HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2003-04-14 #FF AGENDA REPO T �►/ �
DATE Apnl 14, 2003 ,fi
TO Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU John B Bahorski, City Manager
FROM Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION — REVIEW OF ON- STREET
PARKING REGULATIONS AND LAYOUT, SEAL
BEACH BOULEVARD BETWEEN ELECTRIC AVENUE
AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Consideration of Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council to authorize
the City Engineer to review on- street parking regulations and space layout on Seal Beach
Boulevard between Electnc Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
BACKGROUND
On March 5, 2003 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on General Plan
Amendment 03 -1, Zone Change 03 -1 and Zone Text Amendment 03 -1, to revise he
zoning provisions of the Limited - Commercial Zone to allow new residential development
as a permitted use During the public testimony, several individuals indicated that the
current on- street parking situation in the area is a problem to their business operations
After closing the public heanng and determining to approve the requested General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, and Zone Text Amendment, the Commission adopted on 4 -1
vote, Commissioner Sharp voting no, the following recommendation
"To request that City Council authonze City Engineering Staff to review
potential parking restnctions on Seal Beach Boulevard from the area of
Electnc Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway "
Please refer to Attachment 1, the Planning Commission Minutes of March 5, 2003 to
review the public and Commission discussion regarding this recommendation Please
note the discussion also related to the issue of providing diagonal parking in this area,
Agenda Item Al'
C \Documents and Settings \LWhittenberg\My Documents \SBBLVD\PC Recommendation Parking Restriction Study CC Staff
Report doc \LW\03 31 03
Planning Commission Recommendation re
Review of Parking Resti zctions on Seal Beach Boulevai d
between Electi zc Avenue and Pacific Coast Highwal
Citv Council Staff Report
Api it 14 2003
similar to Main Street Please refer to pages 7 -9 of the March 5 Planning Commission
Minutes to review this discussion
Staff has obtained a letter proposal from RK Engineering Group, Inc to conduct the
requested parking analysis, including a scope of work and budget not to exceed $7,500
Refer to Attachment 2 for a copy of the letter proposal The proposal also includes a
work program to review Seal Beach Boulevard for potential diagonal parking
opportunities
If the City Council determines to proceed with this investigation, it would appropnate to
adopt the resolution provided that will authorize the transfer of the appropriate funds
from the unallocated reserves to the Engineering Department Contract Services Account
Please refer to Attachment 3 to review the appropnate resolution
FISCAL IMPACT
Re- allocation of existing staff to manage the consultant that will conduct the necessary
studies Direct cost of $7,500 00 to come from a reallocation of unallocated reserve
funds If the City Council determines to proceed with this matter, it is recommended that
the Planning Department Contract Professional Services Account 001- 030 -44000 be
increased by $7,500 The current estimated fiscal year ending undesignated general fund
balance is $3,810,369 Approval of this budget amendment will decrease the estimated
ending undesignated fund balance by $7,500 to $3,802,869
RECOMMENDATION
Consideration of Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council to authonze
the City Engineer to review on- street parking regulations on Seal Beach Boulevard
between Electnc Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
If the City Council determines to proceed, the following actions are recommended
1 Adopt Resolution No ,__A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Seal
Beach Authorizing Budget Amendment 03 -26 for Contract Professional Services
for a Parking Study of Seal Beach Boulevard between Electnc Avenue and
Pacific Coast Highway
2 Authonze staff to execute Letter Proposal with RK Engmeenng Group, Inc , in an
amount not to exceed $7,500 00 for work as set forth in their letter dated April 1,
2003
2
PC Recommendation Parking Restnetion Stud\ CC Staff Report
Planning Commission Recommendation , e
Review of Pa, King Rest, tenons on Seal Beach Boulevai d
between Elect, ac Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
City Council Staff Repo/ t
Apia 14 2003
NOTED AND APPROVED
1111y I
ee
e Whittenberg Jo , ': Bahorski
,,
Director of Development Services y Manager
Attachments (3)
Attachment 1 Planning Commission Minutes of March 5, 2003
Attachment 2 Letter Proposal re Seal Beach Boulevard Between Electnc
Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway Parking Review, RI(
Engmeenng Group, Inc , dated Apnl 1, 2003
Attachment 3 Resolution No , A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of Seal Beach Authonzing Budget Amendment 03-
26 for Contract Professional Services for a Parking Study
of Seal Beach Boulevard between Electnc Avenue and
Pacific Coast Highway
PC Recommendation Parking Restnction Study CC Staff Report 3
Planning Commission Recommendation !e
Review of Par king Rest! colons on Seal Bcach Boulevai d
between Electric Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
City Council Staff Report
Api 1114 2003
ATTACHMENT 1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF
MARCH 5, 2003
PC Recommendation Parking Restnction Study CC Staff Report 4
