Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1992_12_01MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON DECEMBER 1, 1992, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting called to order at 7:08 P.M. by Vice-Chinn. Di Monda. Pledge of Allegiance led by Secretary Schubach. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Comms. Marks, Suard, Vice Chmn. Di Monda Comm. Oakes (arrived at 7:10 p.m.), Chmn. Merl (arrived at 7:13 p.m.) None Michael Schubach; Planning Director, Sylvia Root, Recording Secretary CONSENT CALENDAR Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 4, 1992, Planning Commission Minutes of November 17, 1992, Resolution P.C. 92-65 to approve a Parking Plan to allow less than required parking, thereby allowing a chiropractor's clinic within the Ocean Plaza office building at 2615 Pacific Coast Highway. Resolution P.C. 92-66 approving a Conditional Use Permit to authorize auto repair at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway ( Sola Motor Works). Comm. Suard pulled Resolution P.C. 92-67, requesting conditions be included regarding canvas maintenance. MOTION by Comm. Suard, seconded by. Comm. Marks, to_ APPROVE the Minutes of November 4 and 17, 1992, and Resolutions P.C. 92-65 and 92-66. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Marks, Oakes, Suard, Vice-Chmn. Di Monda None None Chmn. Merl (arrived 7:13 p.m.) Comm. Suard and Mr. Schubach discussed Resolution 92-67, determin- ing adequate conditions were included regarding maintenance of all canvas materials. Resolution P.C. 92-67 approving a Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan to allow automotive service (paintless dent removal) in conjunction with an office and to allow tandem parking, and adoption of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 150_0 Pacific Coast Highway_. 1 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 MOTION by Comm. Suard, seconded by Vice-Chmn. Di Monda, to APPROVE Resolutions P.C. 92-67. AYES: NOES: Comm.·Marks, Oakes, Suard, Vice-Chmn. Di Monda None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Chmn. Merl (arrived 7:13 p.m.) Chmn. Merl assumed the Chairman position. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No one wished to speak regarding an item not placed on the Agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS CUP 91-22 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ON-SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL, LIVE ENTERTAINMENT, 24-HOUR OPERATION AND TANDEM PARKING FOR MOTORCYCLES, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 1100 THE STRAND (continued from August 18th and SeDtember 15, 1992 meetings). Recommended Action: To deny the request. Mr. Schubach outlined the previous reasons for continuance of this application which included noise being created within a patio glass enclosure with no sound proofing, police concerns regarding allowance of 24-hour service, possible congestion resulting from the take-out window and lack of commensurate parking facilities. He stated a proposal to mitigate those concerns had not yet been received by Staff, resulting in Staff's recommendation for denial. Comm. Marks again requested that precise, to-scale drawings be submitted by the applicant, requesting this be made a requirement. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Merl at 7:15 p.m. Peter Mangurian, 5 2 11th Street, announced he would be a City Council candi date next year. He apologized for the bar and street noise, as well as corruption in the area, stating drug sales within downtown and other parts of Hermosa Beach was being pro~ected. He stated he was not selling drugs, nor "paying off". He felt air conditioning was not necessary, stating that if the windows were "cracked", it would become cold within the building. He stated he would not need entertainment amplification. He said the statement that he was not willing to limit the scope of expansion was a lie, commenting he did not want the City's inability to rectify the downtown problems to be taken out of him, as he had not created them. He felt nothing would be done by the Police Dept. until the City Council changed, noting he had called the Police Dept. many times regarding noise, with no results. He said if his business was going to be run decently, he needed help from the City. When asked by Comm. Suard, Mr. Mangurian stated no one had asked him to limit the scope of his request. Comm. Suard noted this 2 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 I request had been discussed in detail at the last Public Hearing on this subject. Comm. Oakes confirmed that the applicant was still requesting 24-hour take-out service, bar, dining, living enter- tainment and tandem motorcycle parking. Mr. Mangurian explained the bar could not remain open after 2:00 A.M. Comm. Oakes expressed the Commission's concerns relating to noise, noting that nothing had been done to correct it. Mr. Mangurian stated he did not intend to have loud noise, he would keep the volume down. However, he stated he could turn the volume up and asked what the Commission would do about it. Comm. Oakes confirmed that nothing in writing had been submitted regarding the plans of operation. Mr. Mangurian stated the take-out service was basically for the week ends and all operations would close no later than 2:00 A.M. Mr. Mangurian stated the Commission members were politically appointed and took orders from the people who appointed them. He stated the Commission could give him the opportunity to help clean up the downtown area or perpetuate the current drug problems resulting from the City's policies. He noted that by his business being a "dump", which was unnecessary, the adjacent residents' properties depreciated by 10%. He suggested that maybe the Council would be changed next year by the voters. Mr. Mangurian stated a policeman had told him the downtown area would be cleaned up when the Council gave its permission to do so. He felt one policeman with one ticket book could clean up the downtown area and noted the Commission had the power