Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1992_05_19..... MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON MAY 19, 1992, 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 Comm. Merl. ' ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: CONSENT CALENDAR Comms~ Di Monµa, Marks, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz None Michael Schubach; Planning Director, Edward Lee, Assistant City Attorney, Sylvia Root, Recording Secretary MOTION by Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. Di Monda, to (1) CONTINUE the April 21, 1992 Minutes to allow expansion of paragraph 2, Page 9, and APPROVE the following Consent Calendar items : Minutes of the May 5, 1992 Planning Commission meeting Resolution P.C. 92-23, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #23258, AND A PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 628 MONTEREY BOULEVARD. Resolution P.C. 92-26, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING.A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW AN AMUSEMENT ARCADE (SPECIFIC TO SLOT CAR RACING) IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE INCIDENTAL SALE OF SLOT CARS AND RELATED ITEMS, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 950 AVIATION BOULEVARD (SUITES A &B). AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, and Suard None Chmn. Ketz None COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No one wished to address the Commission regarding a matter not related to a public hearing on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 91-18 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT . AMENDMENT TO ALLOW AUTO DETAILING IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING CAR WASH, PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW EMPLOYEE PARKING ON ADJACENT PROPERTY, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 1000 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, HERMOSA CAR WASH (continued from February 4, March 17, and April 21, 1992 1992 Meetings). 1 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 3 (1) Recommended Action: To continue to June 16, 1992 meeting. Mr. Schubach stated the Police Department, due to its involvement in riot containment, had not had the time to assist Staff with the requested noise metering. Staff recommended continuance to allow the Police Departm~nt the time necessary. Public ~earing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 7:03 p.m. No one wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Ketz closed the Public Hearing at 7:03 p.m. MOTION b¥ Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. Di Monda, to CONTINUE this item until the Planni ng Commission's June 16, 1992 meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard, Chmn. Ketz None None None CON 92-5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #20876 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION AT 612 TENTH STREET. Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map. Comm. Di Monda absented himself from this item because he was noticed due to being within the 300 feet area. Mr. Schubach stated the already-constructed building had received an approved C.U.P. in 1989, but had not obtained a Certificate of Occupancr, nor the final map. He described the project, noting substantial compliance with Zoning standards. Mr. Schubach furnished the landscape plan to the Commission for perusal. Comm. Marks felt that a three story building with one exit was an unsafe structure. No one wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Ketz closed the Public Hearing at 7:06 p.m. MOTION by Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. Suard, to APPROVE CON 92-5, Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map #20876 for a two-unit condominium subdivision at 612 Tenth Street. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Merl, Suard, Chmn. Ketz Comm. Marks Comm. Di Monda None Chmn. Ketz stated this item was approved, subject to appeal within 10 days to the City Council. 2 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 CUP 92-2 · CONDITIONAL .USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW LIVE ENTERTAINMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT, AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 807 21ST STREET, 2ND STREET RESTAURANT (continued from March 3 and April 7, 1992 meetings). Recommended Action:-To approve said Conditional Use Permit amendment and adopt the Negative Declaration. Mr. Schuba~h stated this item had been continued to allow.a parking agreement to be obtained and limits on noise levels and hours of entertainment to be reviewed. He stated a parking agreement had been obtained which is satisfactory. Staff recommended { 1) the hours of entertainment be limited to 10:00 p.m. daily, (2) the musicians be limited to only acoustic instruments, with indirect amplification and (3) a six-month review. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 7:13 p.m. Richard Limbasuta, 807 21st Street, stated he agreed with all the conditions except the limited hours of operation. He stated customers do not start arriving until after 7:00 and requested the hours of entertainment be increased allow music until 11:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday nights. Art Mackey, musician, stated only one small speaker would be used; the noise level has been not been a problem in the past. He stated dinner music is being played; it's very subdued. Comm. Marks noted that the music was being limited due to resident complains of noise. He suggested an application be submitted after six months, when the residents are satisfied with the level of no i se. Comm. Di Monda discussed methods of amplification ( specifically through a microphone) with Mr. Mackey. • Paul Amarelus, 123 33rd Street, spoke in support, stating he enjoyed soft jazz music during dinner. He noted the bass beat is very low and expressed his surprise that complaints r~garding noise were received. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 7:20 p.m. Comm. Suard did not see a difference between amplification through a microphone or direct amplifier. He felt amplification of the bass should be allowed since noise limitations were already established, extend the hours of entertainment to 11: 00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Comms. Merl, Di Monda and Chmn. Ketz agreed. In respond to Comm. Di Monda' s inquiry, Mr. Schubach discussed Staff's intent relating to Condition No. 16. Mr. Schubach noted a six month review with two specific changes to be considered at that time, as well as any other problems which might occur. Comm. Di Monda discussed tracking to determine the effectivity and/or success of mitigation measures, requesting this item be returned to the Commission in six-months. Comm. Di Monda referenced page 6, No. 13, discussing with Mr. Schubach the inclusion of conditions relating to Public Works, Fire Department, etc. requirements. Comms. Merl and Di Monda felt redundant conditions should be eliminated; many of which were established through State and City • 3 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 f "• , r .' l codes .•• Mr~: Lee . explained .why redundancies were present within the C.U.P.s amd the issue was discussed among the Commission and Staff. Mr. Lee suggested ··a provision in all C.U.P.s be added stating, "There shall be compliance with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code", to which the Commission agreed. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Merl, to APPROVE CUP 92-2 to allow live entertainment in conjunction with a restaurant, and adoption of a . Negative Declaration at 807 21st Street, 2nd Street Restaurant, subject to conditions to include: (l) removal · of Condition No. 13 and replacement by the statement, "There shall be compliance with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code", (2) Condition No. 9 be revised with the hours of entertainment to be from 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays, and from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.rn. on Sundays through Thursdays, (3) Section II, Paragraphs 7(d) and 13 be deleted, and (4) to include language within Paragraph 16 to assure this item will definitely return to the Commission for review in six months. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comma. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard, Chmn. Ketz None None None Chmn. Ketz stated this item was approved, subject to appeal within 10 days to the City Council. HEARINGS CON 90-7 A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #22156 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 829 15TH STREET. Recommended Action: To grant a six-month extension. Mr. Schubach stated Staff recommended approval of extension of the C.U.P. to November 15, 1992 and the Parcel Map to June 15, 1993. He detailed the project-approval history, described the structures and explained the difficulties experienced by the applicant in obtaining financing. The term "lis pend ens" was explained by Mr. Lee for the Commission's information, noting it appeared to have been filed in error and would be removed, clearing title and allowing the applicant to possibly obtain his requested loan. Responding to Comm. Marks inquiry, Mr. Schubach stated this project had not been "grandfathered", and without the extension being granted, the applicant would have to reapply. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 7:42 p.rn. Raymond Levert, 12741 Bellflower Blvd, Downey, explained that at the time he pulled the print, he discovered the lien against the previous property owner. He explained the actions taken to remove the lien and to obtain a construction loan. Mr. Levert discussed the hardships that will be experienced if the extension is not 4 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 approved. He stated he did not submit the original plans and the original plan check expired. He bought the property December 1, 1991 and resubmitted the plans during April 1992. The lis pendens had been recorded December 10, 1991. Mr. Lee explained the process of· f -iling a II lis pendens 11 • Comm. Di Monda requested that support documentation be supplied to the Commission if this request is again presented in six. months. Additionally, as a general rule, documentation covering similar requests should be supplied. to ::the Commission. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 7:49 p.m. MOTION by Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. Suard, to APPROVE a six- month extension of CON 90-7 C.U.P. and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map #22156 for a two-unit condominium at 829 15th Street. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: P-10 Cornms. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz None None None VEHICLE PARKING ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG BEACH DRIVE. Recommended Action: To reaffirm the conditions approved by the Planning Commission at the July 2, 1991 meeting. Mr. Lynn Terry, Deputy City Engineer, gave the Staff Report, noted this item had previously been heard by the Commission on April 16, 1991. He itemized the progress of this item through the Commission and City Council, noting the Council's decision to concentrate on Beach Drive, alone. He itemized the conditions p·reviously approved and requested reaffirmation by the Commission; then he itemized the conditions previously approved. Using a display map, Mr. Terry discussed the affected lots and discussed current parking of vehicles upon those lots. Comm. Di Monda noted an actual count of the amount of cars parking on those lots had not been obtained. Mr. Terry stated the average number of cars on both sides of Beach Drive counted during July, August and September of 1991 was between 60 and 70, not 200 as initially stated (which was based upon a compaction of properties). Comm. Merl and Mr. Terry discussed the timing for project completion and the approval of necessary encroachment permits. Comm. Marks and Mr. Terry discussed the number of corner lots on the west side of Beach Drive. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 8:00 p.m. Jerry Compton, 1200 Artesia Blvd., represented a client at 542 6th Street. He suggested the City vacate the land which would result in putting the land back on the tax rolls, obtain tax revenue and the City would not need to obtain insurance for that land. He stated the City could impose building and parking restrictions. He 5 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 discussed tp.e possibility that encroachment permits would not: be obtained and the current insurance liability. Mr. Compton felt the entire City should be reviewed as to land vacation, resulting ·in additional revenue for the City. He stated of the 32 east side corner lots, 15 are being utilized ·and of the 32 on The Strand, 29 are being utilized. Comm. Di Monda and Mr. Compton discussed the approval history of Mr. Compton's client's project and compared the parking pattern and situations within Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach. Comm. Marks and Mr. Compton discussed the impact upon the property owners if the land were vacated. Susan McFarland, 25 8th Street, distributed three photographs for the Commission's review after determining they had not previously received copies. She stated she had been concerned and involved in the walk street situation since 1978, noting the situation has escalated to include illegal curb cuts, walls removed and illegal vehicle entry and parking on the front portion of the walk streets. She requested a "strong review" of this situation be immediately conducted and that enforcement of vehicle violations be immediate. Chris Waggerman, 19 8th Street, stated the parking problems are continuing to increase, with landscaping being removed to enable more parking. She had been involved in this issue since 1978 and supported Staff's recommendation. She requested that "no parking" at all corners be implemented and enforcement be immediate. She asked that laws not remain in the "books" if they are not going to be enforced. Jim Listener, 2715 Eloesty, stated the nicest lots in town were those on the walk streets east of Beach Drive and west of Hermosa Avenue. He commented he did not understand why parking lots would be put in front of the views. He felt the City Council had sent the message that parking lots in front of natural settings were not wanted and supported Staff's recommendation. Chuck Sheldon, 800 The Strand, discussed the lengt~'of testimony regarding this item and noted the substantial differences in parking ordinances and topography between Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach. He felt it was erroneous to compare the two cities. He discussed the complex issues associated with land vacation by the City and felt the Planning Commission did not have sufficient data to currently make a decision. He stated he and other residents were concerned about the City's position regarding the issue of vacation and assumed land title. He noted the 65 years of use by the property owners and protested the removal of the owner's parking rights. He stated he submitted plans to the Building Department in 1985 which showed no guest parking except at the rear of the lot, which were approved. He discussed parking with Comm. Marks, stating he had not and does not consider parking on the rear of the lot illegal. Comm. Marks and Mr. Terry discussed the choice to not enforce parking requirements in that area until the City Council took its final action. Mr. Terry noted that prior to that decision parking requirements were enforced. - 6 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 Paul Shank, 1838 The Strand, said his property is a corner lot with parking on the east side and landscaping on the west. He felt the previous extensive review and analysis had been a superb compro- mise. Be felt residents were entitled to parking because when the properties were purchased, parking was allowed. He sympathized with the situation on 8th Street, but felt that a "witch hunt" should not begin because of one situation. Jean English, 30 13th, stated her parents have owned the property at 2240 Strand since 1956. She presented a photograph of cars parked at that address in 1940. She explained that two lots were together with a garage on only one. If the parking allowance was removed, her parent would have no parking on her lot. She stated the garages cannot be entered from Beach Drive. She was against "vacation". Pat Corwin, 31 8th Street, stated he had reviewed the City's plans prior to the purchase of his property. He discussed the rental of properties and the associated abuse. He suggested the City's overall plan be reviewed to assure methods in which to beautify the City and increase safety. Jim Rosenberger, Bay View Drive, asked that Paul Shank speak in his stead. Chuck Shank, 800 Strand, expressed concern for safety on the lots on Beach Drive and corner lots, noted the importance of the port- able barriers, and protested allowing public parking within the residential area. Comm. Di Monda stated that at the current time, anyone may park on a corner lot on the west side of Beach Drive without being ticketed by the City. Mr. Shank stated he and his neighbors had purchased the properties at a higher premium with the understanding that the parking was available to them. H~ felt the suggested compromise was very fair. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 8:50 p.m. Chmn. Ketz and Comm. Di Monda agreed the Commission had previously left the decision as to an encroachment permit or vacation up to the Council's determination as to the best interests of the City, which Mr. Terry confirmed as true. Mr. Terry stated that particu- lar agenda item of the report he wrote, the indication had been to go one way or the other, not specifying as to which. Based upon further Staff analysis, Staff recommended the encroachment permits be the preferred method. Chmn. Ketz then commented that the statement at the top of the page of Mr. Terry's report was not true and were not conditions the Commission had approved at that meet- ing, which Mr. Terry confirmed. Mr. Terry stated the Commission had approved the encroachment permit or the vacation; therefore, Staff recommended the encroachment permit be the correct method. Comm. Di Monda asked why the Commission received a Staff Report in which it stated the Planning Commission had said something when Mr. 7 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 Terry knew the Staff Report's • the conditions, stated he was respond. Commission had not said it. He objected to the statement that the Commission had approved all of as this was known not to be a true statement. He astounded by this, to which Mr. Terry did not Comm. Di Monda then addressed "vacation", (a) explaining the tax benefit to the City would be minimal and the City would maintain more control and the ability to protect the land by keeping ownership and having restrictions, (b) the City Attorney bad stated the City does own the property and (c) the idea is to keep the land open. He stated Staff Report Item 6 was to specifically exclude boats, motor homes, campers and trailers, which is missing, adding a stipulation that all work in the public right of way will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. He stated commercial property has not been specifically addressed. No. 9 should include the walk streets and clarification that the designated area is the east side of Beach Drive to and including Hermosa Avenue. Comm. Di Monda proposed that commercial properties should be pulled as a separate study, 23rd Street should be an exception and any other areas within the City that have structures front ing on public right-of-ways should be reviewed. Although Mr. Terry disagreed, Comm. Di Monda maintained that the subject area consisted of the east side of Beach Drive up to and including Hermosa Avenue. Mr. Lee responded that the noticing had been applicable to the public right-of-way along Beach Drive, which could be reasonably extended to Hermosa Avenue. He stated that clarification to include Hermosa Avenue would not represent a problem. Comm. Suard and Mr. Lee discussed the City's possible liability, the encroachment process and its control of the use of the public right-of -ways, as well as adequate conditions applied in terms of insurance, structures, safety, etc. Mr. Lee stated it was unclear at this time as to actual ownership of subject land title, but noted that the general rule is prescriptive rights will not apply to public-owned property. If the property owner did ~ot choose to maintain the public right-of-way, the City had that responsibility. Comm. Suard asked .why encroachment had been chosen over vacation, to which Mr. Terry responded that if the City vacated the property, it would lose control as far as future possibilities, which should remain open. Comm. Suard and Mr. Lee discussed property evaluation conducted by the County Tax Collector's Office, which would not allow the land to be vacated to the property owners with a fee bein~ charged based upon land value. Mr. Lee suggested the Commission consider the administration of encroachment permits, allowing use of public right-of-ways versus the continuing need for public purpose for the walk streets and make its decision based upon those considerations. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Merl, to APPROVE the following vehicle parking on public right-of-way conditions and proposed separate studies. 1. Allow the open space of the walk streets to be used .by the Strand corner lots for private use. 8 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 3. Establish that 1/3 of the public right o~ way is to be landscaped. 4. Require that a permanent barrier is to be installed between the landscaping and the parking. 5. Require that direct access shall be only from Beach Drive. 6. Establish that parking is for automobile use only; boats, motor homes, campers and trailers are prohibited. 7. Require fence height within the public right of way to be limited to 36" maximum height. 9. Establish that no parking is to be allowed on the east side of Beach Drive to and including Hermosa Avenue at the walk street right-of-ways. 10. All work within City right-of-ways and applications for encroachment permits will be reviewed by the Planning Commis- sion prior to work start up. 11. The existing properties west of Beach Drive that currently sub- stantially confirms to the standards established by the Commission and administered by Staff will be allowed to apply for encroachment permits and continue to use the property in the manner it is currently being used. Additional encroachment permits will not be issued in order to prohibit additional parking in the public right-of-way. 12. The commercial properties along The Strand will be pulled and a separate study conducted. 13. The properties that have been built fronting a walk street and having the walk street as the only access to the garages will be pulled and a separate study conducted. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Corruns. Di Monda, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz Corrun. Marks None None Chmn. Ketz then brought forth for discussion Item No. 2, establish- ment of a maximum distance allowed for parking from Beach Drive and Item No. 8, establishment of allowable private use through a revocable encroachment permit. MOTION by Comm. Suard, seconded by Comm. Di Monda, to APPROVE the establishment of a maximum distance of 30' from Beach Drive shall be allowed for parking, with a two-vehicle parking maximum. The 30-feet limitation does not apply to the maximum distance of properties which meet the qualifications under Condition 11. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Corruns. Di Monda, Suard and Chmn. Ketz Corrun. Marks and Merl None None 9 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 Chmn. Ketz felt the vacation issue was extremely complicated and recommended the Commission move forward on the encroachment permit, to which the Commission agreed. MOTION by Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. establishment that a private use is to revocable encroachment permit. Suard, to APPROVE the be allowed through a AYES: NOES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The Commission DIRECTED that the revised Vehicle Parking on Public Right-of-Way along Beach Drive recommendation be returned to the Commission for review at its June 2, 1992 meeting. A break was taken from 9:42 p.m. to 9:50 p.m. SS 92-4 SPECIAL STUDY TO CONSIDER RELOCATING THE SIGN ORDINANCE BACK TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND TO EXAMINE OTHER POSSIBLE AMEND- MENTS TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Recommended Action: To direct Staff as deemed appropriate. Mr. Schubach stated Staff had presented the existing ordinance to the Commission for its review and decision as to parameters. Upon receiving input from the Commission, Staff will then focus its study on the areas and issues of greatest concern. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 9:51 p.m. No one wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Ketz closed the Public Hearing at 9:51 p.m. Chmn. Ketz felt placement into the Zoning Ordinance would g i ve bette r control, to which Comm. Merl agreed. He suggested a review of neighboring cities' ordinances. Comm. Di Monda agreed, stating the business people of Hermosa Beach should not have any more burdens placed upon them than those in neighboring cities. He noted the sign ordinance fees and fines were the responsibility of the City Council, which would make a determination that it felt was fair, to which the Commission agreed. Mr. Schubach suggested Staff create a matrix {comparison chart) going across the board, to include what is done or not done by Hermosa Beach and similar cities. Comm. Di Monda requested the sign ordinance be given to the Commission, as well as that of another city that is located a distance away (i.e. Santa Barbara, etc.) for review prior to the June 2, 1992 meeting. Mr. Schubach agreed to obtain the requested information for the Commission. Comm. Suard stated the new sign regulations should be clear, not redundant and consolidated for easy understanding by the local business and any other affected people. Comm. Di Monda.criticized 10 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 the definitions in general, stating all definitions should be brought to the "front", including the sign ordinance. Comm. Suard stated he would furnish additional written comments to Staff, in order to save time during this meeting. STAFF ITEMS a. Election of the new Chairman and Vice Chairman. MOTION by Comm. Suard, seconded by Comm. Merl, to CONDUCT AN ELECTION to fill the positions of Chairman and Vice-Chairman. No objections, so ordered. MOTION by Comm. Suard, seconded by Chmn. Ketz, to ELECT Comm. Merl as Chairman, Planning Commission, 1992-1993. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CoJDJns. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz None None None MOTION by Comm. Merl, seconded by Comm. Suard, to ELECT Comm. Di Monda as Vice-Chairman, Planning Commission, 1992-1993. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CoJDJns. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Suard and Chmn. Ketz None None None b. Correspondence from Building Department regarding 125 Pacific Coast Highway. RECEIVE AND FILE c. Memorandum regarding Planning CoJDJnission liaison for May 26, 1992 City Council meeting. Comm. Di Monda stated a change the manner of handling is needed, noting that the City Council is not made aware of the liaison presence, the liaison is not on the agenda, an information packet is not forwarded prior to the meeting, and yet the liaison is expected to speak during the meeting with no information on hand. The Staff Report should state the liaison intention to attend and an information packet furnished to that person for review. The Commission agreed with these state- ments. Mr. Schubach stated the liaison is to be a member of the majority who voted on the particular issue. Mr. Schubach stated the packet(s) would be sent to a liaison prior to the meeting. Mr. Lee explained that prior to the City Council meeting, the Council Members would review the Planning Commission's minutes 11 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92 and would be aware as to the discussion and decisions made by the Commission relating to the particular items. RECEIVE AND FILE d. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda. RECEIVE AND FILE e. City Council minutes of April 28, 1992. RECEIVE AND FILE COMMISSIONER ITEMS a. Request by Commission Di Monda regarding the fences at 26th Street & Hermosa Avenue and 16th Street & Hermosa Avenue. Comm. Di Monda noted the Staff Report addressed this issue. A bamboo fence had been erected without approval, although it is very attractive. A six-feet high wall that was previously noted had been approved. Mr. Schubach explained the complaint procedure, noting the complaint had been forwarded to the Building Department for handling. He will update the Commission as information is obtained. Comm. Marks suggested that forms be completed by the public prior to speaking on any issue to the Commission. The form should include name, address, subject, who they are representing (if anyone) and whether he/she is an opponent or proponent. Chmn. Ketz felt this was a very good idea and noted other cities currently follow this practice. Mr. Schubach stated that the practice had been previously implemented and that it did not work well because people did not wish to complete the forms. Comm. Marks also suggested a "phone-in" capability for the viewing audience. The Commission felt too many problems could result as far as caller verification, etc. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Merl, to adjourn at 10:13 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 May 19, 1992. Christine Ketz, Chairman >\c~ I G 1. l °' ,~, 1- Da.tle 12 P.C.Minutes 5/19/92