HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1961_07_10}([NUTES OF THE RIDULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNiNG COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HEREMOSA BEACH, held at the City Hall at 7 :30 p.m., Monday, July 10, 1961. ROLL CALl,: Present -Comm_. Nobie, Jolmson, Black, Hales and Chairman Fredricks. Absent .;. Comm. Viault and Locken. Present -Bud M. Trott, Chief Bldg. Inspector; John Stevens, City Engineer. Connn. Locken took his place during the discussion on Shaw application. CHAIRMAN APPOINTMENTS Inter--Ci ty Highway -Comm. Hales; Southwest Planning Committee, Comm. Viaul t; Reading Secretary, Comm. Noble. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES of June 12, 1~61, regular meeting unanimouso JOHN T • AND PI-i::r.LIP G. SHAW Continuation of ·nearing on application for zone amendment from M to R-3 of the south SOt·of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10, Block 81, Second Addition·to Hermosa Beach, 73l-16th Street. Mr. John E. Stevens, City Engineer, had been requested at the previous meeting to make a study of the sewer capacity, etc., affecting this property. It was his opinion, after making such a ?ju~ '-ffflr:"Vey, that the existing system is adequate to take care ·of the present and . I all expected sewage. •H<:lwever, he said, there is one stretch of 8" .1ine on Ardmore showing the possibility of a surcharge at a maximum peak. Mr. Guy T. Edgcomb representing owners of the property reiterated his reasons for requesting the zone change, arguing that this property would be logically develope.d R-3. No one voiced opposition to the request, and the Chairman ordered the public hearing closed. Chairmah. Fredricks said, as a·matter of record, it was too bad there was not a full Commission present, since this type of action requires 5 "aye" votes for approval. Mr. Trott called attention to suggestions at earlier meetings on this matter that something be worked out with owners of the property directly to the north for a joint development, adding that the City Engineer had taken tim~ to lay out some possible streets for the area. Mr. Stevens presented a sketch showing 18th Street cut through from Pacific Coast Highway to Ardmore and Springfield continuing south to 16th Street, Mr. Stevens explaining that there is a 60' right-of-way for 18th Street east of the highway, and that it wouJ.d be a logical step to proceed down. on to Ardmore with a fairly good roadway, and if some of the deve.1opment on the area in question could be so laid out as to project the Springfield roadway through, it would give .ajf added circulation, and a service alley on the rear of the subject property might be beneficial. These are items wlu.ch should be planned ahead and fairly well kept in mind, since this area is beginning to develop, he said, and are points to consider in suggesting to developers how they could conform to certain ideas the city might have. The sketch at hand had been made qUJ.ckly to get something before the Commission to show how better circu.Lation might be accomplished and that if more time were spent on it; the pattern ~ be developed in a better way, Mr. Stevens said. U(ijnT
Planning Conunission 2 Juiy 10, 1961 SHAW CONTD Basically what is being suggested is a Jn?-nor master plan as far as the roadways are concerned, with an R-3 potential use governing what might be developed, it was Conun. Noblets opinion, and he added that he would much prefer seeing multiple development than manufacturing. Chairman Fredricks remarked that Mr. Priamos, owner of property to the east of the subject property zoned for manufacturing had been contacted by a member of the Commission and had no present plans for development of his property and was not interested at this time in joining in with other owners for development of the area. Comm. Hales was of the opinion that the application at hand would consist of spot zoning; the sketch submitted by the city engineer represented the whole area, and it would be difficult to grant a change for this one piece of property, feeling that there should be a general show b:· t:'.le majority of t:he owners bef or-~ 1.·c~oning the ;_trea. Comm~ Black felt the subject property and all adjacent property should be R-3 and not manufacturing. He explained, as he had at previous meetings, that this area was undeveloped at the time the zoning ordinance was adopted and it had been felt at that time, because of the close proximity of the railroad, that this property might develop"~toward manufacturing, but that the trend was very definitely toward residential. Because of the large area of the land asked to be rezoned by pe~itioners, Comm. Black believed this should not be classified as spot zoning. Conun. Hales granted the point that the trend seems to be toward residential development of the area and felt there should be a review of the areas :zoned manufacturing within the city to determine whether there is too much that does not have