Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03.06.84MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 1984, IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 7:30 P.M. Meeting called to order at 7:37 P.M. by Comm. Smith. Pledge of Allegiance led by Comm. Strohecker. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Smith, Soulakis, Strohecker Comms. Brown, Shapiro, Chmn. Izant ALSO PRESENT: Pamela Sapetto, Planning Director Comm. Smith was designated to act as Chairman at this meeting of the Planning Commission. Chmn. Smith noted that a Public Hearing for a zone change located at 2604 Hermosa Avenue had been advertised for this meeting of the Planning Commission. He noted that this issue was inadvertently omitted from the agenda; therefore, he opened the Public Hearing and continued it to the next meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for Tuesday, March 20, 1984. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Comm. Strohecker, seconded by Comm. Newton, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of February 21, 1984, with the following addition: Page 11, Sentence 1, Paragraph 1, should read: "Comm. Smith felt that the issue becomes hazy when the issue of the use of C-Potential precise plan and standards where residential and commercial abut becomes intermingled." No objections. So ordered. APP ROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS Motion by Comm. Soulakis, seconded by Comm. Newton, to approve P.C. 84-3. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Soulakis, Strohecker, Chmn. Smith None Comms. Brown, Shapiro, Izant Comm. Soulakis commented that P.C. 84-4 originally had ten conditions and that he added an eleventh condition, that being a condition pertaining to the penciled-in portion on the plans that showed where the storage area is to be located. He noted that there are now only eight conditions. He asked what happened to condition nos. 8,, 9, and 10. Ms. Sapetto suggested holding the matter over to the next meeting of the Planning Commission. Chmn. Smith so ordered that P.C. 84-4 be held over to the next meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 2 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RETREAT -PRESENTATION BY BILL FOWLER, EXECUTIVE DIREC TOR OF THE HE RMO SA BEAC H CHAMBE R OF CO MMERCE Bill Fowler, Executive Director of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce addressed the Planning Commission. He noted that for the past three years, the City and the Chamber have met for a City Chamber Retreat. He stated that this year the retreat would be in Oxnard. A full-day session is planned for Friday, March 30, 1984. The morning session will cover changes in the Sign Ordinance. The afternoon session will be conducted by Shearson American Express and will cover the topic of personal finance management, direction of the late '80s, and different options for investment. Also being covered will be the issue of the downtown plan as it is being proposed. Other areas that will be covered include the multi-use corridor and the area along Pacific Coast Highway. Mr. Fowler noted that the Olympic Spirit Team will attend the luncheon. There will be a short film and a presentation on past Olympiads. A special speaker will attend in the evening, also. Mr. Fowler invited each of the Commissioners to attend this Chamber Retreat. He urged each of the Commissioners to call him if there were any topics that they would like to see included on the agenda for the retreat. Comm. Strohecker stated how much he has enjoyed the last two retreats. He stated that they are both entertaining and infor­ mative and well worth attending. PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE Ms. Sapetto gave staff report. The City Council has directed staff to pursue preliminary plans to develop a hotel project in the down­ town area using the Biltmore Site. This has been done pursuant to the Request for Proposals issued by the City Council, and nego­ tiations have commenced with the developer who was selected. Ms. Sapetto noted that a brief presentation will be made to the Commission to inform them of the progress and to solicit Planning Commission opinion regarding the project. Ms. Sapetto stated that the Commission will be presented with a development agreement which will encompass not only the terms and conditions of the development, but also the scope and scale of the project. This is being done so that the community will have an opportunity to make known their opinions concerning the type and scale of the project. Ms. Sapetto discussed the development agreement. She stated that the development agreement has two purposes. The first purpose is to allow the Commission to look at the project to see whether it is in conformance with their concept of what the general plan says about the downtown area. She stated that the development agreement can incorporate into it zoning regulations, height, st ori es , parking requirements, etc; it is, really, a zoning tool. For this reason, public hearings must be conducted, and it must PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 3 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) be adopted as an ordinance. Ms. Sapetto stated that the second purpose of the development agreement is to allow the City and the developer a chance to negotiate the agreement as they would negotiate a contract. It allows the City to require that certain conditions