requirement. Mr. 43 DaVeiga stated that there is no FAR requirement, but there is a lot coverage 44 requirement in all areas of the City in conjunction with the setback requirement. Mr. 45 Whittenberg noted that for a 25-ft. and 37.5 ft. or wider lots in Old Town the lot coverage 46 requirement is 75 percent. Commissioner Roberts noted that this would probably max 6 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 out to the setback requirements. Mr. Whittenberg stated that it comes close, but for 2 37.5 ft. and wider lots it would not quite match up to the setback requirements. 3 4 Chairperson Deaton then called for a show of hands for those people in the audience in 5 favor of allowing three-story development on all or some lot sizes. Mr. Whittenberg 6 clarified that the ZC currently allows three-story development on lots that are 37.5 ft. or 7 wider, and the City has never contemplated allowing three-story projects on smaller lots. 8 Chairperson Deaton stated that she wished to open the discussion to anyone in favor of 9 allowing three-story development on any size lot. 10 11 Chairperson Deaton called for a show of hands for those people in the audience in favor 12 of allowing 3-story development on lots measuring 37.5 ft. or more. Six people raised 13 their hands. 14 15 Chairperson Deaton called for a show of hands for those people in the audience in favor 16 of allowing 3-story development regardless of lot size. Two people raised their hands. 17 18 Chairperson Deaton called for a show of hands for those people in the audience in favor 19 of imposing a limit of 2-stories for all lot sizes in Old Town. Twenty people raised their 20 hands. 21 22 Public Hearinq 23 24 Chairperson Deaton opened the public comment period and began with those speaking 25 in favor of allowing third story development on any size lot. 26 27 Pat Kearns, 209 15th Street, stated that he lives in a two-story home on a 25-ft, lot and 28 then spoke on the issue of the fairness of zoning standards for different lot sizes under 29 the current ZC. He cited several residences with varying standards and noted that there 30 also was a time when Covered Roof Access Structure(s) (CRAS) were disallowed, yet 31 no one ever discussed this, and now there are a number of 20 ft. x 5 ft. CRAS 32 throughout Old Town, and many extend way beyond the 25 ft. height limit. He said that 33 the ZC is so ambiguous that no one is enforcing existing laws. He recommended that 34 all homes be required to provide at least 4 off street parking spaces to alleviate parking 35 problems, and no floor elevation should be less than 8.5 ft. above the floor level. 36 37 Mr. Whittenberg noted that the real issue tonight is three-story, two-story, or three-story 38 with some design standards to ensure compatibility with the neighborhood. He asked 39 that public comments be confined to the topic under discussion. 40 41 Craig Gibson, 305 1 ih Street, stated that the homes shown on the PowerPoint 42 presentation are all poorly designed, but there are three-story homes on the 200 block 43 of 14th Street that are very well done. He recommended looking at factors like roof pitch 44 and rear setbacks to help address the issue of obstruction of air flow and sunlight. 45 Commissioner Roberts asked if Mr. Gibson was recommending having an architectural 7 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 review committee of some kind. Mr. Gibson said he is not concerned with style, but 2 obstruction of the line of sight. 3 4 John Morgan, 215 16th Street, said he concurred with Mr. Gibson's comments on the 5 homes displayed tonight, and added that there are ways to make a three-story house 6 more appealing. He suggested that property owners with plans for three-story projects 7 already in progress be grandfathered so that they may continue under current zoning 8 standards. 9 10 Joyce Parque, provided photographs of current three-story projects noting that one of 11 them is a condominium with a third-story on the rear half. She indicated that 12 Chairperson Deaton had met with Councilman Antos prior to the public hearing on the 13 condominium project, and this was not right. She then noted that some of the projects 14 had been approved with V~riances. She stated that denying homeowners the ability to 15 build a three-story home was taking away their property rights. 16 17 Chairperson Deaton stated for the record that she never had a meeting with 18 Councilman Antos or anyone else prior to the meeting in question. 19 20 Chairperson Deaton then called for those who wished to speak in favor of limiting 21 homes in Old Town to only two stories. 22 23 Mike Butte, 412 Central Way, stated that he lives on a 37.5 ft. lot and the quality of life is 24 what is important to him, which means that he wants to see light and sky and feel the 25 ocean breeze. He said that long-term he believes that his property values will increase 26 if he maintains his home as a single-level home, giving Seal Beach a quiet village 27 appeal. He said he opposes the idea of an architectural review board and 28 recommended grandfathering in those projects that are currently in progress. 