HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2004-05-24 #BB AGENDA REPORT
DATE: May 24, 2004
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM: Mac Cummins, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Exemption from Temporary Moratorium (Trapezoidal
Lots) re: Height Restrictions — 212 14 St.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Consider granting an exemption from the temporary moratorium on construction of or
additions to dwelling units in excess of two stories on trapezoidal lots. The subject
project was in the "pipeline" at the time of the adoption of the temporary moratorium.
BACKGROUND:
Late in 2003, the City received an application for a variance to the City Code for the
ability to construct a 3rd story on the rear half of the property located at 212 14 St. Under
the Municipal Code, 3 story construction is permitted in the old town area, when a "lot
width," as that term is defined in the City Code, is 37.5 feet or greater.
A question arose approximately 2 %2 years ago with reference to trapezoidal lots along the
Electric Avenue greenbelt. For these parcels, the lots are not one uniform width, but
rather are above 37.5 feet in one part of the property and below 37.5 feet in another part
of the property. At the time, the City considered the matter in a hearing before the
Planning Commission and the Planning Commission directed staff to interpret the
ordinance for third story construction and alteration as requiring a parcel width of 37.5
feet or greater at multiple points on the parcel. A midpoint "lot width" of 37.5 feet on a
trapezoidal lot would not necessarily satisfy this requirement.
When staff received the application for a variance late last year, staff began its usual
research process. Upon conferring with the City Attorney's office, staff and the
Attorney's office came to the conclusion that the Code definition of lot width should
supercede any discussion undertaken by the Planning Commission on this topic, and the
Code definition considers only the width at the midpoint of the property. The Code does
not take into account lots with a varying width, such as trapezoidal lots. As such, staff
informed the applicant that they could proceed with their project.
Agenda Item , 98
The Planning Commission considered this matter, and the Commission approved a
Memorandum to be transmitted to the City Council which detailed the Commission's
concerns. Principally, the Commission felt that for the purposes of height, the ordinance
should be more clear and specifically not allow lots to build a 3 story unless both sides
of the lot are sufficiently wide. The Council considered this memo on January 26, 2004
and directed staff to prepare the draft moratorium. This moratorium was presented to the
Council at its February 9, 2004 meeting. The Council adopted the moratorium that
evening.
During the discussion of the item that evening, the subject arose of how the Council
wished to handle projects in the "pipeline." The Council determined that all projects in
the pipeline would be treated the same any other potential applicant, and the pipeline
projects could apply on an ad hoc basis for an exemption to the moratorium. The
applicant in the above referenced variance case is requesting an exemption from the
moratorium. Staff has attached the applicant's letter requesting exemption, as well as the
minutes of the February 9, 2004 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. Staff time in preparing staff reports.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider granting an exemption from the temporary moratorium on 3 story height
construction on trapezoidal lots. The subject project was in the "pipeline" at the time of
the adoption of the temporary moratorium.
Mac Cummins, AICP
Associate Planner /Special Projects Manager
NOT . ' APPROV
rr
John B. ahorski, City Manager
Att. ents (4)
1. Moratorium
Agenda Item
2. Diagram of Trapezoidal Lots
3. City Council Minutes January 26 & February 9, 2004
4. Applicants letter of request for exemption
Agenda Item
Attachment 1
ORDINANCE NUMBER /426
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH PROHIBITING THE ISSUANCE
OF BUILDING PERMITS AND OTHER LAND
USE ENTITLEMENTS FOR ANY
CONSTRUCTION OF OR ADDITIONS TO
DWELLING UNITS IN EXCESS OF 25 FEET IN
HEIGHT UNLESS CERTAIN MINIMUM LOT
DIMENSIONS EXIST AND DECLARING THE
URGENCY THEREOF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Moratorium established. The City of Seal Beach hereby
establishes a moratorium on construction, enlargement, expansion, and structural
alteration of dwelling units, if the construction, enlargement, expansion, or structural
alteration would result in the dwellings exceeding 25 feet in height (hereinafter
"Development Of Excessive Height "), unless the Lot Width, Lot Front Line, and Lot
Rear Line of the property are all at least 37.5 feet in length (hereinafter the "Minimum
Dimensions for Development "). This moratorium shall not apply to lots where the Front
Lot Line, Lot Width, and Rear Lot Line are all the same length.
