Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout(HIC)_(Minutes)_(November 9, 1978)MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE HERMOSA IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION HELD IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, ON NOVEMBER 9, 1978 Meeting called to order by Chmn. Foreman at 8:00 pm ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman Conm. Grimshaw Ed King, Staff APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chmn. Foreman requested to hold over approval of the minutes of October 3, 1978. so ordered. comm. Freeland made the following correction to the October 17, 1978 minutes: Page five (5), 412 Strand, vote to read Comm. Freeland abstained. Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Freeland, to approve the October 17, 1978 minutes as corrected. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw HIC 78-5 RESOLUTION Comm. Hendersen read the resolution. Motion by Corrm. Freeland, seconded by Comm Shiffer, to approve the HIC 78-5 Resolution. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION ITEMS comm. Freeland felt that several items under Commissioner's Items did not involve the members of the audience. Chmn. Foreman disagreed. She added that the Commission's primary function was the Corrrnissioner''s Items. Mr. King noted that the items were usually brief and informative. M9tion by Comm. Freeland to place Section 3, Design Review and Section 4, Sign Review before Section 1, Improvement Commission Items. The motion failed to receive a second. Trash Subcommittee Report Mr. King explained that the Commission has been working on a centralized trash container program .for the downtown area in order to meet the March, 1979 date for required enclosed trash containers. He reported that the subcommittee, composed of members of the Improvement Commission, the City Council, the Chamber of Corrmerce and BF! had met on "=~ October 31st. He noted that letters had been sent to businesses infonnaing them of the program. H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED Beautification Awards -·Nominee November 9, 1978 1831 Monterey Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Shiffer, to grant an award for design. AYes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm.Grimshaw Sign Terminology Mr. King felt it would be appropriate to discuss the Sign Terminology and Sign Percentages later in the agenda. Chmn. Foreman suggested discussing them under Commissioner's Items. So Ordered. Chmn. Foreman explained that the Improvement Corrmission acts as a recommending body to the City Council. She said that the Commission recommends anything that needs improvement. She encouraged the audience to contact Mr. King about any improvement su.ggestions. Motion by Chmn. Foreman, seconded by Comm. Hendersen, to request that the City Council consider an ordinance prohibiting windows from being opened out onto sidewalks. Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: DESIGN REVIEW 19 Pier Avenue Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Freeland Comm. Grimshaw Request by Southland Development Company of 22850 Crenshaw, Torrance, for sign and design review. chmn. Foreman asked if the sign will be on the mansard roof. The applicant replied yes. Mr. Freese commented on the bright colors. He asked if the sign would be burnished. The applicant said no. Chmn. Foreman asked if there was any signing proposed for the rear door. The applicant explained that it would not be used as a common entrance. Chmn. Foreman asked about the danger of the windows opening out onto the alley. The applicant noted that the windows orginally opened in; but approval had been given by Bill Grove for the windows to open out only 3 inches past the bricks. He added that the windows are cank, louvered and side mounted. Mr. King said that it was his understanding that the windows could not open over public right of way. Chmn Foreman commented on the liability for both the Cantina and the City. She ~ recommended that they not open beyond public right of way. She asked what was planned directly inside the windows. The applicant said it would be a seating area. H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED November 9, 1978 Page 3 chmn. Foreman commented that it was nice to have the sign and design review presented at the same time. Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Shiffer, to approve the signa,d design request with the stipulation that the windows do not open past the bricks (the exterior wall} on Beach Drive. Ayes: Noes: Absent: 441-31st Street Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw Request by Michael Sanders of 3130 Hermosa Avenue for a second story addition. Comm. Freese asked if there would be any landscaping. The applicant said yes. Motion by Comm. Hendersen, seconded by Comm. Shiffer, to approve as submitted. Ayes: Noes: Absent: 762 Bayview Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Conm. Grimshaw Chmn. Foreman suggested holding over the review until the end of the design reviews because the applicant was not present. So Ordered. 2907 Braeholm Place Request for a second story addition. Motion by Comm. Shiffer, seconded by Comm. Freese to approve as submitted. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw 1097-1099 Aviation Blvd. Request by Atanas Golakoff for stucco rehabilitation and a new tile mansard roof. Chm~. Foreman expressed concern about where the sign would be placed. She asked how many offices there would be. The applicant said that there would be 3 or 4 offices. He added that ::.he was not planning the signing now. Chmn Foreman said there did not appear to be any room for signing except on the roof. Comm. Shiffer suggested that signing could be placed between the tops of the windows and the bottom of the roof. Comm. Freese explained to the applicant that the Commissioners were concerned because roof signs have proven not to be very effective in the past. Chmn. Foreman said it would be much better for the appearance of the remodel to have ~/ all the signing approved at one time. She asked if the applicant had a set of plans. ' . H~I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED November 9, 1978 Mr, King noted that the Building Department had requested more information. Shiffer said he would like to see some plans to scale. Page 4 Comm. Comm. Freeland asked Mr. Golakoff if he had a contractor. Mr. Golakoff said the contractor was supposed to have given him sketches of what it would look like, but did not. Comm. Freeland asked Mr. Golakoff if it would be too much of an inconvenience for him to bring back drawings to the Commission. Mr. Golakoff agreed to come back to the November 21st meeting. Chmn. Foreman said that the request would be continued until the November 21st meeting so that a scale drawing could be presented. So ordered. 