HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1991_05_07MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
May 7, 1991
7:00 p.m. -City Ha11 Counci1 Chambers
Meeting called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Chairwoman Ketz
1. Pledge of Allegiance:
Pledge of Allegiance led by Chairwoman Ketz
2. Roll Call:
Present: Chairwoman Ketz
Commissioners Di Monda, Marks, Peirce
Absent: Commissioner Rue
Also Present: Michael Schubach, Planning Director
Edward Lee, Assistant City Attorney
Jan Scherb, Recording Secretary
Section I
Consent Ca1endar
3. MOTION by Commissioners Di Monda and Peirce to
approve Minutes of April 16, 1991, and,
4. to approve the following Consent Calendar items.
(a) Reso1ution P.C. 91-8 approving a Conditional Use
Permit to authorize existing live entertainment
and dancing in conjunction with an existing bar and
adoption of a Negative Declaration at 30 Pier
Avenue, The Lighthouse Cafe. ,
(b) Reso1ution P.C. 91-22 approving a Conditional
Use Permit and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
#22560 for a 2-unit condominium conversion at 544
25th Street.
(c) Reso1ution P.C. 91-28 intention to study
possible text amendments pertaining to the
definition and regulation of adult uses.
Section II
Communications From the Pub1ic
5. Anyone wishing to address the Commission regarding a
matter not re1ated to a pub1ic hearing on the agenda
may do so at this time.
Page 1 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Ms. Cindy Jednak of 1236 Third st., Hermosa Beach
read her letter addressed to Hermosa Beach Planning
Department. Ms. Jednak's request to operate a
coffee house at 1312 Hermosa Avenue had been
denied and Planning Director Schubach explained Ms.
Jednak wants the coffee house to be a permitted use.
We can probably interpret coffee house to be a snack
bar and it will be up to the Commission to approve
it, Mr. Schubach continued. Director Schubach
said denial was a matter of parking, and our
Code allows us to review this to determine whether
adequate parking is available for that use.
Chairwoman Ketz told Ms. Jednak that it sounds like
you have to go through Planning staff in order to get
on the Agenda. Mr. Schubach told Ms. Jednak he'd look
into the matter and had her address and phone number
from her letter if we decide to add this to the use
list.
Section III
Public Hearings
NOTE: Items 6 and 7 to be heard together.
6. CON 91-1/PDP 91-1 Conditional Use Permit and
Vesting Tentative Parcel Hap 122305 for a 2-unit
condominium at 918 15th Street (continued from March 5
and April 2, 1991 meetings).
Mr. Schubach stated applicant was not ready with
revised plans required by the Planning
Commission; the staff had no problems with that.
The Commissioners asked if Mr. Schubach felt they were
making progress toward goals that had been requested
and Mr. Schubach felt that while progress was being
made the item had been continued so many times that he
would like to see May 21 be the final day for the
decision.
7. CON 91-2/PDP 91-2 Conditional Use Permit and
Vesting Tentative Parcel Hap 122304 for a 2-unit
condominium at 930 15th street (continued from March 5
and April 2, 1991 meetings).
Commissioner Di Monda made a Motion, seconded by
Commissioner Marks to continue Agenda Items 6 and 7 to
Hay 21, 1991 meeting.
Recording secretary reads the votes:
AYES:
NOES:
Ketz, Di Honda, Harks, Peirce
None
Page 2 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
None
Rue
8. PDP 91-4 --Precise Deve1opment P1an and waiver to
a11ow the insta11ation of two portab1e c1assroo:ms at
1645 Va11ey Drive, Hermosa Va11ey Schoo1.
Planning Director Michael Schubach stated (Planning)
staff recommends approval of the request subject to
the conditions contained in the attached resolution.
Director Schubach read from the Report:
The precise development plan is necessary to comply
with Section 9. 5-8 which requires Planning Commission
approval of any development on Open Space zoned
property. Further, since the portable classrooms do
not comply with Section 9.5-5, Building Setbacks (the
classrooms are set back from the north property line
15 feet rather than the required 20 feet) a waiver
pursuant to Section 9.5-8 is necessary.
