Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1991_07_16MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON JULY 16, 1991, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chmn. Ketz. Pledge of Allegiance led by chmn. Ketz. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: comms. Di Monda, Marks, stifano, Chmn. Ketz comm. Peirce Also Present: CONSENT CALENDAR Michael Schubach; Planning Director, Edward Lee, Assistant city Attorney; Sylvia Root, Recording secretary After being welcomed to the Commission by Chmn. Ketz, Commissioner stifano stated he would be abstaining from the July 2, 1991 minutes. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by comm. stifano to approve the following consent calendar items: Minutes of the July 2, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. Resolution P.C. 91-43, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM SECTION 13-7 (B) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING NON- CONFORMING STRUCTURE TO EXCEED 50% OF REPLACEMENT VALUE AT 167 ARDMORE AVENUE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 15, TRACT NO. 256. Resolution P.C. 91-44, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF- SALE BEER AND WINE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CONVENIENCE MARKET, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 635 MONTEREY BOULEVARD, LE MASTER'S GROCERY, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, TRACT NO. 864. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Conuns. Di Monda, Marks, stifano, Chmn. Ketz None None Comm. Peirce COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Mr. Richard Sullivan, Third street, commented upon comm. Rue's remarks in the Easy Reader, stating city council may create as many Planning Commissions as it deems necessary. Mr. Sullivan stated the ways in which to set policy are through the city council and the Initiative process. PUBLIC BEARING CUP 90-36 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AUTO SALES AND DETAILING, AND AUTO REPAIR (SMOG CHECK ONLY) AT 303 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, CONSTANTINE'S. Recommended Action: To continue to August 6, 1991 Planning commission meeting (improperly noticed). 1 P.C.Minutes 7/16/91 3 Mr. Schubach stated staff would assure notices are issued correctly. No one wished to address the commission regarding this matter. Chmn. Ketz stated CUP 90-36 would be heard by the commission on August 6, 1991. CUP 91-10 TO CONSIDER REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 1160 AVIATION BLVD., JACK IN THE BOX. Recommended Action: To approve the modified conditional Use Permit per conditions contained in P.C. Resolution 91-45. Mr. Schubach stated Staff recommends approval of the modified conditional use Permit with several new conditions added. Jack In The Box is an existing business with commercial-land use to the north, east and west, and residential land use to the south. complaints have been received by Mr. Schubach, resulting in direction to staff for investigation, presentation of a Resolution of Intent, and setting of a hearing. staff felt posting of signs would aggravate the current situation. site review did not find excessive noise, but the parking lot is inadequate to handle drive-thru traffic. staff believes a 90 degree parking with two-way traffic could be incorporated and, as a condition of approval, requires this issue to be addressed with submittal to the Planning Dept. of alternate plans. Additional landscaping will be required within 90 days of approval of the Planning Director. Area residents submitted to Staff a videotape indicating noise nuisance at Jack In The Box. Mr. Schubach said staff recommends a reevaluation of hours of operation limited those hours and decreasing speaker-box volume as conditions of approval. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 7:12 p.m. Mr. Phil Singerman, 1224 E. Catella, orange, requested a meeting with staff, neighbors, and police dept. representative to discuss the concerns, implementing these suggestions and conducting a 6-month results review. Mr. Singerman discussed various actions being taken by Jack In The Box management and its willingness to work with others. He discussed the history and finances of this business location, challenging some statements made by residents. Chmn. Ketz questioned the closure time of the diningroom, _to which Mr. Singerman explained security and cleaning requirements. comm. Di Monda asked if Mr. Singerman disagreed with more than one of the 10 conditions. Mr. Singerman disagrees with two conditions. • comm. Marks asked the volume of business done during nighttime hours, to which Mr. Singerman stated.10%, which is about 50% of income. A videotape taken from a resident's private home was shown to the commission and audience. Mr. Raymond Leathers, 1225 11th Place, disagreed with Mr. Singerman's statements and discussed the business operating hours, noise levels and police assistance activities. Mr. Don oleski, 1249 11th Place, explained the circumstances when he took the videotape which was shown and questioned the manner of receiving residents' input, to which Mr. Schubach responded petitions had been received. 