|
|
 City of Hermosa Beach --- 05-19-98
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON APRIL 21, 1998, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Meeting called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chmn. Tucker.
Pledge of allegiance led by Comm. Pizer.
ROLL CALL
Present: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker Absent: Comm. Schwartz Comm. Merl indicated he would be late to the meeting. Also present: Sol Blumenfeld, Community Development Director Michael Schubach, City Planner Deborah Salas, Recording Secretary
CONSENT CALENDAR
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti commented on page 8 of the Minutes, relating to the discussion on the condominium on 11th Street, referring to the "no right turn," expressing that it should be "no left turn." Chmn. Tucker commented on the Resolution regarding 802 Hermosa Avenue, referring to the specific ceiling height. Director Blumenfeld responded that the distance from the mezzanine to the truss could not be more than seven feet.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Pizer, to APPROVE the minutes and the resolutions, including the above-mentioned change.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Merl ABSTAIN: None ORAL/WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. PDP 97-25 -- PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REDESIGN MOBILE HOME PARK TO ACCOMMODATE LARGER UNITS AT 531 PIER AVENUE (CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 20, FEBRUARY 17, AND MARCH 17, 1998 MEETINGS.
Staff Recommended Action: To continue to May 19, 1998 meeting.
Director Blumenfeld said that this continuation would be the last and final continuation before the applicant would either need to go forward or withdraw his application.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 7:15 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Pizer, to CONTINUE the item to the May 19, 1998 meeting.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None
8. PARK 98-2 -- PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW THE SHARED USE OF THE EXISTING REQUIRED PARKING FOR OFF-SITE BUSINESSES AT 200 PIER AVENUE (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 17, 1998 MEETING).
Staff Recommended Action: To continue to May 19, 1998 meeting.
Director Blumenfeld said the applicant was requested to provide a plan for dealing with his current tenants with respect to the shared parking plan and has not produced the plan, hence the reason for the delay.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 7:14 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Pizer, Seconded by Comm. Perrotti, to CONTINUE the item to the May 19, 1998 meeting.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None.
9. VAR 98-1 -- SIGN VARIANCE TO ALLOW A WALL SIGN TO BE LOCATED ABOVE THE SECOND STORY AT 1300 THE STRAND, BEACH HOUSE HOTEL (continued from March 17, 1998 meeting).)
Staff Recommended Action: To continue to May 19, 1998 meeting.
Director Blumenfeld said the applicant is still exploring options on a location and may still want to request a sign variance though they are currently looking at the Phase II development and there should be some resolution by the May meeting.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m.
Shirley Cassell, said this building has a two-and-a-half-foot parapet above what it should be and is above the 30-foot limit.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 7:17 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Pizer, to CONTINUE the item to the May 19, 1998 meeting.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None
10. SS 96-1 -- TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING DEFINITIONS OF NONCONFORMING DWELLING UNIT, KITCHEN, ATTIC, BASEMENT (EXCLUDE FROM BUILDING HEIGHT) AND HABITABLE ROOM (CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 17 AND MARCH 17, 1998 MEETINGS)
Staff Recommended Action: Item withdrawn for reconsideration as separate Text Amendments.
Director Blumenfeld said Staff is compiling a list of items that present inconsistencies either in interpretation or to code enforcement for the Zoning Ordinance.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 7:19 p.m.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Pizer, to WITHDRAW the item until a future date.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None
11. GP 98-1/ZON 98-1/CON 98-4/PDP 98-4 -- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR (CC) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MD) AND ZONE CHANGE FROM SPA7 (SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NO. 7) TO R-2, AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #52508, FOR AN EIGHT-UNIT DETACHED CONDOMINIUM PROJECT TAKING ACCESS FROM 7 TH STREET, ON THE REAR PORTION OF TWO COMMERCIAL PARCELS FRONTING ON PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (635 AND 705 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY), AND PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO RECONFIGURE THE LAYOUT AND INCREASE THE P.C.H. FRONTAGE OF THE EXISTING LUMBER YARD, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 635 & 705 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY.