The subject building have a temporary appearance and
general features which make them somewhat
inconsistent, in terms of architectural appearance and
the type of roof, with the remaining school buildings
on the site.
The School District indicates that the "relocatable
buildings are on permanent foundations; and were
installed to replace the previous temporary
buildings because of an immediate need due to an
increase in the number of students. Their plans
are to keep them at this location indefinitely.
The School District also notes that have already
received all necessary approvals from the
appropriate State and Federal agencies. They
did not believe city approval was necessary, and still
contend that the city has no review authority.
The only concern of staff is that the air conditioning
uni ts on the southerly side of the building, which
faces the residences in the mobile home park, generate
noise which is heard from the park. The City has
received complaints regarding the noise from these
air-conditioning units. staff is recommending a
condition that the air conditioning uni ts either be
enclosed or relocated to the other side of the
building away from the mobile home park.
Otherwise, given the existing low intensity building
coverage on the entire property, staff does not see
any other problems with classroom structures.
Page 3 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Edward Lee, Assistant City Attorney said the State
Architect's office determines the character of these
buildings. They follow their determination of what is
applicable, rather than the City's.
Chairwoman Ketz asked if there were any questions and
Commissioner Peirce commented that these are
relocatable buildings; the state Architect cannot call
them permanent in the future. Edward Lee, Assistant
City Attorney also spoke and said this was not a
variance and did not make them permanent.
Commissioner Peirce made a Motion for Approval,
seconded by Commissioner Marks for approval of waiver
for the setback for the school with the condition that
the air conditioning be enclosed or relocated so it
does not disturb neighbors.
Chairwoman Ketz opened the Public Hearing at 7:18
As no one appeared, Chairwoman Ketz closed the Public
Hearing at 7:20.
MOTION by Commissioner Di Monda for Approval subject
to attached conditions, was seconded by Commissioner
Marks.
Recording secretary read the votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Ketz, Di Monda, Marks, Peirce
None
None
Rue
Approved with the conditions in the Resolution and it
is subject to appeal before the City Council within
ten days.
9. COP 91-6/park Plan 91-3 --Conditional Use Permit and
Parking Plan for a martial arts studio, and adoption
of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 320
Pacific Coast Highway.
Planning Director Schubach read from the
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the
requested Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan
subject to the conditions contained in the attached
resolution.
The proposed studio is located within an existing
building, and would occupy 35% of the leasable floor
area within the building. The subject site is at the
northeast corner of P.C.H. and Third street, and is
Page 4 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
abutted by residentially zoned property to the east
(R-1 single-Family Residential).
The building was previously used by an auto dealer, an
auto parts store, and an auto stereo sales and
installation business. These businesses have all
left, however, and the remaining portion of the
building was recently leased to two retail
establishments ("Coast Lighting" and a furniture store
"Contrasts").
Building Department records indicate the building was
remodeled in 1983-84 to add 2280 square feet. At that
time parking requirement for retail uses was 1 space
per 300 square feet, and there was no landscaping or
buffering requirements for commercial properties
abutting residentially zones properties.
At their meeting of March 21, 1991, the Staff
Environmental Review Committee recommended an
environmental negative declaration, with a mitigation
measure that class sizes be limited to ensure that
adequate parking is available. Further, in response
to the applicant's proposal to restripe the parking
lot increase parking from 22 to 29 spaces including
four tandem stalls, staff recommended against the use
of tandem parking.
The applicant is proposing to operate a Karate studio
for the purpose of providing instruction for both
adults and children. The interior would include a 900
square foot workout mat, with the remaining area as a
retail/waiting area. The applicant has a current
clientele of students from its previous location in
Redondo Beach and plans to continue the same class
schedule. The maximum class size indicated is twelve
students (children), while the maximum size adult
class is for 10 students. (Note that daytime -classes
only occur three days a week, Wednesday, Friday and
Saturday at 10:00 a.m., otherwise the remaining
classes begin at 5:00 p.m. or later).
The applicant also proposes to restripe the parking
lot to maximize the number of parking spaces. By
using 30% compact spaces the number increases from 22
spaces to 25 spaces.
Although the studio is somewhat unique, it falls into
the category of "health and fitness center," and, as
such, a Conditional Use Permit is required.