Section 2. Moratorium defined. Notwithstanding any other ordinance or
provision of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, except as permitted by Section 4 below,
no application for a building permit, conditional use permit, or any other entitlement for
Development Of Excessive Height, shall be approved during the term of the moratorium
established in Section 1 above, unless the dwelling is located on a lot meeting the
Minimum Dimensions for Development, or the Lot Width, Front Lot Line, and Rear Lot
Line of the lot are all the same length.
Section 3. Moratorium term. This Ordinance shall expire, and the
moratorium established hereby shall terminate, forty -five (45) days after the date of
adoption unless extended by the City Council, at a regularly noticed public hearing,
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858.
Section 4. Hardship Exemption. An application for a building permit,
conditional use permit, or any other entitlement for Development Of Excessive Height
may be approved during the term of the moratorium established in Section 1 above if the
applicant has obtained a hardship exemption from the City Council. Hardship exemption
applications shall be filed in writing with the Director of Development Services and shall
contain all documentation relied upon to support the hardship claim. A hardship
exemption application must be filed no later than 10 days in advance of a regular meeting
of the City Council in order to be considered at such meeting; otherwise the application
shall be considered at the following regular meeting. The City Council shall grant a
hardship exemption upon making a finding that denial of the exemption and enforcement
of the moratorium against the applicant's property would result in the applicant being
deprived of all economically viable use of the property.
Section 5. CEOA Finding. The City Council hereby finds that it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption of this Ordinance, and
establishment of a moratorium hereby, may have a significant effect on the environment,
because the moratorium will impose greater limitations on development in the City, and
will thereby serve to reduce potential significant adverse environmental impacts. It is
therefore exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to Title 14,
Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code of Regulations.
Section 6. Penalty. Violation of any provision of this Ordinance shall
constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand
dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six (6) months, or by both
such fine and imprisonment. Each and every day such a violation exists shall constitute a
separate and distinct violation of this Ordinance. In addition to the foregoing, any
violation of this Ordinance shall constitute a public nuisance and shall be subject to
abatement as provided by all applicable provisions of law.
Section 7. Legislative Findings. The City Council finds that Seal Beach
residents and property owners are likely to submit applications for construction,
enlargements, expansions, and structural alterations of dwelling units, that would result in
the dwellings exceeding 25 feet in height. However, many such lots are not suitable for
Development Of Excessive Height as a result of the properties being too narrow at one
end due to their trapezoidal shape.
In March, 2000, the Planning Commission issued a policy statement that
trapezoidal lots should meet certain dimensional requirements in order to be considered
as having a "Lot Width" of 37.5 feet. The Code of the City of Seal Beach only allows
Development Of Excessive Height where Lot Width, as that term is defined in the Code,
is 37.5 feet or more. The Planning Commission took the position that the majority of
trapezoidal lots within the City were in locations unsuitable for Development Of
Excessive Height, due to the potentially adverse impacts on light, airflow, and views.
However, the City Code currently permits Development Of Excessive Height on many
trapezoidal lots where structures of such height would have such detrimental effects.
The City intends to study, within a reasonable time, the adequacy of its existing
ordinances regulating development on trapezoidal lots. The Planning Commission, the
City Council and the people of Seal Beach require a reasonable, limited, yet sufficient •
period of time to consider and study legally appropriate and reasonable policies
regulating residential buildings and uses on trapezoidal lots in order to prevent excessive
heights of buildings on properties that cannot accommodate such heights and which will
result in view blockage and visual blight. Given the time required to undertake the study
and planning this situation calls for, the City Council finds that it is necessary that this
temporary moratorium be declared to ensure that construction of or additions to buildings
and uses that may be in conflict with the contemplated new development policies are not
permitted in the interim. The City Council has the authority to adopt an interim
ordinance pursuant to the City Charter and Government Code Section 65858 in order to
protect the public health, safety, or welfare.
Accordingly, the City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety and welfare presented by construction, enlargement, expansion,
or structural alteration that would result in a dwelling exceeding 25 feet in height unless
the dwelling is located on a lot meeting the minimum dimensions for Development, or
the Lot Width, Front Lot Line, and Rear Lot Line of the lot are all the same length. In the
absence of immediate effectiveness, the approval of building permits, conditional use
permits or any other applicable entitlements for Development Of Excessive Height will
result in that threat to the public welfare. Due to the foregoing circumstances, it is
necessary for the preservation of the public health, safety and welfare that this Ordinance
take effect immediately. This Ordinance is an urgency ordinance for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health and safety within the meaning of Government
Code Section 36937(b) and therefore shall be passed immediately upon its introduction
and shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Couof the City of Seal
Beac at a meeting thereof held on the day of •
, 2004.
