Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1983_03_15MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON MARCH 15, 1983, IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 7:30. Meeting called to order at 7:30 P.M. By Chairman Peirce ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cornms. Brown, Peirce, -Shapiro, Smith ABSENT: Cornms. Izant, Loosli, Strohecker ALSO PRESENT: Pamela Sapetto, Planning Director; Alfred Mercado, Planning Aide; Mr. Castenada, TDC Planning APPROVAL OF MINUTES Comm Smith pointed out that on page 2 the word "proviso" was mis­ spelled. Motion by Chrmn Peirce, seconded by Comm Shapiro, to approve the minutes noting the above correction. AYES: Comms. Brown, Peirce, Shapi,ro, Smith NOES: None GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE REQUEST: STORER CABLE Mr. Mercado gave the staff report. He stated that the site for this proposal is one where the land use element of the general plan and the zoning ordinance are inconsistent in what they allow as permit­ ted uses. The zoning ordinance designates this site as manufacturing while the general plan designates this site as open space. He stated further that the subject property is presently occupied by a commercial development and has been utilized for cornmericial pur­ poses for several years. The implementation of the proposed actions would not introduce any change to the physical environment. He added that under the present zoning, industrial uses are permitted. Uses of this intensity may adversely affect adjacent residential and pub­ lic uses. The proposed C-2 zoning and general plan commercial would provide greater compatibility with adjacent development. Furthermore, state law requires that the city zoning ordinances be consistent with local general plans. He stated that with respect to the conditional use permit for the 'l00' tower, it is not clear if the tower is an allowable use in a C2 zone. However, there is a provision in the Zoning Code that grants to the Planning Commission the authority to approve uses, which in the commission's opinion are not obnoxious, hazardous or detrimental to the welfare of the district, etc. He added that it should be considered whether the exi~.:1:!ence of such a tower will diminish land value of the surrounding properties, and thereby unjustly affect substantial vested rights of such property owners. PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 He stated that it was staff's recommendation that the proposed general plan amendment and zone change be approved and that the request for a conditional use permit for the 100 foot tower be considered through the authority granted under Sec. 800-C. He added that the 100' tower, when considered by the environmental review board, was issued a negative declaration. Which in essence means that no measurable adverse environmental impact will be felt. Therefore, the Commission's decision on the tower should be guided by its compatability with its environment and its contribution to the community. In answer to Comm Smith's question Ms. Sapetto stated that in the general plan staff found that as far as open space was concerned, it -appeared that most of the open space areas were adjacent to schools. In answer to a question from the audience, Chrmn Peirce stated that the applicant's proposal ·.was to change the general plan from open space to commercial, and the zoning from manufacturing to general commercial, C-2 Public hearing was opened by Chrmn Peirce. He added that the hear­ ing would take testimony on ·the zone change and general plan, then if that passes, he will reopen the hearing and take testimony on the Conditional Use Permit. The commission agreed that the two issues should be dealt with separately. Ron Miller, Phoenix Arizona, representing the applicant Storer Cable stated that at the request of the planning staff the applicant hired an independant planning consultant to do a study of the property as to what the issues were relative to rezoning the property from a manufacturing to a commercial zone, and changing the general plan to a commercial plan. He added that the applicant had contracted with TDC; with the planning staff setting the requirements of the study and the applicant provid i ngthe economic resources. From the report TDC indicated that there would be no major negative impact from re­ zoning the parcel, as its existing use will not change. In answer to. ·Chrmn Peirce's question, Mr. Miller stated that the con­ struction of the tower was the reason why applicant was requesting the zone change Wilma Bird, 1152 7th Street, Hermosa Beach, stated that the reason for the open ·space zoning was that the School Board had talked about condemning that property and taking it to enlarge the Valley Vista School. The School District intended to use that area. However, now since the District is not going to use it, it doesn't make any difference what it is called, except in what you permit next to the mobile park. For example, manufacturing is noisy, with commericial being less so. Public hearing was closed by Chrmn Peirce. PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 Chrmn Peirce stated that the report from TDC was not specifically labled as being from the applicant, and said that in the future it would be a good idea to designate that with a cover letter or some other form of identification. Comm Smith asked if the School District had been notified of this hearing. Chrmn Peirce added that it would help the Commission if in the future staff would provided them with more information re noticing. Ms. Sapetto -responded by saying that the reason why -the list of persons notified for hearings is not included in the packet is that it is usually 10 to 15 pages long. Comm. Smith stated that it is not necessary that the Commission be given the entire list, but that the particular noticing procedure followed should be contained in the body of the staff report, so the commission would know and could say with confidence to the public that the proper noticing procedqre has been followed. He felt that this would save