a manufacturing potential., adding that he would like to know just how much manufacturing-zoned property there should be in the city. Conun. Locken gave his view that manufacturing would go elsewhere because of the tax structure in the city and agreed with Mr. Hal.es' suggestion that there should be a special hearing with all owners of property in this area. ,Since Mr. Edgcomb had not been advised of the sketch on possible traffic circular,, 1:i,m subrni tted by Mr. Stevens, Chairman Fredricks re-opened the hearing to give Mr. Edgcomb an opportunity to comment on .this aspect~ His plans were flexible and would tie in fairly well with the suggestions outlined on the sketch of roadways, Mr~ Edgcomb told the Connnission. On motion by Conun. Johnson, seconded by Corum. Noble to grant this petition, 'the vote was as follows, denying the request: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: Comm. Noble and Black. Connn. Johnson, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. Comm. Viault. Comm. Black moved that action be postponed until a full Connnission is P.resent. Corron. Locken seconded the motion. The Chairman asked Mr. Edgcomb if he would prefer to wait for a full Commission or have action at this time. Mr. Edgcomb answered that he would prefer action on the petition at this time and would appeal to the City Council if the petition were denied. The original rn~tion and second were thereupon withdrawn by Comm. Black and Locken respectively. Conun. Johnson then moved the adoption of P. C. 154-327 denying the request to ,rezone the subject property, for the reas~n that it had, not been shown under
Planning Commission SHAW CONTD 3 July 10, 1961 Article 15., Section 1500, of the zoning ordinance that this is required for public necessity, convenience or general welfare; this is a part of such a large area that a study should be made and an understanding of the full area be attained; and it is evident that a plan should be promulgated for that particular area, further study being needed to determine its best use. Oomm. H.ales seconded this motion., which carried as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm.-Johnson, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. Comm, Noble and Black. Comm. Viault. A motion was then made by C onun. Noble that a letter pe written to 1he City Council requesting that funds be dis~ursed to retain a competent planning consultant or engineering firm to analyze the entire area in question and to submit such plans to·the Commission for future use in its determination for changes in this area, including roadways, lighting and any other maintenance, and convenience facilities necessary for the proper city·residential planning, and an overall look at the M zone in the city in general, but with emphasis on the particular neighborhood in question to see what the potential is. This motion was seconded by Corrnn.· Black and carried unanimously·. ALLEN G. TATKIN Public hearing on application of Al.len_G. Tatkin & Associates to amend the conditional use permit granted by P. c. 154-39 to include both Lots 18 and 19, Block 81, Second Addition to Hermosa Beach, at 1835 Pacific Coast Highway; to increase the square footage of the existing hospital on Lot 18; and to amend Ordinance N. s. 191 by changing the precise plan, 'Which previously provided for a medical btri.lding, to now pro~de a heliport and parking area for the hospital, on Lot 19. A lette:J;>' ,was read from Fred D. Schwartz, architect, outlining the proposed exp:ansion of the. hospital. Mr. Schwartz was present to represent the applicant. Mrs. Etta Simpson, 651-25th Street, was in favor of a conditional approval for the heliport, provided the city could control the areas this helicopter could fly over the city. Mr. Phil Madson inquired if the hospital would take emergency cases under anycircumstances. Mr~ John Schmolle said the original conditional use permit called for 24--,.hour emergency service. In opposition to the heliport, letters from c. Dimas, 720~21st Street, and Andrew N. Dimas, 216~34th Street~ Manhattan Beach, were read by the secretary,· Speaking in opposition were c. B. Crow, 1850· Pa_cific Coast Highway, David Burt, 115~7th Street, c. A. Lockhart, 1835 Rhodes, G~ E. Andreasen, 1928 Ardmore, F. H. and Antoinette Alkire, 1810 Pacific Coast Highway, a Mr. Elkhard, and Charles Sundberg, 1830 Pacific Coast Highway. Mr. Schwartz insisted that the heliport would be used only for the direst emergency cases. Flight patterns would be determined by the FAA. In answer to the objection that the zoning was not M-2, in which gelicopters were allowed to land, according to one of the objectors, Mr. Schwartz said this ruling did not govern emergency landings if a life must be saved. There followed further questioning as to the availability of heliports in neighboring hospitals and other pertinent points, resulting in the Commission's feeling that a thorough study should be made concerning this feature of the petition.