be met that could otherwise not be guaranteed, such as the timeframe of when the project will take place, funding, and degree of involvement of the City in the project. Ms. Sapetto concluded by saying that the development agreement will be a very useful tool. Gregory T. Meyer, Hermosa Beach City Manager and Executive Director of the newly-formed Parking Authority, addressed the Commission. He noted that development on the Biltmore Site is an historic occasion. He stated that considerable community input will be needed on how best to utilize that piece of property. Mr. Meyer stated that any development on that site should be within the existing development standards. He mentioned zoning and, particularly, height. With this in mind, an attempt is being made to proceed with a specific project for City Council approval. Mr. Meyer stated that nothing has been finalized and that the purpose of this presentation is to obtain input from the Commission. He felt that it is important to look back over the past 20 years to determine why the Biltmore Site was not developed. It certainly is not because there was a lack of ideas; rather, it has been a failure to arrive at an agreement, failure to develop consensus among the neighborhood and community at large, and failure to arrive at an agreement among the Planning Commission, Vehicle Parking District, and City Council. He noted that he would like to come up with a viable plan at this time. Mr. Meyer noted that development agreements are relatively new in California. He stated that they basically came into being at the behest of developers who wanted a guarantee of a fair chance in the hearing process before committees such as the Planning Commission and City Council. He noted that staff has been pleased with the concept of adopting a development agreement process that allows for formal development agreements that require public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. That develop- ment agreement document then becomes part of the code. Mr. Meyer felt that a development agreement in this case is impor­ tant because the City is the major land owner. The overall, under­ lying concept of this project is that the City will be the sole land owner. Mr. Meyer noted that the Biltmore Site is a unique site within a 200-mile dis~ance along the coastline. He noted that in no other PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 4 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) area is it possible to propose by zoning a commercial recreational development and meet coastal criteria in the local plan. The Biltmore Site is now zoned commercial recreational and meets the requirements of the Coastal Commission. In the economic macroscale of Southern California, the Biltmore Site is truly unique. Mr. Meyer noted that this project is of great importance to the City because of economic reasons. A hotel is a significant economic generator in a positive sense to the community. He noted that Hermosa Beach has been operating at a loss. He stated that it is very important to obtain the greatest utilization possible from the commercially-zoned property in the community. He stated that there is under-utilization in the commercially­ zoned parcels. He stated that economic vitality is absolutely necessary in Hermosa Beach. Mr. Meyer noted that the Blue Ribbon Committee in 1983 determined that the best possible use for the Biltmore Site would be a hydrocarbon recovery facility which would bring in more than one million dollars a year. They decided to pass on this option. The hotel concept was determined to be the best compromise which would embody a number of significant positive benefits to the City. Whatever negative impacts do exist can be mitigated. Staff has embraced this assumption and have spent countless hours working on this in trying to reach an agreement in how best to proceed. Mr. Meyer stated that it is felt that the development will fill an economic need. The hotel will also stimulate the downtown area.and will also provide hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in bed tax, beverage income, etc. There will also be income if the City is to be the land owner. The hotel will provide considerable income and also help to rejuvenate the downtown area without any further government intervention. Mr. Meyer noted that staff has looked at studies done in Manhattan and Redondo for hotels in those cities. Those studies indicate that one can assume approximately 39 percent of the spending money will go to the hotel room, and 61 percent will go to other things. For every one hundred dollars per night spent in a hotel room, approximately one hundred fifty dollars per day will be spent by that person. This is a hard number which is accepted in the hotel industry. These figures show the economic impacts that a hotel can create. Mr . Meyer felt that there will be no significant economic impact to City staff with the creation of a hotel. In other words, the creation of a hotel is not anticipated to gobble up proceeds by way of utilization of city services. He felt that no negative impacts would be felt by homeowners and taxpayers. Mr. Meyer addressed the issue of parking. He stressed that parking is a major factor in any commercial developmentm The parking issue needs to be addressed if there is to be an economic rebirth in the downtown area. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 5 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Mr. Meyer stated that it is necessary to create additional parking in the downtown area while another area is being disrupted. He noted that there must be some type of safety valve if building will be taking place and parking on Lot C is being disrupted. Staff, in concurrence with the VPD, is pursuing the idea of a parking structure on Lot B (behind the Cove Theater). Lot B can now accommodate approximately 40 cars; a parking structure would be able to accommodate approximately 110 or 120 vehicles. He felt that the structure on Lot B should be built, because Lot C would not be able to accommodate parking for nearly a year due to construction. The City wants to encourage business and allow for expansion; there­ fore, the City has gone to the VPD to suggest the idea of increased parking facilities. The VPD has authorized a study to tak@ :::-.place :~c;'luring the next 30-day period (working days) to determine tµe financial feasibility of a parking structure on Lot B, a parking structure to be located behind the Community 'Center, and a parking structure on Lot c. (The study began on March 5.) Mr. Meyer distributed information to the Commissioners from Merrill Lynch. Merrill Lynch has been retained by the City, the Parking Authority, and the VPD to be the financial service. A legal bond counsel has also been retained. Mr. Meyer stated that the City does not want to acquire more land for parking; rather, they want to utilize the land devoted to parking now in the best possible manner. Mr. Meyer stated that the studies on the parking must be completed before further action can proceed. The parking issue will come • back before the Commission as an issue separate and distinct from the issue of the hotel. Mr. Meyer noted that he and Ms. Sapetto have been designated as the City negotiating team. They are dealing with a timeframe established by the City Council. They must return with a report by April. They are dealing with the concept of a Doubletree Hotel or its equivalent with the developer. The developer, in concert with Doubletree, is now in the negotiation process with the City. Mr. Meyer noted that Doubletree is a conservative, above-average facility. It ranks in the upper hierarchy of hotel chains. There are Doubletree facilities in Seattle, Monterey, Scottsdale, Houston, and Dallas. He stated that the Monterey Doubletree is a very nice hotel. The design will be an integral part of the project. Mr . Meyer noted that the architectural firm chosen has a very good reputation and has done some outstanding work on other projects. He said that their work is of award-winning caliber. Chmn. Smith asked Mr. Meyer what role the Planning Commission would take in this project . He asked for clarification on the time frame. that the Commission would be dealing with. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 6 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Mr. Meyer replied that the vehicle by which the Planning Commission would participate would be the development agreement. He stated that the Commission would be dealing with the issue of design of the hotel. Another issue before the Commission will be that of parking. Traffic is an issue that the Commission will also address. The P.C. will also consider technical questions that will be raised in the EIR process. Mr. Meyer noted that the EIR has been ordered. He noted that staff is very pleased with the fact that preparation of the EIR is being done by PBR. This is being paid for by the developer under separate contract. Mr. Meyer also stated that the Commission would be looking at the project in the sense that it is a project involving public lands. The project will be looked at in relation to the rest of the commercial and in relation to the land use element. Comm. Soulakis noted that there are many aspects to be dealt with in this process and that the Commission will be focusing in on one aspect. Mr. Meyer noted that the developer has in mind a project that will exceed the Biltmore Site in scope. This is a point of great significance for the Commission. Als~ parking will be a major issue for the Planning Commission's approval. Mr. Meyer noted that staff is very carefully trying to work within the scope and concept of the downtown business district which extends from Pier Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway. He noted that in the history of the downtown area, this project is the largest in terms of square footage. He stressed that the issue must be looked at in terms of the entire area, not just as one project. Chmn. Smith thanked Mr. Meyer for his presentation. Joseph T. tanglois, 11726 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 500, Los Angeles, stated that he is the attorney for the firm of Greenwood-Langlois. Mr. Greenwood is the architect. He stated that Wayne Wedin has also joined their team. Mr. Wedin was formerly a city manager for 13 years and is generally regarded as an expert in this particular type of development. Mr. Langlois stated that his firm's most significant achievement has been their work in Santa Monica. His firm brought to permit the largest building ever permitted in Santa Monica subsequent to the election held a few years ago. He felt that they were able to accomplish this because they are young and they do not have an "us-against-them" attitude in terms of looking at development. He also felt that they are flexible. Mr. Langlois noted that