everyone a lot of time. Ms. Sapetto agreed. Ms. Sapetto stated in response to Comm Smith's question,as to whether the School District had been notified of this hearing, that they had not been noticed. She explained that the reason was that according to case law, the courts have established and _defined proper noticing as that noticing that is prepared from the tax rolls. The School District is not on the tax rolls, nor is any public agency. Chrmn Peirce stated that if the School District were riot right next to the property in question, noticing to them would not be as ger­ mane, but since it is right next to it, he felt the District has a positive interest in this case. He recommended that the District be noticeq and that the hearing be continued to the next meeting. He apologized to the applicant for the d~lay. Mr. Miller suggested that since there is an appeal time, that the commission come to ·a decision tonight, and then the District could appeal the decision if they were opposed. Ms. Sapetto stated that that would cause a problem, since if the applicant is accused of de­ fective noticing it invalidates the whole process; if the Planning Commission review is not conducted in a legal format, it invalidates the proceedings. Ms. Sapetto added, in response to Comm Shapiro's question, that technically this was legal notification because of the use of the tax rolls. However, if there is a question as to whether legal notification took place, and since the District is the nextdoor neighbor, it could jeopardize the procedure. She added that through the Environmental Review process, the District got a copy of the EIR, but that would be indirect notification. In answer to Comm Brown's question, Ms. Sapetto stated that all pro­ perty owners within a 300' radius of the proposed project need to receive mailed notification. PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 Mr. Miller _stated that Storer Cable is not trying to get around notification and wants to work with the community on this. Comm Smitl:,1 stated that in regards to the staff report, he had sug­ gested during the last discussion on this item that staff include in its report an analysis with respect to whether or not Storer is meeting the public access provisions of their contract with the city and whether or not, in staff's opinion, they are providing a satis­ factory level of service to the citizens. He also wanted to know if Storer would be able to pass on an increase to its consumers tied to this particular capital improvement. He stated that he would like to be relatively sure Storer is in compliance with the existing agree­ ment when voting on this issue or any other issue related to them. REVISED HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN Mr. Casteneda gave the staff report. He stated that the material presented ton:Lqht includecl another sect:Lon of the housing element toqether w:Lth backqround information on bootlegs that had been re­ quested by the Commission two '"t.meetings ago. He stated that first the housing program is intended to provide an opportunity to describe the specifications that the city intends to undertake in order to address the community housing needs. The section dealing with this topic is required by State Law. However, the items which are included in that topic are left up to the dis­ cretion of the city. Overall what is included in this section is to demonstrate that the city is making the maximum practical efforts in view of resources, etc., to the housing need. Briefly, staff has divided the material into 3 sections; housing improvement, housing production, and the affordability issue. Many of the specific items are on-going, in the sense that they are already part of the city's mode of operation and were included to demonstrate that the city is doing something to address the particular issue. He continued by saying that the first of these sub-sections is on land use controls, page 4, re housing improvement incentives. This is a summary of what ways, other than pouring money into housing, that is available to encourage improvement. One suggestion is that since people don't know exactly what some of the processes are or the exact procedures, that perhaps a booklet explaining the impact of zoning, etc., could broaden the scope of information to the con­ sumer. Another suggestion is the use of the administrative variance in certain situations, i.e., dealing with setback requirements, et. The administrative variance cuts down time and effort, in the sense that notification is done by the city. And only adjacent property owners, and not those within the 300' radius, are notified. Finally, we want to link these to the potential for a residential rehab pro­ gram through the use of block grant funds. He added that another item which has been discussed before is deal­ ing with where the city stands in terms of the quality of housing; how much is deteriorating, what are the conditions dealing with boot- PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 legs, etc. ONe of the future actions included for consideration is to take the time over the next period of years or soorer to get basic information on the quality of existing stock. Another po­ tential action dealing with residential rehabilatation is that the city may sometime in the future, through the use of block grant funds, make resources available for handyman programs or low interest loans to facilitate housing. With respect to the bootlegs, staff has included a copy of the memo that was transmitted to Commission and Council by the Building De­ partment, which provides background information on the issue. Staff also included a section from an early draft that went to the Commis­ sion and Council about a year ago dealing with the topic. Finally, for the purposes of illustration, the fact that this is an issue which many coastal communities are dealing with, we included material from the City of Laguna Beach. Because no new policy directions were established at the joint work session of the Commission and the Council in July, essentially staff has