3205 Hermosa Avenue Request by Robert Stroyke for roof modifications. Motion by Comm. Shiffer, seconded by Comm. Freese to approve as requested. Ayes: Noes: Absent Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw 936 Hermosa Avenue Request by Hans Hoff of 2951 La Carlita Place, Hermosa Beach, for a commercial building. Chmn. Foreman asked the applicant if he had any plans for signing. Mr. Hoff said no. Comm. Shiffer asked how many tenants there would be. Mr. Hoff replied five on the first floor and four on the second. Chmn. Foreman asked if there were plans for any freestanding signs. Mr. Hoff said no. Chmn. Foreman said that the architects usually provide space for signing on the drawings. Mr. Hoff said he had no plans at this time. Chmn. Foreman noted that the plans do indicate space for signing. Mr. Hoff said his idea of signing would be burnt wood type of signing. Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Shiffer, to approve the design as submitted. Ayes: Noes: Absent.: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw Chmn. Foreman reminded Mr. Hoff that when the signing is planned, he will have to come back to the Improvement Commission for approval. 218 -28th Street Request for remodel. The applicant was not present. chmn. Foreman asked if there were any drawings. Mr. King said that he made the decision -"-..__/ to accept photos since the Building Department did not require drawings for this project. chmn. Foreman suggested holding over the review until the end of the agenda because the Commissioners had questions about the color and the shakes. So ordered# H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED 963 -15th Place November 9, 1978 Page 5 Request by Philip Freeman of 3629 West 181st Street Torrance, for a single family dwelling. Comm. Freese corrunented that he was pleased that the design had been carried out on all four sides. Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Shiffer, to approve as submitted. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw Chmn. Foreman complimented Mr. Freeman on the set of plans. 32 -9th Street Request by Russell Keldorf, Architect, for enclosure of an existing open area along the northern elevation. Mr. King noted that there were no slides of the property due to a staff error. Mr. Keldorf explained that the roof line will match the existing and the same shingles wi 11 be used. Motion by Comm. Shiffer, seconded by Comm. Hendersen, to approve the request as submitted. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw 236 -27th .Street This request for a single family dwelling was given conceptual approval at the October 3, 1978 meeting on the condition that the texture finish and landscaping plans be brought back for review. Request for final approval. Motion by Corrun. Shiffer, seconded by Comm. Freeland, to approve the final plans. Ayes: Noes: Absent: SIGN REVIEW 517 Pier Avenue Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw Mr. King explained that the project site is in the C-2 zone. He said that roof signs are allowed to project out in C-3 zones but the code does not specify that roof signs can project in C-2 zones. Mr. King said it would be up to the Improvement Commission to interpret. He added that the proposed sign might be considered a combination sign. He further explained that a combination sign consists of any combination of projection, pole or roof sign. The applicant explained that the problem is that no one can see the existing sign. . . • H. I. C. MINUTES CONTINUED November 9, 1978 Page 6 He felt it would help to turn the sign perpendicular to the street. Chmn. Foreman noted that the sign had previously been approved with the stipulation that no more than 4 inches separate the roof from the bottom of the sign. She added that the sign now appeared to be 4 feet from the roof. Chmn. Foreman suggested projecting the sign from the front of the building. She suggested a double faced vertical sign. She felt this would prevent conflicts with other signing. The applicant asked for a continuance so that he could have new drawings made. So ordered. 316 -Pier Avenue Chmn. Foreman suggested holding over this sign review until the November 21st meeting because of questions about the colors. So ordered. 1200 Hermosa Avenue Request by Ed Vincent for 2 wall signs Mr, King explained that review and possible approval of this sign request in no way indicates a City approval of the existing operation and use. He noted that the proposed wall signs in addition to the existing signs would total over 100% of the allowable signage and would require a variance. Chmn. Foreman asked if the total signing would total more than 40% of the facia. Mr. King said it would depend on the determination of where the second story begins. Comm. Freeland asked if there are other businesses on the second story. Mr. Vincent said yes. Comm. Freeland asked if the total signing was figured for the total area. Mr. King explained that if signing were approved, any signing requested by the businesses on the second story would bring the total over the allowable signa ge. Mr. Vincent explained that he wanted to give the building continuity by covering the existing plywood with signing. Chmn. Foreman and Comm. Freese both expressed concern about the use of green and orange. Mr. Vincent said that these colors are used inside the building. Mr. Rosenberger of 515 Hollowell, stated concern about the colors and size of the signing. He felt this request would not integrate with the design of the building. He said that in the past the building has been subdued and elegant. Chmn. Foreman agreed with Mr. Rosenberger and added that this is one of the oldest buildings in Hermosa Beach. She noted that it