) 6 . 444
MAYOR
/
/ ATTE . 1:
.1/
_' 1)/
C 0 LERI
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing ordinance is an original copy of Ordinance Number /.S/!, on file in
the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City
of Seal Beach, pursuant to the C,'ty, Charter and Government de Section 65858, at a
meeting held on the ( day of 004
by the following vote:
i
AYES: Councilmember i_,,, ,� d el, , , o ,,
NOES: Councilmembers; < <.
ABSENT: Councilmembers '
ABSTAIN: Councilmember —,
And do hereby further certify tha • rdinance Number A524 has been published pursuant to ' ' .
the Seal Beach City Charter and Resolution Number 2836.
40 A
:-.,, _ki / .
Clerk
Attachment 2
Diagram of Trapezoidal Lots:
Standard Lot: Trapezoidal Lot:
20 Feet
37.5 Feet
1 ■ 40 Feet
• ■
60 Feet
Attachment 3
Page Seventeen - City Council Minutes - January 26, 2004
'� fir:.
[ L. r Cm
TITLES 1 THROUGH 9 OF THE SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (2004
EDITION).' By unanimous consent, full reading.of Ordinance
Number 1515 was waived. (Anticipated second reading is
April 26, 2004). ,
AYES: Antos, Campbell, Doan, - Larson, Yost
NOES: None Motion carried
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO - HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS -
TRAPEZOIDAL LOTS
Councilman Yost said he would remove himself from this
discussion inasmuch as his home is on a trapezoidal lot,
and left the Council Chamber. The Associate Planner
reported that about three months ago the Planning
Department received an application. for ,a variance to the
Municipal Code to construct a third story on a residential
property in Old Town that abuts an alley near Electric
Avenue on a,trapezoidal lot. He noted that staff had been
interpreting the provision of the Code in question which is
that if one has a 37.5 foot or wider lot a third story can
be built on the back half of the residential property, the
Planning Commission had made an interpretation some time
ago that in order for that provision to be applicable both
sides of the lot needed to be 37.5 feet wide or wider, upon
conferring with the office of the City Attorney it has been
determined that that interpretation is not correct, the
correct definition is set forth in the Municipal Code and
would essentially be the mid -point of any lot. The Planner
stated that upon staff analyzing the situation there are
some lots, particularly those that front Electric Avenue,
that are trapezoidal in shape and would qualify to build a
third story on the rear half of the lot, to that the
Planning Commission has some concerns and has forwarded a
memo to Council recommending an urgency moratorium to
further clarify the definitions within the Municipal Code
in reference to lot widths. The Planner confirmed that
this is primarily an Old Town issue only because of the
nature of the streets running at strange angles.
Councilman Antos agreed that this issue most likely needs
to be looked at and a procedural method developed for
consideration by the Planning Commission and Council,
therefore moved to recommend that a moratorium be
established to allow staff time to address this issue,
• suggesting that it is possible that these kinds of
buildings are not what the Commission and Planning staff
would like to see in these areas. It was noted that the
motion would be a directive to staff to prepare an urgency
ordinance for consideration at the next meeting, requiring
only a majority vote, at such time as an urgency ordinance
is considered there would be a requirement for four
affirmative votes. Councilman Larson offered that he would
vote for the motion however that does not mean he would
support an urgency ordinance. Mayor Campbell seconded the
motion.
AYES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Yost Motion carried
AYES: Antos, Yost
NOES: Campbell, Doane, Larson Motion failed '
Councilman Doane moved to approve budget amendment 04 -21
for the acquisition and installation of parking meters
along Main Street and on the non - residential area of Ocean
Avenue, Central Avenue, and Electric Avenue up to•the alley
between Main Street and Eighth Street and Main Street and
Tenth Street, approval of an agreement with POM for
purchase of said meters, and approval of an agreement with
AMPCO Parking Systems to provide full time coin collection
and maintenance of the parking meters, upon review by the
City Attorney, and authorize the City Manager to execute
the agreement. Councilman Larson seconded the motion.