reiterated what the city is currently doing and provided some additional direction in the sense of streamlining. He continued by saying that staff indicated that perhaps to devote sufficient time to this particular topic, the Commission may want to deal with this at a public hearing and perhaps bring in the Building Department and City Attorney to explore ways of accomplishing the issues in the city. He stated that the second maj.or category deals with the amount of new housing developments. Staff indicated some of the ways and means in which the city currently addresses this. Briefly, staff indicated the close relationship between the land use element and the housing element in terms of amount of new housing concerned. The housing element should not depart from what is in the land use element, it should reinforce it. He added that with regard to a potential action in terms of environ­ mental assessment, that policy which was included in an earlier sec­ tion dealing with a preference for environmental review of signifi­ can~ programs at the neighborhood level, should receive priority. There should be a preference to get involved in residential develop­ ment when they have significant impact on a neighborhood scale. He stated that with respect to growth forecasts, staff is attempt­ ing to develop a program action which would address the amount of new housing that could be built, starting from the neighborhood level on. He added that new stats and numbers will be out around April 8 and that means that at that point it would be transmitted to the city for review. There is a 90 day review period once they are approved for distribution, then the city will have three months in which to react. As soon as those numbers become available staff and Commision should discuss it and see what its relationship is to the city. The next item deals with senior housing site availablity, and it takes credit for past actions the city has taken in devoting re­ sources to this area. PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 Chrmn Peirce pointed out that there was some information missing re the second bullet on page 7, which would have explained that bullet item. Mr. Castenada stated that that information spoke to the various residential categories in the zoning ordinance together with mobile home park zoning which was added last year. It indicates that there is a broad range of housing allowed in the community, from sing:E­ family to existing mobile homes. Chrmn Peirce stated that the land use element has a number of 10,225 units and suggested that there should be a similar number reflected in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Castenada stated that the information should have been con­ tained in the zoning ordinance, as well as additional tests outlin­ ing the difference between the numbers of units that would be allow­ ed under one system versus the other. Staff is assuming that the Commission has a preference, or will in the future, on which number they want to use. Mr. Castenada continued by saying that the next category deals with housing affordability and assistance, and staff attempted to re­ flect the latest decisions and interpretations of the Commission Council, and staff. Staff indicated by way of illustration, it may be possible to look at the minimum floor space requirement, and, under select circumstances lower that requirement re senior housing, etc. The gist of it would be to periodically look at the develop­ ment standards and perhaps modify and revise and upgrade them. He stated re existing affordability, under mobile home park zones, what staff reflected is that the city did undertake, after a number of meetings with Council and Commission, a revision for both the land use element and the zoning ordinance, to install a mobile home park zone. He added that the next item deals with a coastal issue, which in­ dicates what is feasible in providing housing for low and moderate income households in new developments. What has :.been suggestzed 4's the adoption of feasibility guicelines to test whether or not it would be practical to develop low and moderate income housing. Staff has attempted to reflect where the city stands on this issue at this time, but the details have not been considered by the Council or Commission as yet. Chrmn Peirce stated that he understood that the city can offer but does not have to offer incentives in providing affordable housing within new housing developments. Comm Smith added that the law states that cities have to offer something but leave the levels of what is offered up to the city. Having a variance procedure in it­ self satisfies the minimum of the law. Mr. Castenada added that the material staff has reviewed seems to verify the statement that is in the draft, and some of it is up to interpretation by staff and attorneys. The housing element recog- PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 nizes that there are specific actions, steps that could be taken which have yet to be developed by either the Commission or the council. He suggested that this topic should be included but should be revised because staff doesn't want to leave the im­ pression that the city is committed to density bonuses in the coastal zone, if that is not the case. Chrmn Peirce agreed. Comm Smith aBked what happened with the shared housing program allocation of $S,OOO which ended in 1982. He wanted to know if there were any measured results re benefits to senior citizens and if there is that information should be included in the ele­ ment. Mr. Castenada and Chrmn Peirce agreed. Mr. Castenada continued by saying that the next item deals with senior citizens' housing program and the several issues related to it. Staff has tried to summarize where the program stands and indicate that it is continually under stUQY but has not been imple­ mented. Chrmn Peirce stated that on page 13 under this topic, the second sentance referring to "in-lieu fees" that Commission had recommend­ ed that that be deleted and he believed Council had concurred on that. Mr. Castenada stated that the next item