The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/10/06Regular Session — 7:10 p.m. Closed Session - Immediately following Regular Session MAYOR Sam Y. Edgerton MAYOR PRO TEM Michael Keegan COUNCIL MEMBERS Patrick 'Kit' Bobko J. R. Reviczky Peter Tucker CITY CLERK Elaine Doerfling CITY TREASURER John M. Workman CITY MANAGER Stephen R. Burrell CITY ATTORNEY Michael Jenkins "Pride is tasteless, colorless and sizeless. Yet it is the hardest thing to swallow." - August B. Black AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, October 1.0, 2006 - Council Chambers, City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Executive Level NIMS/SEMS Training — 6:00 p.m. i All council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. The Council receives a packet with detailed information and recommendations on nearly every agenda item. City Council agendas and staff reports are available for your review on the City's web site located at www.hermosabch.org. Complete agenda packets are also available for public inspection in the Police Department, Fire Department, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk. During the meeting, a packet is also available in the Council Chambers foyer. All written communications from the public included in the agenda will be posted with the agenda on the City's website 1 CITY CLERK 6 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL i ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE LEVEL NIMS/SEMS TRAINING RECONVENE ANNOUNCEMENTS PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION PRESENTED TO BOB MEISTRELL CLOSED SESSION REPORT FOR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2006: NO REPORTABLE ACTIONS. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Members of the public wishing to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction, or to request the removal of an item from the consent calendar, may do so at this time. Comments on public hearing items are heard only during the public hearing. Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker. Members of the audience may also speak: 1) during discussion of items removed from the Consent Calendar; 2) during Public Hearings; and, 3) during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters. The City Council acknowledges receipt of the written communications listed below. No action will be taken on matters raised in written communications. The Council may take action to schedule issues raised in oral and written communications for a future agenda. 1 • • Citizens with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are requested to submit those comments to the City Manager. NO WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member removes an item from the Consent Calendar. Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 4, with public comment permitted at that time. (a) Recommendation to approve minutes of the regular meeting of the City Council held on September 26, 2006. (b) Recommendation to ratify check register and to approve cancellation of certain checks as recommended by the City Treasurer. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) . Recommendation to accept donations of $200 from Bartel Associates to be used for repairs and maintenance on the Veteran's Memorial and $100 from Diane Garsen to be used for Fire Department equipment purchases. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated October 2, 2006. (e) Recommendation to accept the work by KC Industries, Inc. for Project No. CIP 05-643 Pier Concrete Deck Treatment; authorize the Mayor to sign the Notice. of Completion; and, authorize staff to release payment (10% retained 35 days following filing of Notice of Completion). Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 3, 2006. (1) (g) Recommendation to receive and file the draftminutes of the Public Works Commission meeting held on September 20, 2006. Recommendation to approve the Los Angeles County Cardiac Care Program Equipment and_Training Agreement with the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services — Emergency Medical Services Agency; authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement; appropriate $51,000 for the reimbursable purchase of the equipment not to exceed $17,000 per unit; and, approve estimated revenue of $51,000 from the County of Los Angeles. Memorandum from Fire Chief Russell Tingley dated October 4, 2006. (h) Recommendation to receive and file report of Customer Service Surveys/Complaints. Memorandum from City Clerk Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated October 3, 2006. (i) 0) • • Recommendation to adopt resolution approving final map #62912 for a 2 -unit condo at 836 Bard Street. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated October 5, 2006. Recommendation to adopt resolution approving final map #62913 for a 2 -unit condo at 842 Bard Street. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated October 5, 2006. 3. CONSENT ORDINANCES a. ORDINANCE NO. 06-1273 — "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING GRAFITTI REMOVAL AND AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE." For adoption. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated October 3, 2006. b. ORDINANCE NO. 06-1274 — "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3.32 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE." For adoption. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated October 3, 2006. 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 7:30 P.M. a. REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, ON AUGUST 15, 2006, TO APPROVE, WITH MODIFICATIONS, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT, STILL WATER CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN BISTRO, AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE ALLOCATION OF USES WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated October 2, 2006 and a memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 5, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: To sustain the Planning Commission decision to approve the request subject to conditions of approval as contained in the attached resolution. • 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BANNER PERMIT FEES FROM THE HERMOSA BEACH WOMAN'S CLUB FOR THE ANNUAL PANCAKE BREAKFAST ON OCTOBER 22, 2006. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated October 4, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the $245 banner fee for the pancake breakfast on October 22, 2006. b. PIER AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 2, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Form a design oversight committee comprised of two members of the Public Works Commission, the Planning Commission and City Council; review public comment regarding the trial striping layout on Pier Avenue between Hermosa Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway; direct staff to either terminate the test striping and return to four lanes of traffic or to leave the two lane option in place; and, if the direction is to return to four lanes, authorize staff to issue a change order to PCI, Inc. in an amount not -to -exceed $20,000 to remove existing pavement markings and provide new striping. c. PIER CLOCK BENCH BARRIER PROJECT — AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 3, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the award of construction contract for Non-CIP Project No. 009-06 Pier Clock Bench Barrier Project to Dave Shaw Concrete and Block, Inc. in the amount of $48,000.00; authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the contract subject to approval of the City Attorney; authorize an additional appropriation of $29,869.00 from the Downtown Enhancement Fund; and, authorize the Director of Public Works to issue change orders as necessary up to $7,000.00. d. COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Lisa Lynn dated October 3, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission recommends that Council approve the agreement between the City and Coca-Cola Bottling Company to accept Centennial sponsorship of $25,000 and install vending machines at select City locations for the period of one year. • • e. CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION — JANUARY 14, 2007 BIRTHDAY PARTY PROPOSAL. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Lisa Lynn dated October 3, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Appropriate $53,000 of Centennial Celebration sponsorship funds towards entertainment for the January 14, 2007 birthday celebration. f. REVIEW OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO ADD RESIDENTIAL (LIVE -WORK) AS A PERMITTED LAND USE IN TIIE M-1 (LIGHT MANUFACTURING) ZONE. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated September 28, 2006. g - RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. REVIEW OF ELIMINATING RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS IN THE C-1 ZONE. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated September 28, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. h. ORDINANCE ADJUSTING CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated September 26, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Waive full reading and introduce ordinance adjusting Council compensation for City Councilmembers and amending the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code. 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER NONE 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated October 3, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Appoint delegates and alternates to the various committees consistent with the policy of maintaining permanent representation whenever possible and delete any obsolete temporary subcommittees as appropriate. • • b. VACANCIES — BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS EXPIRATION OF TERMS — PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated October 5, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Schedule a meeting prior to the regular meeting of Tuesday, October 24, 2006 for the purpose of interviewing applicants with appointment to be made that evening at the regular meeting. 9. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Council members for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or, 3) resolution of matter by Council action tonight. NONE ANNOUNCEMENT IN OPEN SESSION OF ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on September 24, 2006. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. Existing Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Name of Case: Philia Five Group, LLC dba The Union Cattle Company Case Number: YS015070 3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Government Code Section 54957.6 City Negotiator: Stephen Burrell Employee Organization: Hermosa Beach Firefighters' Association ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION ORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT 7 • • • • National Incident Management System (NIMS) IS -700 Executive Course NIMS Intent • Broad applicability • Improve coordination and cooperation 3 NIMS Compliance Each city must adopt NIMS by 9- 30-2006 Initial staff NIMS training done by 9-30-06 More NIMS training in 2007 Refresher NIMS training every 3-5 years * ' Public safety employees every 5 years All other employees every 3 years • What is NIMS? • A comprehensive, national approach • Applicable at all jurisdictional levels z Why Do We Need NIMS? Experience shows a need for: • Coordinated responses • Standardization • Interoperability 4 NIMS Concepts and Principles • Flexible framework that: 3 Facilitates working together ... At any type of incident ... 3 Regardless of size, location, or complexity • Flexible management structures • Requirements for standardized processes, procedures, and systems 6 I NIMS Standard Structures • Incident Command System (ICS) • Multiagency Coordination Systems • Public Information Systems 7 Command and Management • Incident Command System (ICS) • Multiagency Coordination Systems Types of Plans • Standard Operating Procedures • Emergency Operations Plans • Corrective Action Plans • Mitigation Plans • Recovery 11 6 NIMS Components • Command and management • Preparedness • Resource management • Communications and information management • Supporting technologies • Ongoing management and maintenance Preparedness Responsibilities of Cities • Coordinate and work with organizations • Establish: • Plans and procedures > Conduct training classes & exercises > Interoperable communications > Resource management guidelines > Response priorities > Mutual Aid agreements > Personnel & equipment standards 10 Training and Exercises The NIMS Integration Center will: • Use national standards & guidelines • Use standard modeling & simulation • Define general training requirements • Set discipline specific requirements 12 76 t • • • 2 a • Personnel Qualifications / Certification Development of standards, including: > Training Experience Credentialing Currency requirements > Physical and medical fitness 13 Resource Management