to help authorize that clean up. Mr. Mangurian stated the problem was being perpetuated by design, noting he lived with the problems on a daily basis and the police did nothing about it. He discussed the lack of manageability of people on drugs, noting the only way to stop the drug situation was to change the Council. Responding to Chmn. Merl, Mr. Mangurian stated he did not' want to operate 24-hours per day, but wanted the possibility at a. later date without having to go through the C.U.P. process. No one else wished to speak regarding this item, and Chairman ·Merl closed the Public Hearing at 7:29 p.m. Comm. Suard stated the Commission had previously ·asked the application be refined, with supplements, definition and narrowing of the request for better understanding, which had not been done. Comm. Suard, based upon the information before the Commission, proposed the request be denied. Chmn. Merl noted the difficulty in determining exactly what was being proposed by the applicant, expressing concern regarding the lack of clarity. Comm. Oakes felt the applicant had not made an effort, as previously requested. Comm. Di Monda commented that the City and Commission did not condone what was happening in the downtown area, the Police Dept.'s refusal to issue tickets for violations or any dealing in drugs. He noted the applicant was asking for cart blanch to do whatever he wanted to, whenever he 3 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 wanted, suggesting the applicant presented this issue and his other problems to the City Council. MOTION by Comm. Oakes, seconded by Comm. Suard, to APPROVE Staff's recommendation to DENY the request. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl None None None Chairman Merl stated this item was denied, subject to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of this meeting. CON 92-8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR REMODELING AND ADDITION TO A CONDOMINIUM AT 49 AND 55 8TH STREET (continued from November 4, 1992 meeting). Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Schubach gave the Staff Report, noting the previous concerns expressed, noting the applicant had responded to the Commission's request by submitting correspondence which had been given to the Commission. He noted the clear approval of the deck enclosure by the property owner of 55 8th Street, even if it stands alone, and clarified he could not commit to enclosing his own deck at the same time. The owner: of #47 also e xpressed support. Mr. Schubach said the Commission must review the merits of the request, understanding only one balcony might be enclosed, and discussed the Condition added by Staff. He then discussed a similar, previously-approved project at 44 7th Street. Comm. Suard discussed with Mr. Schubach the basis for the 1990 approval of the deck enclosure at 44 7th Street. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Merl at 7:35 p.m. Kevin Jones, 49 8th Street presented a thorough disclosure document and presentation, noting the efforts made in the preparation and detailed the information of that report, design and supporting documentation. He discussed the Homeowners Association's CC&R's, definitions and rule-enforcement processes. Mr. Jones reviewed the process of his application and presented a petition in support of his project signed by local residents. He also discussed his efforts to receive response and the lack of any response to his requests and communications by the property owner of #53. Mr. Jones also discussed recent precedents set on projects on 7th Street and the front decks of his own building, which he felt were rel evant to his project. He noted the person currently objecting to his project had been a major beneficiary when the front decks were enlarged, commenting the objection was that of one single person, not representing the Homeowners Association quorum. He reiterated 97% of his neighbors were pleased and strongly supported his plans, feeling the project would be beneficial to the 4 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 building and not affect the area. He stated he was willing to remove a window from the plans, if the Commission so wished, but felt a window on the third level was not necessary and was outside the scope of his original request. He noted he would do whatever was requested by the Commission. He also stating his design had no impact on views, was consistent with the building design and should be reviewed as an addition, by itself, and reiterated the approvals of the neighbors and the Homeowners Association quorum. Comm. Suard congratulated Mr. Jones on the excellent presentation and documentation which addressed all the concerns previously expressed by the Commission. He then discussed with Mr. Jones Ms. McFarland's previous involvement in the design of the building and her current support of Mr. Jones' plans. Comm. Marks discussed with Mr. Jones particulars as to location of those residents who had and had not signed the petition which Mr. Jones had presented. Comm. Di Monda determined the project totaled 123 square foot, being "about" 7 feet wide. Comm. Di Monda felt it would be less than 7 feet, not meeting minimum room-size requirements. Mr. Schubach stated the plans had been submitted for review, with no comment having been received. In response to Comm. Marks inquiry, Mr. Jones stated the adjacent homeowner was not in a financial position to begin such a project. Rigo Banuelos, 53 8th Street, commented upon the excellent presentation by Mr. Jones, noting his concern was that both units complete the proposed project at the same time. He stated Mr. Jones had previously agreed to that condition and was taking advantage of the fact that ownership had changed. He reiterated his concerns regarding maintenance of building integrity and his request that both units be enclosed at the same time. Mr. Banuelos outlined the processes completed when his balcony was enlarged, noted that both front balconies were completed together, and felt the back ones should have the same requirement. Responding