The City Attorney advised that if the motion is passed he
would provide certain changes to the Resolution, the`'
Council can then take a separate action on the Resolution.
AYES: Campbell, Doane, Larson
NOES: Antos, Yost Motion carried
The City Attorney read the title of Resolution Number 5207
entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT, NO.
04 -21, FOR ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF PARKING METERS
AND FOR COLLECTION OF COIN AND MAINTENANCE OF PARKING
METERS."
The City Attorney recommended that following the Resolve
statement that there be a new paragraph one to read
"Pursuant to Section 1010 of the City Charter and Section
2 -22 of the City Code the City Council hereby finds that
parking meters may be purchased more economically on the
open market and that the meters can be obtained from only
one vendor for the reasons stated in the staff report and
as stated by staff in its oral presentation which are
hereby incorporated by this reference, for the reasons
stated in the record it is in the City's best interest to
award the contract to POM;"
amendment number two, "That the budget is amended as
follows,;' the budget amendment description, account, etc.,
following;
the third amendment is a paragraph three, "The City Council
hereby directs the City Manager to execute agreements with
POM for the purchase of the meters and AMPCO Parking
Systems for providing service as to the meters."
Doane moved, second by Larson, to adopt Resolution Number
5207 as amended.
AYES: Campbell, Doane, Larson
NOES: Antos, Yost Motion carried
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1516 - TEMPORARY MORATORIUM - HEIGHT
RESTRICTION - TRAPEZOIDAL LOTS
Councilman Yost stated he would remove himself from
discussion of this item as he resides on a trapezoidal lot.
The Associate Planner presented the staff report, noted
•
Page Fifteen - City Council Minutes - February 9, 2004
that the item is before the Council at the direction of the
E, Council from the last meeting, explained that the Planning
Commission had considered this matter, forwarded a _
memorandum to the Council requested that consideration be
given to placing a temporary moratorium on building permits
on trapezoidal lots within the City. The,Planner said the
key issue is that there are some lots, primarily in the Old
Town area, that front Electric Avenue and are trapezoidal
in shape, and the City has a number of development
standards that are tied to width, setback and height' ,
-specifically, the height in Old Town has always been a
contentious issue and the Planning Commission felt that the
current definition of lot width was too loose as it was
being applied to potential building heights in the City and
asked the Council to consider placing a temporary
moratorium on trapezoidal lot construction until the lot
width can be better defined. He explained that with a .
trapezoidal lot there are different lot widths and the way
the definition is currently read there are some situations
where both lot widths may not meet the minimum standard yet
the average of the lot widths does, from the Planning ,
Commission standpoint they feel that both sides of the lot
should be sufficiently wide to meet the requirement to be
able to build a third story on the back half of the lot.
The Planner noted that a super majority vote was necessary
to enact the proposed Ordinance. He mentioned also that in
the past four to five years the City has received only one
application for construction on this type of lot, that
application is currently in the process, and should the
Council adopt the moratorium, historically the Council has
not included projects that are within the pipeline, however
the Council could do so, that direction is also sought.
Councilman Larson said this is not an issue in his district
therefore he will support the recommendation. He said
however that he has a concern in that the Council has
adopted a number of urgency ordinances of late that have
stopped projects yet for valid reasons, in this instance
the staff told the applicant that their project was okay,
the applicant has now proceeded to the Coastal Commission,
if this is adopted that project will be stopped at that
point. ,
Councilman Antos moved to approve Ordinance Number 1516,
noting also that staff has said they will look at this in a
timely manner. Councilman Doane seconded the motion,
i however inquired if this will stop the project that is
J already in the process. The Associate Planner responded
that that is at the discretion of the Council, historically
however the Council has exempted projects that are in the
pipeline, staff is seeking direction on that issue. For
clarification, the City Attorney suggested that first the
opinion of the maker of the motion should be sought, if the
desire is to exclude that particular property then the
recommendation would be to amend the Ordinance to exempt
that particular project from the terms of the moratorium.