Includes: • Descriptions (Capability) • Inventories • Mobilization • Dispatch • Tracking • Recovery • Reimbursement 15 Mutual Aid and EMACs Cities should have agreements with: Other agencies • Private -sector and NGOs • Charitable organizations 17 • • What Is Resource Management? Four tasks: • Establishing systems • Activating the systems • Dispatching resources • Deactivating resources 14 Equipment Certifications • Development of national equipment standards • Review I approve national standards for equipment 16 Supporting Technologies Principles: 1. Interoperability and compatibilities 2. Technology support 3. Technology standards 4. Broad-based requirements 5. Strategic planning and R & D 18 3 • Publication Management • The development of naming and numbering conventions • Review and certification of publications • Methods for publications control • Identification of sources for publications • Management of publication distribution 19 Communications and Information Management Principles: • Common operating picture • Works for all jurisdictions and agencies • Common communications and data standards 21 ICS • Proven emergency management system • Flexible for all disciplines • Works for all incidents 23 • Communications/Information Management NIMS identifies standards for: • Interoperability • Communications. • Information management. • Information sharing 20 Integrated Communications • Hardware systems • Planning all frequencies • Information Transfer (int & ext) 22 ICS Features • Common terminology • Organizational resources • Manageable span of control Organizational facilities • Use of position titles • Uses an Incident Action Plan Integrated communications Accountability 24 • 4 • • • Common Terminology ICS requires: • Common terminology. • "Clear" text. 25 Span of Control • Ranges from 3 to 7 • 1 to 5 is optimum ratio 27 Incident Command Organizational Level Title Incident Command Incident Commander Command Staff Officer General Staff (Section) Chief Branch Director Division/Group Supervisor Unit Leader Strike Team/Task Force Leader 29 Organizational Resources • Includes: i Personnel D Facilities > Equipment and supplies • Typed by capability 26 Incident Facilities • Set up at each incident • An ICP is always set up 28 Incident Action Plans • Communicate incident objectives • Based on operational periods • Distributed to all supervisors 30 5 Accountability • Orderly chain of command • Check-in for all responders • Only 1 supervisor per person 31 Unified Command Unified Command (Representadres Fran Local )udWctbm) Operations Planning Logistics Finance/ Administration 33 Area Command Area Command Planning Logistics Finance/ Administration 35 Unified Command • More than 1 agency responds in a jurisdiction • Incidents cross jurisdictions 32 Area Command • Multiple incidents within a jurisdiction • Large incidents that cross jurisdictions 34 How Does Unified Command Work? • Agencies work together to: > Analyze Intelligence Establish objectives and strategies > Allocate resources Unified Command does not change other features of ICS. 36 • • • 6 • • • Multiagency Coordination Systems • Support incident management • Facilitate logistics and resource tracking • Allocate resources • Coordinate information • Coordinate issue resolution 39 Multiagency Coordination Systems • Combination of resources • Common framework • Supports incident activities 41 What Does Area Command Do? • Sets overall strategy and priorities • Allocates resources • Ensures proper management • Ensures objectives are met • Ensure strategies are followed 38 Multiagency Coordination Systems • EOC • Area Command • Unified Command (aka Multiagency Coordination Entities) 40 Multiagency Coordination Systems Support incident management: i Policies Priorities Facilitate Y Logistics 8 3. Resource tracking • Use resources based on incident priorities • Coordinate incident information • Coordinate interagency: Policies, r Priorities and 3 Strategies 42 7 • EOC Organizational Functions EOC Manager Communications Information Management Coordination Resource Management 43 Public Information • Provides information to: > Command > The Public • Ensures information provided is: > Accurate > Timely > Coordinated 45 The JIC Location where public information staff work for coordinating and disseminating information 47 • t. EOC Functional Coordination MuIdagency Coordination Entity (aka the EOC) Situation status Resource needs Priorities Strategic coordination Other Multi -agency Coordination Entities /I\ Incident Command 1 Incident Command 2 Incident Command 3 44 Public Information Officers • Advise the IC • Establish and operate within the JIS • Ensure that officials & public are informed 48 JICs ziState JIC Local ]IC 1 i Agency 1 PIO Local3IC 2 Agency 2 PIO IC/UC/Area Command PIO (at incident JMC) 48 8 • • • • • • • JIC Characteristics • Includes representatives of all players • Procedures / protocols for working with other JICs 49 • JICs Joint Information Center Press Secretary (jurisdictional) Liaison (as required) Research Team Media Team Logistics Team 50 9 /a/To • Tuesday, October 9, 2006 Emergency Action by the Council Issue: Request immediate relief for the traffic safety issues on 16th street west of PCH. High daily count of 5233 low of 3500 vehicles using 16th street west of PCH per day. Count by Pub Works in Sept.. Does not count cars turning from PCH onto 16th street and then going into the Von's parking lot. Boils down to 5 cars per minute on a one block street in an 18 hour day. . Cars are turning in the Pavilion parking structure from the center westbound lane. Cars eastbound must block traffic when making a left turn into the parking structure. What does this mean? (use attachment 1 for reference) 1. Speed of traffic and volume of traffic is dangerous to anyone using the sidewalks or crosswalks of 16th street. 2. Traffic volume is dangerous for children and parents walking their kids to the Valley View School 3. Traffic volume is dangerous for the elderly trying to use the crosswalks 4. Creates a nuisance because of the large number of cars using horns 5. Counted 32 vehicles between the parking garage and the traffic light. 6. Someone is going to blow right thru the stop sign at 16th street and Ardmore because of excessive speed and may injure or kill someone. 