Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1991_03_05MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON MARCH 5, 1991, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting called to order at 7:02 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz. Pledge of Allegiance led by Comm. Peirce. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Comms. Marks, Peirce, Chmn. Ketz Comm. Rue• Also Present: Michael Schubach, Planning Director: Edward Lee, Assistant City Attorney: Sally White, Recording Secretary (*Comm. Rue entered Council Chambers at 7:05 P.M.) CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Marks, to approve as submitted the following consent calendar items: Planning Commission minutes of February 19, 1991: Resolution P.C. 90-84, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CI1Y OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING OUTDOOR DINING AND THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE AT 200 LONGFELLOW AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, BLOCK 117, SHAKESPEARE TRACT. There being no objection to approval, so ordered. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No one appeared to address the Commission. CON 91-1/PDP 91-1 --CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #22305 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 918 15TH STREET CON 91-2/PDP 91-2 --CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #22304 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 930 15TH STREET Chmn. Ketz noted that the two above projects would be heard together. Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated March 5, 1991, and recommended that this matter be continued to the meeting of April 2, 1991. He explained that staff had received a letter from the applicant requesting that the matter be continued. Mr. Schubach further noted that only today staff had gone to the project site and discovered that the on-street parking spaces which were thought to be legal parking are actually posted with "No Parking" signs. Consequently, another parking space is not needed for this project. 1 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 Mr. Schubach asked that the Commissioners provide input on this project, especially in regard to the overall architectural appearance of the projects. He explained that both projects are identical; however, they were requested as two separate projects. Public Hearing opened and continued at 7:05 P.M . by Chmn. Ketz, who noted that no one appeared to speak on either of these projects. Mr. Lee explained that it would be appropriate at this time for Commissioners to express their views on the overall architectural features of the projects so that staff can discuss the issues with the applicant. Chmn. Ketz commented that the main issues relate to potential view loss and setbacks. Comm. Rue stated that with the two lots, he was surprised that the open space was not combined. He noted that overall lot coverage is under the allowed maximum. He felt that the projects could be consolidated, and that attempts could be made to make the projects less intrusive bulkwise. Chmn. Ketz favored staffs suggestion that there be only one driveway for the projects. Comm. Rue noted that there is no view preservation ordinance; however, he felt that the views can be made more attractive. He did not feel this project, as submitted, takes advantage of the maximum potential view. Comm. Marks asked whether it is necessary that there be a second means of egress from the third level, to which Mr. Schubach replied in the affirmative and stated that he would check into the matter further to ensure that that requirement is met. Comm. Peirce stated that all four units are identical. He felt that more can be done to make the projects more attractive, both to potential owners as well as to the City. MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Marks, to approve staffs recommendation to continue the public hearing to the meeting of April 2, 1991. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Marks, Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Ketz None None None CUP 91 -1 --CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO SELL ADULT VIDEOS AND FOR OFF-SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONNECTION WITH AN EXISTING MARKET ALREADY LICENSED BY A.B.C. AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE, BOCCATO'S GROCERIES Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated February 26, 1991, and recommended approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the conditions specified in the proposed resolution. This project is located in the C-1 zone, with a general plan designation of neighborhood commercial. The lot size is 3850 square feet, and the building size is 2800 square feet. The current use is as a preexisting grocery store. There are five parking spaces. Boccato's Groceries is located on the southwest comer of Manhattan Avenue and 32nd Street. It is the only use of the lot. The store is open from 9:00 AM. until 9:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and from 10:00 AM. until 8:00 P.M. on Sundays. The applicant indicates that the store is open until midnight daily during the summer. 