Staff Recommended Action: To deny said requests.
Director Blumenfeld stated that the zone change portion of this item needed to be approved before the Commission could act upon the development permits, and both items could be considered in one hearing but the Resolutions must be acted upon separately.
He said City Council had considered a similar zone change and General Plan Amendment request for the same property in conjunction with a 24-unit condominium development, including frontage on 6th Street, which was denied based on the reluctance by the Council to reduce the commercial lot depth of the property and the potential development limitations which would be created by the proposed redesignation of highway oriented commercial use. He noted that in 1994, the General Plan Amendment designation was established, setting out the SPA Zone which currently is attached to this property and which allowed the properties immediately south to have a 300-foot depth and properties immediately to the north to have a 120-foot depth. He said the depth of the commercial property remains an issue for the City relative to redevelopment of the commercial corridor. The Council rejected the previous proposal, noting that this was one of the few remaining parcels with a depth of 300 feet. Potential commercial users that might utilize that 300-foot depth are such things as mini box retail type users, highway oriented users, or larger retail users as opposed to strip malls that could occupy a more reduced commercial depth. Based upon this previous Council direction relative to the zone change and General Plan request, Staff is recommending denial of the project. Without the redesignation of the property for the zoning, no residential use is permitted and the reconfiguration of the Learned site would also not be possible under this proposal. He said that utility of the site relative to the land use designation and appropriateness of the proposed use relative to the surrounding uses should be considered. He noted that approval of the project should include Staff direction to work with the applicant to prepare a fiscal impact analysis, which the City Council could use in considering the zone change/General Plan Amendment request. He said the Council was concerned about the potential impacts to the city with respect to reduced commercial lot depth, and this study could help identify benefits or disbenefits of the net reduction in commercial acreage and net gain in commercial acreage tax, service demands, and market consideration for future oriented highway development.
Director Blumenfeld said the proposed project is going to be developed at 11.3 units per acre which is well within the maximum allowable density of 24 units per acre provided under the General Plan and the zoning for R-2 development. Each unit will have a two-car garage and two guest parking spaces fronting along a 26 foot wide private street. The condominium units will be detached single family style units on lots of 29 feet by 108 feet. He noted that the project was inconsistent with the area development patterns where the lots are frequently 40 feet in width, as well as being inconsistent with the development standards for the Subdivision Ordinance and R-1 and R-2 type development standards, which require a 40-foot lot width and a 4,000 square foot lot size for development. He also noted the narrow lots resulted in an unvaried design and setback with frontage along a relatively narrow street and that the overall project could be enhanced if the building line and the building plans were more varied and if the project was reduced to six units offsetting the building size with additional building setbacks and more building articulation. The proposed project would not generate significant traffic impacts as described in the traffic report in the Staff report, noting that there are 120 vehicle trips a day which does not impact the Level of Service for any of the intersections studied (5th, 6th and 8th Streets.)
With respect to the Learned Lumber project, he noted that the overall plan clearly provides for more efficient design for Learned Lumber and has a direct benefit to the community by providing customer parking and driveway access at PCH rather than 6th Street which currently absorbs approximately 95 percent of the 807 trips per day from Learned Lumber. To the extent that the Learned property and the project can be made more efficient and more competitive with surrounding building supply uses, the project obviously benefits the community.
Staff is also recommending that if the project is approved, some additional traffic control measures be incorporated in the project to minimize truck turning movements onto 6th Street. Additional curb and gutter along 6th Street and additional operational recommendations were also provided to minimize conflict in the surrounding residential areas. In response to a question by Comm. Perrotti regarding the motel property, Director Blumenfeld stated a developer had expressed some interest in developing a hotel. Comm. Perrotti asked if there was going to be any type of knuckle at the 6th Street driveway entry to redirect truck traffic, and Director Blumenfeld said there could be a knuckle in addition to some signing to preclude right turn movements.