1 CITY OF SEAL BEACH
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3
4 Minutes of March 5, 2003
5
6
7 Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission
8 to order at 7 30 p m on Wednesday March 5 2003 The meeting was held in the City
9 Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag 1
10
11 ROLL CALL
12
13 Present Chairperson Hood Commissioners Deaton Ladner Shanks and Sharp
14
15 Also
16 Present Department of Development Services
17 Lee Whittenberg Director
18 Alexander Abbe Assistant City Attorney
19 Mac Cummins Associate Planner
20
21 Absent None
22
3
24 AGENDA APPROVAL
25
26 Mr Whittenberg requested that item No 2 Minor Plan Review (MPR) 03 -3 and Item
27 No 3 Variance 03 -1 both for 250 Ocean Avenue be continued to the Planning
28 Commission meeting of March 19 2003 He also requested Item No 5 Determination
29 of General Plan Conformity be continued to the Planning Commission meeting or March
30 19 2003
31
32 MOTION by Deaton SECOND by Ladner to approve the Agenda as amended
33
34 MOTION CARRIED 5 — 0
35 AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp
36 NOES None
37 ABSENT None
38
39
40 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
41
42 Chairperson Hood opened oral communicaLions
43
44
1 These Minutes were transcnbea rrom audiotaoe or the meeting
1
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 Mr Warren Morton stated that he would again like to bring to the attention of the
2 Planning Commission the illegal condition at 1110 Electric Avenue He stated that
3 instead of a double car garage a single -car garage is in place He said that the utilities
4 from the adjacent property extend under this structure and now there are extra front
5 doors on the building He commented that perhaps extra units were being added to this
6 building He asked the Associate Planner whether he had inquired about these issues
7 Mr Morton stated that the City must stop approving legal non - conforming additions
8 without total compliance by the property owners and that thorough follow- through with
9 inspections must be done He noted the similarity with the property at 1220 Central
10 Avenue where units were added to an approved legal nonconforming property He
11 reiterated that approvals for these types of structures should be subject to the
12 Conditional Use Permit process or eliminated altogether
13
14 There being no one else wishing to speak Chairperson Hood closed oral
15 communications
16
17
18 CONSENT CALENDAR
19
20 1 Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 19 2003
21
22 2 Minor Plan Review 03 -3
23 250 Ocean Avenue
24
25 Applicant/Owner Jim Watson
26 Request Architectural review of a proposal to construct a new built -in
27 BBQ and a fireplace structure within the rear and side yard
28 setback areas of the subject property
29
30 Recommendation Continue to meeting of March 19 2003
31
32 MOTION by Shanks SECOND by Ladner to approve the Consent Calendar as
33 amended
34
35 MOTION CARRIED 5 — 0
36 AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp
37 NOES None
38 ABSENT None
39
40
41 PUBLIC HEARINGS
42
43 3 Negative Declaration 03 -1
44 General Plan Amendment 03 -1
45 Zone Change 03 -1
46 Zone Text Amendment 03 -1
2
City or Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 Seal Beach Boulevard between Electric Avenue and 125 feet north or Landing
Avenue
3
4 Applicant/Owner City or Seal Beach / Vanous
5 Request General Plan Amendment 03 -1 — A request to amend the
6 Land Use Element of the General Plan to revise allowable
7 uses within the Limited Commercial and use designation to
8 allow residential uses not in conjunction with a related
9 commercial or office and use Revise the and use
10 designation and Land Use Map rrom General Commercial to
11 Limited Commercial for the subject properties located north
12 of Landing Avenue
13
14 Zone Change 03 -1 — A request to change the zone on
15 properties located from Landing Avenue 125 feet north on
16 Seal Beach Boulevard from General Commercial (C -2) to
17 Limited Commercial (L -C)
18
19 Zone Text Amendment — A request to amend the provisions
20 of the Limited Commercial (L -C) Zone to allow new
21 residential construction as a permitted use in the L -C Zone
22 Currently new residential uses are permitted only in
23 conjunction with an allowable business use
1
z5 Recommendation Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution
26 Nos 03 -11 03 -12 and 03 -13
27
28 Staff Report
29
30 Mr Whittenberg stated that Negative Declaration (ND) 03 -1 was prepared to comply
31 with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
32 comment period on the Drart ND closes on Monday March 17 2003 He noted that
33 anyone wishing to provide comments could do so tonight or they could provide their
34 comments in writing or by e -mail to the Department of Development Services He
35 reported that copies of the ND were available tonight as well as in the local libraries He
36 explained that the basic project is a General Plan Amendment (GPA) Zone Change
37 (ZC) and a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) He stated that Seal Beach Boulevard (SBB)
38 between Electric Avenue and Landing Avenue has been designated a Limited
39 Commercial Zone (L -C) since 1992 He said that north of Landing Avenue on SBB
40 there are 3 lots that are developed with residential uses that have been zoned General
41 Commercial (C -2) since the mid -1950 s or early 1960 s He stated that north of these 3
42 lots are the more recent homes constructed on the former Shore Shop property He
43 said that this property zoning was changed in 1998 from a C -2 Zone to a Residential