7. Residents have cars shining lights into their residents up to 3 am in the morning by illegal parkers in the Von's unloading area. 8. Residents are resorting to upgrading their doors and window to keep the additional noise out. Traffic volume is creating bottlenecks by vehicles going into the Pavilion Parking Garage. This happens several time a day. Noise levels are elevated by cars and 18 wheelers using horns as they try to pass the garage bottleneck and continue down 16th street. Once through these cars roar down 16th street. Cars are waiting in the Von's truck unloading area at all hours in order to maximize their health club workout session parking. They wait with vehicle lights on and radios blaring for their exercise class (?) to start. A couple of minutes before the start of sessions they enter the Pavilion parking garage.. We have already contacted the City Manager and the Police Chief. The City Manager indicated that something would be done. But that written and verbal contact was several months ago and we have heard nothing since. Page 1 • • Therefore we request that (see attachment 2): 1. That cars eastbound on 16th Street not be allowed a left turn into the Pavilion parking garage. 2. That cars entering the parking garage only be allowed to turn from the north lane which is current marked for a right turn lane. 3. That the center lane which is westbound be marked for a straight through lane and left turn only. 4. That cars leaving the pavilion parking garage only be allowed a left turn going east on 16th street toward PCH. This will reduce the traffic passing the residences on 16th street. 5. Traffic entering Von's main parking lot will make a left turn if westbound or a right turn if eastbound. Westbound delivery trucks will still be able to make a left turn into the Von's unloading area. Respectively submitted by: Ron and Linda Miller 1600 Ardmore #213 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310-937-9052 Page 2 PCH ATTACHMO # 1 - Current <NORTH Park Entr 1600 ARDMORE Park Entr ARDMORE Sept 29 2006 5233 Vehicles Per Day 16TH Street West VONS PARKING ENTRANCE Truck Unloading —Area Traffic Ctr VONS PCH Pavilion Park Entr ATTACH/NT # 2 - Proposed Park Entr 1600,, a. ARDMORE Park Entr ARDMORE d 16TH Street West <NORTH VONS PARKING ENTRANCE ,f VONS A' s. • • • /0/0-6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, September 26, 2006, at the hour of 7:20 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Fire Chief Russell Tingley ROLL CALL: Present: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton (by teleconference from Sheraton Hotel & Towers in Chicago, Illinois) ABSENT: None ANNOUNCEMENTS - Councilmember Tucker announced the annual Beach Cities Toy Drive wrapping party on December 19 at Joslyn Center in Manhattan Beach at 1600 Valley Drive. Councilmember Reviczky announced a Hermosa Beach Sister City Association fund-raising auction on Sunday, October 1, from 1-4 p.m., at 1800 The Strand, with a variety of auction items to bid on, and a grand prize drawing for one-week in a two- bedroom unit at a choice of world-class luxury hotels in Mexico plus $600 toward airfare; said there would be delicious food and gave locations selling tickets. Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan announced that the 2nd Story Theater's first production "The Beast," a play written by local resident Angelo Masino, was running on weekends at 8 p.m.; said Pat Love would be installed as the new president of the Kiwanis Club on Saturday, September 30; and asked the meeting be adjourned in memory of long-time Hermosa resident and business owner Peter Mangurian. Councilmember Bobko said the Hermosa Beach Education Foundation was having a casino night fundraiser on Saturday evening, September 30, with tickets available on their website at http://www.hbef.com. PRESENTATIONS INTRODUCTION OF NEW FIREFIGHTERS AUSHLEY BAKER-WILHITE & SCOTT DURKIN Chief Tingley introduced two new firefighters, both Hermosa Beach residents and both from the reserves program, including Hermosa Beach's first full-time female firefighter, and the City Council welcomed them to the community. PRESENTATION OF DONATIONS TO THE HERMOSA BEACH HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM $15,000 FROM THE KIWANIS CLUB OF HERMOSA BEACH $50,000 FROM P.I.N.K. PRESENTED BY BARBARA ROBINSON Terry Bose, of the Hermosa Beach Kiwanis Club, said Kiwanians were pleased to present the proceeds of their "Taste at the Beach" event to the Historical Society. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12000 2a • • Barbara Robinson, of the retail women's clothing store p.i.n.k., said she was happy to be able to assist her new adopted City with the completion of the museum and thanked the community members who provided support and hard work to make Hermosa Beach a better place to live. Rick Koenig, representing the Hermosa Beach Historical Society,thanked both women and their organizations for their generous donations, noting that their generosity would enable to the Society to build a museum of which many generations of Hermosans could be proud for years to come. CLOSED SESSION REPORT FOR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2006: NO REPORTABLE ACTIONS. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN. COMMUNICATIONS There were no written communications. Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Jim Lissner — Hermosa Beach, said that there had not been compliance with the Brown Act because the notification that Mayor Edgerton would be participating in the meeting by teleconference from his hotel in Chicago was not announced at least 72 hours before the meeting (City Attorney Jenkins said, although Mr. Lissner was correct in the strict interpretation of the Brown Act, the agenda had been posted more than 72 hours before the meeting, the only change to the agenda was the announcement of the Mayor's teleconference participation from the location of his business trip, the Mayor had posted the agenda at the front desk of the hotel and made his room available for anyone wishing to attend, as required by the Brown Act, Mr. Lissner's document submitted at the meeting had been faxed to the Mayor; therefore, he did not feel that the teleconference participation of Mayor Edgerton prejudiced the Council's decision in anyway and still provided the openness and transparency of the proceedings); Steve Klein — Los Angeles County Library Regional Administrator introduced Anita Brown, the new librarian for the Hermosa Beach County Library, noting that she been with the County Library system for many years, with the last six years in Lawndale; Anita Brown — Hermosa Beach Librarian, thanked her staff, the Friends of the Library, and the community for their warm reception and said she looked forward to many years of service in the beautiful City of Hermosa Beach; and Dallas Yost — Hermosa Beach, asked that consent calendar item 2(f), award of the construction contract for the Pier Clock Bench Barrier Project, be removed for separate discussion. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12001 v • • • 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: Action: To approve the consent calendar recommendations (a) through (s) with the exception of the following items, which were removed for discussion in item 4, but are shown in order for clarity: 2(f) Tucker, (i) Keegan, (j) Reviczky, and (n) Keegan, Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None (a) RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2006. Action: To approve as presented the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 12, 2006. (b) RECOMMENDATION TO RATIFY CHECK REGISTER NOS. 44198 THROUGH 45426, AND TO APPROVE THE CANCELLATION OF CHECK NO. 44749, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY TREASURER. Action: To ratify the check register as presented. (c) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. Action: To receive and file the Tentative Future Agenda Items as presented. (d) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE AUGUST 2006 FINANCIAL REPORTS: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report; and 3) Investment report. (e) Action: To receive and file the August 2006 financial reports: RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE ACTION MINUTES. OF THE PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2006. Supplemental letter received from Howard Longacre on September 25, 2006. Action: To receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of September 5, 2006. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12002 • • (f) RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE THE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR NON-CIP PROJECT NO. 009-06 PIER CLOCK BENCH BARRIER PROJECT TO DAVE SHAW CONCRETE AND BLOCK, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $48,000.00; AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE CONTRACT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY; AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $29,869.00 FROM THE 109 DOWNTOWN ENHANCEMENT FUND; AND AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ISSUE CHANGE ORDERS AS NECESSARY UP TO $7,000.00. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated September 19, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Councilmember Tucker at the request of Dallas Yost for separate discussion later in the meeting. Public Works Director Morgan responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Dallas Yost — Hermosa Beach, objected to the division of the Plaza from the community by the proposed wall, said he understood the concern for public safety but that construction of the wall actually created other safety hazards. (9) Action: To direct staff to construct a mockup of the barrier to show its exact size and continue the item to the meeting of October 10 or October 24. Motion Keegan, second Edgerton. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE FOLLOWING CLAIM AND REFER IT TO THE CITY'S LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR. Memorandum from Personnel Director/Risk Manager Michael Earl dated September 18, 2006. Claimant: Jaco, Brad Date of Loss: 03/19/06 Date Filed: 08/16/06 Allegation: Trip & fall Action: To deny the following claim and refer it to the City's Liability Claims Administrator, as recommended by staff. (h) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE PROJECT STATUS REPORT. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated September 19, 2006. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12003 r (i) U) • • Action: To receive and file the Status Report of capital improvement projects that are either under design or construction as of August 31, 2006. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROPRIATE $14,731 FROM THE CITIZEN'S OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) PROGRAM TO PURCHASE THIRTY-FOUR (34) TASER CAM AUDIONIDEO DIGITAL RECORDING DEVICES. Memorandum from Police Captain Thomas Eckert dated September 19, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan for separate discussion later in the meeting. Police Chief Savelli responded to Council questions, noting that this is a sole source for these devices. Action:. To appropriate $14,731 from the Citizen's Option for Public Safety (COPS) program to purchase thirty-four (34) TASER Cam AudioNideo digital recording devices, as recommended by staff. Motion Keegan, second Reviczky. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT DONATIONS OF $2,002.11 COLLECTED FROM ANONYMOUS DONORS AT THE SUMMER CONCERT HELD ON JULY 30, 2006 TO BE USED FOR THE CENTENNIAL CONCERT SERIES IN AUGUST 2007; 11,600 FROM THELMA GREENWALD TO BE USED FOR A MEMORIAL BENCH FOR RICHARD M. GREENWALD; $422 COLLECTED FROM ANONYMOUS DONORS AT THE FIESTA BEER GARDEN TO BE USED FOR THE CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION; AND TWO NEW "TREK" BICYCLES WITH AN ESTIMATED VALUE OF $1,500 FROM MIKE SANTOMIERI TO BE USED BY . THE PATROL OFFICERS. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated September 19, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Councilmember Reviczky for separate discussion later in the meeting in order to acknowledge and thank the donors. Action: To accept the following donations: $2,002.11 collected from anonymous donors at the July 30, 2006 Summer Concert to be used for the Centennial Concert Series in August 2007; City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12004 • • $1,600 from Thelma Greenwald to be used for a memorial bench for Richard M. Greenwald; $422 collected from anonymous donors at the Fiesta Beer Garden to be used for the Centennial Celebration; $1,500 estimated value for two new "Trek" bicycles from Mike Santomieri to be used by the Patrol Officers. Motion Reviczky, second Edgerton. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None (k) RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP #60182 FOR A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 1600 MONTEREY BOULEVARD. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated September 18, 2006. (I) (m) Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6495, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 60182, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 1600 MONTEREY BOULEVARD IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA." RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP #60263 FOR A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 406 OCEAN VIEW AVENUE. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated September 18, 2006. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6496, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 60623, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 406 OCEAN VIEW AVENUE IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA." RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP #62301 FOR A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 58 TWENTIETH STREET. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated September 18, 2006. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6497, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 62301, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12005 I • • PROJECT LOCATED AT 58 TWENTIETH STREET IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA." (n) RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF FIFTEEN (15) SECOND CHANCE BALLISTIC VESTS (BODY ARMOR) TO ALL STATE POLICE EQUIPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,662.00 (BID AMOUNT OF $8,925 + 736 TAX). Memorandum from Police Captain Thomas Eckert dated September 18, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan for separate discussion later in the meeting. Police Chief Savelli responded to Council questions. Action: To authorize the purchase of fifteen (15) Second Chance ballistic vests (body armor) to All State Police Equipment in the amount of $9,662 (bid amount of $8,925 + 736 tax), as recommended by staff. Motion Keegan, second Reviczky. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None (o) RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PROPOSAL FOR A CABLE TELEVISION PROGRAM TO FEATURE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES AND ALLOCATE $5,000 TOWARD THE PROJECT FROM PROSPECTIVE EXPENDITURES. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Lisa Lynn dated September 19, 2006. Action: To approve the proposal for a cable television program to feature City of Hermosa Beach parks and recreation activities and allocate $5,000 toward the project from prospective expenditures, as recommended by staff. (p) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE ACTION MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2006. Action: To receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 19, 2006. (q) RECOMMENDATION FOR REAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FROM 2005- 06 TO 2006-07, ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2005-06 AND 2006- 07. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated September 19, 2006.. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12006 • • Action: To approve the staff recommendation to reappropriate the amounts listed in the staff report from the FY 2005-06 budget to the FY 2006-07 budget, and approve the additional appropriations listed in the staff report for 2005-06 and 2006-07. (r) RECOMMENDATION TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE DATE FOR THE REQUIRED AB1234 ETHICS TRAINING ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2006 FROM 5:00 P.M. TO 7:00 P.M. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated September 21, 2006. Action: To acknowledge the date for the required AB1234 ethics training on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. (s) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE ACTION MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 16, 2006. Action: To receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of August 16, 2006. At 7:40 p.m., the order of the agenda was suspended to go to public hearing item 5 (a). 3. CONSENT ORDINANCES — None 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION Items 2(f), (i), (j), and (n) were heard at this time but are shown in order for clarity. Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are shown under the appropriate item. At 9:23 p.m., the order of the agenda went to public hearing item 5(b). 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL, ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2005, OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR A RESTAURANT WITH ON -SALE ALCOHOL TO CHANGE THE CLOSING TIME FROM 12:00 MIDNIGHT TO 2:00 A.M. DAILY AT 73 PIER AVENUE, MEDITERRANEO RESTAURANT. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated August 31, 2006. Community Director Blumenfeld presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 , Page 12007 • The public hearing opened at 7:46 p.m. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Tommy Short — restaurant owner, said he had been in this location for 12 years, first Brewski's and, for the last three years, Mediterranee, noting that neither restaurant had ever been cited for any violations; thanked the Council for providing full representation for this hearing; said they hated having to ask their customers to leave at midnight because many people worked late; said he had no plans to sell his business; Julio Bobolini — Mercury Air Group at LAX, said he had a 24-hour business and entertained people from overseas who were accustomed to eating much later than most Americans; said his clients appreciate an upscale restaurant like Mediterraneo; Steve Roberts — Cafe Bugaloo owner and Hermosa Beach resident, said he was lucky to have had a business in Hermosa Beach for 11 years and knew how expensive it was to operate a restaurant; urged the Council to give Mediterraneo a level playing field with the other establishments on the Plaza by giving them the extra hours; Matt Houston — Mediterraneo General Manager and Hermosa Beach resident, reiterated that both Brewski's and Mediterraneo had impeccable records; said when the full liquor license was given to Mediterraneo, the Council was concerned that it would become another bar but this had not happened; said all the local newspapers had given the restaurant great reviews for its wonderful appetizers, a great wine list, and a favorite late night dining location; Thurleen Anderson — Hermosa Beach resident and Leadership Hermosa participant, said that she and her friends did not want to go to the noisy bars on Pier Plaza nut wanted an upscale restaurant like Mediterraneo where they could have a conversation; said that Mediterraneo brought a much needed balance to the Plaza; felt there were many people who were interesting in a late-night bite to eat; Colin Anderson - Hermosa Beach, said he worked until a late hour and