2 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 Boccato's is one of the remaining existing businesses selling alcoholic beverages subject to the alcohol amortization ordinance which has not obtained a conditional use permit. At their meeting of January 17, 1991, the staff environmental review committee recommended an environmental negative declaration and recommended that the Planning Commission require the applicant to enclose the trash dumpsters behind a view-obstructing fence and gate. and to slurry seal and restripe the parking lot. The requested CUP would authorize the continued general alcohol sales and if approved would also allow the sale of adult videos and magazines. Staff is concerned with the proposal to add adult video sales. The proposed use of a liquor store/video sales could be a dangerous trend for wholesale opening of these types of busines ses in establishments that service neighborhoods. Because of the proximity to residences, within a hundred feet, and the possible availability to minors for sale, it is felt by staff that this is not a proper mix of businesses. Also, Section 10-5 of the zoning ordinance states the sale of adult videos should be greater than 100 feet from residential property. According to the City Attorney, since the proposed video sales are only a small portion of the business, incidental to the alcohol sales, the City does not have the authority to deny the sales. As such, staff recommend that any adult video sales must be incidental to the grocery store/liquor sales and should not represent more than 10 percent of the sales. Staffs only other concerns are related to the appearance of the parking lot. The existing tv.ro trash dumpsters are completely exposed to view and should be screened. Further, the parking lot striping is severely faded and the surface is uneven and in need of repair. Otherwise, since this is an existing grocery store/general alcohol sale business, staff felt that the sale of alcohol should be allowed to continue, subject to the proposed conditions. The conditions are limited to standard conditions of the zoning ordinance and conditions related to the trash dumpster and the parking lot surface. The standard conditions include a provision to require that single containers be sold in clear bags. The Police Department has als o requested that a standard condition be added to require alcohol establishments to participate in the Eliminate Alcohol Sales to Youth (EASY) Program. Mr. Schubach, in response to a question from Comm. Peirce, explained that the requirement to screen the trash enclosure is a provision of the municipal code, not the zoning ordinance: however, staff has been including it as a standard condition in CUPs. Mr. Schubach, in response to a question from Comm. Peirce related to what the requirements for the pavement would be if this business were not applying for a CUP, explained tha t businesses are required by the parking ordinance to maintain their parking lots in a reasonable condition. • Mr. Schubach, in response to a question from Comm. Marks, stated that no complaints have been received related to the hours of operation for this business. He noted, however, that several letters have been received from people who oppose this business having to obtain a CUP. Comm. Marks noted that this application had been filed under protest. and he asked for clarification on what this means. Mr. Schubach explained that the applicant was required by the City to apply for a CUP under the City's amortization process within two years of notice. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz. at 7: 17 P.M. 3 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 Phil Freeland, 315 South Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, representing the applicant. addressed the Commission and: ( 1) said that the applicant is applying for this CUP under protest because he does not feel it is a legal requirement to obtain the CUP; (2) said the business has been in operation for 22 years and is legally "grandfathered in" because a CUP was not previously required; (3) said that the business has caused no problems in the past; (4) asked for a written legal opinion from the City Attorney related to the legal requirement for obtaining the CUP; (5) said that it is not within the purview of the City to require a CUP for a business already licensed by the State ABC and one which is in operation. Mr. Freeland continued and: ( 1) discussed the City's reasoning for the CUP requirement; (2) said that this business was licensed by the ABC long before the City applied alcohol sales requirements; (3) said that the business is compatible in its neighborhood; (4) objected to the recommended conditions as suggested by staff, explaining that the applicant feels many of the conditions are unreasonable, especially since this business has been in operation for many years; (5) said that if the CUP is denied because an agreement cannot be reached in regard to the conditions, and the business is subsequently forced to close, it would be a case of inverse condemnation. Mr. Freeland continued and: (1) stated that the City does not have the right to close the business without paying just compensation; (2) stated that he was not certain of the City's position on this matter; (3) asked for a written clarification; (4) asked that this hearing be continued for 30 days so that the attorney for the applicant can further study the matter and determine a course of action; (5) noted that the applicant would like to withdraw the portion of the request relating to adult videos, and all references to adult videos in the CUP. explaining that the applicant has no desire to sell such materials. Comm. Marks asked whether Mr. Freeland or the applicant had met with staff to