In response to a request from Comm. Pizer to redefine the SPA7, Director Blumenfeld said the SPA zone permits C-3 type uses and, in addition, it has some other specific provisions that permit redevelopment or reuse of properties that are deemed to be nonconforming to the commercial use. Reading from the Zoning Ordinance he noted -- "on property being exclusively used for residential purposes at the date of adoption of this ordinance, the uses shall be permitted to continue as a residential use maintaining its conforming status and may be remodeled or redeveloped as a residential use as long as the density, number of dwelling units, is not increased."
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Mike Learned, 635 Pacific Coast Highway, Hermosa Beach, said in 1970 they attempted to make the corridor a commercial corridor. He said the lumber yard has been a commercial site since the 1920's. These condominiums will be built on standard 30 X 90 foot lots.
Curt Nelson, on behalf of JCC homes, said there was some density concerns voiced by certain Council persons about whether it was in the best interest of the City of Hermosa Beach to lose any of the thickness of the commercial corridor. He said the air space envelope of these units will encompass all the exterior surfaces of an approximate 3,000 square foot dwelling along with yard area, driveways, and it will have conventional two-car garages in addition to other guest parking spaces, some open spaces. He said Mr. Learned is willing to have a ban on right turns out onto 6th Street from the commercial site and that will address existing concerns in the residential neighborhoods there to the west along 6th Street since the trucks will only be able to turn left leaving the site. He said although the units are going to be very similar units, the setbacks, the square footage that is devoted to each unit, the overall attractiveness, the articulation of the buildings themselves, and the roofs matches up very favorably with anything in the area, and they're going to have a beneficial effect on property values of nearby residences. He said in comparison to what was previously approved, this is all going to remain or become even more commercial with no new impact on 6th Street and certainly some lessening of the impact on 6th Street, and we have a project here that I think is in the best interest of the community both commercially and to the residences. We are very confident we're going to have no negative impact that will prevent us from selling these.
Joan Arias, 720 8th Street, said they are less concerned about the residential use than they are about the reconfiguration of the lumberyard which puts a very noisy part of the business right next to their house, and she asked that a little more attention be put to that.
Shirley Cassell, Hermosa Beach, said the developers are in the project for profit and they will build and leave with their profit.
Rebuttal
Michael Learned, in regards to Mrs. Arias' concerns about noise, said he would do whatever is mutually agreeable to work on those sound deadening type walls. We have a 10-foot setback as required by the Fire Code, and there is a commercial code in the city about the decibel level, and we would abide by all those codes, but we would make the extra effort to say both site lines and noise, we would like to talk to them and solve whatever issues they have. In response to a question from Chmn. Tucker, Mr. Learned explained that they are required in that section of the parcel to holdback 10 feet from the block wall which is on the property line at that point because that is the fire code so what is basically there is a non-flammable storage area. Mr. Learned said traffic flow through the lumber yard is improved immensely by this plan because they now create a 49-foot-wide driveway accessing Pacific Coast Highway; therefore, the trucks have better turning radius.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing.