44 Medium Density (RMD) Zone He said a GPA and ZC were done at that point and a ND
4 5 approved for that project The Director or Development Services explained that what is
before the Planning Commission (PC) this evening is a request to modiry what can be
I built by right on the L -C zoned properties on SBB He stated that right now new
3
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 residential uses can only be constructed in conjunction with a non - residential
2 professional office or light retail use and the new residential has to be on either the
3 second or third floor above the new non - residential use of the property He reported
4 that in July 2002 City Council (CC) authorized Staff to review this issue to consider
5 allowing single - family residences (SFR) to be constructed by right or by Conditional Use
6 Permit (CUP) approval without having to be in conjunction with a non - residential office
7 or light retail use He continued by noting that the ZC is to change the zoning of those
8 first 3 lots north of Landing Avenue that are now in the C -2 Zone to the L -C Zone and
9 they would then fall into compliance with the standards that are being considered
10 tonight He stated that these 3 lots are currently in a legal nonconforming status and
11 are already developed with residential uses and the C -2 Zone does not allow
12 residences at all He said that by placing these lots in the L -C Zone they will still be
13 legal non - conforming uses in that they all have more units built on them than what the
14 current density standards allow but this rezoning will bring them into a category that
15 allows residential uses He reported that pubic notice was published in the newspaper
16 and mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the area
17 He stated that Staff has attempted to reflect some of the competing concerns from the
18 property owners in that area as how best to deal with what should be built along this
19 area of SBB He noted that there are differences of opinion and this is what makes it
20 difficult for the PC and CC to deal with He noted that copies of the Staff Reports and
21 minutes from the community meetings on this issue have been provided to the
22 Commissioners for review Mr Whittenberg then reviewed the resolutions prepared for
23 the GPA ZC and the ZTA He explained that for the GPA the basic items to consider
24 would be to revise some of the language within the existing General Plan (GP)
25 description of what a L -C land use should be He noted that these revisions should
26 reflect the idea that in addition to the mixed -use residential /commercial uses that are
27 now encouraged in that area a person should also be able to develop the property for a
28 strictly residential use in accordance with certain City development standards He
29 continued by noting that the second part of the GPA is to modify tables and other
30 information to reflect these changes and to reflect the change in the land use
31 designation in the GP for the 3 lots north of Landing Avenue from a C -2 to an L -C
32 designation He then noted that the last major change in the GP would be to change
33 the and use map of the City With regard to the ZC Mr Whittenberg stated that under
34 California Law the GP and zoning for cities must be consistent He stated that Seal
35 Beach is a Charter City and technically is not bound by the general laws of the State of
36 California but the City has for many years taken a position of complying with these
37 provisions or law He continued by explaining that the ZTA outlines the changes to the
38 Code sections related to permitted uses and building standards for Residential Medium
39 Density (RMD) for this area to allow residential uses and also for residential in
40 conjunction with mixed use projects He stated that Staff is recommending that for new
41 homes on the SBB side the front setback provisions allow the homes to be developed
42 using the Residential High Density (RHD) standard which allow an average setback
43 instead of a straight line setback He said this would allow for some building variation
44 along the street frontage He noted that the supplemental Staff Report distributed
45 tonight was prepared to incorporate direction from the City Attorney to delete Paragraph
46 28- 1155(f)4 rro the L -C Code section This paragraph would require that in order to
4
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 construct in the L C Zone the occupant of the residential unit above the mixed -use
project must work in the mixed -use non - residential part of the project below the house
3 The Director of Development Services then noted that since 1992 when the L -C Zoning
4 was approved two projects have been approved but neither one has been constructed
5
6 Commissioner Questions
7
8 Commissioner Deaton stated that she understands that under the L -C zoning
9 residential commercial or a combination of the two can be constructed Mr
10 Whittenberg explained that as the L -C Zone currently exists it allows non - residential or
11 mixed -use non - residential and residential but does not allow strictly new residential
12 uses Commissioner Deaton confirmed that with the proposed changes all three would
13 be allowed Mr Whittenberg confirmed that this is correct Commissioner Deaton
14 referred to the e -mail from Richard Grossgold and stated that he is concerned that
15 should he lose his office building due to fire or another calamity he would not be able to
16 reconstruct the office building again Mr Whittenberg stated that the new zoning would