Councilman Antos asked if the property in question is a
single family or multi - family project, and has it gone to
Coastal Commission. The response of the Planner was that
it is a single family project, was approved in concept in
that it meets all current standards, it is presently being
Page Sixteen - City Council Minutes - February 9, 2004
processed at Coastal Commission, it has been there for
(: about a month, also, it did not require Planning Commission
approval, it was staff approved. Noting that this is a
trapezoidal lot, Mayor Campbell asked the width at its •
widest and narrowest, possibly the square footage, the
Planner could not recall other than it is substantially
wider on one side versus the other. The City Attorney
offered that his recollection was that the lot may be
thirty -seven and a half feet in the middle, larger at the -
street frontage than thirty -seven and a half, and tapers to
the back at less than thirty -seven and a half, the Planning
Commission interpretation was that it should be thirty-
• seven and a half at the rear as well, and noted that under
current Code the definition of lot width is based on the
width at mid -point of the lot. Councilman Antos offered
that it has been said in the past when these lots have been
dealt with that sometimes there is a hardship provision
where a project may be affected while going through the
pipeline and can go before the Council or Planning
Commission for an exemption, and if this matter has not
gone before the Planning Commission it would seem that by
including it and providing the hardship exemption provision
this matter could go to the Commission for review if they
have not done so. The City Attorney clarified that built
into the ordinance under Section 4 is a hardship exemption
whereby the applicant would need to come before the City
Council to receive the exemption, there are two ways to
deal with a project that is in the pipeline, either an
exception, which means it is grandfathered in, or through
the exemption process under which they would need to apply
for the hardship exemption before the Council, the only
difference would be if the Council amended the ordinance to
exclude this property the owner would not need to come back
to the Council to apply for an exemption, if the ordinance
is not changed the owner would need to apply to the
Council. Councilman Antos said his recommendation would be
to leave the ordinance as written, then the owner could
make application to the Council and in all probability it
would be referred to the Planning Commission for review and
a report in that they are the body that recommends to the
Council on land use issues. The Development Services
Director clarified that the project as proposed and under
the current Code definitions for lot width the project does
not require review by the Commission in any manner, if the '
project were referred the Commission would review it under
the current provisions of the Code that says it is
/ allowable. Councilman Doane offered that he does not like
being contrary to the Planning Commission as they have the
expertise in that area.
The City Attorney read the title of Ordinance Number 1516
as presented, AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH PROHIBITING THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS AND
OTHER LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION OF OR
ADDITIONS TO DWELLING UNITS IN EXCESS OF 25 FEET IN HEIGHT
UNLESS CERTAIN MINIMUM LOT DIMENSIONS EXIST AND DECLARING
THE URGENCY THEREOF."
AYES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Yost Motion carried
Attachment 4
NEWLAND CONSTRUCTION INC.
A Professional Builder & Remodeler
1- 800 -7 -WE BUILD /714 -639 -0300 License # 451478
Fax # 714 -639 -8954
April 6, 2004 CITY CA: `EACH
TO: CITY OF SEAL BEACH APR - S ?0U4 r ;
HARDSHIP EXEMPTION E; „;; tM'E jT'OF
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
RE: Mr. and Mrs. Coop
212 14 St.
Seal Beach, CA 90740
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
In regards to the home on 212 14 St., the Coop's have spent thousands of dollars on the -
drawings. They were in the pipeline and had been approved in concept by the ,Planning
Department when this moratorium stopped us.
They also have Coastal Commission Waiver:
RATIONAL: The subject site is an inland lot neither located between the first public road and
the sea nor within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or the main high tide of the sea. The
proposed project conforms to the Commission's parking requirement (two- spaces per residential
unit) and is designed to be compatible with the character of the surrounding development. Public
access to the beach exists south of the project site at the end of 14 Street. Directing storm drain
runoff to permeable surfaces is consistent with the marine protection policies of the Coastal Act.
The proposed project design is compatible with the character of surrounding development and
does not have any negative affects on visual or coastal resources, public recreation or coastal
- access. Also, the proposed development will not prejudice the City's ability to prepare a
Certified Local Coastal Program and is consistent with past Commission actions in the area and
Chapter Three policies of the Coastal Act.
The Coop's feel the project would improve the neighborhood; with it being on two sides
of the alley, it would make turning radius easy for everyone. There are at least three homes a
few doors away that have built similar improvements. This would benefit everyone.
Please allow the Coop's to continue with their home improvement.
Sincerely,
Terry Booth
Newland Construction; Inc. /Agent for the Coop's
TB /lb
428 S. Montgomery Way, Orange, CA 92868