Furthermore, the parking requirements for a health and
fitness center are as follows:
Page 5 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
"one space for every 50 square of gross floor are
used for facilities offering exercise, fitness or
aerobic dance classes, or one space for every 100
square feet of gross floor area for gymnasium type
weight lifting and weight training activities".
strict application of the above requirement would
result in a parking requirement of 45 spaces. It
should be noted, however, that this requirement was
based on a "worst-case" scenario (i.e. where the
majority of space isused for the highest intensity
classes; like aerobic dance). Martial Arts
classes are typically not nearly as crowded or
space intensive.
Nevertheless, the only way the proposed use can
operate at this location is through approval of a
parking plan, pursuant to Section 1169 of the zoning
ordinance. This section gives the Planning Commission
the authority to allow for a reduction in the number
of parking spaces required, if a finding can be made
that adequate parking is provided in consideration of
factors such as common or shared parking facilities,
varied work shifts, and unique features of the
proposed use. In this case the common parking lot
serves two retail businesses which place demands on
the parking lot at different times of the days than
the proposed studio. Further the unique features of
this use (such as limits on the class sizes, the high
percentage of children as students and the partial
retail section) could be considered to contribute to
less parking demand.
As noted in the schedule submitted by the applicant,
the classes during the day are primarily for children,
and the largest class at night (7:00) p.m. is for 10
adults. Assuming that the peak time for retail
businesses is earlier in the day, it seems that
adequate parking should always be available. This
depends, of course, on the class sizes remaining
small. As such, staff is recommending a condition
that the class sizes be limited as follows:
A maximum of eight (8) adults (age 18 or over)
for classes held before 7:00 p.m.
A maximum of eighteen (18) adults for classes
held at 7:00 p.m. or later.
No class, including adults and children, shall
exceed a total of twenty (20) students.
These conditions will ensure that the few daytime
classes be of limited impact and also provides a lot
Page 6 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
of room for expansion of class sizes from their
currently indicated levels. Although children will
still require car trips for drop-off and pick up when
enrolled in a class, the parking impact is usually
minimal unless the parent/driver is waiting
through the entire class period.
This will also ensure that the parking lot can handle
the peak demands of the martial arts studio in the
evenings as 25 spaces should be sufficient to handle
the instructors and students in addition to any
employees staying late in the retail stores. The
currently indicated hours of operation for the two
retail businesses are as follows:
"Coast Lighting" -10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mon-Fri,
10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Sat
"Contrasts" furniture store:
10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mon-Sat
Although the current tenants in the rest of the
building are appropriate for shared parking in
conjunction with the proposed martial arts studio
(especially home furnishings stores, which are usually
low intensity), there is no guarantee that these will
remain, or that hours will stay primarily daytime
oriented. As such, staff is recommending a condition
that the two adjacent lease spaces be maintained as
retail uses, a covenant be recorded as such, and any
change in use require Planning Department and/or
Planning Commission review.
Further, staff is recommending a condition to prohibit
the marking and reservation of individual parking
stalls for each business. This lot is a common and
shared parking lot such that any space is available
for any business at any time.
An additional concern of staff is related to the
overall appearance of the parking lot, and its impact
on adj a cent residences to the east. No landscaping
exists on the parking lot either for aesthetic
purposes or as a buffer from the residences.
The lot is bordered by a chain link fence on the Third
Street frontage, and a block wall on the east side
which ranges from 4-6 feet in height. The SPA-7 zone
currently requires that a 5-foot landscaped buffer be
provided between commercial uses and residentially
zoned property with a minimum of one 24-inch box
specimen tree for every 10-feet of length and the
zoning ordinance (parking section) requires a minimum
Page 7 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
.
1
6-foot high wall where parking lots abut residential
zones .
Given that this is an existing building all zoning
requirements cannot possibly be brought up to code
(for example a landscaped strip on the PCH frontage).
However, for other items retro-fitting is possible.