deals with the shared equity program and it deals more with the moderate income issue as a result of the Agreement, i.e. for certain portions of those projects to be sold to moderate income households and perhaps through the shared equity program. Ms. Sapetto stated that the Appletree proje~t has gone thit"mugh and possibly the I.a Playa project has filed afinal. She added that the finals go to the City council and not to the Commission. Mr. Castenada explained that the affordable housing fund is like some of the other actions, in that the Council by resolution has estab­ lished a fund. There is an account in the City Treasury with approx­ imately $50,000, with more to be allocated to that fund by way of the Commodore Project. The resolution indicates uses for the fund, basic­ ally in the area of housing. The Council requested and has obtained from staff a report indicating other potential uses of this fund in an attempt to get insight on uses other than housing. Ms. Sapetto added that the last programs that have been approved deal mostly with community center improvement, acquistion of open space, etc. She continuted by saying the uses for the fund were set up by resolution so the resolution can be changed. However, any changes should be within the relm of housing because the way the funds were acquired were for the purposes of housing. Funds could be used for peripheral types of housing issues was the last determination by the Council. Mr. Castenada stated that the last item speaks to block grant funds with potential allocation for reducing the costs for new moderate income housing. PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 Mr. Castenada stated in conclusion that staff would like to con­ tinue the housing element until the meeting of the 19th and try to pull together all of the various comments that have been made on all the other sections, together with this section, and produce a fairly complete package from beginning to end to be discussed at that time. Then, depending on Commission's desires, either continue to work on the element or have a work session with the CitY Council and citizens. Chrmn Peirce opened the public hearing. Wilma Bird, 1152 17th street, Hermosa Beach, suggested that a real study be done, block by block, as to where there is affordable hous­ ing in Hermosa. She added that Redondo Beach has a rule that no single-family dwelling can be removed unless it is replaced by the same. She felt that Hermosa has more than its share of affordable housing in the illegal units, and the city shouldn't plan more until they know exactly what the city has now. She didn't think that block grant funds should be used in this way. In response Chrmn Peirce stated that oneof the items in the plan is to initiate~ survey the quality and affordability of housing in the city. Public Hearing was closed, there being no more public testimony. COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS Ms. Sapetto stated that the Mayor suggested that the Planning Commission sub-committee meet with the Council sub-committee on the Seaview Inn property on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. Chrmn Peirce and Comm Brown stated that Thursday evening would be good for them. Ms. Sapetto suggested that the meeting be at 6:30, since the Biltmore site committee is meeting on that night also. She add­ ed that she can verify that time with Comm Izant. Assuming that he can make it at 6:30 on March 24th, there will be a meeting between the Commission sub-committe and Council sub-committee re the proposed zone change on the Seaview Inn property and any other items that might be on the agenda. Comm Smith stated that there is still the issue of the supposed lack of specific standards re condo conversions which should be discussed. Ms. Sapetto responded that Staff had suggested that a workshop be held on the 8th or 20th of April to discuss that issue. comm Smith stated that on the housing element there are two issues he would like considered with respect to the particular portion dis­ cussed this evening; one being the use of housing affordability fund to provide interest free loans to owners of bootlegs to help them bring it up to code. Two, that the city explore with the South Bay Board of Realtors some ethical comrnittrnent not to sell buildings that include bootlegs, and perhaps even encourage the owners to report them to the city. He added that the people who are in con­ trol of property are real estate people and they know more about PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -March 15, 1983 property in the city than does the city. Since they are ethical people, this might be a good recourse for the city in terms of ex­ ploring the housing stock. Chrmn Peirce agreed with this suggestion. Ms. Sapetto stated that the traffic sub-committee did not meet to­ night because the Council is now deliberating about removal of the highway parking again. since there has been some discussion with Manhattan Beach re their support of the LACTC ~tudy. Th ~ LACTC study is a stud.y for the use of the railroad right of way as a transportation system linking the two cities to El Segundo. She continued by saying that Manhattan Beach has in the past opposed that link. However, Manhattan Beach conceded they would support the consideration of that railroad for a corridor for a transpor­ tation use, if the city of Hermosa Beach will consider removing the lanes on PCH on the south end of town. This topic will be discussed at the Chamber retreat on Friday. So the sub~committee delayed further action until after the meeting. Chrmn Peirce asked to be supplied with the materials to be used at the retreat which deal with various community planning issues, as well as a report as to what took place. Ms.Sapetto replied that she had planned to do that and to present the information in the packet at the next meeting. Motion by Comm Smith to adjourn. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes were approved at a regulat meeting o f the Planning Commission held on the day of _________ , 1983. ------ DATE ,lrf A I (_ '