Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 08.27.84MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON AUGUST 27_.; 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: Comrns. Peirce, Sheldon, Schulte, Compton, and Chmn. Izant. ABSENT: Comms. Newton, and Shapiro. ALSO PRESENT: Pamela Sapetto, Planning Director; Assistant Planning Director. Kim Reardon-Crites, (Comm. Compton arrived at 8:09 P.M.) CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL Ms. Sapetto stated that she would give the staff report and then refer to Mr. Ayers to further describe some of the components involved in this issue. Ms. Sapetto stated that the staff recommends the following: 1. To certify the Final EIR and adopt Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2. To rezone a portion of South School conditioned upon the failure of the Mello-Roos assessment district ballot measure: a. To review the City Council directive to rezone .87 acres of South School which fronts Monterey Boulevard to R-3, high density. b. To consider the designation of PD R-2, medium density on a larger portion of the property in order to disperse the density. c. To recommend PD R-2/medium density designations for South School from Montery Boulevard to Cypress if the Letter of Credit issue is committed to by the City Council. Ms. Sapetto stated that earlier this year the City Council and Planning Commission denied the School Board's request for rezoning. The City Council and School Board have since met to discuss a solution to this problem. Tonight's proposal is a result of those discussions. The City Council and the School Board have agreed to form a Joint Powers Association, or a non-profit agency for two purposes: 1. To preserve as much of the school property as open space as possible. 2. To improve and expand Valley School so that it may serve as the single school site. Ms. Sapetto stated that the School Board and the City Council adopted the following strategy at their joint workshop meeting of June 28 and July 5, 1984: 1. The City Council would place on the ballot an assessment district pursuant to Mello-Roos legislation. This assessment district would creat the funding necessary to purchase the entire railroad right-of-way recently abandoned by Santa Fe Railroad and all of South School. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 19 8 4 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 2 2. The City Council would place on the ballot an exception to the anti-oil-drilling ordinance. This exception would allow oil­ drilling at the City Yard only. The revenue from this would be used exclusively for the acquisition, maintenance, and operation of open space within the City. 3. The City Council would place on the ballot a measure to allow the School District to drill for oil at South School if Mello-Roos fails. This revenue would be used for education. 4 . The City would participate in a Joint Powers Association or non-profit agency to acquire South School and Seaview Parkette for open space purposes at $3.5 million. 5. The City would rezone .87 of South School to R-3 (that portion which fronts Monterey Boulevard) conditional upon the failure of Mello-Roos. Ms. Sapetto stated that the Planning Commission must review the rezoning of portions of South School. They may consider two alternatives. Alternative No. l would rezone that portion of property which fronts Monterey Boulevard to R-3, which is what the staff refers to as the built-up portion. Ms . Sape t t o sta t ed t hat a lt ern a t i ve No. 2 would disperse development t o a g r ea t e r de gr ee , g u aran t ees the same value of land, and allows the P la nn i ng Commis s ion and t he Ci t y Co uncil to review the development o f the pr oj ect . The sta f f feels th at Alternative No. 2 is the better of the first two alternatives. Ms . Sape tto s tat ed tha t Al terna tiv e No. 3 addresses the problem that if t he City Co un cil is t o liv e u p to its agreement with the School Bo ard , a Le tt er o f Cr ed i t mus t be e xtended by the Joint Powers Ag r eement o r non -pro f it a gen c y . Th e only collateral that can be p l edged is a r e zo ne d So u t h Sc h o o l prope rt y t ha t is wo rth t h e va l ue of t he Le tt e r of Credit , wh ic h is $4 mi ll i o n . She s t a t e d th a t t he City may decide to use other resou r c es to p l edge as coll a t er al. But in discussing this with Mr. Ay e rs, h e fel t t hat tha t wo u ld probably be unacceptable to the ba nk th at is ex t ending the Letter of Credit. Ms. Sapetto stated the Planning Comm ission needs to review these alternatives and make a recommenda ti on to the City Council. Ms. Sapetto then introduced Mr. Ay er s to further discuss the Letter of Credit. Chmn. Izant expressed the feeling that Mr. Ayers' letter was quite clear, and he didn't feel an e x planation was necessary. He