As such, staff believes that the conditons of approval
should require the following:
-The provision of a 5-f oot wide landscaped buffer,
planted with trees and shrubs, one 24-inch box
specimen tree for every 10 feet of length, along the
east property line (adequate turning radius exists
so no parking spaces would be lost);
-The provision of a 6-foot high decorative block
wall along the east property line (either all new
with decorative split block, or the existing wall
with extensions, as long as a textured coating is
applied);
Installation of a decorative block wall a minimum
of three (3) feet high be constructed along the
Third Street frontage to replace the chain link
fence.
staff is including these provisions, with additional
statements requiring the submittal of landscaping and
irrigation plans and details of the decorative wall for
approval by the Planning Director and that the improvements
be implemented on the site within six (6) months.
Applicant Al Johnson, owner of the business named Al
Johnson's Karate School at 3 2 O Pacific Coast Highway
in Hermosa Beach. Responding to the staff report in
which reference is made to the distance between the
parking space and the pull up door; there is ample
space at this time and I agree to the class sizes and
to the rest of the the conditions in the Conditiional
Use Permit and of the conditions listed in the Staff
Recommendation.
As there were no other speakers on this request
Chairwoman Ketz closed the public hearing and brought
the meeting back to the Commission and asked if there
was a Motion.
Motion for approval with the conditions attached and
seconded by Commissioner Di Monda.
We have a Motion and a second approving PC 91-29 as
recommended by staff; will all of you record your
votes now (using the new voting machine).
Page 8 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Recording Secretary reads the votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Ketz, Di Monda, Marks, Peirce
None
None
Rue
The Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use
Permit with conditions as listed in our packet and it
is subject to appeal before the City Council within
ten days.
10. Conditional Use Permit No. 91-3 and Parking Plan 91-2
Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan Amendment for
on sale general alcohol in conjunction with billiards,
food service and retail sales and adoption of
Environmental Negative Declaration at 1605 Pacific
Coast Highway, On The Break.
staff Report requests this item be continued to the
meeting of June 4th 1991 to incorporate this proposal
with the Health Club proposal for the upper floors
into a Master Parking Plan Amendment. We do have an
alternative tonight and that is to deny the request
based on stated community concerns such as the
existing saturation of alcohol establishments and bars
within the city and potential nuisance of a bar
activity and the impact on Police Department
resources. Preliminary information on the Health Club
indicates that parking would not be sufficient for the
proposed restaurant/bar in conjunction with the Health
Club. When the Pavillion was originally approved it
was envisioned as a mixed entertainment/restaurant and
retail center; a billard hall/restaurant/bar, although
it involves sports entertainment, seems to be a
departure from what was originally presented.
Further, the location of the proposed establishment is
at ground level with the entrance at the nearest point
to the nearest neighboring residential uses to the
north.
Section 21-13 through 21-15 of the Municipal Code
states a Permit from city council is also necessary to
allow the operation of billiard tables prior to the
issuance of any business licenses (whether this item
is approved tonight or not).
Chairwoman Ketz opened the public hearing and asked the
applicant or representative to come forth.
My name is Dee Harris; ·I'm the property manager of
Hermosa Beach Pavillion ,at 1605 Pacific Coast Highway,
Hermosa Beach. I'd like to start off by saying there
is no existing lease for a Health Club, and there may
Page 9 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
never be one. I do have a signed lease in effect with
Sal Gagliano, owner of On the Break Sports Club and
Restaurant. We are one of the many million dollar,
upscale sports clubs that are appearing all over the
country and billards have become one of the top ten
participation sports in the country. Table fees range
from $6-12. 00 an hour which eliminates a lot of the
bad element.
As far as we can see the main concerns of the
community are alcohol and security related. The
Pavillion currently employs security 24 hours a day, 7
days a week and Pavillion management is willing to
increase security during the Sports Clubs' peak hours
and it is my understanding that our tenant, Mr.
Gagliano, is also willing to hire additional security
at his own expense, if needed. Apart from one
approved beer and wine license in the Pavillion, there
are no other alcohol-related establishments in the
noticable vicinity, excluding Marie Callendar's.
Parking is also an issue and a revised planning plan
has been submitted to the Planning Department: do you
have any questions?
Chairwoman Ketz asked if anyone else would like to speak on
this request:
I'm Wesley Bush, Executive Director of the Chamber of
Commerce. 1) I've been over there (The Pavillion)
several times and it seems like they have four floors
of parking and no one to park in it; I don't see that
parking is a problem. 2) According to figures I
received this morning from the City Treasurer,more
than 60% of the sales tax our City receives is
generated by the businessess on Pacific Coast Highway
and as such, 3) I believe they are entitled to more of
the Police Department budget.