29 30 John DeWitt, 1105 Electric Avenue, spoke about maintaining the "charm" of Old Town 31 and prohibiting the construction of three-story homes, as this leads to a loss of sunlight, 32 privacy, the ocean breeze, and the view. He stated that a maximum height of 25 feet 33 should be the standard and that Covered Roof Access Structure(s) (CRAS) should no 34 longer be allowed, as outdoor stairways for access to roof decks work just fine and do 35 not require exceeding the height limit. 36 37 Barbara Moreland, 116 4th Street, expressed her concern over the possible sale of a 38 neighboring double lot that currently has 5 apartments on it. She stated that if a new 39 three-story home were constructed with the third story on the rear half of that lot, this 40 would block all the light from the windows on the side of her home facing that lot. She 41 suggested that special consideration be given prior to approving a three-story home 42 when it neighbors a single level home on a 25-ft. lot. 43 44 Chi Kredell, 1633 Seal Way, stated he served on City Council when the zoning for 37.5- 45 ft. or wider lots was devised. He said the reason it was approved was that at that time 46 duplexes could be constructed on all 25-ft. wide lots, and in order to make the town 8 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 more livable for families wanting to live in single-family residences (SFRs) the zoning 2 was down zoned to allow only one SFR on a 25-ft. lot. He said that a third story on the 3 rear of a 37.5-ft. lot was also allowed; however, there were no condominiums in town. 4 He said that this is an opportunity for the Planning Commission to change the city and 5 keep Seal Beach a quaint town. He said he would be happy to respond to questions. 6 7 Roger West, 1301-B Electric Avenue, spoke against having three-story homes in Old 8 Town. He said that since purchasing his property in 1968 it has been down zoned at 9 least three times and he has benefited from the increase in his property value and the 10 value of living in Seal Beach. He recommended that those who are interested in 11 building homes solely for profit should look into other cities. 12 13 Don Kennebeck, 209 3rd Street, noted that the property across the street from his home 14 measures 30 feet, but it appears on the map of properties measuring 37.5 feet or more. 15 Mr. Whittenberg explained that on irregular shaped parcels the calculation is done by 16 taking an average of the front and rear lot measurements. Mr. Kennebeck then noted 17 that two 30-ft. lots have just gone up for sale on his street and a developer wants to 18 purchase both lots. He asked if the developer would be able to consolidate the lots into 19 a 60-ft. lot and construct condominiums. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this was possible. 20 He explained that parcels can be combined, as long as it exceeds the minimum lot size, 21 but density and development standards would also apply. He said that under today's 22 zoning standards 3 to 4 units could be placed on this size lot. He explained that the 23 Zoning Code (ZC) requires that condominium projects receive a discretionary land use 24 approval (Conditional Use Permit), which requires a public hearing and a determination 25 by the PC that that particular use at that particular location would not be detrimental to 26 neighboring properties. Mr. Kennebeck then asked if the City still permits the 27 construction of apartment complexes in Old Town. Mr. Whittenberg stated that if the lot 28 size is large enough to accommodate apartments and the project meets all of the 29 required setback, lot coverage, parking, and density development standards, the project 30 would be allowed. Mr. Kennebeck asked if enclosed garages for parking could be 31 constructed as the first floor of the third story portion to rear of the lot. Mr. Whittenberg 32 stated that all parking must be off street parking in enclosed garages off the alley. 33 34 Barbara Barton, 415 Ocean Avenue, said she moved to Seal Beach for the small town 35 atmosphere. She spoke in favor of maintaining a maximum height of 25 feet and 36 prohibiting three-story construction. 37 38 Belinda Howell, 222 17th Street, said Seal Beach is one of the few beach communities 39 in California that has remained small, and she would not want to see this change. She 40 stated that visually and aesthetically three-story residences in Old Town are 41 disproportionate to the size of the city and its streets. She noted that three-story 42 construction on Balboa Island had created a loss of air circulation and many residents 43 now have to install air conditioning, and she does not want this to happen in Seal 44 Beach. She thanked the PC and Staff for their work on this issue. 45 9 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 David Broonend, 307 14th Street, spoke in favor of a 25-ft. height limit to prevent loss of 2 view, ocean breeze, and sunlight. 