stated that the Commission would be making a land use planning decision and not a financial decision. He felt that the City Council had already made up its mind in terms of financing. Mr. Ayers stated that there was a meeting with the bank, School District, the City, the Bond Council, and the underwriters, Merrill Lynch. He stated that during the last three years, the City has fallen short $1 million in revenue each year as opposed PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIO NAL REZO NING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 3 to e x penditures. This means that the City is a terrible credit risk. He stated that because of these financial problems,the bank insists that the rezoning be done sufficient to produce a value of $5.1 million. They will then loan a Letter of Credit for 75 percent of that amount. Comm. Peirce did not feel that these financial issues were a planning problem. He felt that the proper issue for the Planning Commission is, what is the proper planning for South School. Chmn. Izant asked Mr. Ayers if this land is the only land that could be used as collateral. Mr. Ayers replied in the affirmative. Mr. Ayers stated that he felt he should give the Commission all the information he had in order to give the Commission a broader perspective, including the financial information. Comm. Sheldon stated that he wanted to hear Mr. Ayers information. He stated he had many questions to ask Mr. Ayers. Comm. Schulte concurred with Mr. Sheldon. Comm. Sheldon asked Mr. Ayers how they could accomplish the goal of preserving open space while allowing zoning on School property to equal the sum of $5.1 million. Mr. Ayers stated that the property as it is currently zoned is valued at somewhat less than $1 million. The City wished to preserve open space land by putting an issue on the November 6 ballot to provide the money. Because of State law, the School Board needed to proceed with their construction prior to that election. In order to achieve both goals, the City Council agreed that it would provide $3.5 million of financing to the School District. Mr. Ayers stated that if the November 6 bond issue passes, the City may well, out of the proceeds of that -:l:1.iond issue, have enough to be able to preserve all of South _School as open space if it so chooses. If the Mello-Roos bond issue fails, then in order to redeem the debt which the City, through the non-profit corporation, would have incurred, then the City would have to sell enough of the South School site to pay off the indebtedness. Mr. Ayers stated that that was the Pla nn ing Commission's purpose tonight --to rezone South School in su c h a way as to ob tain enough revenue to pay off the indebtedness. He sa id that to re zone to create $5 .2 million worth of value does n I t n e cessarily me an that that has to be sold if Mello-Roos fails. The Cit y would on l y need to sell enough to r e deem about $4 million of the bond. If Mello-Roos passes, the land, perhaps, could all be open space. If Mello-Roos fails, perhaps a third or a half of it could be open space. Comm. Sheldon stated that the letter by Mr. Ayers of August 22, 1984, conflicted with the Planning Commissions letter dated August 24, 1984, regarding what portion of South School is in issue. Mr. Ayer~ letter stated, "The property west of the east line of Cypress Avenue extended is excluded." PLA..~NING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SO UTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 4 After some discussion, the Commissioners decided that Mr. Ayers' letter should read, "East of the east line of Cypress." Comm. Sheldon reasked his question of how the requirement to get $5.l million in value by rezoning South School conforms to goal No. 2, which is to retain as much open space at South School as possible. Mr. Ayers responded that in order to purchase the land, the City needs to create value. The City cannot legally pay $3.5 million for $1 million worth of land, which is what the land is worth as now zoned. Merrill Lynch, in order to provide the money to the City through the non-profit corporation, needs a guarantee of $5.1 million. That is the value of the entire parcel. That creates the value. If Mello-Roos fails, there is only a need to sell approximately $4 million worth. Comm. Sheldon asked if the City has a more recent appraisal than the one from 1982 at $25 a foot for this land. Mr. Ayers responded that the bank does, but that the City doesn't have these details. Comm. Sheldon asked if that was $25 a foot based on R-3. Mr. Ayers answered in the affirmative. Comm. Sheldon stated that if the value of land had gone up from $25 a square foot to perhaps $40 a square foot, the amount of R-3 land needed to be built on to achieve the financial goals would be significantly less. Comm. Sheldon did not feel it was proper to try to