17 allow him to rebuild a project but due to building standards he hesitated to state that
18 Mr Grossgold would be able to reconstruct exactly what he has now He referred to
19 Attachment 7 Section 28- 2406(c) which states that if a nonconforming non - residential
20 structure is damaged less than 50% it can automatically be reconstructed in its original
21 configuration and if damaged more than 50% it can be rebuilt subject to the Minor Plan
22 Review (MPR) process and all of the parking that existed at the time of the damage
7 3 must be provided Commissioner Deaton asked if what Mr Whittenberg was stating is
that Mr Grossgold s building is a nonconforming non - residential building Mr
z5 Whittenberg clarified that every building along SBB between the Electric Avenue alley is
26 impacted by this proposal including the 3 lots north of Landing Avenue which are
27 currently nonconforming uses of property Commissioner Deaton clarified that if these
28 are nonconforming properties then no matter what happens to their building they will be
29 allowed to rebuild it as it is Mr Whittenberg stated that in all cases the provisions allow
30 to rebuild as it is as long as the same number of parking spaces are provided as existed
31 bet Commissioner Deaton asked if these properties are nonconforming due to
32 parking setbacks lot coverage issues etc? Mr Whittenberg stated that they are
33 nonconforming due to all of these issues and probably several others He explained
34 that all of the residential uses in this area are over density as most of them are 2- to 4-
35 unit apartment buildings and some of them already have mixed uses that do not comply
36 with the setback or parking requirements Commissioner Deaton confirmed that when
37 rebuilding the property owner will not be asked to bring the structure into conformity
38 Mr Whittenberg confirmed that this was correct and noted that the City would not
39 propose changes to the existing provisions of the nonconforming section that would
40 impact them any differently if the PC were to do nothing this evening
41
42 I Chairperson Hood reviewed the items to be considered for determination and he asked
43 1 it GPA 03 -1 ZC 03 -1 and ZTA 03 -1 could all be voted on with one motion or should
44 they be voted on separately' Mr Whittenberg stated that Starr would prefer that
2 -5 separate motions be made Chairperson Hood then confirmed that the closing date for
c omments on the Negative Declaration is Monday March 17 2003
5
City or Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 Public Hearing
2
3 Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing
4
5 Mr Greg Miller stated that the issue of commercial parking along this area or SBB has
6 not been addressed He said that the street is always filled with cars from the overflow
7 on 17 Street occupying the parking spaces on SBB He noted that this also includes
8 ' some abandoned vehicles He stated that when new residential homes go in no one
9 will park in their garages but will park on the street He expressed concern over where
10 his customers would find parking if the street is filled with cars He asked to know how
11 this is to be handled
12
13 Ms Serretta Fielding provided a brief history of this area of SBB and stated that one of
14 the reasons property owners would like to have the option to construct a residential use
15 on the lots is that because the block is zoned as L -C it is not possible to acquire a loan
16 on a property in the L -C Zone She noted that the reason the two approved mixed -use
17 developments have not yet been constructed is due to an inability to acquire funding
18 She said that many property owners purchased their homes in this area when the
19 commercial lending rates were low but the rates have increased dramatically and
20 consequently there have been no improvements made to this block She also explained
21 that when the Bay Motel was sold and the address was converted to a home along
22 ( Electric Avenue the commercial draw to this area was lost She noted that the
23 commercial draw was also affected by the loss of the Shore Shop Ms Fielding stated
24 that with residential on both ends of the block there is little draw for commercial along
25 this section of SBB She said that the street has seen very little development since
26 1984 when she moved to this area She encouraged approval of this option as it would
27 allow property owners to acquire loans to build residential or improve their lots She
28 noted that she and the Director of Development Services had discussed designating
29 this area on the new zoning map as L -C and /or RMD as this is the only way
30 residential loans will be approved
31
32 Mr Ross DeLahay stated that he is a realtor who represents the owner of the property
33 at 233 Seal Beach Blvd He stated that this property has been listed for over two years
34 but with the L -C zoning no one has expressed an interest in purchasing it He stated
35 that L -C is no longer viable unless a large shopping center is being developed He also
36 explained that financing for an L -C zoned property is difficult He reported that he has a
37 long list of people waiting and ready to make an offer if the property is to be zoned as
38 R -1
39
40 Mr Mario Musso past owner of the Shore Shop provided a brief history of the property
41 and noted that when the large retailers come to town it made it difficult for the Shore
42 Shop to survive and it became necessary to look for another use for the property He
43 explained that rezoning of the property from L -C to residential made it possible to