to Comm. Oakes inquiry, he described the modification to the balconies at the front of the building, which were completed . at the same time. Comm. Di Monda determined the drawing he was reviewing was incorrect, as it did not show the wrap-around balconies. No one else wished to speak regarding this i tern, and ·chmn. Merl closed the Public Hearing at 8:10 p.m. Comm. Oakes and Mr. Schubach discussed open space requirements of the entire building. Mr. Schubach stated open space was not an issue in this application, which had 308 square feet. Comm. Suard presented his concerns regarding the inadequate open space requirements of the R-3 zone and suggested that City Council address this issue in order for the Commission to obtain its sense of direction. However, he did not wish to inconvenience the property owner and acknowledged there was little opposition to the project. He felt there was a deficiency in the Zoning Regulations. Comm. Di Monda agreed, feeling that the 7th Street project should 5 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 not have been allowed. Repeated enclosures would decrease light and air which would decrease the area value. He felt proposed room did not meet the minimum room-size requirements expressed his opposition. the the and MOTION by Comm. Marks, seconded by Chmn. Merl, to APPROVE this Conditional Use Permit. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Marks, Chmn. Merl Comm. Di Monda, Oakes, Suard None None Chairman Merl stated this item was denied, subject to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of this meeting. CUP 92-25 CONDITIONAL USE PE RMIT TO ·AUTHORIZE AN EXISTING GENERAL AUTO REPAIR SHOP AT 602 FIFTH STREET , BOB CREECH AUTO REPAIRING. Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit. Chmn. Merl excused himself from participation due to conflict of interest and exited the Chambers. Vice-Chmn. Di Monda assumed the position of Chairman. Mr. Schubach stated the request would authorize the continued use of the property for auto repair, subject to conditions and was submitted in accordance with the amortization ordinance. He noted R.V. repairs were conducted outside as R.V.'s would not fit into the buildings. Outdoor work activity violated the zoning ordinance. Mr. Schubach stated parts and equipment could not be stored in required parking facilities or outside the main buildings if not screened from the public. He described the condition of the buildings and sheds, recommending a trash enclosure be provided and detailed the recommended hours of operation. He stated the small site is a good example of site inadequacy, noting the·business was an existing development and discussed specific and standard conditions to the C.U.P. Public Hearing opened by Vice-Chmn. Di Monda at 8:24 p.m. Ken Loomis, 602 5th Street, introduced himself and his business, noting he had bought the property in 1979 after having worked there many years. He continued with general repairs and had worked on motorhomes since their introductio n in the mid-'50's. He explained other businesses would not work on motorhomes, noting they could not be worked on inside a building due to their size. Mr. Loomis stated his customers had a problem with parking enforcement and described the available area parking, requesting leeway for short-term parking. Mr. Loomis addressed the conditions as follows: ( 1) Everything he did is in violation to the zoning ordinance since the M-1 Zone Use had been changed. Mr. Schubach 6 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 confirmed the business had a "legal nonconforming" status, ( 2) Could a portable shed be used in place of a block wall; could his 2-3 trash cans, drums and an occasional box be contained in his building as he did not need a dumpster, (3) He objected to striping the pavement, noting the city was responsible for repairs of the cracked pavement in the public right-of-way, (4) He suggested his current storage shed be repaired, not replaced or painted, ( 5) Vehicles sometimes remained on site until the repairs were paid, (6) It was not possible to do all work inside the building due to the size of the R.V. 's, nor to complete estimates in a 15-minute time period, (7) He asked if the Commission expected him to buy car covers for the motor homes and felt the 72-hour limit was unrealistic, (8) A bell on his telephone was necessary so he could hear it when he was outside the shop, and (9) his signs had been on the building since it was built. Mr. Loomis stated he had received the notice the day prior to Thanksgiving, which gave him no time to review and discuss the conditions with Staff. He stated his trash was located out of view at the back of the lot, but that he would like to clearr the area and make it more usable. Comm. Marks and Mr. Loomis discussed parking in the front area, with Mr. Loomis stating customers would not park their R.V. 's immediately next to the building. Comm. Marks suggested Mr. Loomis discuss his suggestions regarding the sheds with the Planning Dept. Comm. Di Monda suggested Mr. Loomis meet with Staff to resolve the issues and his questions. He felt a dumpster was a Municipal Code requirement, which was outside the jurisdiction of the Commission; the metal shed, storing of vehicles and striping of the lot could be discussed with Staff. Comm. Di Monda explained the reason for some of the other conditions being included, noted those requirements which were outside the Commission's jurisdiction and noted that Condition 14 should read " ... no exterior .bells, buzzers ... " Mr. Schubach agreed clarity of Condition 14 was needed and agreed that many of the items could be resolved or explained to the applicant. • Rick Bernstein, 519 5th Street, presented letters of support from neighboring residents. He stated the business is a goo_d and supportive neighbor, with recycling of materials, little noise or dirt. He felt the business was of benefit to the area. Marvin May, 2230 The Strand , 20 year resident, stated the Commission should be reas onable since the business had been at that location for over 50 years and the residents had grown around it. He stated Bob Creech Auto Repairing was a good neighbor. No one else wished to speak regarding this item, and Vice-Chmn. Di Monda closed the Public Hearing at 8:36 p.m. Vice-Chmn Di Monda stated he agreed with the testimony, the business had been in its location a long time, the neighborhood had 7 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 changed and the Commission would continue an issue such as this to allow resolution to everyone's satisfaction. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Oakes, to CONTINUE this application to February 2, 1993, to allow the applicant to discuss solutions and resolutions to the items in questions, and DIRECTED Staff to meet with the applicant to work out those details. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: A break was the meeting seated. Comm. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard None Chmn. Merl None taken from 8:52 to 9:00 p.m. and reconvened the meeting Chmn. Merl returned to with all Commissioners CUP 92-20 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AUTHORIZE AN. EXISTING GENERAL AUTO REPAIR SHOP AT 525 CYPRESS AVENUE, JOHNSON'S BRAKE. Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Schubach stated Staff had not found the business to be a source of any problems, with no complaints received. The shop performed only brake repairs by appointment, with only one repair space being utilized. Staff was concerned with the risk of intensification of the site and included conditions to ensure the same level of operation into the future. He discussed the opportunity to combine trash receptacles with neighboring properties being offered to the applicant. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Merl at 9:03 p.m. Albert Castillon, 525 Cypress Avenue, agreed with the Staff Report except, due to the lack of work, "drive-in" vehicles are. being accepted. He stated he repairs three cars per day. He stated he did intend to use at least one more spot for cars. He stated he did not have a trash bin; he used his neighbors. Comm. Oaks suggested and the Commission agreed to change the requirement to " ... or a maximum of three cars ... " Mr. Schubach noted the provisions enabling Mr. Castillon to add additional parking and space and agreed that two small businesses could share trash receptacles. No one else wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Merl closed the Public Hearing at 9:07 p.m. Comm. Di Monda requested Condition 12 be amended to read, " ... no exterior bells ... " or similar appropriate terminology be used and Item 1. (a) shall read, "Repair work activity shall be limited to a maximum of three vehicles.", to which the Commission agreed. Mr. Schubach stated Condition 12 should read, "There shall be no bells, buzzers, or similar apparatus that can be heard beyond the 8 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 property line." This particular condition will be changed in C.U.P.'s in a uniform manner. MOTION by Comm. Oakes, seconded by Comm. Marks, to APPROVE CUP 92-20 with the addition of the changes as discussed. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comm. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl None None None Chairman Merl stated this item was approved subject to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of this meeting. CUP 92-21 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AUTHORIZE AN EXISTING AUTOMOTIVE TOP AND UPHOLSTERY BUSINESS AT 619 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, GEORGE & AL'S AUTO TOP SHOP. Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Schubach stated this was similar to the previous item, the same conditions had been provided. He noted a potential security problem between the two buildings and suggested a fence be installed. The condition regarding a trash container could be modified if the applicant could place his trash inside the building and such storage met the Municipal Code. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Merl at 9:12 p.m. Ralph Werneli, 1617 Beach Avenue, Torrance, found no problem with most of the conditions, agreed to install a gate or fence, but questioned the required manner of parking area resurfacing. Mr. Schubach stated a skincoat, repair of potholes and restriping would be sufficient. Mr. Werneli stated his 2-3 cans of trash are kept inside the building at all times until picked up. He stated placing an enclosure outside would be difficult for the trash truck to pick up and requested this condition be deleted. No one else wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Merl closed the Public Hearing at 9:14 p.m. Comm. Di Monda requested that Condition 12 be standardized, as previously discussed during this meeting, to which Mr. Schubach agreed. Responding to Comm. Di Monda, Mr. Schubach stated the "15 minutes time limitation for estimates" was a standard requirement and had been acceptable to other mechanics in the past. Comm. Oakes questioned Condition 7, the ·agreement regarding trash containment. Mr. Schubach explained the applicant wished to store his containers inside his building; Staff recommended he comply with Municipal Code, as it was not a major contributor to outside debris. Comm. Oakes requested this condition be change to state the applicant may maintain his trash receptacles within his -build- ing if such storage meets Code and Building Dept. requirements. 