translate dollars needed into zoning with an inadequate appraisal of the dollar value of the land. Mr. Ayers stated that there must be an agreement between the City and the non-profit corporation governing what disposition is made of the property. If Mello-Roos passes, the non-profit corporation must sell the property to the City as the proceeds of the Mello-Roos bond issue. If Mello-Roos fails, then the non-profit corporation may sell only enough property to redeem the note issue. Comm. Sheldon said that he did not know how they could rezor..e property to equal $5.l million and then restrict the sale of that property to preclude a developer from buying all the property that was just rezoned to equal $5.1 million. Mr. Ayers stated that the ownership of this shortly after the rezoning takes effect, to District controlled non-profit corporation. between the City and non-profit corporation in it. property will transfer, the City and School The legal agreement will have that restriction Comm. Sheldon asked whether the Commission might be opening itself up to lawsuits if they rezone all the school property to R-3 and then try to preclude developers from buying it. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 21, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 5 Mr. Ayers stated that the City, on behalf of the non-profit corporation, would bid on three or four different parcels or lines and determine the line that would create enough value. Then immediately upon sale or agreement, the City would act to rezone the rest of the land back to open space. Chmn. Izant asked Ms. Sapetto what would happen if the Planning Commission did not forward a recommendation to the City Council at this meeting. Mr. Ayers responded that that would kill the deal. He stated the City Council has scheduled a special meeting on September 4 to act on the Planning Commission's recommendation. Comm. Compton asked why this issue was not brought to the Commission sooner. Mr. Ayers replied that a joint City Council-School board meeting was held on June 28 in which they agreed to immediately act upon a rezoning. The City Council did pass a resolution of intent and it has taken this long to get it to the Planning Commission. Comm. Sheldon asked Mr. Ayers if he was correct in stating that if the Commission elected for what they believed to be sound reasons hot to act on this tonight, that that doesn't just defer the deal, it kills it. Mr. Ayers answered in the affirmative. He stated that it was his understanding that if the School Board did not receive the money prior to October 15, their plans will be in jeopardy an~ it will cost them several hundreds of thousands of dollars additionally. He also stated that the City's credit is not good enough to go back out and try again. Comm. Sheldon asked that if the Commission rezoned the property so that the value is less than $5.1 million, has the City committed to kick in the rest. Mr. Ayers stated that the City doesn't have the money to kick in. Comm. Sheldon stated that as he understands Mr. Ayers' letter, as the City is a co-guarantor, in the event Mello-Roos fails and the land does not achieve enough money to pay off the non-profit corporation, the City has committed to the difference. Mr. Ayers stated that that was correct. Comrn. Sheldon asked if it was conceivable that the City would have to build out all zoning passed to achieve $5.1 million in order or raise $3.5 million. Mr. Ayers responded that it's conceivable, but that they like to think that the value of the property is such that a major part of it can be retained for open space. He stated that the bank appraisal is $5.1 million, but that that is probably about 25 percent low. Comm. Compton asked if it was correct that the Commission needs to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 6 adopt Alternative 3 for the deal to go through and that the others done' work at all. Mr. Ayers. replied in the affirmative. Chmn. Izant asked what action the City Council could take if the Planning Commission recommended Alternative 1 or Alternative 2. Ms. Sapetto replied that as long as the Planning Commission considered the Alternatives, if the Commission turned it down, then the City Council could take the action that they felt it was necessary to take. Comm. Schulte asked which part of the property in Alternative 3 equaled the value of $5.1 million. Mr. Ayers replied that the bank appraisal encompassed all of the property, but that in talking with Pam, he was confident that Alternative 3 would create what the bank needs. Comm. Schulte asked why the bank was privy to an appraisal that the Commission was not privy to. Ms. Sapetto replied that it was the bank's appraisal. Comm. Schulte summarized by saying that in order for the deal to go t.hrough, the Commission must zone the land in some manner that is consistent with the