HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1983_04_19MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA
BEACH HELD ON APRIL 19, 1983 IN CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Comms. Brown, Loosli, Peirce, Shapiro, Strohecker
ABSENT: Comms. Izant, Smith
ALSO PRESENT: Alfred Mercado, Planning Aide
APPROVAL OF MINUTES -MEETING OF APRIL 5, 1983
The Commission noted the following corrections:
Page 1, approval of minutes: Commissioner Strohecker should be
listed as abstaining from voting.
Page 5, correct Roy Shubert's address to read "553" rather than
"5531".
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE moved, seconded by COMMISSIONER SHAPIRO
THAT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 5, 1983, BE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Comm. Brown, Loosli, Peirce, Shapiro, Strohecker
None
Comm. Izant, Smith
RESOLUTIONS P.C. 83-8 & P.C. 83-9
P.C. 83-8
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN BY CHANGING THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 1529 VALLEY DRIVE FROM OPEN SPACE TO COMMERCIAL,
AND A ZONE CHANGE FROM MANUFACTURING TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL
P.C. 83-9
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 2-UNIT CONDOMINIUM, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
AND PARCEL MAP NO. 15562 LOCATED AT 732 MANHATTAN AVENUE
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE moved, seconded by COMMISSIONER BROWN
TO APPROVE RESOLUTIONS P.C. 83-8 & P.C. 83-9, AS PRESENTED
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Comm. Brown, Loosli, Peirce, Shapiro~ Strohecker
None
Comm. Izant, Smith
-1-
REVISED HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE said that the Commission has been working on the
draft Housing Element for a number of months and the document before
the Commission this evening is a compilation of all of the Commis~
sion's comments incorporated into the framework of the Housing
Element plan which was set up about one year ago.
Inasmuch as the document is 27 pages long and contains quite a bit
of material, CHAIRMAN PEIRCE recommended that the Commission receive
the report from staff and then continue the public hearing to the
next meeting to give the Commission time to review the report.
There being no objection, it was so ORDERED.
Ralph Casteneda reviewed the draft Housing Element with the Commission.
He agreed that final approval should be continued to the next meeting,
since staff has just received the latest SCAG figures on projected
growth in the community (regional share figures). He said he plans
to prepare a separate memo on this t0pic alone since it is a v~ry
critical issue with regards to the Housing Element as well as the
Land Use Element.
Mr. Casteneda highlighted the changes made since the last meeting
which incorporates the commission's input from the last two to three
meetings.
Page 6, regaring "numbers" in the document, an attempt has been made
to make clear that this is an estimate of 400-500 units rather than
trying to imply that this is the actual figure. Staff feels this
will address the Commission's concerns in terms of being too specific
by qualifying it in terms of an estimate rather than a specific
number.
With regard to new housing construction, SCAG has revised their
figures downward from 765 to 477, which is a substantial decline,
for Hermosa Beach. This may reflect the work that the Commission
started about a year ago directing staff to work with SCAG to
reconcile some figures.
Page 10, Housing Constraints, population density has been shown as
compared to Los Angeles County.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE suggested that this figure might be deceiving since
much of L.A. County is vacant land. He suggested comparing it to
another city, rather than the county.
Mr. Casteneda said he could compare it with the City of Los Angeles
rather than the County, and the Commission agreed that this was a
good idea.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE asked if there was documentation in the city files
which reflect the interpretation of the Planning Commission (such
as minutes) 0£ the density categories being 13.1-25 as medium density
and 25.1-40 as high density.
-2-
Mr. Casteneda said that the Commission had discussed this at previous
meetings and it should be in the minutes of the meetings.
COMMISSIONER LOOSLI said there are several condominium approvals
which would reflect this interpretation, and that he believed it
was in the Local Coastal Plan.
Page 13, Objectives, Mr. Castenada said it was desirable to stay away
from using specific figures in the objective because the City does not
have a track record on some of these programs and some of them had not
started at all; therefore, it was really not possible for the Commission
to establish a specific target to achieve over the next five years. The
actual language of this section has been changed to delete specific
numbers and it is explained that this was done intentionally.
On page 16, specific figures have not been used, again because of the
lack of a track record.
He said there were no major changes in the Housing Program Section; it
has been reorganized and made more brief. Under Implementation of SB 626,
page 25, dealing with provision of low and moderate income housing in
the coastal zone, rather than the previous extended discussion, we have
indicated that during the next years the method of implementation will
come out, but that this housing element does not necessarily establish
that direction. A quote has been taken from that Bill that the housing
element does not need to do that. The only level of commitment is to
implementation of the law, as is interpreted at a certain point in time.
The other programs have remained the same as in the previous document.
With regard to using interest free loans in connection with bringing bootleg
units up to standard, staff is still reviewing this and will have to
contact the County and HUD, and hopes to have this information at the
next meeting.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE asked if there would be an appendix to the Element which
would include data to substantiate the statements made in the Element.