9 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 MOTION by Comm. Oakes, seconded by Comm. Marks, to APPROVE CUP 92-21 with the changes noted. AYES: NOES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Chairman Merl stated this item was approved subject to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of this meeting. CUP 92-15 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR REPAIRS, PARTS AND ACCESSORIES, AND ADOPTION NEGATIVE DECLARATION AT 828 PACIFIC COAST CYCLES. MOTORCYCLE SALES, OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL HIGHWAY, SOUTH BAY Recommended Action: To approve said Conditional Use Permit and adopt the Environmental Negative Declaration. Mr. Schubach stated a public notice to residents within a 300-feet radius had been completed, but the property lines used were based on the legal description provided. The adjacent parking lot is not indicated as owned by the same property owner. The City Attorney has indicated the parking lot must be included. Approximately a dozen property owners must be also notified. The public hearing can be continued to a date certain, or testimony may be heard at this meeting with a tentative approval recorded and continuation of the public hearing to a future date for the purpose of noticing. Mr. Schubach then gave the Staff Report, described the proposed relocation and business remodeling and operations. He stated a lift was proposed to lower the cycles from the parking lot to the floor below. Staff did not cons i der the change in sales to be an intensification of the use, but did not believe the proposed employee parking stall location acceptable or necessary. ·Since the ~roposal is essentially the same as that approved by.City Council in 1991, Staff recommended the same or similar conditions be applied. Mr. Schubach then defined the additional recommended Conditions. With the recommended mitigating conditions,. Staff did not object to the proposal. Responding the Comm. Di Manda's question, Mr. Schubach stated motorcycles could be brought into the building from Pacific Coast Highway through the front door, but was precluded since there was no curb cut. Chmn. Merl confirmed the action options open to the Commission. Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Merl at 9:26 p.m. Jack Wood, 200 Pier Avenue, Ste. 38, stated the applicants had no particular objection to the conditions -of approval and submitted a letter acknowledging the problems of incomplete noticing. He stated the business had performed well enough for the Council to waive its 6-month review procedures. Mr. Wood explained that the partners were . splitting, with Miko purchasing the property arid 10 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 becoming a partner. Mr. Wood explained the State had no compelling reason to allow a curb cut on the State highway and the City prohibited the cycles traversing the sidewalk. Be explained the method of moving the cycles using an electric-powered forklift. He noted a unique opportunity was present since the business had previously operated under the CUP for an extended period of time, and no one had complained about the business in the past. He described the type of customers and their bikes, summarizing that Hermosa Beach could use more businesses such as this. Comms. Di Monda, Oakes and Mr. Wood discussed various methods considered relating to the motorcycles' entrance into the building, as well as the associated traffic and noise problems. Comm. Marks requested plans that displayed grade elevations. Mr. Woods objected to the request as not having been required. Mr. Woods stated the Building Dept. had withheld permit approval until after the Planning Commission meeting. He requested communi- cation to the Building Dept. stating the Commission had no objec- tion to the applicant assuming all liability and a permit being issued, so that construction on the handicapped bathroom facilities and display room could begin. Messrs. Woods, Schubach and the Commission discussed the applicants construction plans and the problems experienced in obtaining the permit. Dale McClinton, 940 8th Place, stated the character of the neighborhood had not changed, but noted the area was less desirable due to the increase in traffic on 8th Place and the resultant vehicular noise., He requested multiple restrictions to ~educe the noise levels of traffic and motorcycles which would result: 1) instructions should be given to employees as well as meetings being held, 2) customers are to be told to not test vehicles on rocal streets, and 3) access must be from Pacific Coast Highway. Comm. Di Monda responded Mr. McClinton' s suggestions which were appropriate were already included in the CUP. Mr. McClin~on felt that considerable changes had been made to the original CU~. Mr. Woods invited Mr. McClinton to tour the proposed location in order to address his concerns. Jerry Snyder, 710 Hermosa Avenue, supported the application. He felt that Miko was sensitive and considerate to the residents, with the business contributing to the area and community. John Granacki, 8th Street, disagreed that the operation was quiet. He stated 8th Street had a lot of traffic noise, which was like a canyon which echoed and vibrated. He objected to doubling the volume if two CUP's for motorcycle shops existed. He discussed the noise generated by motorcycles and objected to another CUP being issued. Jean McGreevy, 8th Place, 40-year resident, saw many problems for the local and longtime residents if the CUP were approved. She felt the location of that business in a residential areas would be an ongoing nuisance to long-time residents. She discussed baffling 11 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 the motorcycles, construction of a 6-feet block wall, planting of trees for buffering, limiting the types of repairs, parking code violation, need for security guards, the view of the parking lot. She stated her neighbor will be disturbed by the vehicles in the parking lot and the accidents on 8th and 9th Streets will increase and should be considered. Burt Sourer, 844 9th Street, 30-year resident, objected to receiving the notice one day before a holiday and the week end, feeling the notification system was defective. He opposed approval of the CUP, noting that about two accidents happen a week on 9th Street. He requested this issue be continued to allow neighborhood participation at the meeting. Joanne Hall, 830 8th Place, owns the property adjacent to the parking lot. She objected to construction of the six-feet wall because she would then be "closed in" and the parking lot would still be under her window. She felt her property would decrease in