3 4 Jim Caviola, 1117 Ocean Avenue, spoke in favor of a 25-ft. height limit. He said he had 5 previously resided at 305 Ocean Avenue and had planned to construct a new home 6 there, but the lot was always shaded by the large homes that surrounded it. He stated 7 that he had sold that home and constructed a new home at 1117 Ocean Avenue, and 8 one lot from their home is Rene Bollen's property on which the condominium project is 9 proposed. He described how as an attorney for a large developer in Newport Beach he 10 has dealt with many homes having major problems with mold due to a lack of sunlight. 11 As a result, landscaping is no longer allowed between homes in order to help prevent 12 this. He said he did not want to experience this and recommended limiting the height to 13 25 feet and grandfathering those projects that are already in the plan preparation 14 process. 15 16 Ricki Layman, 119 5th Street, spoke in favor of a 25-ft. height limit, as she has a two- 17 story apartment complex next door and the 37.5-ft. lot on the other side of her home 18 may be placed on the market soon. She said if a three-story home is built on that lot, 19 her property will be completely enclosed. She recommended restricting the height limit 20 in Old Town to 25 feet. 21 22 Mario Voce, 730 Catalina Avenue, asked if homes on The Hill are allowed a third story. 23 Mr. Whittenberg stated that all of the residential areas in town, except for the Rossmoor 24 condominiums, the Oakwood Apartments, and Surfside, have a 25-ft. maximum height 25 limit. Mr. Voce said he favors the 25-ft. height limit in all residential areas in Seal 26 Beach. He said that in visiting his old neighborhood on the 200 block of 14th Street the 27 look is "highly monumental overall," due to the three-story homes constructed on this 28 block, and this has definitely changed the character of the neighborhood. 29 30 Mr. Whittenberg addressed the comments on the issue of Covered Roof Access 31 Structure(s) (CRAS) being very large. He indicated that at one time the City was 32 allowing these structures without any design standards imposed upon them, but the 33 standards were changed in 1992 when CRAS applications were allowed to be 34 considered by the PC. He said that the size of a CRAS is now limited to the area 35 necessary to enclose the stairway. He noted that this issue can be addressed at a later 36 time, as it is not the issue under discussion. He responded to the question of how large 37 1,700-1,800 sq. ft. homes can be constructed without any discretionary review. He 38 stated that certain uses of privately owned property are allowed "by right," which means 39 that if the project meets all City standards, the project may proceed and permits can be 40 issued. He explained that for some design features or structural changes to a project 41 the property owner may have to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Height 42 Variation (HV), Minor Plan Review (MPR), or a Variance (VAR) and have a public 43 hearing before the PC to determine whether the project will be compatible with the 44 neighborhood. 45 46 10 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 Commissioner Comments 2 3 Commissioner O'Malley stated that the objective of the PC is not to make the lives of 4 residents miserable by changing the requirements in the middle of the stream. He said 5 that when serving on the Sewer and Storm Drain Ad Hoc Committee after the last big 6 flood, he learned how the flooding problem began. He indicated that when discussing 7 some of the causes of the flooding, one of the reasons was determined to be 8 overbuilding. There is a lot of runoff from The Hill as there are very few permeable 9 surfaces or green areas to absorb the rain water, and as such, the water runs 10 downward from The Hill and causes flooding in Old Town. He also touched on the 11 issue of mansionization and how it is affecting neighborhoods. He noted that many of 12 the public comments included the issue of fairness and constitutional rights, but what 13 this is about is what is best for the majority of the people within the City of Seal Beach. 14 He stated that the issues of having good air circulation, sunlight, having green areas to 15 help absorb rain water, and neighborhood compatibility are all very important, and the 16 PC must make recommendations that would provide relief to most of the people in Seal 17 Beach, so that they may continue to enjoy their homes and their lives in this City. 18 19 Commissioner Ladner stated that he is in agreement with Commissioner O'Malley's 20 comments and spoke in favor of a 25-ft. height limit. 21 22 Commissioner Roberts thanked Staff for a very thorough report, and he thanked the 23 members of the public present tonight for their comments. He stated that in coming to 24 tonight's meeting he thought that compromising by limiting lot coverage and 25 incorporating third story setbacks would help solve some of these problems; however, 26 after hearing the comments from the public tonight he has changed his opinion. He now 27 believes that a 25-ft. height limit would be the proper way to go. He noted that being a 28 resident of College Park East (CPE) he is a little hesitant to make this determination, but 29 he loves Seal Beach and Old Town and constructing three story homes on the 430 lots 30 that are 37.5 ft. or wider would tremendously change the feeling of the City. He said he 31 would like to explore the grandfathering issue to determine how to fairly handle those 32 people who have had the life vision of building their home to three stories. He indicated 33 that he wished to hear from the public again after Commissioner Comments. 