44 construct seven SFRs which have added over 85 million dollars to the tax base of the
45 City far exceeding the sales tax revenue generated by the Shore Shop in its last 10
46 years of operation He stated that if the remainder of this area of SBB were rezoned to
6
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeung Minutes or March 5 2003
1 allow residential it would be advantageous not only to the residents but also to
2 neighboring property values and ultimately to the City s financial base
3
Mr John Grossgold speaking on behalf of his father Richard Grossgold stated that his
5 rather s main concern about being able to rebuild after a disaster had been adequately
6 addressed He said he was also glad to see the elimination of the requirement that
7 business owners or their employees must reside in the upper residential units of mixed -
8 use structures within the L -C Zone He also emphasized that the zoning map should
9 rerlect L -C and /or RMD for the ability to obtain financing He encouraged approval of
10 the zone changes
11
12 Mr Medhat Rauof spoke in favor of approving ZC 03 -1 and ZTA 03 -1 He described the
13 difficulty he has had in developing his property at 233 Seal Beach Blvd He also
14 expressed his concerns regarding excessive cars parked along the street
15
16 Mr Brady Johnson a resident of Electric Avenue spoke in favor of the proposed zone
17 change He said he had informally surveyed the residents on his block and they all
18 spoke in favor of seeing this change He stated that the parking problem is probably a
19 result of apartment tenants having no designated parking and having to park on the
20 street
21
22 There being no one else wishing to speak Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing
7 3
1- - Mr Whittenberg clarified that the properties would not be zoned as R -1, but Staff is
25 proposing that the L -C designation remain and the allowable uses be changed to also
26 allow residential use He said that what is allowable within the zone is what is most
27 significant and not the zone category itself He stated that if the PC determines to
28 change the name of the zone he sees no problem with using the designation L -C /RMD
29 or whatever the PC feels would be most appropriate
30
31 Commissioner Comments
32
33 Commissioner Deaton expressed her concern about the parking issue She asked if the
34 L -C designation were retained would it be possible to restrict parking in this area? Mr
35 Whittenberg stated that the PC could make this recommendation to City Council He
36 noted that any restrictions on parking are of extreme concern to the California Coastal
37 Commission (CCC) He stated that if the concern is regarding cars that are parked and
38 not moved for several days this is an enforcement issue that could be handled by the
39 Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD) He noted that the Vehicle Code does allow
40 cars to park on the street for 72 hours Commissioner Deaton stated that she
41 understands the problems with the CCC but she believes that if businesses along SBB
42 are to survive their patrons must have adequate parking Mr Whittenberg noted that in
43 the L -C Zone there are provisions to provide parking ror new commercial uses He said
44 that there is a provision that allows ror a credit for a certain number of parking spaces
45 required for a new business -type use to be counted for being provided on the street
itself He stated that the CCC is also concerned with this issue He noted that of the
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes or March 5 2003
1 two projects on SBB approved by the CCC one was required to provide residential
2 parking on the property and the other was required to provide both non - residential and
3 residential use parking on the property Commissioner Deaton inquired whether the
4 existing businesses have parking on the premises or are relying on street parking Mr
5 Whittenberg reported that it varies some have parking on the property and others have
6 parking in the alleys Commissioner Deaton commended Staff for the manner in which
7 this issue has been handled but stated that she is still concerned about the parking
8 She said that the CCC is probably not happy about the apartment buildings without
9 sufficient parking according to City Code Mr Whittenberg emphasized that at the time
10 that it was constructed every residential use that is out there met whatever parking
11 requirements were in place at that time He stated that over the years most cities have
12 changed parking requirements from one space to two spaces per unit which is what the
13 City requirement is today
14
15 Commissioner Ladner asked if it would be possible to place a time limit on parking in
16 front of the businesses in this area Mr Whittenberg reiterated that placing a limit on
17 parking on any public street within the Coastal Zone is a CCC issue He explained that
18 the PC could make a motion to make this recommendation to the City Council
19 Commissioner Ladner stated that he believes the issue to be important enough to make
20 this recommendation He suggested that there be no overnight parking and time limited
21 parking during the day
22
23 Commissioner Shanks asked if there were sufficient room for diagonal parking Mr
24 Whittenberg stated that he believed the actual curb -to -curb width along this area of SBB
25 is the same as Main Street so this might be an option that could be included in the
26 recommendation to City Council He noted that the neighboring residents would have to