value if the CUP were approved. -Phil McGreevy, 840 8th Place, felt the business should not be located in the residential area, objecting to the noise created by the motorcycles. He felt prospective buyers would not buy these homes if a motorcycle repair shop were located next to the houses. Beverly Wood, 940 8th Place, stated she disagreed with Mr. Schubach. She stated 8th Place is a narrow street, of which two cars cannot pass if a car is parked at the curb. _She felt a traffic study should be conducted, expressed her concern that a CUP currently exists and another might be issued which would result in increased noise levels and unsafe conditions for pedestrians. She noted a correction: signs should be placed on 8th Place, not 8th Street. She also objected to the signs placed in the winddw of the proposed site, the tile removed from the building and the. sense that some sort of approval had already been received by the applicant. Mr. Schubach stated the new proposed CUP had been changed. Staff could reword the conditions for clarity, if the Commission so wished. Comm. Di Monda suggested the "old language" in Condition 17 be incorporated, to which Mr. Schubach agreed. Comm. Oakes suggested the condition referencing the manner of "loading" be deleted. Mr. Wood explained the only truck that would be loading would be a "wrecker", which is little larger than a pick-up truck. Ms. Wood, requested that Condition 24 be included in th~ new CUP. Mr. Schubach stated this was not a necessary requirement, but that it could be included. Ms. Wood referenced Condition 25, requested that it be included, also, to which Mr. Schubach agreed. She discussed the six-feet fence and driveway modification, requesting the residents and a petition signed by 62 residents be considered when the Commission makes its decision. Howard Longacre, 1221 7th Place, stated the only problem he had was with noise, asked if the noise ordinance was actively enforced, 12 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 were there records, and commented upon the levels of noise currently within his residential area. He stated he had no problems with two-wheel vehicles, but suggested a moratorium until the noise issue was settled. Leslie Beal, 920 8th Place, asked if the curb on the north side could be painted red and that the employees could be prohibited from parking on 8th Place, feeling it would become too congested. Greg Tucker, 850 8th Place, said the motorcycles cost about $30,000, felt 8th Place was a very dangerous street and noted the complaints stated were to deflate the traffic problems on 8th Place, not to prevent the applicant from doing business. He requested that a traffic study be conducted. Rebuttal Lars Viklund, 223 Avenue B, Redondo Beach, applicant, felt the business would not contribute to the noise problem, noting the neighbors of his current shop had never complained. He stated noise studies had been conducted , with no problem. He said that he considered all the neighbors and hoped the neighbors considered him. He stated his customers did read the signs and were considerate of the neighbors. Jack Wood stated the business had operated over one year without complaints being received. He noted the applicants had no objections to the proposed conditions, misunderstanding about the block wall was evident, signs would be posted, customers would not be allowed to go up 8th Street and were not interested in going up and down 8th Place, show bikes would not enter under their own power. He invited the residents to tour the store and see the signs. He reiterated his request that the Building Dept. be told the Commission had no objection to the restrooms being constructed. Miko Sorrobi, applicant, invited the neighbors to visit and see the type of business he has, requested his business be allowed to open and, if he is not a good neighbor, then close him down. He stated it was not fair to be accused of something that he had not done yet. He stated he was a good neighbor and wanted to conduct his business. No one else wished to speak regarding this item, and Chmn. Merl continued the Public Hearing at 10:40 p.m. The Commission again discussed its options for action with Mr. Schubach. Comm. Oakes suggested the applicant obtain a permit for existing use improvements, keeping this separate from this issue. Comm. Di Monda confirmed with Mr. Woods that Mr. Grove, Building Dept. had been Mr. Woods contact. Mr. Woods asked the Commission to state that it did not have any objection to tenant improvements as long as they did not imply approval of the CUP, stating he believed he could then solve the a pplicants' problem. He noted the 13 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 bathroom would take at least 30 days to build, which should not be wasted. Comm. Di Monda stated he would like the Commission to send a letter to the City Manager telling him the Commission wished Bill Grove would enforce the rest of the Municipal Code with· the same enthusiasm that he seems to use in denying what appeared to be the rights of the applicants, who wish to improve existing tenant space at their own risk. Comm. Di Monda stated he did not understand why the Building Dept. could not enforce the sign ordinance, the ordinance against barbed wire and other items, as well. Responding to Comm. Oakes questions, Mr. Wood stated the previous property owner had signed the building permit application and a fee was accepted. Mr. Wood said he did not wish a problem to be created, as Mr. Grove was one of the more cooperative Building Directors of any of the cities Mr. Wood had dealt with. Comm. Oakes confirmed that the action was simply tenant improvement, feeling the applicant should be able to simply submit a bathroom plan to obtain the permit. Mr. Wood stated he had previously done exactly that; although the check was accepted, no permit was issued even though it has been through plan check and the corrections finished. The Commission then discussed the possible actions it should take, with Comm. Di Monda stating the Building Dept. had no right to