HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1961_04_17REPORT OF A WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE PLANNIID-COMMISSION-OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH WELD AT THE CITY HALL ON MONDAY, APRIL 17, 1961, AT 7:30 PaM:o In the absence of Chairman Viault, Vice-Chairman Fredricks presided. He announced that this workshop meeting had been s.etby Chairman Via.ult at the last regular meeting of the Commission, April 10, 1961, to fulfill a request of the City Council that the Commission study the advisability and feasibility of certain beach convenience facilities and hold public hearings in regard to these matters. Mr. Fredricks welcomed the townspeople-present and explained that this was a workshop meeting, not a public hearing, but that the public was always entitled to attend any workshop or any other meeting of civic bodies. The Commission would attempt to be as objective as possible, he said, adding that they had been supplied with certain material in regard to the subject, which would be considered in their studies. On completion of their studies, the Commission would make certain recommendations to the City'Council. Mr. Fredricks emphasized that tonight's meeting, as set forth, was called for a specific purpose and would go no further than to have an oral report and statement of background of the actual written report, dated March 21, 1961, that was submitted to the City Council by the City Manager and the City ~ineer. For the information of those present, Mr. Fredricks continued, the Chairman of the Planning Commission had appointed Commissioner Joe B. :rtfoble as chairman. of a Planning Commission subcanmittee, hi~ function being to head a committee (which will be a committee of the whole Commission) to make studies of this problem and to meet with interested citizens and citizens' groups, to have meetings of this subcommittee and the interested groups. One of the interested groups is comprised of citizens living in the 2nd Street area., and there will be a meeting with that group. Also, there are groups that have studied this problem, the Beach Subcommittee of the Citizens Advisory Committee and the ma.in body of the Citizens Advisory Committee, and meetings will be held with them. With these introductory remarks concerning the purpose of tonight's meeting and again expressing appreciation to those present for their interest in attending, Mr. Fredricks asked City Manager Harris (for the Commission's record) to tell briefly how the matter of beach conveniences developed, and resulted in the presentation to the Council of the report heretofore mentioned. Mr. Harris explained that the Citizens Advisory Committee and Beach SubcQlllJili.ttee had worked on this subject matter for nearly a year. The subcommittee was representative of the nine geographical areas of the city. For study purposes, the beachfront was broken down into four zones. With reference to the point of facilities, pertaining to restrooms, Mr. Harris recited from the Beach Subcommittee's inspection report of May 25, 1960, as follows: At the north end, Area 1, from Neptune to 25th Street, ttreplace and reroute the walk at the end Qf the Strand and consider an area around the pumphouse as a possible location." Area 2 would comprise 25th Street to Pier Avenue. ''It i$ felt that restrooms would be a good addition to the enjoyment of the beach, particularly for those who come from the inland. There is a question of the best location, the present pier and 22nd Street being considered the most advantageous. An additional suggestion might be to place the facility off the beach on property acguired by the city --example, on Hermosa Avenue.n In Area 3, from Pier Avenue to 4th Street, nremove the old pier stub and build new lifeguard quarters and public restrooms."
Planning Commission 2 April 17, 1961 Area 4, 4th Street to Herondo Avenue, "provide public restrooms every ten blocks.n On December 5, 1960, the subcommittee on Beach Improvements made their final recommendations, and in addition to other recommendations, s\l§gested that 11 ••• a large utility building should· be erected in the· pier area which would contain extensive restroom facilities, showers, lockers, lifeguard facilities, etc. Adequate restroom facilities on 2nd Street, 22nd Street and near the north end 9f the Strand should be provided." Quoting from the section of this report entitled '~eneral Thinking", Mr. Harris read, 11The connnittee also feels that we should • attempt to proper],y accommodate the crowds who will elect to come to our beach, rather than to entice them here to once again overcrowd our facilities. A key point here is that offstreet parking must be coordinated in city planning so as to provide extra1parking facilities only at points of access where public facilities are ~vailable. The subject of the location of restroom facilities constituted the biggest single item of debate and discussion at our meetings. It was generally agreed that the restroom facilities should be placed where the peak crowds exist during the busy weekends of the swmner months.. It was pointed out that poorly located restrooms would stand virtually unused most of the winter months and would be met with rather violent opposition by the citizens of HerID0sa Beach. In analyzing the spots where restroom facilities are actually required, it appears that the restroom facilities at 2nd Street, facilities at the end of Pier Avenue, facilities somewhere in the vicinity of 22nd Street, and one other restroom near the north end of the Strand would undoubtedly take care of the situation. 