Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10.30.84✓ I MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1984, IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 7:30 P.M. Meeting called to order by Chmn. Izant at 7:30 P.M. Pledge of Allegiance led by Chmn. Izant. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Corrnns. Compton, Newton, Shapiro, Sheldon, Clnnn, Izant Comms, Peirce, Schulte ALSO PRESENT: Ralph Castaneda, Acting Planning Director; Kim Reardon-Crites, Planning Assistant; Linda Brown Brayton APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Connn. Sheldon, seconded by Comm. Compton, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of October 9, 1984. No objections. So ordered. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS )' Chmn. Izant noted that in Resolution P .c. 84-31 there still remained the question, of the $2000 needed to complete the land use survey, Mr. Castaneda stated that he had discussed this issue with the City Manager. They reviewed the current department budget as well as potential resources available in the community, such as the junior colleges. He felt that by reallocating funds in the budget which will not be used as originally intended, and by utilization of interns from the junior colleges, this project can be completed in a more timely manner, He therefore asked that the Planning Commission refrain from voting on P.C. 84-31 and instead to continue working with the City Manager on this issue. Chmn. Izant questioned whether the resolution still needed approval from a technical standpoint. The resolution could then be held back and not sent forward to the City Council. Motion by Comm. Compton, seconded by Comm. Shapiro, to approve Resolutions P.C. 84-30 and P.c. 84-31. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Connns, Compton, Shapiro, Sheldon, Chmn. Izant None Comm. Newton Comms. Peirce, Schulte Chmn. Izant directed staff to not forward P.C. 84-31 to the City Council at this time. ZONE CHANGE FROMM TO R-3 AT 142 ARDMORE Chmn. Izant noted that this item would be continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission so that staff can do additional work on this zone change request. Ms. Reardon-Crites suggested that this issue be continued to November 20. The applicant has been told that this issue would be heard at that time. She did note that, because of time constraints, this project has not gone through staff review. Chmn. Izant questioned whether the City has made this connnitment to the applicant. Ms. Reardon-Crites replied in the affirmative. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 ZONE CHANGE FROMM TO R-3 AT 142 ARDMORE (Cont.) PAGE 2 Public Hearing opened at 7:38 P.M : and continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission, scheduled for November 20, 1984. ZONE CHANGE AT 754 24t h PLACE FROM R-1 TO C-3 DESIGNATION Ms. Reardon-Crites gave staff report, stating that on September 20, 1984, this project was granted a negative declaration by the Environmental Review Board ind.icating that this project will have no significant adverse environmental impacts. This .project was continued to the current meeting due to an error in the noticing which listed an incorrect address for this property. Ms. Reardon-Crites stated that the applicant has asked for a zone change from R-1 to C-3. In doing research for this project, staff discovered that this property was granted a zone change from R-1 to C-3 on October 16, 1962. This was not discovered earlier for several reasons: the research for the project was being conducted on the assumption that the address listed on the application was correct, and the zoning maps still list the property as being zoned R-1. The ordinance effecting thisichange has been provided to the Planning Commission. Ms. Reardon-Crites stated that the Planning Coll!Il1ission needs to take no further action on this item. The applicant is applying for a zone change where the zone he desires is already in place; therefore, his money will be refunded. She further noted that it is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission receive and file this item. Chmn. Izant noted that it is still necessary to go through the public hearing process in this matter. Therefore, he opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 P,M. Thomas Armstrong, 1717 Via Arriba, Palos Verdes Estates, addressed the Planning Commission. Comm. Compton suggested to Mr. Armstrong that he work with those people who will be affected by this development. He felt that this would be a good-neighbor policy. Mr. Armstrong stated that the proximity of this development to R-1 is not unique in the City of Hermosa Beach. He said that these problems had their origins over 50 years ago. He did state that he is sensitive to ·the problems, though. He stated that since the.last meeting of the Planning Commission, he had written a letter to the people whose property adjoins his on the south; he has had no response from them. He also noted that he has made arrangement to discuss the project with Mr. and Mrs. De Lancey. He stressed that every effort would be made to treat his neighbors with respect and care. Public Hearing closed at 7:50 P.M, Motion by Comm. Sheldon, seconded by Comm. Compton, to receive and file this item. AYES: Comms. Compton, Newton, .Shapiro, Sheldon, Clunn. Izant NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Connns. Peirce, Schulte Comm. Shapiro questioned whether an applicant has the right to recoup any out-of-pocket expenses, such as blueprints, were this to ever happen again. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 ZONE CHANGE FROM 754 24th PLACE FROM R-1 TO C-3 DESIGNATION (Cont.) Ms. Reardon-Crites stated that she would check the policy on this. PAGE 3 Mr. Armstrong did note that he has $140 worth of glossy 8 x 10 photos that were to be presented to the Planning Commission. He noted that these are no longer of any use to him in light of what has happened. REFINED LAND USE ELEMENT SCHEDULE Mr. Castaneda gave staff report, stating that at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, it was decided to proceed on the Revised Land Use Element by focusing attention on several issues and geographic areas. In doing so, it appears beneficial that information on each issue be presented in a common fonnat. Mr. Castaneda stated that the use of a common format enables the efficient organiza­ tion of data and other materials and provides the Planning Connnission with additional knowledge of the nature of subjects to be discussed. With these considerations in mind, he presented a suggested format for review by the Planning Commission: 1. Existing Conditions: data, maps, slides, etc. 2. Future Trends: data, maps, slides 3. Previous Studies/Act~ons 4. Issue Identification 5. Land Use Alternatives: data, maps, exhibits, etc. 6, Zoning Implications 7, Comments from public on written material and presentations 8, Planning Commission Recommendations Mr. Castaneda continued by outlining the issues and their schedule for discussion by the Planning Conunission: 1. November 20 -Pacific Coast Highway/Multi-Use Corridor Discussion of the land use designations that should be applied to P.C.H, and, more specifically, the Multi-Use Corridor. The discussion will focus on the questions of land use compatibility, physical and/or market constraints on additional commercial development, nature of residential areas that are presently zoned C-Potential, and other related issues. 2, December 18 -Residential Neighborhoods 3. This session will be devoted to a discussion of the City's single-family and multi-family neighborhoods. To the extent possible, the statistical findings of potential build-out per the zoning districts will be presented. The areas of inconsistencies between the General Plan and zoning will be presented and implications on future growth discussed, Potential changes to the land use categories and zoning implications will be described. January 15 -Downtown Area Policy Plan Presentation of a status report on the Downtown Area Policy Plan. The City Council has approved the study and authorized PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 REFINED Ll.ND USE ELEMENT SCHEDULE (Cont.) work to proceed after the December 11th special election. The lead consultant (P~R) will be prepared to present to the Planning Connnission the results of Tasks 1, 2, and 3. PAGE 4 These tasks will cover the background studies and research (i.e., land use and parking); overview of market demand (i.e., demand for restaurants, speci alty retail); and two alternative "sketch plans" (i.e., relation shi p between land uses, circulation). A primary function of this workshop is to provide the consultants with a direction for preparing the preferred Policy Plan and to guide how the downtown area should be treated in the Land Use Element. 4. February 19 -Other Land Use Issues This work session would be devoted to a discussion of other land use issues which should receive attention. The potential list of other issues includes the following: school sites, railroad right-of-way, Aviation connnercial corridor, local and neighborhood conanercial areas, non-residential General Plan/ zoning inconsistencies, 5. March 19 -Composite Land Use Element This work session/public hearing would be devoted to a consider­ ation and evaluation of the Composite Land Use Element. The composite would be based on the decisions made by the Planning Commission to date. Assuming there is a general consensus on the composite plan, the Conunission could continue the matter to another public hearing for possible adoption. Comm. Compton noted that he is very pleased with the staff report as presented. He noted, though, that too many topics might be up for discussion at some of the meetings. He noted that some of the meetings might tend to spill over. He thanked Mr. Castaneda for such a fine report. Chinn. Izant noted that it is important to look at alternatives. Mr. Castaneda outlined the method by which the Land Use Element is to be revised. He further noted that the Planning Commission has available to it several options to accomplish this. Chmn. Izant questioned whether it is realistic to expect that the Planning Commission will be able to cover all of the issues as outlined by staff. He also noted the amount of work that would be necessary ori the part of staff in coming back with answers to the Commission's questions, Chmn. Izant noted the magnitude of the issues before the Planning Connnission. Carran. Sheldon questioned whether the City was working under any time constraints in regard to completing the Revised Land Use Element. Chmn. Izant stated that he knew of no state-imposed deadline for completion of this project:. Mr. Castaneda stated that he knew of no state-imposed deadline either. Nor did he know of any deadline set up by the City Council . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 REFINED LAND USE ELEMENT SCHEDULE (Cont.) PAGE 5 Comm, Sheldon suggested being more flexible in the scheduling of issues; if one issue has not been completed, it could be carried over to the next meeting. On the other hand, if an issue has been wrapped up, the Commission could go on to the next item. He also noted that other issues would be sure to come up in the meantime. Chinn. Izant felt that this approach would be more realistic, He felt that the schedule as presented should be used as a form of goalsetting -trying to accomplish those items as scheduled and making some decisions. Comm. Newton explored the issue of joint workshops with the City Council or study sessions, Mr. Castaneda stated that the Planning Commission is free to call a joint workshop when it feels ready to do so. He also stated that before a recommendation is made for a joint workshop, there should be a solid consensus in terms of what direction the Planning Commission wishes to take in a matter. Connn. Newton questioned whether there would be any advantage in having a study session. Mr. Castaneda felt that a study session would be appropriate after several of the issues have been discussed by the Planning Commission, Mr. Castaneda agreed with the comments made hy Chmn. Izant in regard to the great amount of material to be covered at each session. He suggested devoting two sessions to each issue as a mitigating measure. Comm. Compton liked the idea of devoting two sessions to each issue. He also noted that interested persons who were not able to come to one meeting would still be able to give their input at the second session. Comm. Compton suggested that the meeting of March 19 be a joint meeting with the City Council before the Planning Commission makes their final recommendation to the Council. EXAMPLE OF PRESS RELEASE Ms, Reardon-Crites presented a sample public notice aimed at being more infonnative, Comm. Newton very much liked the appearance of the new press release. She felt that it is very informational and that it is worth any additional publication costs which might be incurred, Chmn. Izant and Colllin, Sheldon both agreed with Comm, Newton's remarks, Comm. Compton expressed concern over zoning implications related to land use, He suggested that these implications could be mentioned 1n the noticel thereby alerting people who would be affected by actions taken. Comm. Newton also felt that this is an important point. She suggested possible wording for the notices: "The outcome of these hearings may affect your property rights." PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 EXAMPLE OF PRESS RELEASE (Cont,) PAGE 6 Connn. Compton again stressed the importance of possible zoning implications. Chmn, Izant felt that additional wording would be a good idea, COMMISSIONERS' PRIORITIES Mr. Castaneda stated that, based on a review of the FY84-85 budget plus recent planning related actions, it appears that there are at least three priorities ~or completion by the Planning Commission during the remainder of the current fiscal year. He noted that these priorities include the following: 1. Continuing work on the revised Land Use Element and recommending, for adoption by the City Council, a preferred Land Use Element. 2. Extensive involvement in the preparation of the Downtown Area Policy Plan (i.e.·, special meetings with o,;vners, etc.). 3, Establish priorities for next year in sufficient time for consideration by the City Council in the FY85-86 budget (i.e., traffic and circulation). Mr. Castaneda also suggested that the Planning Commission review the existing Zoning Code, in view of the Land Use Element and the development standards. Comm. Shapiro asked why the revision of the Land Use Element is a priority, Mr, Castaneda stated that it was a City Council recommendation that the Planning Connnission work on the revised LUE, COMMISSIONERS' ITEMS Comm, Compton mentioned a discrepency in the 2oning Cpde related to square foouage figures in the section pertaining to R-3, high density. He noted that the Code mentions 950 square feet per unit. The high density zone allows no more than 40 dwelling units per acre, He stated that 40 units divided into the number of square feet per acre comes out to a figure of 1,089 square feet. He felt that this discrepency needs to be addressed. Roth figures should be published so that a developer knows exactly what he can build, He further felt that the figure should be adjusted to reflect either 950 sq. ft. or 1,089 sq ft~ He felt that this information should be stated clearly. Comm. Sheldon noted that all subcontractors working for a general contractor in the City of Hermosa Reach need to have Hermosa Reach business licenses, The Building Department will not conduct their final inspection until it is proved that all subcontractors are in possession of a valid business license. He suggested that all general contractors be made aware of this fact. Chmn, Izant suggested that Mr. Castaneda pass this information on to the Ruilding Department. Comm. Newton stated that after Pier Avenue was repaved, the street was re-striped. She noted that the parking situation is now very dangerous in that there is not enough room to pass parked cars without crossing over onto the other side of the street. She suggested that someone look into this dangerous situation, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -OCTOBER 30, 1984 COMMISSIONERS' ITEMS (Cont.) PAGE 7 Conun. Sheldon noted his concern over the fact that the parking rate on meters has now gone up to twenty-five cents per half hour. He felt that the parking rates in the City are atrocious. Chmn, Izant directed staff to look into the Zoning Code discrepencies in regard to the 950 square feet versus 1,089 square feet. He also suggested that staff look into other portions of that section to determine whether other discrepencies exist. Motion to adjourn at 8:30 P.M. No objections. So ordered. CERTIFICATION Date