Mr. Casteneda said that he could have this ready for review at the next
meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:55 P.M. No one wished to speak. PUBLIC
HEARING CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MAY 3, 1983, at 7:55 P.M.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE suggested that the staff forward a copy of the proposed
document to the City Council in their next information packet. THERE
BEING NO OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
SIX MONTH TIME EXTENSION ON TRACT .MAP NO. 42255 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR FIVE UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1442-48 MANHATTAN AVENUE
This is a request for a six-month time extension on the validity of the
tentative tract map and conditional use permit; both due to expire on
April 27, 1983.
A final map for this project is in the process of being recorded, but
will not be completed before the arrival of time constraints. Staff
recommends approval of the time extension, as requested.
-3-
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE moved, seconded by COMMISSIONER LOOSLI
TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 83-10
Ayes:
Noes:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA
BEACK APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 42255 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOCATED AT
1442-48 MANHATTAN AVENUE
Comm. Brown, Loosli, Peirce, Shapiro, Strohecker
None
Absent: Comm. Izant, Smith
TWELVE MONTH TIME EXTENSION ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 14366
AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TWO UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT
651 FOURTH STREET
This is a request for a twelve month time extension on the validity
of the tentative map and conditional use permit; both due to
expire on April 14, 1983.
A final map for this project is in the process of being recorded
but will take several months. Staff recommends approval of
the time extension, as requested.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE moved, seconded by COMMISSIONER SHAPIRO
TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 83-11
Ayes:
Noes:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF HERMOSA BEACH APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 14366 AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT LOCATED AT 651 FOURTH STREET
Comm. Brown, Loosli, Peirce, Shapiro, Strohecker
None
Absent: Comm. Izant, Smith
AMENDMENTS TO THE C-POTENTIAL ZONE
Al Mercardo gave the staff report. He stated that on March 22,
1983, the City Council adopted a resolution of intention
requesting that the Commission identify ways that are more
facilitory than presently under Section 1103 of the City Code,
in transforming C-potential land to commercially zoned land.
The rationale here is that the viability of the multi-use
corridor requires strenghtening, that commercial development
is best suited for Pacific Coast Highway, and that the existing
mechanism by which C-potential property is transformed into
commercial zoned property is not the most functional.
Mr. Mercardo outlined five scenarios in the memorandum, four
of which would amend the zoning code (Section 1103) by modifying
the process by which C-potential property is transformed to
C-zoned property.
-4-
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission reach agreement
on proposal No. 1 as having the most viable attributes, and
that a PEIR be prepared for proposal No. 1, to be forwarded
to the Board of Zoning Adjustments for review.
COMMISSIONER LOOSLI said that passing any one of these possible
alternatives would mean that the C-potential property would
become commercial whether or not they wanted to. He said that
the highway studies should be completed prior to implementation
of any of these alternatives, including No. 1., to determine
if any of the currently C-potential zoned properties should
not really be commercial and take them out of the C-potential
zone, otherwise they will become commercial.
Staff was requested to determine where the Commission is with
their study on the Highway determining which areas should be
C-potential and those that should not be.
Public hearing opened at 8:05 p.m.
Pat Rile, 725 -24th Place, asked if this would affest her
area. She also urged the Commission to review the different
projects on an individual basis.
Wilma Burt, 1152 -7th Street, asked the difference between
C-potential and Commercial. She asked if this would change
the taxes. She said the City should be careful of the depth
of the commercial zone on the east side of Pacific Coast Highway.
She also said that this plan should prohibit allowing residentially
zoned properties to be surrounded completely be commercial.
Public hearing continued to the next meeting at 8:20 p.m.
CHAIRMAN _PEIRCE requested that staff report on the past actions
taken by the Planning Commission with regard to prior studies.
So ordered.
ACTIVITIES FOR FY 1982-83 AND PRIORITIES FOR FY 1983-84
The Commission reviewed the list of current priorities and
proposed priorities for the coming fiscal year.
Chairman Peirce suggested adding to the list of suggested
priorities for this coming year, under #7 1 Transportation:
Circulation Element/Parking.
After further discussion and review ., the Commission agreed
THAT THIS LIST OF PRIORITIES BE APPROVED 1 AS AMENDED.
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE SO ORDERED.
-5-
LAND USE ELEMENT REVISIONS--UPDATE OF CITY CO UN CIL ACTIONS
The Commission reviewed the update of Council actions with
regard to a Request for Proposal (RFP) to hire an outside
consultant for the purpose of rationalizing the discrepancies
between the General Plan and Zoning.
MISCELLANEOUS
The Commission was reminded of the joint meeting with the
City Council to be held May 5, 1983.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIRMAN PEIRCE moved, seconded by COMMISSION SHAPI"RO
THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED, THE TIME BEING 8:30 P.M.
THERE BEING NO OBJECTION, IT WAS SO ORDERED BY CHAIRMAN PEIRCE.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes were approved at
a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the
3rd day of May, 1983.
~ES PEIRCE, CHAIRMAN JOEL SHAPIRO 7 SECRETARY
DATE
-6-