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said the majority of the City Council has expressed a desire to keep all commercial zoned areas remaining commercial and, although the Rudat study was a study of the downtown area, you could use the same philosophy for the commercial corridor, Pacific Coast Highway. He said if there were more of an indication that there was some type of serious proposal to replace the motel with a small hotel, that he would keep that zoning commercial and deny the request for the zoning change and the general plan amendment; however, it seems pretty speculative at this point that there will be any hotel development or proposal there. He said he agreed with the concept of the General Plan Amendment and the zone change; however he also agreed with Staff in that there should be some type of fiscal impact analysis and that the applicants can work with Staff to determine exactly what Staff needs, and he said it's a critical issue that the City know exactly what impact this zoning change and General Plan Amendment will have on the City and its revenues. Comm. Pizer said this is a complicated situation but it's gotten a lot easier the second time around, and it looks like the highest and best use of the property for Learned Lumber is shown on this plan based on their business and assuming that they would keep this lot for a long period of time. He said that Learned Lumber's business will increase because of their exposure to Pacific Coast Highway, and there will be tax revenue and business revenue probably in the downtown from the condos. Chmn. Tucker said that the demographics today for a big major retailer is traffic, and I just don't think Pacific Coast Highway really generates that kind of traffic anymore per se, and that he was not sure if a financial analysis was needed. We have eight condominiums that will generate property taxes and benefit to the schools and other things. He said technically it is probably 3,000 square feet ahead with this reconfiguration for the commercial end of it, so he thought it is a viable project to go ahead and rezone this into the commercial section that they want. He said the only thing he would like to see is maybe the driveway shrunk down on 6th Street to make sure the trucks really can't turn right on 6th Street. Comm. Perrotti stated that if a fiscal impact study was done and it really indicated a serious impact, that that would be something that would be important for the Commission, City Council, Staff, and for the public to know.
Curt Nelson, JCC Homes, said they plan on presenting a real world set of our figures and where we feel the impact will lie and how it will be in the best interests of Hermosa.
MOTION by Comm. Pizer, seconded by Chmn. Tucker, for Staff to come back with a resolution for a general plan amendment and zone change.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said the problem that we've seen, especially in adjoining areas of other cities, is that there are a lot of lots that are 29 feet, 30 feet, and the concern is that there isn't enough lot width to give the designers enough variety area to vary a project and make it as good as it could. He expressed concerned about how this is going to look because once these are built it's something that we're going to have to live with for 50 years or so. Director Blumenfeld explained, in response to Comm. Pizer's question, that the project is under common ownership so there really is not a typical single family lot but rather a single family style detached condominium. There is one condominium map that creates eight single family style detached condominiums so that it technically conforms to the Condominium Ordinance. However, he noted that it is not in conformity with is the R-1 and R-2 pattern of development, which is prevalent in the area, and also it is not consistent with the minimum standard of R-1 and R-2 development for R-1 and R-2 development in the Zoning Ordinance or the Subdivision Ordinance which prescribes a minimum 40-foot-lot width for R-1 and R-2 development. Comm. Pizer said he did not have a problem with the lot width and the appearance, but that they could look acceptable for the community and be in compliance with the styles in Hermosa Beach, and he said he liked the reorientation of the condos so that the noise is minimum for the condo buyers. Chmn. Tucker said he didn't think the lot width was of great concern but that it would be nice to see some balconies pop out as well as the roofs be different color tiles instead of just all one color. He said these people are responsible for their street since it is private, and it is a project that's going to be high end, and it's going to generate money for the City based on just the property taxes. I'm hoping that there's decorative concrete in the driveways and maybe some strips of concrete or decorative concrete in the street just to make it look a little more upscale.
MOTION by Comm. Pizer, seconded by Chmn. Tucker, for Staff to come back with a Resolution of Approval for the condo project.
AYES: Comm. Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: Comm. Perrotti ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None Director Blumenfeld said the last item for consideration is the commercial development permit for reconfiguration of the Learned site. Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said after getting more information about the reconfiguration and especially the problems that we've had on 6th Street with a lot of heavy truck traffic, that it is going to alleviate a lot of the complaints that the city staff has received. Comm. Pizer said that something should be included about the property adjacent to the lumber yard regarding mitigation of the noise. Chmn. Tucker said it may be good to cut the driveway off of 6th Street down.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, seconded by Comm. Pizer, to DIRECT Staff to prepare a Resolution approving the Precise Development Plan reconfiguring the lumber yard and increasing the frontage on Pacific Coast Highway.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz, Comm. Merl ABSTAIN: None (Ten-minute recess taken at 9:10 p.m.) (Planning Commission meeting resumed at 9:22 p.m.)