Larry Vaughn, 21515 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 1155,
Torrance, CA 90503 addressed the Commission. 1) I am
an attorney in Torrance and 2) represent some of the
people in the neighborhood 3) I was present at the
EIP 4) Police spoke against applicant 5} I would
like to read aloud the following letter:
May 3, 1991
Mr. Ken Robertson, Chairman
Environmental Review Committee
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
Dear Mr. Robertson:
Page 10 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
~
Since we will be unable to attend the May 7, 1991
meeting, will you please make this letter known at the
hearing.
We are totally against a pool hall with a liquor
license at the Hermosa Beach Pavillion. It would
change the atmosphere of the entire neighborhood -and
not for the better. Parents would no longer be
comfortable in allowing their children to go there.
Tenants should be chosen by what they can add to the
community -not someone who will disrupt the sleep and
possible safety of all of us who considered this a
residential neighborhood -not a "bar closes at 2: 00 11
area. Often at 2: oo a.m. is when the fights start
plus other crimes that require police intervention -
at cost to the city.
We are long time residents of Hermosa Beach -51 and
35 years it is very depressing to see how the
quality of our city has changed over the last 15 years.
Again we say -NO POOL HALL; NO LIQUOR LICENSE!!
Thank you.
S/
Mr. and Mrs. Frank E. Sasine
1641 Raymond Avenue
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
I spoke with Kim Dax, President of the Homeowners
Association at the Commodore at 1600 Ardmore and they
object to the presence of this business because of the
alcohol license and the business being open until 2:00
a.m. -there is a substantial amount of objection to
this business.
Mr. Robert Fishman, a resident of 17 Harbor Avenue,
Redondo Beach, CA and owner of one of the units at the
Commodore, 1600 Ardmore, Hermosa Beach. 1) Kim Dax
asked me to speak on behalf of the 100 owners. 2) We
feel this business would encourage children to drink
and drive home drunk. 3) With the subterranean
parking we have gang fights and drug sales.
Gordon Gray who lives and,owns Unit No. 126 at 1707
Pacific Coast Highway (Hermosa surf) adjacent to the
Pavillion, spoke to the Commission: 1) I think we're
dealing with semantics here. It has been termed a
world class sports club; this is a pool hall. 2) My
unit borders the wing between the Pavillion and 1707
PCH. I have a young family and am concerned about an
increase in noise and crime.
Page 11 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Ken Clayton, President Homeowners Association of
Hermosa Surf addressed the Commission: 1) Hermosa
surf Association objects to the pool hall's serving
alcoholic beverages. 2) There's been an increase of
graffiti and public urination on our building and the
introduction of an alcohol-serving pool hall will
aggravate this situation.
Commissioner Marks asked Mr. Clayton if he'd find the
serving of just beer an alcohol acceptable at the pool hall
and Mr. Clayton said he would not (find that acceptable).
Mrs. Bee Hill of 1707 PCH, told the Commission she was
1) Upset over the pool hall; things happen there that
owners have no control over. 2) I'm alone a lot of
the time and I don't need this element being around at
night.
Mrs. Dora Anderson of 1600 Ardmore, Unit #316, Hermosa
Beach opposes the pool hall because 1) I own a unit
on the backside of the building and it is very noisy
on weekends, especially when the movies get out late
and doors are banging which makes it difficult for my
child and myself to sleep. 2) The pool hall would
increase the present noise volume. 3) There's a
different element coming into the community. Garcia's
has a full liquor license and Picasso's may have a
liquor license.
Jerry Compton addressed the Commission with his
concerns: 1) Staff report states the use is better
on the upper floor than the lower floor. If people
are concerned about noise, I'd rather it be out on
PCH, rather than on the upper floor where the noise
could affect neighboring, residential tenants. 2)
Parking required for this use is available. 3) Use
itself may or may not be questionable, depending who
you listen to. 4) CUP is designed to protect these
people from the element they are concerned about. 4)
I have been a business advocate in this town; we need
the tax revenue. The attorney "representing people in
the neighborhood" , I believe, represents Mr. Pocket's
Pool Hall in Manhattan Beach and present a good case
against this pool hall. 5) I think you need to give
a business a chance; make the requirements really
tough -but give them a chance. We need business in
this town.