bank's appraisal which the bank has which the Commissioners have not seen. Mr .. Ayers answered yes. Comm. Schulte felt that the bank was treating the Commission like an adversary. Mr. Ayers responded that the bank has worked with the City very nicely. The public hearing was opened at 8:30 P.M. Dave Jones, 334 Culper Court, stated that the people are voting in November on an open space initiative to rezone open space at all the school properties. And now it looks like the School Board and the City Council are putting pressure on the Planning Commission to beat the initiative. He asked what would happen if the open space initiative passes after the city has already rushed this issue through. Ms. Sapetto replied that that would pose a series of legal questions. She stated the City wishes to avoid a legal battle with the School but also wishes to preserve this property as open space, and that is why they have adopted this strategy. If Mello-Roos passes, then the City can afford to buy and preserve the school property as open space. If the initiative passes, then the question becomes, "Does the people's initiative have the authority to deprive property values of the St a t e of wind up in court. California?ll She felt that the initiative would PLANNING COM.MISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 7 Mr. Ayers stated that the South School was bought with State money. The School District attorney said the probability of any school initiative that would deprive the School District of its value has a very remote chance of being upheld because it is actually owned by the State. Comm. Sheldon asked Ms. Sapetto if it was correct that if the rezoning happens before the initiativeT then what we have is a zoning in effect for which, if the initiative passes, is attempting to escheat or inversely condemn residentially zoned property which would not be lega~ or at least be very litigious. Ms. Sapetto replied that might be a possible argument. Mr. Jones thought it would be less sticky if the initiative went through first and then the site was sold. Chmn. Izant responded that it was staff's recommendation that none of this happen until the failure of Mello-Roos. Mr. Jones felt that the City should wait until after the election to do anything. Ms. Sapetto responded that the problem with that is that the School District owns the property and has the power to sell the property at any time subject to certain conditions and regulations. The City Council wants to purchase the property now so the property can be protected for them to buy if Mello-Roos passes. Mr. Jones felt that the original Environmental Impact Report should be sent back to whoever compiled it and have just the South School scenario put forth. He felt the decision should be held off until a single South School EIR is presented to the Planning Commission. Mr. Jones stated that he carried around an open space initiative and got over 200 signatures. Out of the 200 people, only five turned him down, which indicates that what the people want is open space. If the City does have to rezone, Mr. Jones recommended that it be R-2 along Monterey and the rest preserved as open space. If that is not possible, then R-3 along Monterey and the rest open space. Harold Spear, 50 10th Street, stated that he was at the two joint meetings. He felt the memo was wrong to call them workshops. To his knowledge they were formal meetings of the City Council and they were joint meetings. Mr. Spears stated that he at no time heard that under the City Council-School District June 28 agreement did the City agree to negotiate rezoning of the school property to a use which would establish a value of around $4.8 million, a statement which is reflected in Mr. Ayers' memo on page 2. Mr. Spear stated that the only thing he heard was that if Mello-Roos failed, there would be a rezoning essentially as Alternative 1 reads, i.e., R-3 along Monterey. He remembers the joint powers agreement but not that the City was committing itself as to how it was going to do the rezoning to back that up. He stated if R-3 zoning were along Monterey, two things would be true. One is that the open PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 8 ~-space initiative would nbt really be violated because that was applying to the other four acres of South School. He felt that what happened that night was not in direct collision with the open space ag~eement. He felt that Alternatives 2 and 3 were in direct collision with the open space agreement. Mr. Spear feels that the Planning Commission, City Council, and the School Board should all have a joint meeting to work out what would be reasonable planning --reasonable for the City and reasonable for the School. He stated he was very bothered tonight by the fact that there was no City Council member attending the Planning Commission meeting. He