(Comm. Merl arrived at the Planning Commission meeting.)
12. CON 98-3 / PDP 98-3 -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #24974 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 650-652 10 TH STREET (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 17, 1998 MEETING.)
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Mr. Schubach said the issues regarding this project on 10th Street are related to previous project approvals requiring more setback in the front yard, consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. In addition, the building is about 1.7 feet over height, and the landscaping is not adequate.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 9:25 p.m.
Elizabeth Srour, 1001 6th Street, Manhattan Beach, said the posted sign was missing when she went by today, and she thinks the property may have changed owners. Referencing the height issue, she said it was an inadvertent interpretation and their intent is that the new development comply fully with the code, so they would be working with Staff. She said the front unit on the northeast corner has been notched out which provides some relief on the eastern side of the building, and they would accept the six-foot setback which is the standard for the neighborhood. Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 9:30 p.m.
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti suggested increasing the setback to six feet especially because there is a chimney which is 30 inches into the setback. Comm. Merl said the project conforms to the zoning standards. Chmn. Tucker suggested more articulation and more bands and maybe breaking up the stucco a little more. He also expressed concern with the property line and whether or not a wall would be needed.
MOTION by Comm. Merl, Seconded by Comm. Perrotti, with Staff conditions with the proviso that the setback be six feet and also adding a condition, requesting that Staff work with the applicant about further articulation of the south elevation and elsewhere if possible.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None 13. PDP 98-6 -- PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO A DUPLEX AND TO ADD 250 SQUARE FEET AT 1734 PROSPECT AVENUE.
Staff Recommended Action: To continue to May 19, 1998 meeting.
Michael Schubach said Staff is recommending continuation because of the plans that were submitted were insufficient particularly in terms of height. He said there was a lack of landscaping proposed, and a variance would have to be submitted for the garage setback.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 9:35 p.m.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Merl, to CONTINUE the item to the May 19, 1998 meeting.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None (Chmn. Tucker excused himself from the hearing of the following item.)
14. VAR 98-2/NR 98-4 -- VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXPANSION AND REMODEL TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A LESS THAN REQUIRED GARAGE DEPTH (17'4" RATHER THAN 18') AND NONCONFORMING SIDE AND FRONT YARDS RESULTING IN A GREATER THAN 50% INCREASE IN VALUATION AT 225 34 TH STREET.
Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate.
Director Blumenfeld said there are nonconformities as described in the report and that the percent of valuation of the property is 58%, which requires the Commission's review. The project required that the Commission make specific findings to grant a Variance request.
Comm. Merl opened the public hearing at 9:42 p.m.
Dallas Covington, 302 N. Gertruda Avenue, Redondo Beach, said he concurred with the Director's recommendations and said he would answer the questions of moving the retaining wall.
Comm. Merl closed the public hearing at 9:43 p.m.
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said he agrees with the analysis that the sloping topography is sufficient grounds to say that this would be extraordinary circumstances to the property and expanding the garage is not a feasible option. Comm. Pizer discussed the encroachment on the property line with Director Blumenfeld. Comm. Merl said the size of the lot and topography of the lot create some extenuating circumstances and reasonable development of the dwelling are certainly proscribed by this kind of condition.
MOTION by Comm. Perrotti, Seconded by Comm. Pizer, to ADOPT the proposed Resolution and that the Commission has made the appropriate findings based on the steepness of the lot and the lot size.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: Chmn. Tucker Comm. Merl said that as with all Commission items, it is appealable to the City Council within 10 days.
15. CON 98-6/PDP 98-7 -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #21493 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 840 15 TH STREET.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Michael Schubach stated that a 12-foot front yard setback with required garage setback is proposed. He said that previously the Commission was concerned with consistency with the existing neighborhood. Some other issues include an overhang over the open space which needs to be adjusted and required changes for project landscaping are necessary. He commented that one issue is the location of a front door toward the rear of the property and also the issue of having so much lot frontage in driveway area. He noted that while the driveway does provide two additional guest parking spaces, it also makes three-fourths of the front yard driveway.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 9:54 p.m.