App1icant's representative, Ms. Dee Harris addressed the
Commission.
I would like to talk about the hours. The mall closes
at 1:30 a.m. every night; there's no 11 2:00 in the
morning". As far as "drug sales in the garage", the
Page 12 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
(Ii
Police Department randomly check out the mall several
time a day and as yet I have had no notification of
any such activity. It's unlikely we will be
responsible for traffic jams. As for a bad element,
I've rarely seen a bad element because it costs
$6-$12.00 an hour per table, plus food and drinks and
in other billard halls I've visited the people are
wearing suits and ties. These are very up-scale
places and it takes an up scale individual to afford
to go there.
Commissioner Marks asked Ms. Harris if she was on the
grounds at 1:30 a.m. in the morning and was she aware of the
noise emitting from the building to which Ms. Harris replied
that from time to time she has been on the grounds at 1:30
a.m. and was aware of doors closing late at night and that
security guards are there 24 hours to help control noise.
Commissioner Peirce said that if we pass this tonight, the
City council has to approve the pool hall portion.
Mr. Schubach noted the pool hall having the same peak hours
as the theatre.
Commissioner Peirce asked what is preventing this place from
becoming just a bar to which Mr. Schubach answered
"nothing"; we could request we bring it back with a list of
conditions.
Commissioner Di Monda suggested we continue and have Michael
(Schubach) come back with a focused EIR.
Edward Lee, Assistant City Attorney told the Commission if
you want to move forward with it bring back a focused EIR
and conditions for approval.
Chairwoman Ketz and Commissioner Di Monda felt there was too
much impact on adjoining areas and asked the Commissioners
to vote at this time.
MOTION by Commissioner Pierce, seconded by Commissioner
Marks to deny resolution.
Recording Secretary reads votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Ketz, Marks, Peirce, Di Monda
None
None
Rue
Denied. Subject to appeal to City Council within 10 days.
Section IV
Page 13 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Hearings
11. HR 91-1 --To allow a 99 square foot addition to
nonconforming duplex with only one parking space at
2467 Manhattan Avenue.
Recommended Action: to approve this request
Staff recommended approval with the certain conditions:
that a suitable location be found for trash receptacles
prior to the issuance of building permits; that the garage
be used only for the parking of vehicles (Resolution P. c.
91-30) . Chairwoman Ketz asked the applicant or
representative to come forward.
Mrs. Margaret Kemp of 121 Belmont Avenue, Long Beach,
CA, owner of 2467 Manhattan Avenue, Hermosa Beach
explained the house in question had been in the family
for many years and had originally been built as a
duplex with a single garage.
Commissioner Di Monda noted the hardscape next to the house
and asked to make a condition that some of the paving be
remove and planted with trees.
Jim Ingram of 24 70 Manhattan Avenue, Hermosa Beach
spoke to the Commission about his concern that the
remodel of 2467 Manhattan Avenue would not obscure the
ocean view from his house. He felt that although the
remodeling itself would not affect his view the
potential existed for the ordered landscaping/trees to
block his view across the street.·
Greg Windsor
south of the
in questions
consideration.
of 1737 Windsor Avenue (eight blocks
property in question) felt the property
should receive nothing but favorable
Mrs. Kemp agreed to landscape some of (present)
hardscape area without blocking Mr. Ingram's ocean
view and to relocate the present trash receptacle and
garage to be used only for parking of vehicles.
Chairwoman Ketz closed the public hearing and brought the
meeting back to the Commission.
Commissioner Di Monda was in favor of approval with
consideration of size, quantity and type of materials to be
used in the landscaping with the condition that it doesn't
block anyone's view. A 24" box speciman tree was suggested;
relocation of present trash receptacle and the garage to be
used only for parking of vehicles.
Page 14 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Mr. Schubach asked Mrs. Kemp to bring the landscaping plan
to be used to Planning Department and we will take into
consideration blocking of the ocean view.