Planning Commission 4 July 10, 1961 Comm. Noble moved that the request be granted to amend the conditional use· permit to expand the hospital and to include both Lots 18 and 19, Block 81, Second Addition to Hermosa Beach, and to amend the precise plan covering Lot 19 to now provide an additional parking area of 52 cars for the hospital, and to exclude the provision for a heliport until further study with the Coast Guard anthorities and the FAA is accomplished and submitted to the Commission for further consideration. Comm. Johnson seconded this motion, which carried as follows: AYES: NOES: .ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Johnson, Black, Hales and Locken. Chairman Fredricks. Connn. Viault . Comm. Jolmson then moved adoption of Resolution P. c. 15+-328 granting this petition as set forth in the foregoing motion, for the reason that it would improve the hospital facilities for the city without bothering any of the adjacent property as far as the hospital service is concerned; the property is properly zoned for such; and it is deemed necessary to provi~e a study of the heliport because of the protest from the citizens of the surrounding area. Connn. Hales seconded this motion, which carried as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Conun. Noble, Johnson, Black, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. None. Connn. Viault. BERGER FAGENSTROM Public hearing on application for variance of Berger Fagenstrom to permit enlargement of existing porch to approximately 300 square feet on a nonconforming structure having four units without conforming garages, in an R-1 zone, at 34l43 Hermosa Avenue, Lots 7 and 8, Dale Tract. • A letter signed by Mrs. v. Del Bose and Walter J.Del Bose was read by the secretary approving the petition •. _.Applicant was present speaking in beha1f of his request. Following a short discussion, Comm. Johnson moved that the request be granted. The motion was seconded by Conm1.Noble and carried as folloWS":!( AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Connn. Noble, Black, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Viault,. Conm. Noble moved the adoption of Resolution P. c .. 154---329 granting the application, as it is felt that there would be no detriment to the surrounding area or to the city to permit such use, and with the stipulation that the porch, either on top or underneath, shall not be later enclosed for living purposes adding more burden to the parking in the neighborhood. Comm. Black seconded the motion, which carried as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Black, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. Comm. Johnson. Connn. Viault.
Planning Connnission NANCY G. CLARK 5 July 10, 1961 Public hearing on application for variance of Nancy G~ Clark to permit construction of an 8,;;.unit apartmen~ house having subterranean parking, encroaching to both side·property lines, exclusive of front and rear setbacks, at 1021 Manhattan Avenue, Lot 23, Block 35, First Addition to Hermosa Beach, and review of proposed offstreet parking. Robt. w. EdJnondson represented applicant, stating that the property was in escrow and submitting a three~dim.ensional study of his proposed structure. The Connnissioners complimented him on the model presented. Mr~ David Burt, J_l5.2,-,.7th Street, and Mr O Burton Chatham., 1035 Manhattan Avenue, opposed the plan. • On motion by Comm. Johnson, seconded by Comm. Noble,to grant the request, the vote was as follows, denying the petition: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: None_. Comm. Noble, Johns on, Black, Hales, Locken and Chairman Fredricks. Comm. Viault. Comm. Johnson.moved that Resolution P. c. 154,,,.330 be adopted, denying this request for the reason that it has not been shown that there is any particular hardship., and it is not desirable that it be constructed to the property line. Comm. Noble seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. MAMIE, INC. Request of Marnie, Inc., 106 EmeraJdStreet, Redondo Beach, that there be created a new zone.to be designated as R-4, High,..,Rise, Hig~Density, for the specific purpose of rezoning the·eight acres located south of Second Street on the west side of Valley Drive, owned by the company, from manufacturing to R~. The secretary read letters from Mr. Bud M. Trott, Chief Building Inspector, to Mr. Collamer A. Bridge, City Attorney, and from Mr. Bridge in answer to Mr. Trottrs inquiry as to whether land can be rezoned into a new zone at the same time the ordinance is amended creating such a new zone~ It was Mr. Bridge's opinion that the new classification should be in effect before an application can be filed an4 considered by the Convn:ission to change certain property to the new zone. Mr-. Trott was asked to amplify this matter by Chairman Fredricks and stated that Mamie, Inc., bas filed an applicatioI)-3.sking that the matter be set for a hearing, and.the City Attorney's ruling, he believed., is that the application could not be filed, because there is no such zone at the present time. However, he added, if the fommission should see fit to go ahead and establish this new zon~, in bis opinion,at the same time any property that the Commission would choose to include i~ the new zone could be considered for rezoning at the hearings • . Mr. Ronald Moran, 25 Pacific Coast Highway, secretary to the corporation, said this specific request was made for the subject property because it was felt that this rezoning would not affect adversely any area in Hermosa Beach. A year's time bad been spent in developing the project, including top professional _ planning and architectural help0 He submitted a brochure depicting the proposed development.