discuss these issues, to which Mr. Freeland replied that over the past two years they have always maintained that Boccato's is a legally grandfathered use. He said that they have been in contact with City staff over the past two years regarding the requirement that they must apply for the CUP. He also noted that the applicant had received a letter from the City Attorney six months ago. Mr. Freeland stated that the issue is not that the applicant does not understand the requirement; rather, it is that the applicant objects to the requirement. Mr. Freeland, in response to a question from Comm. Peirce regarding which of the specific conditions the applicant disagrees with, stated that the applicant disagrees with all of the conditions, except the one which pertains to maintaining the property in a neat and clean manner. Mr. Freeland, in response to a question from Comm. Peirce, explained that they also object to the requirement that the trash area be enclosed. He explained that an enclosure would necessitate the loss of one on-site parking space. He said that since there are only five spaces. the loss of one space would be a substantial impact. He stressed that there is very little on- street parking, and any loss of on-site parking would be quite detrimental to this business. Mr. Freeland, in discussion with Comm. Peirce, stated that there is no way whatsoever to enclosure the trash area without the loss of one parking space. Comm. Marks asked whether the applicant has met with staff to discuss another possible location for the trash, to which Mr. Freeland replied in the negative. He noted, however, that they are open to options. Mr. Lee. in response to a request from Chmn. Ketz, discussed the City's legal stand on this issue. He stated that it is legally appropriate to bring such use within the conditional use permit process as allowed under the amortization ordinance. He stated, however, that since this is a use which was in effect prior to the CUP requirements, the Commission cannot impose conditions so stringent that it would force the business to terminate. He explained, however, 4 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 that reasonable conditions can be imposed which would mitigate adverse impacts created by the business. Mr . Lee continued by discussing past correspondence between his office that the applicant. He stated that alcohol-related conditions are preempted by State law, and he noted that no conditions in the CUP regulate the actual use of alcohol: rather, the conditions address the environmental issues raised by such use, not the actual sale of alcohol. Mr. Lee stated that the City is on good legal foundation in terms of moving forward with this conditional use permit. He stated that, if so desired by the Commission, his office would prepare additional material on this request. Mr. Lee, in response to a question from Chmn. Ketz, explained what would happen if the CUP were approved, and the applicant did not agree to the conditions. Comm. Rue suggested that the matter be continued so that the applicant and staff can discuss the issues. Public Hearing closed at 7:34 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz. Comm. Rue encouraged the applicant to come to an agreement with the City and try to come to an understanding of the conditional use permit process. He felt that it is important for the applicant to understand the City's position on this matter. Comm. Peirce felt that the only condition at issue is that relating to the trash enclosure. He did not feel it would be appropriate to have the City Attorney spend a lot of time and money preparing more information. He stated that laws are laws and should be complied with. Comm. Rue noted, however, that it is important for the applicant to understand the procedures. He felt it is worth an effort to reach such understanding to avert potential legal problems in the future. Comm. Peirce stated that he would agree to a one-month delay: however, he stressed that he did not want the City Attorney to spend money on further work. Comm. Marks stated that the only physical problem relates to the trash enclosure. He suggested, therefore, that the applicant meet with staff to resolve that problem. Chmn. Ketz agreed that she would like to see the applicant and staff come to a resolution on this problem. MOTION by Comm. Rue. seconded by Comm. Marks, to continue this item to the meeting of April 2, 1991, so that the applicant and staff can discuss these issues in an attempt to reach an agreement. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Marks, Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Ketz None None None CUP 90-25 --CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AUTO DETAILING AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 825 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. HABASH AUTO DETAILING (CONTINUED FROM MEETINGS OF 12/4/90. 1/2/91. AND 2/5/91) Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated February 25, 1991, and recommended denial of the requested CUP based on insufficient parking for the combination of the proposed auto sales lot and detailing business. 