2 P.C.Minutes 7/16/91 Mr. Jim Hallead, 1221 11th Place, stated the current conditional Permit use is outdated and inadequate. He discussed current and suggested business operating hours, noise levels, the Planning Commission's Report findings and conditions being experienced by residents. Mr. Richard Sullivan, Third street, expressed his realization of the difficulty of the problem being discussed and suggested that Jack In The Box hire a noise consultant. Ms. Sylvia schular, 1210 11th Place, stated residents are trying to work with Jack In The Box, but still wish them to close two hours earlier. Mr. Joe Flannagan, 1230 Harper, stated every Friday and Saturday, residents are waken by noise from Jack In The Box. Mr. Singerman stated opening the diningroom may solve part of the problem and reiterated the changes that the management has made to accommodate the residents, asking for a joint meeting. Chmn. Ketz, comms. Di Monda, Marks and Mr. Singerman discussed the number of employees working during the evening, on-site management, security measures, noise pollution, customer controls and reduction of business hours vs. financial impacts. Mr. Singerman introduced Messrs. Mian and Graffius, Jack-In-The-Box corp. management, who stated the Company is willing to cooperate as much as possible, but does not wish to shorten business hours due to financial considerations. Public Hearing closed by chmn. Ketz at 8:10 p.m. Comm. Di Monda felt the problem is the drive-thru and that portion should have the business hours reduced, to which chmn. Ketz agreed, suggesting an additional review in three months. comm. Marks suggested a shorter review period. comm. stifano suggested the owners contact the police when problems appear. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by comm. Marks, to approve staff recommendation with a change of hours of operation to 12:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday, drive-thru por ti~n must close at 11:00 p.m., with a three-month or sooner review by the commission. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Conans. Di Monda, Marks and Cbmn. Ketz Conan. Stifano None Conan. Peirce A recess was taken from 8:17 to 8:27 p.m. TEXT AMENDMENT 90-11 TO REQUIRE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORTS (RIR) FOR MOBILE HOME PARK CONVERSIONS OR CLOSURES TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF DISPLACING EXISTING RESIDENTS. Recommended Action: To approve P.C. Resolution 91-41 recommending to city Council a text amendment to zoning Ordinance to require RIR for mobile home park conversions or closures and adoption of an Environment Negative Declaration. Mr. Schubach presented Staff Report, stating this matter was continued from June 18, 1991. The city of Carson was contacted pertaining to its requirements 3 P.C.Minutes 7/16/91 relating to its mobile home park conversions and closures, and any current litigation, which Mr. Schubach discussed. coastal zone Provisions was sourced, with information being supplied to the commission. Various local cities and mobile home parks were contacted regarding this subject, with the results being presented by Mr. Schubach. He noted it is the responsibility of applicant to demonstrate applicable provisions are met or exemption qualification. staff believes it appropriate to use the broad definition of mobile homes as proposed in the ordinance, rather than the narrow one of the Civil Code, to allow consideration for at least minimal compensation for displacement of residents who have been in a single location for an extended period. compensation will be based upon resident investment, type of vehicle and site improvements. Mr. Schubach stated a general concept is the concern of the Planning Commis- sion, recommending approval of this recommendation, with the proviso if changes are necessary based upon Legality ordinance, this will be considered by the city council. Comm. stifano and Mr. Lee discussed existing guidelines to establish mobile home value. Comm. Di Monda and Mr. Lee discussed appraiser retention and cost payment responsibility. Chmn. Ketz, Comm. Di Monda and Mr. Schubach discussed tenant/owner eligibility for relocation reimbursement. Comm. Di Monda, Messrs. Lee and Schubach discussed proposal language clarification. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 8:46 p.m. Ms. Marie Horowitz, Marineland Mobile Home Park, space 15, commented upon the compensation expressed by the Ordinance. She discussed the methods of intimidation to tenants by the park owners. Mr. Bill Cloud, 531 Pier Avenue, discussed the devaluation of mobilehomes due to rent increases, inferior mobile home park maintenance, and asked for rent control consideration. chmn. Ketz stated the hearing addresses only a change in status of the mobile home park, not rent. Ms. Mary Tyson, Marineland Mobile Home devaluation of her mobile home, rent subjected to threats and intimidation commission for protection. Park, discussed the increases. she felt by the park owners financing and she has been and asked the Joan stoner, Arcadia, representative from Golden state Mobile owners' League, Regional Manager for Los Angeles county, discussed experiences of ex-tenants of closed mobile home parks, leases and questioned park closure current practice. Ms. Stoner stated G.S.M.O.L. currently re t ains l awyers and lobbiest state-wide. Ms. Mary Christine Pitka, 943 Boundary Place, compared what is happening to tenants to past experiences of flight attendants. Ms. Pi tko 's • mother is currently living in a mobile home park. Ms. Pitko stated concern for the elderly who will be displaced. Ms. Margaret c. Rathman, 40+ year owner(s) of Hermosa Trailer Court, stated she received no June 18, 1991 meeting notice. She questioned on-site value and compensation for only low and moderate income households, stating no other type of land development is penalized as will be park owners. Ms. Rathman stated she and her husband adamantly object to Resolution 91-41 in its present form and concur with all objections priorly presented by legal council for Marineland Mobile Horne Park, including the definition of a mobile home. she defined specific past experiences with tenants including the tenants' financial status. stating her park has 19 spaces of which 90% is R.V.'s, her concern is 4 P.C.Minutes 7/16/91 owners will be required to subsidize tenants who are in a higher tax bracket than the owners. Mr. Schubach stated the commission's action is to establish clarity and is based on state law, which requires a Relocation Impact Report. Also, the commission cannot require only low