27 be surveyed regarding parking issues in this area prior to the CC making any kind of
28 determination Commissioner Shanks commented that when visiting this street late one
29 night he found the entire Navy side of the street filled with parked cars He questioned
30 where all of these cars are coming from Mr Whittenberg noted that a public street is a
31 public parking area and the public has a right to park there
32
33 Chairperson Hood observed that tonight the PC is dealing only with agenda items
34 which are the General Plan Amendment Zone Change and the Zone Text Amendment
35 He stated that as he understands it the parking issue is not an agendized item and
36 ; should be placed on the agenda for a future meeting Mr Abbe concurred that the
37 parking issue should be deferred to the next meeting Chairperson Hood asked if the
38 CC approves these recommendations what would the parking requirement be should a
39 property owner decide to modify his /her residence or rebuild a new residence's Mr
40 Whittenberg stated that the current provision for a new residence would be to provide 2
41 parking spaces in a garage for each new residential unit built on the property For
42 rebuilding a damaged residence if it were constructed exactly as it was prior to the
43 1 damage the parking requirement would be the same as before the damage occurred
44 The Director or Development Services stated that this is an issue that was not
45 discussed as a part of the study session on additions to nonconforming structures
46 (because the issue of reconstruction after destruction was not included He continued by
8
City oi Seal Beacn Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of Marcn 5 2003
1 noting that for additions to an existing legal nonconforming residential multi- family or
2 SFR the property owner would be subject to the standards currently in place for these
3 types of structures Chairperson Hood noted that Item No 6 on tonight s agenda deals
4 with the issue of additions or expansions to nonconforming residential uses and that
5 the issue of parking could be discussed at a future meeting He then inquired of the
6 Director of Development Services whether development of a Local Coastal Plan (LCP)
7 is to take place soon Mr Whittenberg stated that the City is in the process of prepanng
8 a LCP to submit to the CCC for review Chairperson Hood asked if limited parking
9 restrictions could be included as a part of the LCP Mr Whittenberg stated that this
10 could be done Mr Abbe interjected that the Director of Development Services had just
11 reminded him that the parking issue is not really within the subject matter jurisdiction of
12 the Planning Commission and the Brown Act only applies to matters within the PC s
13 subject matter jurisdiction so if the PC were to make a recommendation to the CC it
14 would not be in violation of the Brown Act
15
16 Commissioner Sharp commented that before getting too deeply into the parking issue
17 he recommends that the Director of Development Services provide copies of the
18 minutes related to parking issues for review by the Commissioners
19
20 MOTION by Shanks SECOND by Deaton to approve General Plan Amendment 03 -1
21 and adopt Resolution 03 -11 as presented
22
9 3 MOTION CARRIED 5 — 0
AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp
25 NOES None
26 ABSENT None
27
28 MOTION by Deaton SECOND by Sharp to approve Zone Change 03 -1 and adopt
29 Resolution 03 -12 as revised
30
31 MOTION CARRIED 5 — 0
32 AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp
33 NOES None
34 ABSENT None
35
36 Mr Whittenberg noted that the motion should reverence the revised Resolution 03 -12 as
37 it appears in the revised Starr Report
38
39 MOTION by Deaton SECOND by Ladner to approve Zone Text Amendment 03 -1 to
40 include the new zoned designation as L -C /RMD and adopt Resolution 03 -13 as
41 amended
42
43 MOTION CARRIED 5 — 0
44 AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp
45 NOES None
ABSENT None
9
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of March 5 2003
1 Mr Whittenberg advised that these actions tonight are only recommendations and there
2 will be future public hearings scheduled with the City Council and all property owners
3 and all residents and tenants within a 300 -foot radius will receive notice of these ruture
4 City Council hearings He cautioned that the CCC would be very resistant to restricting
5 overnight parking
6
7 Commissioner Sharp stated that although he strongly sympathized with the parking
8 problems he would vote against this motion strictly because the PC would be asking
9 Staff to do something that will lead them to buck their heads against the wall with the
10 Coastal Commission He said that he reels it would be asking the City to spend money
11 that it doesn t need to spend
12
13 Commissioner Ladner commented that based on what the Director of Development
14 Services has said the CCC would object to restrictions on overnight parking so he
15 would strike this part of his recommendation but he still believes there should be a time
16 limited green zone for the commercial uses Mr Whittenberg reminded the PC that they
17 are discussing an issue that technically they have no jurisdiction to change He
18 suggested that any recommendation to City Council be kept as general in nature as
19 possible
20
21 Commissioner Deaton stated that although she is aware that this issue has been
22 extensively studied she believes it deserves further review She noted that this street
23 appears to be very congested and she is surprised that the curb -to -curb width is the