one of their projects was a lar~e office building that included a day-care center, low-cost rental housing, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 7 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) and almost 50 percent of the site was turned over to landscaped parkland. The office building is also economically viable. Mr. Langlois noted that his firm spent six months meeting with staff, City Council, and people in the community to ascertain what should be done on the Biltmore Site, what the building should look like, and what it should provide. He felt that the time spent in these meetings was key in their being selected at the end of the competition. Mr. Langlois presented each Commissioner with a packet containing drawings and floor plans of the proposed project. Mr. Langlois felt that the most critical issue at this point is the height . He stated that the proposed hotel will have approximately 260 rooms, and it would be the smallest hotel in the Doubletree chain. Doubletree is willing to accept a lower number of rooms because of the amenities that the beach provides, and they are willing to focus on those amenities. Mr. Langlois commented on the schematic drawings that were presented to the Commissioners. He referred specifically to drawing No. 1. He noted that there is a total of approximately 130,000 square feet within the entire block configuration. Of that, approximately 31,000 square feet is not owned by the City. All but one parcel of that property has named a price. They are working with that price and would like to reduce it. He felt that no real obstacles remain in acquiring that remaining parcel. Mr. Langlois noted that the greatest asset of the site is the beach,­ and the Strand is also an asset as well as a focal point of the beach . They have tried to recognize the qualities of the Strand, and the proposed building is set back and terraced so that in no case will there be a building going 45 feet straight up. Also, the building is trying to be softened at each and every level, as shown by the drawing depicting the corners of the building. Mr. Langlois stated that there will be a parking structure which will be accessed from both 13th Street and 14th Street. There will be two-way traffic in this area. There is talk of computerizing one of the stop lights which would be at the expense of Greenwood & Langlois. This would provide for better traffic flow through the neighborhood. He also noted that the building would contain a skylighted unloading area or portiere. The lobby of the hotel will sit in another area. He noted that the first floor is virtually 100 percent .given over to public space. Mr. Langloi~ noted that there is no place in the City other than the City Hall Council Chamber where a large number of people are able to gather. He noted that to get people to come to the beach, other than tourists, meeting rooms and facilities need to be provided. He noted that no guest roomswill be on the ground floor. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 8 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Mr. Langlois stated that there is approximately 8,100 square feet on the ground floor which will be given over to banquet and meeting space. There will be 11,800 square feet given over to restaurant, bar, and lounge space which will spread throughout the ground floor. Mr. Langlois continued by noting that there is an entire area which is to be set back from the Strand. This area will be a deck area . used for outdoor seating, dining, and a bar. He noted that the front area of the hotel will be glass so that people can see through to the beach and pier area. Mr. Langlois noted that the hotel will have a major ballroom which can be divided into three smaller ballrooms. There would be a restaurant, coffee shop, and another specialty restaurant, all designed according to Doubletree standards. There will also be a show lounge whidl.can be converted for uses such as Sunday brunches, or entertainment of various kinds or for rental. ' Mr. Langlois stated that the ground floor of one of the parking structures would be designed for retail. This would be the portion that faces Hermosa Avenue and would be in keeping with the flavor of the rest of the downtown shopping area. He also noted that the parking structure will be designed in such a manner that it will be landscaped and have setbacks and openings. He noted that since it will be the primary entrance to the hotel, both he and Doubletree would like to make it as attractive as is possible. Mr. Langlois discussed the mezzanine (drawing No. 3). The hotel is designed to have four floors and a mezzanine. He stated that the number of ocean-view rooms will be maximized to generate higher rates. The mezzanine will run along the front area a half level up through less than a third of the hotel. The ballroom will be open all the way up. Mr. Langlois discussed drawing No. 4, which is a typical floor plan above the mezzanine. In the area above the ballroom, there are plans to heavily landscape the area so that the rooms that do not have an ocean view will be looking out onto a lushly landscaped area. Mr. Langlois elaborated on the parking situation. He noted that the parking is per code for the hotel plus they are adding 100 spaces. Existing parking will be replaced and four new spaces will be added. The hotel will be 45', and the parking structure will be 36'. This achieves parking accommodations for a total number of 390 vehicles. Mr. Langlois displayed for the Commission previous designs that were submitted as part of the competition. Chmn. Smith noted that the hotel will, of course, be the focal point for the downtown area. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 9 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Cornms. Strohecker and Newton were both very impressed with the proposed plans. Comm. Soulakis mentioned the parking situation. Mr. Langlois stated that the traffic would be two-way on both 13th and 14th Streets. He noted that when a large number of vehicles are leaving after a major function, it is easier to disperse them onto two streets. This method will also be more favorable to those residents in the area. Mr. Langlois noted that with the downtown plan for Hermosa Beach, Pier Avenue will probably become a more sophisticated shopping area. He stated that Doubletree is hoping that Hermosa will become similar to their operation in Monterey. Comm. Newton questioned whether there is a firm commitment with Doubletree on this project. Mr. Langlois replied that there is a commitment. Doubletree bid with Greenwood & Langlois on this project as a co-development partner. He noted that the only restraint is that there be a separate development agreement and management agreement. Chmn. Smith noted that he would like to see the building in Santa Monica that was done by Greenwood & Langlois. Mr. Langlois noted that the building is called Greenwood Center. He stated that it is located at Colorado and 62nd Street in Santa Monica. Comm. Soulakis questioned whether the third and fourth floors are identical in the plan. Mr. Langlois stated that the second, third, and fourth floors are all identical. He stated that the mezzanine is not counted as a floor because it is less than one-third of the floor space involved. Comm. Soulakis questioned why there is so much open space. Mr. Langlois stated that the area is above restaurants and bars, places where open space would be pleasing. Comm. Soulakis questioned whether any consideration was given to subterranean parking. Mr. Langlois replied that much consideration was given to sub­ terranean parking because of the community's sensitivity to parking structures. One reason that subterranean parking is not feasible is because you hit water after digging four and a half feet. Also, there are serious flooding problems~ especially as has happened in recent winters. A pumping system would be very expensive. Parking structures above grade tend to be more open, have more light, and are easier to maintain. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 10 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Chmn. Smith noted that many times in the past, the question has come before the Planning Commission of whether parking structures can be made more attractive. Mr. Langlois stated that it is important in the design that the parking structure be very attractive. He noted that the structure will be heavily landscaped along the 13th Street side. Comm. Newton questioned whether the hotel was being designed with consideration for the residents on the upslope whose view will be looking down onto the hotel. Mr. Langlois replied in the affirmative. Mr. Greenwood noted that the building will be heavily landscaped. The design will also be in the Mediterranean style, with tile roof that will be seen mainly by the people on the upslope. Comm. Newton questioned whether the hotel will set the trend for the rest of the downtown area in terms of its architectural theme. Ms. Sapetto stated that consideration should be given to that question when the Planning Commission is making its findings. She felt that the hotel will set a theme, but that every business will not have to be in the same style. Comm. Newton asked when the Commission would see the rest of the plan and how it meshes with the rest of the downtown area. Ms. Sapetto stated that this is something the Commission will be working with in the land use element. Comm. Soulakis noted that of the proposed 390 parking spaces, 100 are for the parking spaces being lost. He questioned whether the balance of the parking spaces would be dedicated to the hotel. Mr. Langlois referred this question to Mr. Wedin. Mr. Wedin stated that the number of parking spaces that are being replaced will meet the needs of the uses that are within the hotel. He stated that the issue appears a bit convoluted because of the funding. He stated that the spaces may end up being public spaces. They are working on this with legal counsel that has been retained by the City Council. He stated that for now, those spaces are intended for hotel use, but they may become available for public parking at some later date. He did note that it is important for them to meet all of the requirements in the code. He mentioned the food area aspects. Mr. Meyer stated that the design of it relates to the PBR presentation. that this is the best type of thing the area north of Pier Avenue. He could develop from this project. the hotel is very powerful as In a planning sense, he felt that could have happened in felt that maybe other ideas PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 11 PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT ON THE BILTMORE SITE (Cont.) Mr. Meyer noted that he and Ms. Sapetto will be recommending to the VPD, Parking Authority, and City Council that the same architectural firm