deny the permit, if the applicant was willing to take the risk. Mr. Wood again asked a letter be sent indicating that the Planning Commission that it had no problems with someone doing tenant improvements to an existing use, provided it did not imply that the CUP was approved and the applicant understood he was accepting all the risk. Chmn. Merl and Comm. Oakes felt the Commission should have no problem with the issuance of such a letter as long as it was understood no presumption of rights were given and it was not part of the CUP. Comm. Marks objected, stating he thought Bill Grove should be given the opportunity to respond. Chmn. Merl thought the posture taken by the Commission was appropriate, although it would be interesting to find out what·· Mr. Grove's objections were. Comm. Di Monda stated that if the statements made were correct, Mr. Grove was not doing his job and was making policy. Comm. Oakes stated the Commission could state that anyone could go into any building, pull a permit for the same use and the Commission would have no objection, since this was self evident. Comm. Marks objected to an interim statement being made, to which Comm. Oakes disagreed, stating it would not be an interim statement. The Commission agreed to send the letter, noting the one objection, while also inviting Mr. Grove to respond to the Commission. Comm. Oakes discussed with Mr. Schubach the various actions to be taken by the residents and the Commission to improve street safety on 8th Place. Comm. Oakes asked that a memorandum be directed to the Traf fie Engineer and Public Works Dept., asking that they examine any problems resulting from the issue of people traveling 14 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 the street and/or parking, if a red curb along Casey's side of the street should be installed due to the difficulty of the inter- section. Chmn. Mer l summarized the request by requesting that comment be made by the Traffic Engineer relative to the circula- tion problem. Comm. Suard felt the Commission should also direct Staff-to address the additional concerns expressed. Mr. Schubach stated Staff would send a memorandum to the City Manager, which would be directed to the Public Works Dept., with the Traffic Engineer being requested to examine the matter and concerns. Comm. Di Monda felt it was a reasonable request by the residents and could be treated as a separate issue, to which Comm. Oakes agreed. Mr. Schubach discussed the conditions in the original CUP that had been deleted, including addressing muffler noises, stating he would investigate the deletions and re-enter any necessary conditions. Comm. Di Monda stated the requirement for employee signatures had been removed from all CUP' s, which should remain deleted. Comm. Suard requested 1) a copy of the letter referenced in prior Condition 25 (page 3, noise study), 2) more information as to how the noise from Harley Davidsons are determined to be excessive, 3) whether it would be possible to condition that all vehicles leaving the shop must meet the noise standards, 4) information regarding any complaints to the Police Dept. , 5) accident records for the southern end of Pacific Coast Highway to see if 8th Street does have more accidents that the others and 6) Staff is to question the current property owner behind the shop to find out if there are any current noise problems. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Marks, to CONTINUE CUP 92-15 to January 5, 1993. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: HEARING Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl None None None CON 90-8 --REOUEST FOR ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PER1"1:IT AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #22100 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 626 7TH STREET. Recommended Action: To grant a six-month extension. Mr. Schubach stated Staff recommended a six-month extension for the CUP and tentative parcel map by minute order. The applicant continued to experience financial difficulties and requested an extension. Mr. Schubach described the proposed project and noted the Commission could extend the expiration date for a tentative map for a period up to three years, ending June 19, 1993. Staff had found nothing in the overall project design to cause reason for 15 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 denial. Comm. Marks observed the original approval was given at least 2 1/2 years ago and objected to granting another extension. Mr. Schubach stated the proposed project did meet all of today's standards. Chmn. Merl invited audience participation. No one wished to speak on this subject. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Suard, to APPROVE Staff's recommendation to grant the requested six-month extension. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Di Monda, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl Comm. Marks None None Chairman Merl stated this item was approved subject to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of this meeting. TEXT 92-4 --TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF REQUIRE- MENTS FOR OR TO PROHIBIT SECOND UN I TS PURSUANT TO STATE GOVERNMENT CODE 65852.2 (referred back from the November 10, 1992 City Council meeting. Recommended Action: appropriate. To recommend to the City Council as deemed Mr. Schubach noted supplemental information (altered wording, as requested by the City Attorney) had been included in the Commis- sioners' packets. Mr. Schubach out l ined the history of the progress of this item through the Commission and Council. The Council referred this item back to the Commission, as required by law, for the Commission's comments on totally prohibiting second units. He then detailed Staff's three recommended proposals and the City Council 's recommendations. He stated that Staff recom- mended proposal #3, with Alternative #A, as it was all encompassing and the City Attorney had approved the terminology. Comm. Di Monda asked if Staff could include in Page 2 of ~he report the traffic volume on Pacific Coast Highway and what would happen to this highway if almost 3,000 more units were allowed. Also, he wished included what the statistics would be with 17,500 trips per day, mentioning quantity of different air particulants. Mr. Schubach stated Staff had looked into this and explained the factors that would need to be included in the formulas that must be used. He suggested that Staff supply a sample, which Comm. Di Monda thought would be important information, since the City was already in violation of E.P.A. and Federal requirements. Comm. Di Monda also commented upon the increase in trash and the decrease in available land fill, which should be addressed in this report on Page 3. Page 4 should also mention the development pattern within the City; where old buildings are built on the lot lines and present associated problems for Police and Fire Depts. 