24 i l same as Main Street as currently it almost seems dangerous in some places She said
25 that parking in this area deserves another look to make sure that it is working
26
27 MOTION by Ladner SECOND by Deaton to request that City Council authorize City
28 Engineering Staff to review potential parking restrictions on Seal Beach Boulevard from
29 the area of Electric Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway
30
31 MOTION CARRIED 4 — 0 — 1
32 AYES Hood, Deaton, Ladner, and Shanks
33 NOES Sharp
34 ABSENT None
35
36
37 SCHEDULED MATTERS
38
39 6 STUDY SESSION Addition and Expansion Standards for Non - Conforming
40 Residential Uses
41
42 Staff Report
43
44 Mr Whittenberg stated that because this is a study session item there would be no
45 recommendations made by Staff He said that an additional Staff Report was prepared
46 based upon direction given to Staff at the PC meeting 01 February 5 2003 He noted
10
Planning Comnusston Reconintendation r e
Review of Pal king Rest] actions on Seal Beach Boulevai d
between Elect] is Avenue and Pacific Coast Highwal
Can Council Staff Repoi t
Api 1114 2003
ATTACHMENT 2
LETTER PROPOSAL RE SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD
BETWEEN ELECTRIC AVENUE AND PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY PARKING REVIEW, RK ENGINEERING
GROUP, INC , DATED APRIL 1, 2003
PC Recommendation Parking Restriction Study CC Staff Report 5
Pp- :2 33 13 33a C ^ -te - r^,; c-'434--'1332 I i
fli:i49g
ii Fi r 1 i 1 1 rc
Mr hi Nil ikorwiO
" S ree
'307
SLOji.ct Seat BeacL B: teva d Ect'ween Electric Avenue and Par; it Coast
H'gnway Parking Review
Dcur \1r vurk'J1ev1C
}
INTRODUCTION
RK ENGINEERING GROUP INC (P ) 's pleased to sJomit this proposed pgreemenr to
prov de raffia eng rC:,riing ces to ei evv a'ong Scat Beat~ Bor,i'eva - o be.tween
`rectr 0 6,, and �acifir Coact rfigmlvay in roe City of Saal Beacn RecenTly tr re way a
gene p ' arne c.ir` zJne cl"argc and :ere tek'` ch approved rez,ide`^tr31
de■e'oprnert along Seal Beacn Boulevard oetween Electric Avenue and Pacify Coast r isgnway
t?r fb n a Tt' Cv c , - - es :d C`fy crgir aern`, s aff 'et pc erti2l pars -g
restrlctrcrs cr Seat Beacri Boulevard Trom re a Or E'ectric /\venue to Pacific; Goat r+Ignway
k rl Krerpar' 3 par}r'r'9 review Or e v i STrnq Coin tions in me area TO toentrt•, existing p.Arrinf
demand vr'd der i cpper'i n r es for diagonal par and other parr, oinons ,or the arc;
Parking recommendations will oe incluoea in tne trarric repor'
}
SCOPE OF WORK
Tne follow n Scope OT vVork is proposed by PK or tnls study effort
t Discuss tree project witn representatives or the City of Seat Beacn Pubic v'vor6s Department
2 Meld review the site to determine eyisnng conditions
? Conduct a par } survey curing a typical weehaay and weekend during tne Hours of
7ng4%
4 Summanze the results of the parking survey
5 Identify any available evisting parking within tne area
6 Review Seal Beach Boulevard for potential diagonal parking opportunities
7 DeN,eiop recommendaTions for the area with respect to pare ing
1 r ir mi i i
t r 11 r N t
f( \ 1 1 r1 H (r 1
Rpr 02 03 10 33a RK Engineer ng 19494'40 °00 p
Par Mark Vul o'evtc
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
April 1 2003
Page 2
8 Summarize the results of the study In a parking study report
PROFESSIONAL FEES
The fee for the work outlined in this proposal is based upon personnel charges plus direct
exocnses as indicated in the attached Exhibit A The fined fee to accomplish the above Score
of Work Is $7 500 If an expanded scope of work is required RK will provide additional propos•i
for that worlr
Three copies (two bound and one ortg'nal for the client s use) of the protect report woutd be
prepared Monthly billings for PK will be based upon the attached Exntbtt A - BILLING RATES
FOR RK ENGINEERING GPOUP INC invoices that are more than 90 day: past due are
subject to interest at the maximum permitted by law
The proposed fee does not include attendance at public hearings /meetings which may be
required to secure approval of the pralect If these are reautred and requested RK would be
pleased to attend these meetings and billing virouid be based upon the billing rates included In
Exhibit A Arty meetings after 5 00 PM will be billed at 1 5 times our normal rates
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
The Client agreos to limit the Design Professionals labil to the Client and to alt cortstruct'cr+
Contractors and Subcontractors on the project due to the Design Professional's negligent acts
errors or orn sstanS, such rta' the total aggregate liability of the Design Professional `o all those
named shall not exceed $50 000 or the Design Professional s total fee for servo -es rendered on
th protec %nchi i grea
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
Alt r pl specifications f data notes and other documents +ncludtng all documents
on electronic media prepared by RK as instruments of service snail remain the property of RK
M CI re use th documents to se sure a pp ro val o f h, s 'her proles s h the rr a k i
not be modified or changed In any way
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
In an effort to resolve any conflicts that arise dunng the Project or following the completion of the
Protec` the Chent and PK agree that atl dtsoutes bet een them arising out of or re-ia`tng o this
Agreement or the Project shall be submitted to nonb nding mediation unless the parties mutJar'
:'tree otherwise
Rpr 02 03 10 33a P< Engineering 19494740902 p 4
EX.hiBi T A
BILLING RATES FOR RK ENGINEERING GROUP iNC
Compensation for Services
The Consultants Billing rates for services are as foflovvs