was also concerned about the data being fed back from the June 28 meeting. Wilma Burt, 1152 7th Street, stated that she was also at these meetings and that at all times she heard that $3.5 million was needed to redo Valley. Mrs. Burt pointed out that Prospect Heights was sold for approximately $1 million; the City made the final payment on Pier Avenue_; they bought the two lots east of 11th street; and bought Prospect Heights' play grounds, which is over $369,000. With these transactions, Mrs. Burt figured that the City needs $2,969,000, not $5.1 million. Mrs. Burt stated that the School Board passed the resolution for a joint powers agreement but that the City Council did not. The City Council passed an agreement that they would work with the school to help them get the money they needed and to zone the school for its best use. Mrs. Burt stated that the State Code says that any school that is abandoned must sell one-third of that land to the City at less than fair market value. She stated that that has not been discussed at this meeting. Mrs. Burt also pointed out that the right-of-way of Cypress and Loma Streets were given to the School free. She felt that the City has enough land to put up as collateral for the loan. She did not think Alternative 3 was necessary. She stated that the City Council very strongly voted down R-3 with 99 units. She did not think they would go along with R-3 with 81 units. Comm. Sheldon asked if the City Council voted for the non-profit corporation. Ms. Sapetto replied that if they looked on page 2, they could find exactly what the actions were that the City Council took. Mrs. Burt stated that yesterday (August 26) two Councilmen told her that they had not voted for it and would not vote for it. Comm. Compton asked Mrs. Burt if she felt either scheme 1 or 2 was acceptable. Mrs. Burt replied that the only one she felt might be acceptable was scheme 1, which is for 34 units. She also wished to point out that at South School, the street right-of-way goes right up to the foundation of the school. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 21, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 9 Comm. Sheldon asked if the City Council voted unanimously for the joint powers non-profit corporation. Ms. Sapetto answered in the affirmative. Comm. Peirce asked Mrs. Burt what percentage of South School she felt should be retained for open space. Mr. Burt replied that according to State law, one-third should be retained. She indicated that she would like to have more than one-third, but she wasn't sure if they could go over State law. But she did feel that because Cypress and Loma Streets were vacated for the School's benefit, she saw no reason why the City should have to pay for that property. Betty Schweisthal, Rolling Hills Estates, stated that she is the director and owner of St. Clare's Preschool in Hermosa Beach. She stated that approximately six weeks ago she opened up an infant center. The center is completely filled and she gets from five to ten calls a day from mothers with infants, many of them from Hermosa Beach, crying for a place to leave their child. Ms. Schweisthal stated that 95 percent of her volunteer help comes from senior citizens. She stated that next year when the school buildings are available she wishes to open a day-care center for senior citizens where they would be around children. Ms. Schweisthal recommended that the City leave the schools as they are because we are in the midst of a baby boom. Mr. Ayers wished to clarify that the June 28 agreement was to, one, rezone a lessor part than is being considered now; two, to purchase for $3.5 million South School and Seaview Parkeete; and, three, to underwrite the school's interim need for construction money due to a State law. Mr. Ayers stated that Alternative 3 is the only way to accomplish the School Board's goal of $3.5 million and the City's goal of retaining school property for open space if Mello-Roos passes, or part of the school property as open space if Mello-Roos doesn't pass. He stated that the Council did not know at that time that in order to accomplish their goals, more property needed to be rezoned. In summary, Mr. Ayers felt that the only way to retain that property as open space is to pass Mello-Roos and to rezone the property so that it can be purchased in total now. The public hearing was closed at 9:00 P.M. Comm. Sheldon stated that he was astounded that there was not one City Councilman or one School Board member attending this Planning Commission meeting. He felt many facts could have been cleared up had members of the City Council and School Board been present. He stated he could think of at least three significant, germane issues that are yet unsolved that, if it weren't for Mr. Ayers' statement that delaying the issue would kill the deal, he would recommend that