Elizabeth Srour, 1001 6th Street, Manhattan Beach, representing Don Karasevicz, said the way the project has been designed to address the parking issue with seven spaces provided on the site, and there is an intention to create two freestanding homes with some very attractive landscaping. She also commented on the setback, saying the project has two detached buildings with a very generous 25-foot corridor between them, which will be very beneficial to the properties to the east and the west. She also commented on there being no decks or doors off the southerly orientation, which helps to preserve the privacy of the properties to the south.
Don Karasevicz, 840 15th Street, spoke about the severe parking problem and the support that exists for having more off-street parking. He also said the situation that precipitates the unusually large setback is the ocean view. He said his neighbors to the immediate rear expressed some concern about a duplex which had been approved that would have windows facing their property, and he said the south elevation on Unit B is lacking windows in order to avoid a privacy issue.
Lauren Gazarian, 833 14th Street, introduced a packet of information and a site rendering, and she brought up the issue of the location of the front door, stressing the foot traffic problem and security risk. She also stressed allowable distance for emergency vehicle access. She said some additional landscaping would help soften the facade, and the grade level should be the same on both sides of the wall.
Aslam Amlani, 833 14th Street, asked the Commissioners to investigate the grading. He also said there should be trees to buffer the property. He said this is a three-story structure.
Rebuttal
Elizabeth Srour, 1001 6th Street, said the applicant is willing to work with Staff to increase the landscaping across the rear of the property. She said the applicant found it important to create two separate dwelling units and to maintain a view corridor.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 10:29 p.m.
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said he agrees with Staff on the setback of 19 feet and that there should be more landscaping in the rear, including mature trees. Comm. Merl said he didn't feel that the 17-foot setback was untoward. Comm. Pizer said there is no room for rear landscaping with the setback, and he proposed allowing a 17-foot setback and more rear yard. Chmn. Tucker expressed concern for the southerly residents with an eight-foot high wall and discussed the position of the front door.
MOTION by Comm. Merl, Seconded by Comm. Perrotti, to MOVE the Staff recommendations plus the modification that the front setback be 17 but that those two feet be completely picked up in the rear as an additional rear setback and direction to Staff to work with the developer to increase the landscaping particularly the addition of mature trees for screening purposes, and Staff work with the developer on the further articulation and to where possible the stepping back of the rear portion of the rear unit and reduce the intrusion of the fireplace into the setback and articulation of the side elevations to provide more relief on the linear wall.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None
16. CUP 98-2 -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COFFEE HOUSE AT 509 PIER AVENUE, ESPRESSO WASH.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Director Blumenfeld said the business owner is now desiring to make some further alterations to the proposed plan which would include an outside seating area and basically that would be a notch created by setting back a portion of the street frontage 10 feet by 14 feet for the seating area. The proposed addition will not increase the floor area and by extension it will not increase the parking plan for the property. He said the only other issue is the operation hours and the owner had proposed to operate from 6:00 a.m. to midnight.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 10:42 p.m.
Pete Buccoleri, applicant, said they want to put an outdoor patio area for their customers.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 10:43 p.m.
Discussion
Comm. Perrotti said it appears as though the applicant has put a lot of time and effort into the project and the outdoor dining is a positive thing for the area, especially with regard to the non-smoking issue. He agreed that the same hours as Java Man would be acceptable and Comm. Merl concurred.
MOTION by Comm. Pizer, Seconded by Comm. Merl, to APPROVE the Conditional Use Permit as discussed.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None
HEARINGS
17. NR 98-2 -- NONCONFORMING REMODEL TO ADD 200 SQUARE FEET TO AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING USE DUPLEX WITH LESS THAN REQUIRED PARKING AT 1157 6 TH STREET.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Michael Schubach said even though the project is small; Planning Commission approval is required because if it is a nonconforming use as well as a nonconforming structure. He noted that there is one parking space for each unit.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 10:47 p.m.