34 35 Commissioner Bello stated that she agreed to accept the appointment as Planning 36 Commissioner because what the City of Seal Beach looks like is very important to her. 37 She thanked Staff for the preparation of the presentation and Staff Reports and she also 38 thanked the public for their attendance tonight and for their comments. She 39 emphasized that light and air are very important to residents, and the feeling of this 40 community is like no where else, and she is very concerned about keeping Seal Beach 41 the way it is. 42 43 Chairperson Deaton said she had received many telephone calls and has spoken with 44 several neighbors who all agreed that having a uniform height limit for all of Seal Beach 45 was important. She noted that although Surfside does have a 35-foot height limit, it is a 46 uniform height limit. She said that she is still unclear as to why one lot size would have 11 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 one height limit and another lot size would have a different height limit, and feels that 2 this seems prejudicial and a granting of special privilege. She indicated that of all the 3 calls received and conversations she has had only two individuals favored three story 4 construction, so basically, what she has heard is the same thing the Commission has 5 heard tonight. She stated that she has heard the snickering about light and air at the 6 various public meetings she has attended, but anyone who lives in Old Town and must 7 deal with plants that won't grow, mildew, and mold would not snicker at air and light, as 8 they are essential to the well being of the community. She said she appreciates Staff's 9 work and assistance in responding to her numerous questions and noted that the 10 information provided on the FAR, infill standards, solar access, and facade articulations 11 is important for all buildings in Old Town, so that the town can be kept as it is. She 12 emphasized that City's Specific Plan and the Master Plan call for a "small town 13 community." She said that every beach city has its own culture and attracts a certain 14 type of person, and Seal Beach has attracted the people who are looking for the small 15 town that vanished from all the other beach communities. She said many residents who 16 live and work in Seal Beach told her that they could not come forward with a public 17 statement, but asked that she help protect the small town atmosphere of Seal Beach. 18 She continued by stating that she would be totally against architectural review as Seal 19 Beach is a town of texture and it is not the business of the Planning Commission to 20 determine which home designs are more beautiful, but their job is planning on what this 21 City should be. She noted that this issue has fractured the community and she 22 encouraged residents to work together to get through this and to keep what is best for 23 Old Town in mind rather than individuals and personalities. She ended by stating that 24 she is also in favor of grandfathering for those individual who have already made an 25 investment in plan preparation; however, she does not want to see everyone leaving the 26 meeting tonight and having third story development plans drawn up, but she does feel 27 that grandfathering is necessary for fairness. Mr. Abbe interjected that depending upon 28 where they are in the development process under state law residents do have "vested 29 rights," so regardless of the ordinance that is ultimately adopted, some of these people 30 will automatically be entitled to utilize the existing provisions. He said he would do 31 further research on exactly where this line is to be drawn, and this will certainly be 32 included in the ordinance. Chairperson Deaton then indicated that she wished to re- 33 open the public comment period to receive further comments from the public. 34 35 Mr. Whittenberg called for a recess at 9:30 p.m. 36 37 The meeting reconvened at 9:40 p.m. 38 39 Chairperson Deaton re-opened for public comment period. 40 41 Victor Grgas, 211 15th Street, said he agreed that this is a divided community regarding 42 this issue, and that the most important issues to be dealt with are as follows: 43 44 1. Architectural diversity 45 2. If the decision is made to permit three stories on a modified basis, the PC will need 46 to give something back in exchange for this, such as requiring larger side yard 12 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 setbacks or cutouts to adjacent properties that would allow for more space 2 between properties. 3 3. Require that larger lots provide more parking on their property. 4 5 He indicated that when he served on City Council (1982-1990) he was under the 6 impression that the most you could build on a third story was 500 square feet, or 7 essentially one room, yet the new condominium project proposed to construct a 1,500 8 square foot third story. He said he is opposed to allowing third stories, but should the 9 PC decide to do so, it should impose conditions that would allow for more space 10 between properties and require an architecturally pleasing design that works well with 11 the neighborhood. 