11 . Mr. Harris indicated that this final report of the subcommittee was incorporated in the Citizens Advisory Committee's report to the City Council, approved by the general membership of the committee on February 23, 1961, and presented to the Council a week or two later. This latter report of the Advisory Committee, numbering 68 or 69 people representing the various areas of Hermosa, suggested that"·•· in addition to restrooms in conjunction with redevelopment of the old pier site, restroom facilities should al.so be located where peak crowds exist during busy weekends of the summer months, at or near 2nd Street, 22nd Btreet, and-at the north end of the Strand. At 2nd Street and 22nd, it is felt that off the sand lo.cations should be considered, and at the north end of the Strand, the facility should be placed at low grade to take advantage of the rise in elevation of the land behind the beach area, The 2nd and 22nd Street locations, being commercial zones, could include more complete facilities for toilets, showers, lockers and dressing rooms, but at the north end, the cOIIIIIlittee reconnnended only m.i.nimum toilet facilities to keep the size of the structure at a . . tt mm.mun. Mr. Harris went on to say that the City Council had instructed the City Manager and City Engineer to prepare a report on the feasibility of providing "beach conveniences" in conjunction with beach operation. This report, dated March 21, 1961, in effect portrayed the suggestions of the Beach Subcommittee and the Citizens ~vi,sory Committee. Mr. Fredricks stated that the Commission had wanted Mr. Stevens, City E;ngineer, to supplement orally information pertaining to the report and answer questions presented by members, but that it was agreeable for Mr. Harris to present the matter in any manner he wished. Feeling that it would be helpful
Planning Commission 3 April 17, 1961 to the people present to hear the report in its entirety, Mr. Harris asked Mr. Stevens to point out areas displayed on the composite map exhibit as he referred to them in the report. The sketches presented were to show the type of development in the suggested or similar locations and were not to be construed as recommendations. Mr. Harris then read the 6 ... page report prepared by himself and Mr. Stevens. At the conclusion; he stated that it was conceptual, an effort to portray what could be done, based on suggestions of the Citizens Advisory Committee and their Beach Subcommittee. He stated that a great deal of time had been spent by these groups in the study and preparation of their reports. He explained that th.ese committees bad felt there was a need for such facilities and that his and the engineer's rep-0rt could be used as a beginning for discussion by the Council, the Commission, and the public. The Citizens Advisory Conmti.ttee and its subcommittee reports represented more than a year ts intensive study. Mr. Harris said that his report was based solely upon these committee reports and their report to the Council. He reiterated that the report under consideration is an effort to portray one means of providing what the Advisory Committee thought was needed, and it was prepared at the direction of the City Council. Comm.. Locken asked the City Engineer, Mr. Stevens, if there had been any investigation of subterranean facilities under the Strand and their cost in relation to the cost as outlined in the report. Mr. Stevens answered that there had been some tal.k·of this, but the police department disliked the idea of an underground tunnel, which should be considered only as a last resort. Some thought had been given to locations where the sloping terrain cmld be cut into, either on the beach or Strand, he said, but below the Strand, a pumping station would have to be provided; no studies were made as to the ground water table, but it is assumed to be quite shallow. This is not impossible, Mr, Harris said, but more d:xpensiveo Mr. Stevens said many aspects were studied and that the drawings di.splayed were depictions drawn up as the whole total came into view, They considered· possible locations, on private property, underneath the ground, on the beach, narro'Wi.ng dow:n to the most feasible type of thing, the depictions presented possibly not being the most feasible from one point of view, but the most feasible from another, and that this is what must be resolved, by getting everyone concerned together and arriving at a decision. Whether or not the facilities were needed was not a part of his work, Mr. Stevens said, Comm. Lo.cken asked if the showers were in conjunction·with the restroomsa In this report, showers were recommended to be on the beach, Mr. Harris said; the Advisory Committee did e~ress the feeling that showers might be at Pier Avenue and not appropriate at the other locations. Asked by Connn. Fredricks as to the cost of a shower installation and drinking fountain, Mr. Stevens said somewhere around $300 for the shower I plus the plumbing hefJ.d, the pipe going out to the shower, and the slab. The drinking fountain head is somewhere around $SO, between $20 and $50, he said. Comm. Black questiQned the necessity for four comfort stations on the beach. Comm. Fredricks answered that the Commission had not ccme t.o that point