16 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 Comm. Suard discussed the lack of any mention of increased parking problems with Mr. Schubach, who acknowledged this was a difficult ~roblem. Comm. Suard felt allowance of additional units would increase the current parking problems. He stated his support of proposal #3, and suggested an addition to the last line to read, " ... immediately and/or retroactively ... ". Chmn. Merl invited audience participation. Howard Longacre, 1221 7th Place, stated his support of proposal #3. Responding to Mr. Longacre' s 9uestion, Mr. Schubach stated that three cities had adopted similar programs. Mr. Longacre felt residents were currently "packed like sardines". No one else wished to speak on this subject. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Suard, to APPROVE Staff's Recommendation #3, but with the proposal previously approved by the Commission to serve as the back-up, contingency proposal. If Recommendation #3 is refused by the State, this back-up p ropos al is to be immediately and/or retroactively applied. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: STAFF ITEMS Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Oakes, Suard, Chmn. Merl None None None Chmn. Merl announced that due to the extended duration of this meeting, the following Staff Items would be continued to. the next Planning Commission meeting: a. Report from the City Treasurer regarding sales and use tax. b. Memorandum regarding the City Council/Planning Commission joint meeting. c. Planning Department activity report of October, 1992! d. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda. e. Memorandum regarding Planning Commission liaison for December 1, 1992 City Council meeting. f. City Council minutes of November 10, 1992. COMMISSIONER ITEMS Comm. Suard .wished to add to the "Staff Items" agenda items that were previously discussed, which included: 1) communications between the City Council and Planning Commission, 2) the hotel, 3) the use of the Planning Commission, 4) greenbelt parking. Mr. Schubach stated those items related to Land Use and RUDAT had been included. Both subjects covered many subjects and would.take a 17 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 great deal of time to thoroughly discuss, to which Chmn. Merl agreed. Comm. Di Monda suggested that another meeting with the City Council be scheduled. The Commission agreed that increased communications were necessary and requested the items be agendized. Comm. Marks asked the status of public park and right-of-way along Beach Drive. Mr. Schubach said the subcommittee was still active, but had not decided upon a conclusion at this time. Comm. Di Monda stated the Building Director had requested a letter from the City Attorney authorizing the removal of the barbed wire, which is not allowed by Municipal Code. Comm. Di Monda requested a memorandum to the City Attorney which requested a letter authoriz- ing the removal of the wire be directed to the Building Director from the City Attorney. Comm. Di Monda also requested a memorandum to the City Manager requesting a reminder be written by the City Manager to the Police Chief stating the police do not seem to be <JOing through the greenbelt parking lot, which has overnight park- ing of vehicles. Comm. Di Monda also requested a very specific memorandum be sent to the Building Director pertaining to the Lighthouse CUP which is going to appear before the Commission. This memo should ask, under the '91 UBC, what is 1.a) the occupancy load of that type of use group, what is the use group and what are the exiting requirements (both corridor and exit door widths in inches. ) Be requested the exact size requirements in inches of these exits based upon occupancy and load, and what the exact size of the corridor and exit door as they exist at this time. Comm. Di Monda requested another memorandum be sent to the City Manager noting that at 542 The Strand, a permitted curb cut and apron, as well as an illegal parking lot has been installed. The permit had been issued in July 1992. Comm. Di Monda stated he understood no parking permits were to have been issued; a permit should not have been issued to allow cutting a curb on City property. He wished an explanation as to how such a permit was issued. Comm. Oakes asked the status of tree trimming in the greenbelt area. Mr. Schubach stated this issue had been discussed, with the determination made that certain trees could not be trimmed, as they would be traumatized and die. The greenbelt area has been cleaned of mattresses, etc. The police have been requested to patrol that area. Howard Longacre, 1221 7th Place, stated the Cable split channel was functioning. He announced the meeting was being shown live and would be replayed Wednesdays and Fridays at noon. The agendas are being shown by Multivision on Thursday and Friday evenings. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at 11:37 p.m. No objections; so ordered. 18 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92 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 December 1, 1992. P ~ ~~~L ~ Rod Merl, Ch~ Michael' Schubach, Secretary l-19-f/J Date 19 P.C.Minutes 12/1/92