12 13 Mike Buhbe, 412 Central Way, stated that the residential lots in Old Town should be 14 restricted to having just one building on each lot, as this would enhance the visual 15 beauty of the town and provide space between structures to help alleviate the threat of 16 flooding whenever it rains. He expressed his concern that the sale of the Seal Beach 17 Inn & Gardens would lead to the construction of one huge structure rather than using 18 the six-lot location for six separate residences. Chairperson Deaton clarified that what 19 Mr. Buhbe opposes is combining of lots in order to build one large structure. Mr. Buhbe 20 stated that this is correct. 21 22 John DeWitt said he feels encouraged by the discussion tonight, as the PC has politely 23 listened to all comments and he will leave happy believing that there is hope of keeping 24 Seal Beach what it is. 25 26 Craig Gibson stated that it appears the PC is favoring a two-story limit, but he wanted to 27 note that owners of wider lots, must set back their side yards 50 percent more than for 28 the 25-ft. lots. He said that the larger homes are not taking up land and preventing 29 runoff, as they are being built up and not out. He said that if the PC limits SFRs to two 30 stories, he would like the PC to consider that it would be fairer to make the setbacks a 31 specific number of feet rather than a percentage of the lot size. Mr. Whittenberg noted 32 that the trade-off is that when you have a 25-ft. lot, under Building Code standards you 33 cannot have livable space closer than 3 feet to an adjacent property line, so you are 34 automatically limited to a 19-ft. wide home; and when you have a 37.5-ft. lot you can 35 construct a 30-ft. wide house on a same depth lot, leaving the potential for a larger 36 building area. He said the reason cities use a percentage is to begin to shrink the 37 impact to the neighboring properties away from the property lines. Mr. Gibson stated 38 that in the presentation he noticed that, other cities had absolute setback numbers. 39 Commissioner Roberts noted that most of these other cities have greater setbacks than 40 Seal Beach, leaving less lot coverage for the structure. 41 42 Steve Cole, 222 1 ih Street, said he lives in a single-story home and favors the 25-ft. 43 height limit. He noted that although front and side setbacks have been discussed the 44 rear setback can be a problem if there is a three-story structure looming up over your 45 back yard. He explained how the setbacks between two 25-ft. lots would allow for more 13 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 sunlight, air circulation, and permeable surface than you would from one home on a 2 50-ft. lot. He recommended grandfathering the plans in progress. 3 4 John Morgan thanked the PC for receiving comments and asked how the 5 grandfathering is to be handled. Mr. Whittenberg explained that Staff would have to 6 consult with legal counsel to make sure that they are in compliance with the guidelines 7 for doing the grandfathering. 8 9 Chi Kredell stated that during his tenure as a member of the City Council when zoning 10 was changed anything that was submitted to the City and in the pipeline was 11 grandfathered, and anything after that was disallowed. 12 13 Mitzi Morton cautioned against grandfathering as this could create a whole other set of 14 problems. She stated that the reason for the down zoning was because residents 15 wanted to have front and back yards, but this is disappearing with the larger homes 16 being constructed. She recommended having greater front setbacks for second stories 17 to allow for more air and light. 18 19 Don Kennebeck commented that in looking at his two-story house from the rear, he 20 realized how huge it is, so he could only imagine how large a three-story house would 21 look, particularly when next to a single-level home. He said that he would support 22 grandfathering as long as it is done correctly. 23 24 Melinda Howell thanked the PC and Staff for their work on this issue. She asked where 25 the 6-ft. front yard setback comes in. Mr. Whittenberg explained that the ZC requires 26 an average 12-ft. front setback, with a minimum of 6 feet, which allows for a front 27 setback of 6 feet and a second story setback of 18 feet equaling a 12-ft. average, or 28 conversely, the first floor could have an 18 ft. setback with a second story setback of 6 29 feet. He stated that this provides for some diversity and prevents having the box look 30 along a street if all the setbacks were at 12 feet. Ms. Howell then expressed her 31 concern over combining lots to create one large structure. Mr. Whittenberg noted that 32 this is another issue that will probably be taken into consideration when returning to the 33 issue of mansionization. 