be used for the parking structures, specifically, those on Lots Band C and the Community Center. This will be to achieve maximum design ambiance with the hotel. Mr. Meyer noted that all construction must be very carefully coordinated. He noted that the Lot C parking structure must be ready when the hotel is built. In essence, the parking structure will be owned and operated by the municipality, not necessarily the City, but possibly the Parking Authority or Parking District. Mr. Meyer noted that there will be revenue bond financing for parking at the Community Center. He noted that Merrill Lynch has been retained to come up with the best possible methods available for the financing. Mr. Meyer noted that through the Community Development Block Grant Program, the City is funded to refurbish the Strand between 8th and 15th Streets. This refurbishing should have been completed by January of this year. The City has been trying to maintain good relations with the County Community Development Department because the City would like to tie that refurbishing in with the construction that will be taking place. The City is prepared to make a commitment in excess of $100,000 for the Strand refurbishment. Mr. Meyer again commented on parking. He felt that a significant number of patrons coming to the hotel will be coming from LAX. The operation of a shuttle is a possibility. He noted that public transportation will be necessary to accommodate travellers coming to the hotel. He noted that even though the City Council has abolished the free shuttle bus, effective March 19th of this year a private contractor will be operating the Hermosa Beach Transit System on a by-reservation basis only. Every May 15 through September 15 a formal beach shuttle system will operate. The funding for this shuttle will be provided partially from money from Proposition A which comes out of the sales tax money for transportation. Chrnn. Smith thanked the gentlemen for a very nice presentation. STORM DRAIN PEIR Ms. Sapetto gave staff report. She stated that the Planning Commission must now look at and review any public projects that require a preliminary environmental review. Ms. Sapetto stated that this project consists of upgrading the storm drainage system within the service area boundaries of Pier Avenue, Monterey Boulevard, 8th Street, and the Strand. It involves 1,500 -2,000 lineal feet of storm drain line which will be 18 -48 inches in diamter. There will be 20 to 30 catch basins placed at key locations to maximize drainage. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 STORM DRAIN PEIR (Cont.) Page 12 Ms. Sapetto stated that this storm drain project will improve drainage and ameliorate the flooding that occurs during the rainy season. It will relieve the stress on inadequate and obsolete drains that currently exist in this area. Ms. Sapetto noted that the approximate cost of the project will be $600,000. The project is being done in conjunction with the County. Hermosa Beach will get the majority of the money through the Community Development Block Grant fund; therefore, an environmental review is necessary at this time, although the project will not commence for approximately one year. In order to have the funding approved, a negative declaration is necessary. Ms. Sapetto recommended that the Planning Commission find that this project will not create significant adverse impacts to the environment and requested that a negative declaration be prepared. Chmn. Smith questioned whether the Fire Department regularly blasts open the drains. Ms. Sapetto replied in the affirmative. She noted that this is a reasonably established method for clearing the drains. Ms. Sapetto noted that a catch basin is that opening underneath the sidewalk and is sometimes quite large. Chmn. Smith commented on the project summary. He noted that the summary states that this area to be served contains 53.1% low-and moderate-income residents. He asked what definition was used, how many of those people are low income, and how many of those people are moderate income. Ms. Sapetto replied that the figures were taken from the 1980 census. An area survey was also conducted by the County. She could not answer how many of the people are low income and how many are moderate income. She noted that 32% of the population of Hermosa Beach is low income, meaning those persons who earn less than 80% of the County median. Comm. Soulakis asked for the correlation between low and moderate income and storm drains. Ms. Sapetto replied that in order to use Community Development Block Grant funds, the project must directly benefit low-to moderate-income persons. In order to use the money in a certain area, it must be proved that the area has 51% of people in the low-to moderate-income category. Chmn. Smith asked for the definition for moderate income. Ms. Sapetto replied that moderate is 80 to 120 percent of the median. Comm. Soulakis asked whether the drainage requirements are being increased in the downtown business area because more cement is being added. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 STORM DRAIN PEIR (Cont.) Page 13 Ms. Sapetto replied that that is not the case. She stated that there is nothing that is projected now in that area. She stated if there are, those issues would need to be addressed in the PEIR and EIR. She noted that when improvements are projected, developments are also projected. Chmn. Smith asked whether there is a time frame for the project. Ms. Sapetto stated it was one year. Comm. Soulakis asked a question relative to zoning. He asked whether an R-1 zone requires more or less drainage per square foot than would a C zone. Ms. Sapetto replied that drainage is based primarily on topography and the runoff. It is basically a question of where the water collects. Comm. Soulakis questioned whether the new storm drains would be _ adequate in terms of future development. Ms. Sapetto replied in the affirmative. She replied that in the planning process, future development has been anticipated. She noted that worst-case examples have been looked at in the existing zones. Comm. Soulakis commented on the statement that last year alone, $35,000 in claims were filed as a result of damage from flooding. He asked whether any of those claims were settled. Ms. Sapetto did not know whether any of the claims were settled. Comm. Soulakis questioned the relevency of the statement. Ms. Sapetto stated that that figure was included to justify the need to upgrade the storm drain system. Motion by Comm. Newton, seconded by Comm. Strohecker, to recommend that this project will create no adverse environmental impacts to the environment and request that a negative declaration be filed. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Soulakis, Strohecker, Chmn. Smith None Comm. Brown, Shapiro, Izant RESOLUTION OF INTENTION: TO AMEND SECTION 9.5-22 (1) (2) AND (3) OF THE HE RMOSA BEACH CONDOM INIUM ORD INANCE Ms. Sapetto gave staff report. She stated that the Condominium Ordinance now does two things. It limits the number of dwelling units per acre in some instances further than does the general plan. The ordinance contains specific regulations for each zone. She noted that at one time these restrictions were deleted from Section 2, but Sections 1 and 3 were not changed accordingly. The restriction basically is "inconsistent with the general plan. She felt that the Commission should examine those areas where the condominium ordinance is inconsistent with the general plan. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 14 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION: TO AMEND SECTION 9.5-22 (1) (2) AND (3) OF THE HERMOSA BEACH CO ND OMINIUM ORDINANCE (Cont.) Ms. Sapetto noted that these inconsistences occur in the R-1 and R-3 zones. Ms. Sapetto asked that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution of intention to look at these inconsistencies. Chmn. Smith questioned what the effects would be were the Planning Commission to make R-1 and R-3 zones consistent with what is now contained in the R-2 and in the general plan. In other words, in effect, what would be happening would be the elimination of the limitation of the 25 dwelling units per acre. Ms. Sapetto replied that many areas of the City have lots that are 7,500 square feet. These areas are R-1. Because of the present restriction, one must have 8,000 square feet to put two units on the lot. The general plan allows two units on 6,700 square feet. Chmn. Smith questioned whether the build out in the housing element was based on the current restriction. Ms. Sapetto replied in the affirmative. She noted that it did not take into consideration this current condominium restriction. It was based on general plan build out and zoning build out. Chmn. Smith asked what prompted this action. Ms. Sapetto stated that this inconsistency was brought to her attention by the Building Department. The inconsistency was brought to the attention of the Building Department by applicants. Chmn. Smith asked how many general plan zoning inconsistencies exist. Ms. Sapetto replied that most of the inconsistences lie in the actual zoning of R-2 and R-3. Chmn. Smith questioned the possibility of charting the general plan zoning inconsistencies so that the Commission would have a list whereby they could begin examining these inconsistences in a systematic manner. Ms. Sapetto replied that it would be necessary to include information on a lot-by-lot basis if a chart were to be prepared. Chmn. Smith questioned whether, during the past two years, all condominium projects approved by the Commission were in conformance with the zoning in the general plan. Ms. Sapetto felt that not all of the zoning has been in conformance. Those units that did not meet the minimum lot size were not allowed to make applications. Comm. Soulakis questioned putting limitations on property owners. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 15 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION: TO AMEND SECTION 9.5~22 (1) (2) AND (3) OF THE HE RMO SA BEACH CONDOMIN IUM ORDINANCE (C o nt.) Ms. Sapetto replied that no limitations were being placed on the property owners; the limitations already exist. This would lift those limitations, but it would not lift the limitations beyond the build out figures that are already seen. Ms. Sapetto stated that when the Commission looks at the resolution of intention, it should look at that restriction that says one is in another general plan designation. The restriction of retaining the lot sizes is all right. Comm . Newton questioned whether this inconsistency should be looked at together with other inconsistencies between the general plan and zoning .or whether it should be looked at separately. Ms. Sapetto replied that it can be handled together. The condominium ordinance may be looked at at the same time. This would