the Planning Commission do nothing at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 21, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 10 Comm. Sheldon stated that to make a decision without a valid, updated appraisal of at least July or August, 1984, of the land value is criminal. He concurred with Mrs. Burt's point that the School District has money in the bank. He stated that he did not know that the School District needs $3.5 million. He did not know why they couldn't guarantee the deal with other school property. Comm. Sheldon stated that it has always been his recommendation to zone the built-up portion of South School as R-3 and leave the rest as open space. Motion by Comm. Sheldon, seconded by Comm . Schulte, to recomm end that the South School property be zoned R -3, high density, to the base of the hill at South School, and t h a t the balance of t he entire portion of that school property be retained as open space. Comm. Compton asked if that would include the area between Monterey and Loma where it is now subdivided into lots. Comm. Sheldon replied that his motion would include all School District owned land to the base of the hill. Comm. Sheldon asked Ms. Sapetto if there was a zoning ordinance which the Planning Commission has the power to implement that would preclude building of any kind. Ms. Sapetto replied that there was no such zoning ordinance. But she stated that that didn't preclude the City from creating an open space zone that says open space with no structures. The present open space zoning allows building of up to 10 percent on property. Comm. Sheldon asked if it was appropriate at this time to define in his motion the zoning of the easterly portion of the entity he has described as a piece of land that will not be built upon. Comm. Peirce responded that he didn't think the City code allowed that and that the City Code would have to be changed first. Ms. Sapetto stated that the Commission would have to draw up a s~parate resolution to adopt an ordinance to amend the open space ordinance or to add an additional section to the open space ordinance. Comm. Sheldon pointed out that his motion called for R-3 zoning because he feels that the ma x imum amount of dollars derived from the least amount of building is what is appropriate. Comm. Schulte stated that it was clear to him that Alternative l leaves the City short of the funds they need, but it was unclear to him whether Alternative 2 leaves the City short of the needed funds. Comm. Sheldon stated he was also unclear of that because the Commission does not have an appraisal on the value of the property or an appraisal based on R-3 of the value of the property, and they did not know how many units R-3 would allow to be built on the property. Therefore, the Commission cannot properly value the property. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 11 Comm. Compton stated that because they cannot make a decision based on what the property is worth or will be worth, they must make a decision based on what the best planning of the property would be for the City. Comm. Sheldon asked Comm. Compton if he would like to zone all the property open space. Comm. Compton answered no. He stated he was not averse to zoning the open space shown by the line in Alternative 2 to some buildable level. Chmn. Izant asked Ms. Sapetto if she had a definable line. Ms. Sapetto stated the built-up portion ends exactly where she has indicated it to end in Alternative 1. However, she indicated that if Comm. Sheldon wished to extend the line down to the bottom of the hili it could be described in that way. Comm. Sheldon asked where that line would fall. Ms. Sapetto responded that that would probably fall either on the line in Alternative 2 or a little bit west of the line in Alternative 2. Chmn. Izant asked Comm. Sheldon if he would like to modify his motion to read: "to the bottom of the hill, but in no case any further east than the westerly most line of Loma Drive." Comm. Sheldon stated that that was an excellent suggestion. The modification was accepted by the seconder of the motion. Comm. Compton asked Chmn. Izant what he felt about the motion. Chmn. Izant, in effect, did not feel that the Planning Commission's recommendation would carry much weight with the City Council. Mr. Spear noted that if the 2.6755 acres in Alternative 2 were zoned at R-3, it would result in 107 units. Mr. Ayers wished to speak on behalf of the City Council and stated that the City Council's goals were to retain open space. He stated that their method of gaining the financing to purchase the property was the only way to do it. And to purchase the property, they must rezone it. Comrn. Peirce noted that the figure of 2.6755 acres in Alternative 2 is approximately 120 percent more than the figure of .87 acres in Alternative 1. He stated that Mr. Speats