Planning Commission 4 April 17, 1961 in its study bttt was hearing Mr. Stevens and Mr. Harris, who were not instructed to consider whether the idea was good or not but, if provided, where the station-s should be. The Commission will go into the study, and the citizens will have an opportunity to express their views on :the need, but not tonight. Comm. Black expressed his opposition to the expenditure of this money. Being in the plumbing business, he said, he knew these facilities would be costly to construct and very expensive to maintain in a sanitary manner all along the beach. COJ11111.. Fredricks explained that the people on the Advisory Connnittee had spent many long hours making their report and that in fairness to them, the Commission should hear their suggestions, giving them the courtesy of considering theirs to be a sincere report by the Commission's honestly looking into it and giving it their be st judgment. Pertaining to cost, Coimn. Noble felt the Commission should have all available information. The restrooms will cost about $9,000 for structure, according to Mr. Stevens. Comm. Fredricks advised not going too far into the cost at this meeting, that Comm. Noble obtain such data at other meetings. Comm.. Hales called attention to the parking sites mentioned in the report and expressed concern at the parking suggestions incorporated in this particular proposal, feeling th.at tbis should be a separate study, related not only to \lse on the beach but to other coJI1mercial and zoning situation, -which if included in this study, might cause evaluating of other things besides beach facilities. Parking was one of the items enumerated·in the instructions for their report, Mr. Harris said. In some instances, they had increased from four to six stalls more than. the parking spa·ces· actually provided, and at the north end there is a considerable problem, where addi-tional parking can be provided. Comm. Hales thought if the parking problem were involved., it would be unfair to other areas in the city, citing the Pacific Coast Highway congestion; that parking problems shoul.d be considered first, expressing his feeling th.at parking should not be considered in the study of.this plan. Conunenting on parking, Mr. Stevens stated that it was one of the items he and Mr. Harris were required to look into, and their report had touched on it, mentioning the idea of pointing up First Street as a possibility of using a walk street for parking. They had looked for some area that might fall into a parking area th'lt could be utilized, and had given typical examples of what might be done. Comm~ Black asked what was proposed at Pier Avenue; if the pier head is demolished, what is proposed for that spot? Mr. ,Stevens answered that the Advisory Committee had felt that the rebuilding of the pier was not an adjunct to the required or necessary development of the beach, but had sug-gested some type of a development, a bandshell or some other type building. Comm. Fredricks said they recommended not having" a pier and this was as far as they went. As for the City Council, he said, he did not think any one idea had been more persuasive than any other -they were not ready economically or in any way to go ahead and get real studies., Mr. Harris said temporary restroom facilities on privately-owned property next to the acquarium were under consideration. Comm... Hales asked if the Council had backed off of the idea of a fishing
... Planning Comm.ission 5 April 17, 1961 pier and tying it in with certain state financial programs. • This is in a state of inaction until the end of the week, Mr. Harris said, adding that the Council had stated if funds are made available from the tideland oil money, they intended to acquire the remaining property and construct a pier; the two are tied together inasmuch as the use of the funds must be for some mari,i.a purpose. If the Council acquires this property, then this is a program they w.i.11 pursue; the details of this are awaiting the court decision on the permitted uses that could be made of the tideland moneyo Comm. Fredricks observed that this was not to be considered in the Commission's recommendationo Howe-,er, Comm. Hales felt this had some bearing, since it is an area under consideration. The beach facilities are to be considered at this time, Mr. Fredricks said. He addressed Comm. Noble, saying that inasmuch as Chairman Viault had appointed him to head a subcommittee, he imagined the Chairman would like to have a report at the next regular meeting (May 8), suggesting that Comm. Noble and his committee (which ls a committee of the whole) meet with the citizens, the groups headed by Mr. James Clemence and Mr. Tom Stevens of the Citizens Advisory Committee, and any other groups, and to get any detailed information possible from Mr. John Stevens, the City Engine~r, and notify the Commission members of dates for such meetings. Mr. David Wilkinson, 2140 Strand, asked that a study group representing the northern area be invited to meet with the other groups, and the Commiss.ion generally agreed Mr0 Wii.lkinson's suggestion was acceptable. In the absence of the Chairman, Comm. Fredricks said that he did not wish to set. any definite meeting date for a public hearing, and instructed Comm. Noble to gather his information, meet with the interested people, and rel}ort his findings at the next regular meeting of the Commission, at which time Chairman Viault wGuJd decide dates for ,Ublic hearings. He and Mr. Stevens were available at any time in any way, Mr. Harris told the Commission. Comm. Hales asked that a vote of thanks be given. to Mr. Harris and }fr. Stevens for their very comprehensive document, enabling the Commission to initiate some action and get the program under way. He commented that the report had been very thoughtfully done. Comm. Fredricks agreed, saying that even though there might be objections, the report would help in their study and aid in ge.tting to a point)where decisions could be made. Comm. Noble suggested that a group of individuals form a committee to represent residents in the city who do not live on the Strand, to formulate their opinions and suggest what comforts are needed when they visit the beach area, the committee to be composed of eff-the"'8trand residents representing themselves. The Beach Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee or Reverend Parker, ·,Chairman of the, main· group, might be in a position to suggest names for such a group, Mr. Harris said. help, Comm. Fredricks thanked Mr. Harris and Mr. Stevens for thei~ declaring the meeting adourn.ed at 8 :45 p.m. /) , ) / -· , -~ \ '.,,_ {...,(__ t\_,l. C ~ • ~ y-,_ Bernice Robinson, ecret~y