be one possibility. Ms. Sapetto felt that the Commission did not want to handle changing the lot sizes at this time. She felt the issue is the 25 dwelling units per acre on R-2 lots. She felt that that language in the ordinance should be deleted. Comm. Newton felt that if the Building Department and applicants as well as the Planning Department are concerned with these inconsistences, then the issue is certainly worth holding a public hearing. Ms. Sapetto noted that the restriction is on the R-2 zone; therefore, it is not necessary to look at the R-1 and R-3 zones. Chmn. Smith felt that the inconsistency may have been created intentionally as an anti-density mechanism. Ms. Sapetto noted that in the resolution, mention of subsections (1) and (3) of Section 9.5-22 would be deleted. Motion by Comm. Newton, seconded by Comm. Strohekcer, to adopt a resolution of intention to consider amending Section 9.5-22 (2) of the Condominium Ordinance to be consistent with the City's general plan. Comm. Soulakis questioned whether a public hearing would be held to look at the issue of revising 9.5-22 (2) of the Condominium Ordinance, namely the 25 dwelling units per acre issue. Ms. Sapetto replied in the affirmative. Chmn. Smith questioned whether subsections (1) and (3) also repre­ sent inconsistencies in the general plan. Ms. Sapetto replied that they do, in that they limit the lot sizes. It is legally defensible, but it does restrict the number of units qllowed. This also applies to subsection (3). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 16 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION: TO AMEND SECTION 9.5~22 (1) (2) AND (3) OF THE HERMOSA "BEACH CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE (Con t.) (Vote on Comm. Newton's motion to adopt the resolution of intention.) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Soulakis, Strohecker, Chmn. Smith None Comms. Brown, Shapiro, Izant Recess from 9:40 P.M. to 9:50 P.M. SPECIFIC PLAN DELETION FOR THE CONVERSION ·oF C-POTENTIAL ZONES Ms. Sapetto gave staff report. She noted that at the meeting of February 21, 1984, the Commission voted to continue this item until the first meeting of April; and that in that interim, staff would gather additional data. Ms. Sapetto continued by saying that the motion to continue this item for approximately six weeks was based on the belief that there are no time constraints in returning this item to the City Council. The City Code, Section 1512 (1), allows forty (40) days for a response from the Planning Commission. Ms. Sapetto recommended two options for the Commission. One, that they look at the development standards submitted for conversion of C-Potential property that abuts residential. If the Commission agrees to that, they can recommend that to the City Council. Two, that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council that nothing be done at this time. Ms. Sapetto noted that staff has done research on other cities which do have development standards pertinent to commercial that abut"s residential. she stated that this proposal is more liberal than that in other cities. Ms. Sapetto recommended the adoption of the resolution as proposed by staff. Public Hearing opened at 9:55 P.M. There being no citizens who wished to testify, Chmn. Smith continued the Public Hearing to the next meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for March 20, 1984. Chmn. Smith asked for the exact wording in the Code that pertains to the 40-day time period. Ms. Sapetto did not have the exact wording. She was not certain why the limit of 4-0 days is specified. She did note that it applies to the resolution of intention. Chmn. Smith noted that this particular issue deserves the attention of the full Commission. ( PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -MARCH 6, 1984 Page 17 SPECIFIC PLAN DELETION FOR THE CONVERSION OF C-POTENTIAL ZONES (Cont.) Motion by Comm. Strohecker, seconded by Comm. Soulakis, to continue this issue to the next meeting of the Planning Commission. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Soulakis, Strohecker, Chmn. Smith None Comms. Brown, Shapiro, Izant COMMISSIONERS' ITEMS Comms. Newton and Strohecker commented on how much they enjoyed the Planning Institute Seminar held in San Diego. Comm. Soulakis asked whether the event to be held in Ox nard was a City-financed activity. Ms. Sapetto replied that it is not. It is a retreat. Chmn. Smith asked whether staff would be able to assemble some materials for the Commissioners. He noted that some of the hand­ outs at the San Diego seminar were extremely helpful. He mentioned specifically the information by the assistant attorney from Carlsbad on how to conduct a commission meeting. Ms. Sapetto noted that she has ordered each Commissioner a handbook. Motion by Comm. Soulakis, seconded by Chmn. Smith, that the Planning Commission meet twice a month. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comms. Newton, Soulakis, Strohecker, Chmn. Smith None Comms. Brown, Shapiro, Izant Chmn. Smith noted that the Commission had asked staff to prepare a list prior to the next meeting of tentative agenda items. This would help the Commissioners prepare for future issues. Motion by Comm. Soulakis to adjourn at 10:12 P.M. No objections. So ordered. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of Hermosa Beach at their regularly scheduled meeting of March 6, 1984. µs ~Secre tary Date