MOTION to Approve with Conditions by Commissioner Di Monda,
seconded by Commissioner Marks.
Recording Secretary read the votes:
AYES:
NOES:
Ketz, Di Monda, Marks, Peirce
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Rue
Approved with the conditions that a suitable location be
found for trash receptacles Drior to the issuance of
bui1dinq permits; that the garage be used only for the
parking of vehicles (Resolution P.C. 91-30) and that some of
the paving next to the house be removed and planted with
trees that will not block anyone's view. Subject to appeal
to City Council within 10 days.
12. CON 89-24 --Extension of the Conditional Use Permit
and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map #20342 for a 30-unit
condominium at 226 Manhattan Avenue.
Mr. Schubach states that the Planning Staff
Recommendations that the C.U.P. be extended one year
to May 21, 1992, by minute order.
The applicant indicates that the reason for the delay
in carrying out the project is due to the current
economic situation.
Chairwoman Ketz opened Public Hearing.
Jerry Compton of 1200 Artesia Blvd., Hermosa Beach, CA
said he was architect of the project. We are in plan
check to finalize the project.
Chairwoman Ketz asked if there were any questions and, there
being none, closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION by Commission Peirce and seconded by Commissioner
Marks to approve request as recommended by staff.
Recording Secretary read the votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Ketz, Di Monda, Marks, Peirce
None
NONE
Rue
Page 15 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
Recommended action: Extend for one year.
Section V
13. Staff Items
a. City Council/Planning Commission workshop.
The City Council, at their meeting of April 23, 1991,
has selected Thursday, June 6, 1991 at 7:00 p .m. to be
the City Council/Planning Commission workshop date.
The topics remain unchanged as Planning Commission
suggested: RUDAT, Greenbelt parking, downtown
business parking and PCB parking.
b. Planning Department activity report of March, 1991.
Commissioner Pierce reminded Planning Director
Schubach that he was to write a memo to the city on
how many riders used MAX and Mr. Schubach replied it
was being done right now and you will have it very
shortly. Our amount of cost went from $47,000 to a
final figure of $19,000 starting this next fiscal
year. We are very reduced in terms of our costs, Mr.
Schubach continued, we are still trying to market to
TRW which is working; the only reason we haven't got
it back together is because we are working with the
ballot measure analysis and the new, general plan.
There's a lot going on with those particular measures
but we'll be getting back to MAX shortly.
Commissioner Pierce asked what Boccato' s had appealed
on the upcoming Agenda and Mr. Schubach said what was
appealed were the conditions. He has submitted a list
of adjustments to those conditions; it wasn't that we
didn't approve it--it's that the conditions were not
satisfactory to Mr. Boccato.
c. Memorandum regarding Planning Commission liaison
for May 14, City Council meeting.
Planning Director
Manhattan Avenue
4/23/91 meeting.
conditional issue.
Schubach noted Dan's Liquor at 3232
was on the Agenda ( continued from
Director Schubach said this is a
2. Appeal from the Planning Commission's decision of the
conditions of approval for a Conditional Use Permit
for the off-sale of general alcohol at 3127 Manhattan
Avenue, Boccato's Groceries.
3. Appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny a
Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map #20822
Page 16 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91
for a 3-unit condominium conversion at 23 Barney
court, 18 & 20 Meyer Court.
d. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda for May 21
Planning Agenda.
14. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. C.U.P. for an existing auto repair shop at 1402
PCH, Folded Wings Ltd.
2. C.U.P. for auto body repair and painting, auto
sales and general auto repair at 210 PCH, Felder's
Body Shop and Sales.
3. 2nd quarter General Plan amendment: a) Biltmore
Site.
COMMISSIONER ITEMS
15.
1) Speeding on Hermosa Avenue and 2nd; was
traffic signal appropriate 2) Discussion of when
CALTRANS will restripe PCH 3) When will ticketing
begin for cars parked on the Strand.
Adjournment
Commission voted to adjourn the meeting and Chairman
Ketz so moved. Meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
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 May 7, 1991.
Christine Ketz, Chairwoman Michael Schubach, Secretary
)
Dae
Page 17 P.C. Minutes 5/7/91