and moderate income families to be considered under the R.I.R. Mr. Lou Riesek, 531 Pier Avenue, #10, complimented Mrs. Rathman for operating a park with a viewpoint toward owner/tenant partnership. He discussed the city of Hermosa Beach's stated future plans to maintain a mobile home park at the Marineland Mobile Home Park location and asked the City to adhere to these past commitments. He discussed park management's harassment of current and prospective homeowners. Mr. Riesek suggested the verbiage of the Resolution, Section 9B should be, "to compare fair market value to condos of equal number of bedrooms," rather than square footage. Ms. Liza Lueke, Space #6 0, a 5-year resident, bought her mobile home as an investment which has been devaluated. she discussed park management harass- ment of tenants and the problems and requirements of relocation, urging ad~ption of the R.I.R. Public Hearing was closed by chmn. Ketz at 9:39 p.m. comm. Di Monda discussed the definition of a mobile home, stating preference to grandfather owners of R. v. 's current location in parks, maintain concurrence with state and County mobile home definition, not allow additional R.V.'s in an mobile home parks. He also explained the problems associated with rent con- trol and suggested city council review of land-lease options by tenants. Mr. Lee explained Section 1445, Paragraph 7 in response to a question by comm. Di Monda, suggesting that Para. 7, Line 3 be changed to: after "payment, " "in lieu of physical relocation which shall consider the fair market value of the mobile home," appraisal of mobile home vs. comparable abode replacement in lump-sum payment computation. comm. stifano asked if rental amount would be considered into the value, to which Mr. Lee responded although mobile-home land rental is unique, all should be considered within the appraisal process. comm. Di Monda requested further explanation of the appraisal processes. Chmn. Ketz felt compensation to renters of mobile homes discriminates against other permanent-residence renters in the city. Mr. Schubach stated state law would have to be reexamined when taking this into consideration. chmn. Ketz, comm. Marks, Messrs. Lee and Schubach discussed State law relating to senior citizen and other-citizen relocation. MOTION by comm. Di Monda, seconded by comm. Marks to continue to September 3, 1991 meeting, for which staff is to obtain language changes and clarification based upon the appraisal. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: HEARINGS CoJIUlls. Di Monda, Marks, Stifano and Chmn. Ketz None None CoJIUll. Peirce SPECIAL STUDY REGARDING ADULT USES. Recommended Action: To direct staff to study this issue further: a. determine a floor percentage amount in definition of adult use. 5 P.C .Minutes 7/16/91 b. obtain a legal opinion to determine if the distance standard from residential areas, public facilities, etc. to adult uses does not interfere with First Amendment rights. Mr. Schubach requested further time to conduct a study by staff. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by chmn. Ketz, to direct staff to study adult uses. AYES: NOES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Stifano and cbmn. Ketz None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Peirce W-2 WATER CONSERVATION: STATUS REPORT RE: INSTALLATION OF GREY WATER SYSTEMS ESPECIALLY IN RELATION TO BUILDING CODES. Recommended Action: To receive and file, and to direct staff to report back to the Planning commission on L.A. County and L.A. City's programs to allow use of grey water systems, if and when they are initiated. Mr. Schubach stated during the June 17, 1991 meeting, Planning commission requested further information. The Building and safety Director was contacted, who indicated he would not allow a modification to a plumbing system which created a grey-water system. The L.A. county Dept. Environmental Health als_o stated plumbing system changes to allow grey water is not allowed. Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo were also contacted, which encourage grey water systems, with restrictions. Mr. Schubach then discussed local implementation requirements and concerns. Receive and file. STAFF ITEMS MEMORANDUM REGARDING PLANNING COMMISSION LIAISON FOR JULY 23, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. chmn. Ketz stated parking in the parkway areas will be discussed at this meeting. TENTATIVE FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. comm. Di Monda asked the status of the greenbelt parking lot issue, to which Mr. Schubach stated he would contact Public Works as to status. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF JUNE 25, 1991. chmn. Ketz stated commission had received these minutes the evening of July 16, 1991. COMMISSIONER ITEMS Comm. Di Monda discussed the commission's prior decision to ask city council to consider restricting parking-lot hours. Mr. Schubach stated staff will have available an analysis and memorandum directed to city council at the next scheduled meeting of the Commission. 6 P.C.Minutes 7/16/91 Mr. Lee, responding to comm. Di Manda's previous request, stated a licensed architect need not present at the presentation of plans before the Planning Commission as long as plans have been signed by an authorized professional. comm. Di Monda asked for further information concerning basements for down- zoning purposes from staff. Mr. Schubach stated this is to be discussed during the Housing Improvement Program which still may be on line after the next election, staff is currently checking plans received carefully to assure the definition is being carried out. comm. Di Monda and Mr. Schubach discussed the specifics of the Zoning Code. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Marks, to adjourn at 10:28 P.M. Ho ohjections1 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 July 16, 1991. Date 7 P.C.Minutes 7116/91 r