Planning Commission 6 July 10, 1961 Comm. Black moved that a letter be written to the City Council requesting professional advice and aid in this matter., because at one time a professional planner,in rezoning the entire city, had zoned the subject property for manufacturing and there had not been any manufacturing developed., and· it was Conon. Black's feeling that it is very probable this property is adaptable to the zone requested., but he would like to have professional advice. Comm. Noble said he would favor a special study of the project submitted. There was no second to Comm. Black's motion, which was withdrawnD Comm. Noble moved that there be a workshop meeting to study and analyze in detail the material Mr. Moran has. Conun. Locken seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Chairman Fredricks then set Monday, July 17, 1961, at 7:30 p.m., for thie workshop meeting . . , J ROBERT W. WOODARD Letter fi;om Robert W; Woodard relative to expansion of Melo--Dees Dress and Yarn Shop, 837 ... 5th Street, the southwest 35' of the northeast 150' of Lot 9, Block 85, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach. This property is presently zoned R-3. Located on the site are a residence and a nonconforming business which has been in operation for_many yea.rs, the property having been zoned for commercial use pr~or to l9St when the present zoning ordinance was adopted. Mr. Woodard was before the Commission for advice and information concerning the possibility of constructing an l8x40' storeroom addition to the building used for commercial purposes. • Views expressed:;. by the Commissioners included the fact that the property is now in a residential. zone, and.though nonconforming, the business can remain, but if the business warrants expansion, it should be on property properly zoned for co111Jiercial use. If this property were in the C-potential area, some thought could be given to.rezoning. The new addition would be for storage purposes only, and would not increase the number of employees or commercial use. Mr. Woodard stated that previous to 1956 the property.was in a C....zone, the new zoning "going through faster than was anticipated." He felt that the area zoned R-3 was relatively small. It was Commo Halest suggestion that Mr. Woodard be informed of the views expressed by letter, and it was agreed that a copy of the minutes be sent to him. . . NELSON & STICKNEY City Clerk's memo referring to City Council action on July 6, 1961, concerning petition of Nelson & Stickney for temporary use of building at 67-13th Street, zoned C-2, for automobile repairingo This building had formerly been used for this purpose, which, though nonconforming, had continued after the zoning ordinance had been amended to exclude this use at that location. After this nonconforming use ceased, the building had been used for a short time as a ware-house. Temporary relief is sought by the petitioners due to the fact that this property is included in the area proposed for offstreet parking by the city. It was the feeling of the Commission-that no action could be taken unless there was a formal application before them, and it was unanimously agreed that a letter be written to the Council stating that when a formal application is filed with the Connnission with regard to the matter•contained in Nelson & Stickney's letter, the Commission would be happy to consider same, on motion by Conn. Black and seconded by Comm. Locken. Prior to the vote, Mr~ John Schmolle made a plea for
Planning Commission 7 July 10, 1961 NEI.SON & STICKNEY CONTD ,t, the Commission,. take action or indicate a favorable attitude because of the hardship involved. BEACH CONVENIENCE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT CODDil. Joe B. Noble, chairman of the subcommittee on beach conveniences, read his report, and Chairman Fredricks suggested that the report, together with various committees' reconunendations and letters from neighboring cities, be received and filed by the Commission and that the matter b.e scheduled on the agenda so that the Connnission can take action to submit a report to the Council as had been requested. On motion by Comm. Black, seconded by Conon. Hales, it was unanimously voted that·the public hearing be held at the next regular meeting on August 14, 1961, and that it be advertised and given publicity in the local newspapers, notices being sent to chairmen of the local committees on beach conveniences. GOULD AVENUE IMPROVEMENT City Clerk's memo referring State Highway Department's contemplated improvement of Gould Avenue to Commission and requesting Commission and City Engineer to study the effect on Hermosa Beach and to prepare any recormnendations deemed advisable. , Mr. Stevens briefly discussed what was proposed, and on motion by comm. Black, seconded by Con:un. Hales, it was unanimously agreed to refer this item to the next regular meeting of the Conunission. Letter dated June IQ, 1961, from Simon Eisner & Associates, and letter dated June 23, 1961, from City Manager Harris to Mr. Eisner, were read by the secretary, received and filed by unanimous vote. Announcement of City Council's re-appointment of Comm. Johnson for four years from July 1, 1961, was made. The Commission was asked to consider proposed offstreet parking for Mro Ed Walker, Bay Cities Taxi, 1099 Pier Avenue, Lots 55 and 56, Hermosa Heights (Hiss) Tract, Mr. Walker proposing to roof over a 23x361 space presently used for parking and car repair. It was unanimously agreed to accept the plan as submitted with no additional parking required and that an affidavit be filed with the Building Department that there would be no garage doors l'i: 7din t be used solely for repairing and parking taxicabs. . lf'1 / ADJOURNMENT at 11:25 p.m. ~
7/10/61 BEACH CONVENIENCE FACILITIES COMMITTEE An analysis of reports from the Citizens Advisory Cormnittee, the James Clemence Committee and the David Wilkinson Connnittee shows a strong tendency toward the following points: 1. Toilet facilities are a definite need and urgency, but these facilities should be restricted gb the pier section of our beach. It is unanimously agreed that the south end of our beach can be taken care of by the available facilities at the lifeguard headquarters. The north end will be convenienced when the toilet facilities now planned are constructed in conjunction with Manhattan Beach. 2~· Drinking fountains along the beach are a needed facility and can be provided at a nominal expen~e to the city. The number of fountains needed was not brought out in the reports, but indications from other beach cities who have already provided such facilities show that one every 1000 feet is desirable. <l~t ~y s mitted, "fP-/iJ-e.... . No le, Chairman JBN:r