comment is well taken and wondered if it was Comm. Sheldon's intent to have that many acres. Comm. Sheldon replied that it is a question of whether you use the low end or the high end of R-3. He stated it was not his intension to over build this area. He stated that if the Commission wished, he could specify in his motion that he intended to use the low end of R-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSTION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 12 Comm. Peirce indicated that either the Alternative 1 map or the Alternative 2 map is incorrect in regards to area. Chmn. Izant asked Comm. Sheldon if he would like to put a numerical limitation in his motion. Comm. Sheldon stated a limit of not to exceed 70 units. Comm. Peirce stated that the number of units is important, but the area involved is also important. He believed 2.6 acres was too much for high density and wished to have the proper acreage tied down. Chmn. Izant pointed out that there was a limitation in the motion of 70 units. Comm. Peirce stated he liked the limitation of 70 units but didn't believe you could put a limitation of 70 units in the motion without having conditional use permits and PD R-3. Ms. Sapetto suggested that they develop it with PD R-3. She stated she would calculate the density per acre and include that in the resolution. Comm. Sheldon estimated that a developer would pay approximately $60,000 a unit for this land. Therefore, this land would be worth approximately $4,200,000 for 70 units at $60,000 per unit. Comm. Compton informed the Commission that the area in Alternative 2 labled "open space to PD R-2" not counting the subdivided lots is .95 acres. Ms. Sapetto recalculated the area in Alternative 2 to be 1.99 acres instead of 2.6755 acres. Comm. Peirce asked if it was correct tha.t the motion was to rezone the area from the southerly extension of the westerly side of Loma Drive to PD R-3 at 35 du/a with a total of 70 units. Comm. Sheldon responded that that was acceptable to him. Comm. Sheldon then called for the question. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Comms. Sheldon, Compton, Schulte, Peirce, and Chmn. Izant. None. Comms. Shapiro and Newton. None. Comm. Sheldon asked Chmn. Izant if it was possible for him to construct a letter profiling the Commission's feeling upon what he considered the City Council foisted on the Planning Commission at this meeting. Chmn. Izant stated that he felt that would be appropriate and that he would take on that responsibility. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 CONDITIONAL REZONING OF SOUTH SCHOOL (Cont.) page 13 Motion by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Sheldon, to accept the Environmental Impact Report for South School as written and to certify the Environmental Impact Report and adopt the statement of overriding considerations. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Comms. Sheldon, Schulte, Peirce, and Chmn. Izant. None. Comms. Shapiro and Newton. Comm. Compton. Chmn. Izant stated that he needed a motion to approve Resolution PC 84-22 which would accept lines 1 through 15, but which would require staff to rewrite lines 16 to the end to reflect the appropriate motion as made by Comm. Sheldon. A member of the audience requested Chmn. Izant to restate what the Commission agreed to. Chmn. Izant stated that the Commission made a motion, which was passed, to recommend to the City Council that approximately two acres which is west of the westerly-most line of Loma Drive or to the bottom of the hill, whichever comes first and which is the lessor o:f the two, will be zoned PD R-3 and have a maximum of 70 units to be allowed on that space. Comm. Peirce wished to clarify that it is the westerly extension of the west side of Loma Drive which is on the north side of the property. Chmn. Izant concurred and requested that the language reflect that. He stated that that is the southerly extension of the westerly side of Loma Drive. Mrs. Burt asked Chmn. Izant which resolution he was talking about -­ A, B, or C. Chrnn. Izant responded that it would be a completely new resolution which reflects the previous motion made. He stated they have taken the staff's resolution and said that the language from line 1 through 15 is acceptable, but that line 16 to the end will now reflect the new motion that was made by Comm. Sheldon. Chmn. Izant then asked the secretary to call the roll. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Comrns. Sheldon, Compton, Schulte, Peirce, and Chmn. Izant. None. Comms. Shapiro and Newton. None. Motion by Comm. Schulte to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. No objections. So ordered. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 27, 1984 page 14 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 August 27, 1984. S tev Joes Shapiro, Secretary Date #