was initially planned and approved as a unit. Motion by Comm. Freese, seconded by Comm. Shiffer not to grant a variance. H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED November 9, 1978 Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw The variance was denied, because it exceeds the allowable signage. Page 7 Comm. Shiffer suggested the applicant design a wood sign similar to the Hermosa Beach sign and cover the existing plywood with a nice piece of wood. Chmn. Foreman felt the green was in keeping with the Irish, the existing signs and the awnings. She added that green was the color used at the time it was designed. comm. Freese criticized the posters that had been tacked up all over, publicizing Shenanigans. Chmn. Foreman added that the posters are against the law. Mr. Vincent said that he was not responsible for them. He said they were probably put up by the musicians. Chmn. Foreman said that the signs represent Shenanigans. Mr. Vincent said he would like to come back to the next meeting. Chmn. Foreman advised him to submit another design.to Mr. King. 433 Pier Avenue Request for one roof and one window sign. Comm. Freeland asked if it was a flat sign. Mr. King said yes. Chmn. Foreman asked about the window copy. Mr. King said that it had not been determined at this time. Motion by Comm. Freeland, seconded by Comm. Shiffer to approve the request with the stipulation that administrative approval be given on the window copy. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw 218 -28th Street Motion by Chmn. Foreman to continue this review to the November 21st meeting. So ordered. 726 Bayview The applicant was not present. Comm. Freeland asked why so many applicants were not present. Mr. King explained that the application says that they are not required to be present, but advises the applicant-to be present and that, requests will be continued if there are any questions. Motion by Chmn. Foreman, seconded by Comm. Hendersen to approve the request with the recommendation that stained walnut trim be carried on all elevations except the trangular window on the east elevation. Ayes: Noes: • _; Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED STAFF REPORTS November 9, 1978 Page 8 Mr. King noted that Mr. Bacon's appeal is scheduled for November 14th City Council meeting. He noted that at the previous City Council Meeting he had been directed to submit a definition for comprehensive sign and street frontage. Mr. King noted that a memo had been sent to the City Manager stating that the subconnnittee still felt that the original decision was valid. comm. Hendersen read the definition of street frontage and the definition of a comprehensive sign plan. Street Frontage-shall mean the linear distance of a lot line,separating the lot from the street or highway. Where such site is abutted by more than one street, each street will qualify as frontage of the following condision exists: There are entrances and exits opening onto the street which are open to the public during business hours. Comprehensive Sign Plan-(To be required on multi-unit commercial developments of three or more units~. The applicant shall submit a sign plan for the development showing the location, size, copy and color for all signs proposed for the site; the sign plan shall include a perspective rendering, showing all signs in relation to the structures(3). Motion by Comm. Shiffer, seconded by Comm. Freese to approve the definitions as read. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Comm. Freese, Shiffer, Hendersen, Freeland, Chmn. Foreman None Comm. Grimshaw Mr. King noted the memo on allowable sign area percentages included in the packets. He explained that the percentage of maximum allowable applied to what had been approved. COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS Comm. Freeland said he had been asked by Councilwoman Tyson for ideas for downtown improve- ments. Corrm. Freeland said he suggested that the downtown area be considered a unique area. ·He stated that there are hardly any zoning or signing restrictions on the downtown area. Most areas are zoned c~l; some parts zoned C-2, while others are zoned C-3. Chmn. Foreman commented that the City lacks a plan for the downtown area. She added that it is about 50% residential also. Mr. King noted that the Downtown Committee had their first meeting. He said that about eight business people attended. Chmn. Foreman noted illegal signing; the Penzoil sign at 2nd and Hermosa and the flags on the condominiums by the apartments. Mr. King said he had talked to the man about the Penzoil sign and it would be removed. Chmn. Foreman said she would like to see the construction and real estate sign eliminated on construction sites. She said that some roof sighs are as big as billboards. She added that the code defines billboards as off site sighs. . ·" _,. H.I.C. MINUTES CONTINUED November 9, 1978 Mr. King noted that one of the priorities of the subcommittee was to establish a maximum on size of signs. Chmn. Foreman said the Coordinating Council is going to assist with the March Beautiful program. She noted that there is no money available for plaques. Page 9 Mr. King suggested that each commissioner bring ideas for the March Beautiful program to the next meeting so that the Corrmission can make recommendations to the City Council. The Commissioners discussed the problems involved in reference to planting trees along the streets. Mr. King said that FAU money is available for sidewalk repairs. He suggested that it would be ideal to cut in for trees at the time that sidewalk repairs are made. Mr. King noted that the Commission tradtionally does not have a second meeting in December. Mr. King noted that the proposed criteria recommended by the Improvement Commission would be on the City Council Agenda. Chmn. Foreman commented that the chain has been added to Lot C. Motion by Comm. Hendersen, seconded by Comm. Shiffer to adjourn the meeting. So ordered. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 pm CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes were approved by the Hennosa Improvement COlmlissl non November 2 1978 ~ /~..::::..a.,..:..4.L....L.&...L.;,--=-r-~~~,?-?"tc~ ~---''----""~U-...... -~----__,;:;..~..,__;;:; PAMELA HENDERSEN, SECRETARY /;;; -,,__ 7 r