Ed Moody said he and his wife want to enclose the deck to stop it from leaking into the garage.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 10:48 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Merl, Seconded by Comm. Perrotti, to APPROVE the item.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None
18. NR 98-3 -- NONCONFORMING REMODEL TO ALLOW A REMODEL AND 450 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING RESULTING IN A GREATER THAN 50% INCREASE IN VALUATION AT 2705 PALM DRIVE.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Mike Schubach said this is a small addition to an existing development, and the only concern is that the applicant maintain at least a portion of the yard at a seven foot dimension.
Chmn. Tucker opened the public hearing at 10:50 p.m.
Dave Studds, 2649 Palm Drive, said they are willing to follow Staff's recommendations as far as maintaining open space. He also asked if he could maintain the open space on the roof deck versus increasing the rear yard.
Chmn. Tucker closed the public hearing at 10:51 p.m.
MOTION by Comm. Pizer, Seconded by Comm. Merl, to APPROVE the nonconforming remodel.
AYES: Comm. Perrotti, Merl, Pizer, Chmn. Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Schwartz ABSTAIN: None STAFF ITEMS
19a. Memorandum regarding code interpretation for commercial parking requirement at 50 Pier Avenue.
Director Blumenfeld said Staff is asking for an interpretation relative to this commercial parking, and the business owner is proposing to construct two small mezzanines, 250 and 372 square feet, and a bathroom to an existing business. He also said the Zoning Ordinance prescribes that two additional parking spaces be provided for the increased gross floor area and the owner either has to provide the parking on site or in lieu, through a Parking Plan. He said the owner's architect submitted a letter that describes parking for the project at 50A as occurring in the Vehicle Parking District Lot A and along Pier Avenue. He said Staff is requesting that the Commission confirm by Minute Order that the proposed parking area is currently not required parking and is available to be improved for parking to satisfy the additional parking requirement. This would also require removing an existing storage container to provide the required parking.
MOTION by Comm. Merl, Seconded by Chmn. Tucker, for a Minute Order.
19b. Memorandum regarding interpretation of enclosure of 70-square-foot deck on third floor Unit A (front unit) relative to total project open space requirement - 3518 The Strand.
Director Blumenfeld said a minute order is required to direct Staff relative to the open space requirements for the subject deck. He said the applicant has submitted plans to enclose a 70-square-foot deck on the third floor of Unit A. In 1987, when the Planning Commission considered this project, the code had provisions for the R-3 zone and said that private and common open space may be covered up to 50 percent but shall not be enclosed on more than two sides. He said in that case the subject deck should not have been included in the open space requirement calculation; however, it was. He said the second issue is the overall open space requirement would have been met if Staff had calculated including the yard areas, which again at the time were not excluded from that calculation. Currently the code reads, "When computing open space in conjunction with yard areas, only an area which exceeds the minimum required yard area may be counted toward open space and only if the overall dimension of the required setback and the exceeding area together has a dimension of at least seven feet." In fact, this provision was not adopted until 1988, so actually there was more than the required open space area because this provision was inoperable. Staff is requiring the Commission by Minute Order to recognize that this area should not have been counted toward open space and will not make this project anymore nonconforming to the requirements that were in effect at its approval.
Staff was directed by Minute Order.
19c. Community Development Department Activity Report of February, 1998.
Comm. Pizer commented that activity has increased tremendously, and Director Blumenfeld said activity has doubled primarily with residential building activity. Receive and file.
19d. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda. Receive and file.
19e. City Council Minutes of March 10 and 24, 1998. Receive and file.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Comm. Merl, Seconded by Chmn. Tucker, to ADJOURN at 11:00 p.m. No objections; so ordered. |
|
|
|