34 35 John Morgan stated that he has paid for the services of a local architect with whom he 36 will meet on Friday. He said he had planned on constructing a three-story home. He 37 asked what he should do now. Mr. Whittenberg stated that at this time there are no 38 prohibitions on building a third story on the rear half of a lot 37.5 feet or wider, as long 39 as all building standards are met. He said that if the City were to decide to change the 40 standard today, by the time the issue comes before City Council for a public hearing 41 and then for a first and second reading of the zoning amendment, it will take 42 approximately 3-6 months. Mr. Abbe noted that there is an initiative on the ballot for the 43 November election that will greatly change the law on Takings, and Staff plans to make 44 every effort to resolve this issue before the end of the year. 45 14 of 16 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 1 Joyce Parque asked if when building a new home now, the requirement was to put 2 gravel on the sides of the home instead of concrete. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the 3 City now has requirements within the Coastal Zone where homeowners of new 4 construction must have French drains or a dry well in the side yard areas to catch the 5 runoff from the roof of the house. She noted that the there are three-story home in 6 Surfside, and homes on The Hill have first floor garages with two stories above them, 7 which equal three stories, and these garages have rooms for nannies. Mr. Whittenberg 8 explained that the garages are semi-subterranean and are not counted as a story or 9 measured for height and these homes do meet the height requirement. 10 11 Barbara Barton asked that this issue be moved on to City Council as soon as possible. 12 13 There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Deaton closed the public 14 comment period. 15 16 Chairperson Deaton outlined the following alternatives for making a recommendation to 17 CC on this issue: 18 19 1. Continue this study session to next Wednesday night to receive more public input. 20 2. Ask Staff to begin preparation of a draft Zone Text Amendment for City Council to 21 be presented to the Planning Commission at the next regularly scheduled meeting 22 and conduct a public hearing two weeks after this. 23 24 Mr. Whittenberg stated that within two weeks Staff could return with some ideas on the 25 grandfather issue. He said that once this is done Staff would have to prepare a Staff 26 Report and formal language provisions to change the Zoning Code (ZC) by ordinance, 27 which will take a while to prepare and requires a 10-day notice of public hearing. He 28 noted that this would create a timetable for public hearings of probably the first or 29 second meeting in October. He noted that the PC could adjourn to another date on 30 which a regularly scheduled meeting will not be held. Chairperson Deaton asked Mr. 31 Abbe if it would be possible to schedule another meeting for next Wednesday to review 32 the grandfathering issue. Mr. Abbe stated that he could complete some research and 33 have some options to present at that time. Chairperson Deaton asked if the 34 Commission was in agreement with this. Mr. Whittenberg clarified that the intent of the 35 Commission is to have an ordinance prepared eliminating the ability to build a third story 36 in Planning District 1, which is Old Town, and to provide a grandfather provision for 37 projects currently under a design contract. 38 39 Commissioner Roberts stated that he agrees with this approach, but he also feels it is 40 important to discuss other issues as they pertain to homes on lots of any size with 41 regard to roof pitches, garages, etc., separate from the third story issue. Mr. 42 Whittenberg agreed that in order to complete this process by the first meeting in 43 October the ZT A would have to deal solely with the third stories. Mr. Abbe stated that it 44 is feasible to complete the process to implement a two-story cap with a grandfather 45 clause by the end of the year. Mr. Whittenberg noted that Staff will not able to publish a 46 notice of continuation of this study session, but would have Channel 3 broadcast this 15 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2006 notice as a public information item and notice will be posted at City Hall. Mr. Abbe added that it is possible to adjourn to a meeting like this without having to go through the whole publication process. MOTION by Roberts; SECOND by Bello to continue this study session to Wednesday, September 13, 2006, at 7:30 p.m. to receive public input, review grandfathering proposals, and receive from Staff preliminary draft ordinance language for setting a height limit of 25 feet within Planning District 1. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Deaton, Bello, Ladner, O'Malley, and Roberts None None STAFF CONCERNS None. COMMISSION CONCERNS Chairperson Deaton thanked Staff and the public for all of their assistance. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Deaton adjourned the meeting at 10:22 p.m. to the adjourned meeting of Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secret Planning Department APPROVAL The Commission on September 20, 2006, approved the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, September 6, 2006. C'~. 16 of 16