Po5uon µourly Rate
1
Pnncrpal S" +' 00
Senior Asao ate $1 OC
Associate $100 00
Principal Engineer /Pnncipal Plonncr /Pnnclpal Designer S 90 00
Senor EnarneerrSenior Planner /Senior Designer S 80 00
Senior Transporl Analyst $ 30 00
Engineer'Pianner $ 70 00
Assistant Engineer /Planner $ 60 00
Transportation Analyst $ 60 00
Senior Engineenng Technician $ 60 00
Engineering Technician 111 $ 50 00
Englnecnng Technician 11 $ 40 00
Engineering Technician! $ 35 00
Engineering Aide $ 30 00
Eyecutive AsgrsTant $ 50 00
Administrative Assistant $ 40 00
artmlri ctr- t ve Aide $ 35 00
Clerical Aide $ 30 00
D ens 1
(1' iteirnbursaPie cirect costs suet 4 x reproduction suop'scs messo ^Cer Se'vtCe kart; distance
telephone cams t and trarric col,nts %ill be blitel - t cos' piu ten ( 10) percent
rater: :Del; ; writ tt le tr3Yre tine anrt open r'Jk! c i^P3, - s ar d P^e
ovc , M1orK the above atcs ne b? inCtecsed 50 petcert
( 3) CIic`lt Oay"nen for protcssionai services t, not conting'nt uoor the ci i t receiving oa nit frDfl
other pares
Ettltl ia f:Lltr'rlcr't' f or anrk v i!! be St. gr ttad ^tcnt" - tly S otcrncnt- , thin thirty (30)
1 r s � F •�•� Ar J Herne t u tpa d 3r er' ebil S (,?t1) d # •c
�cti`S of 1`r I °:1� by a n Q� 2t- 'Z r :�
sJbiec o irterc ,,?t the rnaxirnt.m pe - nit`ed b Iav
Sr;c«1 15 2002
Rpr 02 03 10 33a PK Engineerir 1949x" p 3
SAC �1arl LltiL ojo4tc
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
p n, r 1 2003
Page 3
in th e t rent that SU4t br f the enforcement o f an cf th€ t of this agreement
the prevailing tarty should be entitled to attorney fees and costs in addition to any damages
s ag n3n be te hated by either party used upon a `14ritten fequest to ermtr}otc th
worm The client will pay RK for all work that is completed poor to the termination of the work
TIME SCHEDULE
It is estimated that the Seal Beach Boulevard Parking Review will tal approximately
20 r :lays m � +.- tram the date o f th Y + a X1 e f ce pt o r d_+ 3 -
G��'d�"?r tr l
alt� .7J� 4v G:ttt �e C 'ram c"2 dad.., of authorization ..ca ,. `,?c rc..,, pt or ��� c ., 5:�� t:t
for the stud\, Additionally any delays resulting from circumstances beyond our control such as
y,lea eY tend t [me s l
4ri 'r located in Newport Beach, California and spec alt_es transportation planning and
trafficracousticnl engineering for governmental agencies and the business community The firm
pnrc'pa'S ano associates have over 50 ;feats of corrbined erigineenng and planning experience
throughout Southern California at the regional local and individual project levers The
e nr +re firm s personnei in i arsoodai on r,}ar ng and `a> c'ac,.s+r.'.al e- i loci n
p rovi d e , the spec ai drills necessar; for determining pract cal and mean ngful traffic solutions
This utter can serve as 3 Memorandum of Agreement and our authorization to croc Please
sign one cop/ and recurr� rt J us To (:),,r T es l a - L C l l �a d ser LPg Jou for trrs.
project This proposal is valid for sixty days if signed by the client If you have any
que tions regarding this proposal, pease a call me at (949) 474-0809
Res submitted
RK ENGINEERING CROUP INC CONTRACT APPROVAL
�- xppro ea U\
TtIP
Robert Kahn, P E
Principal Firm Orly OF SEAL BEACH
Registered Civil Engineer 20285 Date
Registered Traffic Engineer 0555
RK rd/1552.
JIB 0884 -03 -01
Attachment
Planning Commission Recommendation' e
Revielt- of Paz king Rest' zctzons on Seal Beach Boulevard
between Elect' is Avenue and Pacific Coast Highwan
Citt Council Staff Repoi t
Ap' i114 2003
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO , A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENT 03 -26 FOR
CONTRACT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A
PARKING STUDY OF SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD
BETWEEN ELECTRIC AVENUE AND PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY
PC Recommendation Parking Restriction Stud) CC Staff Report 6
'12 1') Planning Commission Recommendation re
Revicw of Parking Restrictions on Seal Beach Boulevai d
H ‘i ° between Elect/ is Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
Cm Council Staff Repo! t
I April 14 2003
RESOLUTION NO
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING
BUDGET AMENDMENT 03 -26 FOR
CONTRACT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR
A PARKING STUDY OF SEAL BEACH
BOULEVARD BETWEEN ELECTRIC
AVENUE AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
WHEREAS, the fiscal year budget requires budgetary amendments as outlined below
ORIGINAL PROPOSED BUDGET
DEPT ACCOUNT BUDGET BUDGET AMD (DIFF)
Planning
Contract
Prof Services 001 -030 -44000 $35,000 $42,500 S7,500
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Seal
Beach that the Planning Department Contract Professional Services Account 001 -030-
44000 is increased to 542,500
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal
Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of
, 2003
AYES Councilmembers
NOES Councilmembers
ABSENT Councilmembers
ABSTAIN Councilmembers
PC Recommendation Parking Restnctton Study CC Staff Repots 7
Planning Commission Recommendation re
Review of Pat king Resti ictions on Sail Beach Boulevai d
between Elecu is Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway
City Council Staff Repo, t
Apt it 14 2003
Mayor
ATTEST
City Clerk
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 resolution is an original copy of Resolution Number on file in
the Office of the City Clerk, passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of
, 2003
City Clerk
PC Recommendation Parking. Reatncnon Study CC Staff R.poit 8