5 P.C. Minutes 3 /5 /91 Mr. Schubach suggested an alternative, to approve a master CUP for the combination of the auto sales and auto detailing business. Mr. Schubach explained that the applicant has now submitted a new plan with a scale drawing which shows that the parking has been realigned to the south property line. • He pointed out the changes on the plan.and noted that the applicant asserts that there is now adequate parking. Mr. Schubach stated that staff has discovered on several occasions that cars are being washed in the area designated as a detailing area. It was also noted that an interior wall is still in place which was not allowed. Staff felt that, overall, the site is too small for the proposed location. Staff also noted concern over cars being washed outdoors and cars being parked in the area designated for work area. Staff had concerns over the general overall operation of this business, especially since there is another business at the location. Mr. Schubach, in response to a question from Comm. Peirce, stated that nine parking spaces are required for the two uses. There are seven outside, and two are within the rear of the building. He explained that the required parking has now been relocated to the south property line. Public Hearing opened at 7:46 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz. Jay Habash, 683 5th Street, Hermosa Beach, applicant, addressed the Commission and: (1) stated that he received a letter notifying him that the garage area cannot be blocked; (2) state_d that the property owner has given him spaces 2, 3, and 4 for parking for the detail shop; (3) stated that he has a 24-month lease agreement for the three parking spaces: (4) passed out a copy of the lease agreement; (5) discussed the plans, explaining that cars are no longer being washed outdoors, only indoors, and no motor work at all is done on the premises. Mr. Habash continued and: (1) stated that there are no problems with this business and the other business on site; (2) noted that there is plenty of parking in the area; (3) stressed that he keeps no more than three cars on the lot at any one time; (4) explained that the cars block the way of no one; (5) stated that he has a letter from the surrounding neighbors who do not oppose this business, and he handed in the letter with the signatures. Mr. Habash went on and: (1) explained that when the owner comes in, he needs to have access to the garage; (2) said that he can park in that fourth space so long as the owner is not there getting into the garage; (3) stated, in response to a question from the City Attorney, that he has a 24-month master lease with the property owner, and the master lease runs for the same length of time as the parking agreement; (4) said that he works on no more than three cars at any given time, and there are no more than three cars there at a time; (5) stated that he is in agreement with everything the City is asking him to do; (6) said that he began all car washing indoors one week ago; (7) stated that he uses no power equipment at all outdoors. Public Hearing closed at 7:53 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz. Comm. Peirce stated that the business now appears to be much smaller than was originally submitted. He felt that the business would be viable if only three cars are on-site at any given time. He noted that enforcement is important. He felt it would be appropriate to give the owner an opportunity to operate, and there can be a review in three months. Comm. Peirce noted concern that cars would be stored while other cars are being worked on. Mr. Schubach, in response to a question from Comm. Marks, explained that one parking space is required for each 1000 square feet of lot size. Chmn. Ketz referred to Condition No. l 7(a): "The small air compressor used for dislodging items from dashboards, etc., shall be the only use of any air compressor equipment." She 6 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 asked whether the applicant requested this, or whether it was a staff-recommended condition. Mr. Schubach explained that the condition was added after staff observed the operation of the business. Mr. Schubach. in response to a question from Chmn. Ketz, explained that there is not a condition requiring the doors to be closed during work because the doors face the highway. and staff did not feel noise would be a problem. Comm. Peirce referred to Condition No. 11: "Because of the lack of customer parking, the auto detailing business shall be conducted such that customer vehicles are picked up from the customer's location and delivered back to the customer: a maximum of three (3) vehicles shall be on the premises at one time for detailing." He wanted to ensure that this condition is met. Mr. Lee suggested that the parking agreement be revised to specify the number of cars being committed to his use under the agreement He also suggested the addition of a condition requiring that the applicant provide continuing evidence of the availability of parking for his continued use: otherwise, there would be an automatic termination of the conditional use permit. Comm. Peirce wanted to prevent cars from blocking the front access. He also noted concern over the number of cars to be stored that are not being worked on. Mr. Habash stated that the provisions of his insurance do not allow him to store cars overnight. MOTION by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Rue, to approve P.C. 90-100, with the following amendments: ( 1) a condition shall be added requiring that the applicant provide continuing evidence of the availability of parking for his continued use: otherwise, there would be an automatic termination of the conditional use permit: (2) there shall be a three-month review of the business. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Marks, Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Ketz None None None Chmn. Ketz stated that this decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed by writing to the City Council within ten days. CUP 90-20/PARK 90-5 --REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 1106 HERMOSA AVENUE Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated February 28, 1991, and recommended that the Commission direct staff to pursue enforcement of the CUP as necessary and to strictly enforce the required improvement for parking in the rear by June 3, 1991. On August 7, 1990, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit and parking plan to allow a health and fitness facility (weight training) by adoption of Resolution 90-63. The Commission also requested a six-month review. The approval was subject to several conditions, most notably, a requirement that the rear area along the alley be improved to provide five parking stalls by June 3, 1991: that the business provide validation for the public parking lots: and that bicycle parking be provided inside the building. Staff inspected the site on February 28, 1991, and discussed the conditions with Mr. Mccolgan. The rear area adjacent to the alley has not been improved yet, but Mr. McColgan indicated that he is aware of the requirement and is in the process of preparing plans to carry out the improvement by the June 3 deadline. 7 P.C. Minutes 3/5/91 Mr. Mccolgan also indicated that he provides validation for customers who park in the public parking lots, noting that he validates no more than a dozen in a day. He further noted that the majority of his customers walk or ride bikes. Bikes are parked inside the building. Also, pursuant to Condition No. 7, 800 square feet of the interior shall be used for retail sales and the reception entry area. Although it is hard to determine if this is precisely being followed, several pieces of equipment are displayed for sale toward the front of the building as well as clothing and other accessories that are displayed behind the reception counter. The business is in compliance with all other conditions, except that staff has n ot received evidence that the CUP has been recorded with the deed. Hearing opened and closed at 8:07 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz, who noted that no one appeared to speak on this issue. MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Peirce, to approve staffs recommendation. No objections; so ordered. CUP 90-8 -REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 1018 HERMOSA AVENUE. COMEDY AND MAGIC CLUB Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated February 28, 1991, and recommended that the six-month review be postponed an additional six months. On August 7, 1990, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit and parking plan to allow expansion to the Comedy Club. One of the conditions was to require a six-month review. The plans for the expansion are currently in plan check, with building permit issuance pending. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to conduct a review until the project is completed. MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Chmn. Ketz, to approve staffs recommendation to continue the review an additional six months. No objections; so ordered. STAFF ITEMS a) Planning Department Activity Report for January 1991 No action taken. b) Memorandum Regarding Planning Commission Liaison for March 12. 1991, City Council Mee~ No one will attend as liaison. c) Tentative Future Planning Commission ~enda Comm. Rue asked for an update on the land use element, to which Mr. Schubach replied that staff is currently working on the land use study. Mr. Lee distributed copies of the legal opinion relating to regulation of adult videos. He suggested that the Commissioners read the materials, and they can discuss it at the next meeting. 8 P.C. Minutes 3 /5 /91 d) City Council Minutes of February 12. 1991 No action taken. COMMISSIONER ITEMS Comm. Peirce asked how much money the City contributes to MAX each year, to which Mr. Schubach replied that he is not certain of the exact amount. Chmn. Ketz gave a brief update on the activities of RUDAT. She said that the study is going well. and a fundraiser is being planned for the near future. Comm. Peirce asked about the installation of a red curb along the highway, to which Mr. Schubach replied that he does not have a definite time yet. Comm. Rue asked for an update on the recycling program, to which Mr. Lee explained that progress is being made. Mr. Schubach and the Commissioners discussed the water shortage. Issues covered were possible use of "gray water" which could be used for recycling: spilled sewage: efforts of "Heal the Bay" to save Santa Monica Bay: the procedures which must be undertaken to increase water rates: and rationing. The Commissioners favored a recommendation to the City Council that the City support the efforts of "Heal the Bay." MOTION by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Rue, to send a letter to the City Council asking that the Public Works Department be directed to prepare a draft ordinance to allow "gray water" to be recycled. No objections: so ordered. MOTION by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Rue, to adjourn at 8:33 P.M . No objections: so ordered. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of Hermosa Beach at the regularly scheduled meeting of March 5, 1991. Christine Ketz, Chairman 9 // / ,- J,,/ Michae Schubach. Secretary ,/ .. /· P.C. Minutes 3/5/91