wanted a nice place to eat, rather than a loud bar; said he was always sorry to have to leave Mediterraneo at midnight; Philip Shaw — Hermosa Beach, said he lived near Pier Plaza because he wanted to be able to walk to the area; said there were few places there for his age group to have a nice meal with conversation; Dan Hagle — Hermosa Beach, agreed that Mediterraneo was a great place for the older, calmer crowd and a great asset for the community; appreciated a place where he could take his date or clients; said the only other places for a nice late-night dinner were in Manhattan Beach; said Mediterraneo was a well-run business which deserved the extra operating hours; Robert Resnick — Hermosa Beach, said he had moved from New York two years ago and enjoyed the diversity in Hermosa Beach; said that diversity would be maintained by allowing the extra hours for Mediterraneo; Todd Hart — said he used to live in Hermosa Beach and was also in the restaurant business; said he enjoyed having a nice place to go when his workday ended at a late hour; City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12008 • • Bill Tierney — Hermosa Beach, said he had seen a dramatic change in Hermosa Beach over his 21 years of residency; said restaurants like Mediterraneo had not always existed; said this type of establishment with its great food made Hermosa Beach a better place to live; said he visited Mediterraneo at least once a week and felt it was unfair that they had to close at midnight; Carla Merriman — Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and Visitors' Bureau, said Mediterraneo had become a wonderful asset for the City, attracting the right clientele to downtown; hoped the Council would allow the extension of hours, knowing that the fear of Mediterraneo becoming another bar had been dispelled; suggested that the City institute an entertainment permit as the City of Redondo Beach had done to allow fine restaurants like this to close at 2:00 a.m. when they had proven to be deserving of trust; No name given — said Mediterraneo was the perfect place to take a date to impress her and that he appreciated a nice late-night place to go after an evening movie; Andrea Vadavick — said she was a teacher in Manhattan Beach and planned the annual end of the year party for her school; said usually the location changed from year to year buteveryone had enjoyed Mediterraneo so much, it had been there the last three years; however, they had hoped to be able to linger there longer than midnight; Peter Quelsch — said Manhattan Beach had improved their late night problems by encouraging more upscale restaurants like Mediterraneo with longer hours; hoped the same would happen in Hermosa Beach; Donna Cocke — said she and her husband are theater goers which means they often dine late, and also entertain friends who enjoy a nice restaurant which is open late; Patty Egerer — Hermosa Beach, said that the drinking district on Pier Plaza continues to generate quality of life issues and erode public safety; urged the Council to deny Mediteranneo's request for extended hours; Rick Levins — Hermosa Beach, said the City needs more establishments like Mediterraneo for the over -30 crowd and urged the Council to grant their request; Dave Peterson — said it was important to note that the Conditional Use Permit runs with the land, not the business, which meant that the decision regarding Mediteranneo's hours would apply to any business at that location; in the future; said although it was extreme to characterize Pier Plaza as a drinking district, he encouraged the Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the request for a closing time of 2:00 a.m; Jim Lissner — Hermosa Beach, discussed the handout he provided to the Council (also faxed to Mayor Edgerton at his hotel) regarding operating hours of similar establishments in Manhattan Beach; said that Hermosa Beach was a bedroom community and its neighborhoods were disturbed by late night patrons returning to their cars; Rhonda Turner — said that the wrong target was being attacked and that establishments on Pier plaza with the long lines of people waiting to City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12009 • • get in should have their restrictions enforced to improve conditions downtown; said she was being forced to go to Manhattan Beach to enjoy late-night dining; Albro Lundy — attorney for the restaurant owner, Hermosa Beach resident and business owner, said Mediterranee made the City a better place by encouraging a better clientele for Pier Plaza; said downtown problems could be improved by enforcing CUPs for existing businesses; reiterated Mediterraneo's impeccable record; urged the Council to give them a level playing field with the competition by granting longer hours; Sharon Paul — Hermosa Beach, said Hermosa is a great city but there are problems; said restaurants like Mediterraneo provide a place for the over -50 crowd to go and to improve conditions on the Plaza. The public hearing closed at 8:29 p.m. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6498, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ON APPEAL, TO DENY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO. EXTEND OPERATING HOURS FOR A RESTAURANT WITH ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL AND LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AT 73 PIER AVENUE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AT LOT 27, BLOCK 13 HERMOSA BEACH TRACT." Motion Keegan, second Reviczky. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton None None None The meeting recessed at 8:50 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:04 p.m., with item 4, items removed from the consent calendar. b. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO MERGER OF PARCELS (CHAPTER 16.20) HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE. Community Director Blumenfeld recommended that the item be continued. Action: To continue the hearing to the meeting of November 14, 2006. Motion Reviczky, second Keegan. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, and Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12010 • • 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN. Memorandum from Fire Chief Russell Tingley dated September 19, 2006. Fire Chief Tingley presented the staff report and responded to Council questions, noting that the Emergency Operations Plan would be posted on the City's website and reminding the City Council that, if the plan was adopted, their training associated with this plan was scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on October 10, 2006, prior to their regular meeting. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6499, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT THE UPDATED EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN." Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None b. GRAFFITI REMOVAL ORDINANCE. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated September 21, 2006. City Manager Burrell presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to waive full reading and introduce Ordinance No. 06-1273, entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING GRAFFITI REMOVAL AND AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE," as amended to delete the provision requiring businesses to secure aerosol paint spray cans and wide blade markers in a locked area. Motion Keegan, second Reviczky. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None c. ORDINANCE APPROVING THE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3.32 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, BRINGING IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA'S TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX (TOT) LAWS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2005; ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE FEE FOR ISSUANCE OF A TAX CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE; AND City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12011 • • ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REVISED "TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE EXEMPTION FORM." Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated September 19, 2006. Supplemental information received from Finance Director Copeland on September 25, 2006. Finance Director Copeland presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: (1) Waive full reading and introduce Ordinance. No. 06-1274, entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3.32 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE."; (2) Adopt Resolution No. 06-6500, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE FEE FOR ISSUANCE OF A TAX CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.32.125."; and (3) Adopt Resolution No. 06-6501, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE USE OF THE "TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE EXEMPTION FORM" IN CONJUNCTION WITH ITS TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE." Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None d. RESOLUTION REVISING THE CITY'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED POSITIONS. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated September 21, 2006. Deputy City Clerk Drasco presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6502, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 02- 6237, APPROVING AN AMENDED CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED POSITIONS (EMPLOYEES, BOARD/COMMISSION MEMBERS), AND DESIGNATING THE CITY'S FILING OFFICER." Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by the following vote: City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12012 • • AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a. CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION — FUND-RAISING STATUS REPORT. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated September 20,2006. City Manager Burrell presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To receive and file the Centennial Celebration fund-raising status report, as recommended by staff. Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None b. CENTENNIAL MERCHANDISE PURCHASE. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated September 21, 2006. City Manager Burrell presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To authorize the purchase of resale Centennial merchandise as specified in the amount of $3,175.00 plus taxes and shipping from the Centennial account. Motion Reviczky, second Keegan. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated September 14, 2006. City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12013 • • • Action: It was the consensus of the Council was to continue the item to the next City Council meeting on October 10, 2006. 9. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL - None ANNOUNCEMENT IN OPEN SESSION OF ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on September 12, 2006. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. Existing Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Name of Case: Philia Five Group, LLC dba The Union Cattle Company Case Number: YS015070 3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Government Code Section 54957.6 City Negotiator: Stephen Burrell Employee Organization: Hermosa Beach Firefighters' Association ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION — The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach adjourned on Tuesday, September 26, 2006, at the hour of 9:50 p.m. to a closed session. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION — The Closed Session convened at the hour of 9:55 p.m. At the hour of 10:25 p.m., the Closed Session adjourned to the Regular Meeting. ORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS — There were no decisions made requiring a public announcement. ADJOURNMENT - The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach adjourned in memory of Peter Mangurian on Tuesday, September 26, 2006, at the hour of 10:26 p.m. to the Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006, at 7:10 p.m. City Clerk ty City Clerk City Council Minutes 9-26-06 Page 12014 vchlist Check Register Page: 1 0911812006 5:05:05PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45428 9/18/2006 12676 HANCOCK COLLEGE, ALLAN 19705 Tuition/ Charles & Parente/ FTO Class 001-2101-4312 Total : 1 Vouchers for bank code : boa Bank total : 1 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 110.00 110.00 110.* 110.00 • >e, Page: 1 vchlist Check Register Page: 1 0912112006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45429 9/21/2006 13975 A -I CONSOLIDATED, INC 47322 FOAM WINDSCREEN FOR CC MICROPHONES 001-4204-4309 148.08 Total : 148.08 45430 9/21/2006 06290 AIR SOURCE INDUSTRIES 450244 Oxygen Refill/ Aug 06 001-2201-4309 261.7 Total : 261. 45431 9/21/2006 12066 AIT 7194 Inks/ Sep 06 001-2101-4305 351.11 7202 Toners/ Sep 06 001-2101-4305 352.30 Total : 703.41 45432 9/21/2006 12697 ALLEN, CHRISTOPHER IVAN 19717 Instructor Pymt/ # 10971 001-4601-4221 2,394.00 Total : 2,394.00 45433 9/21/2006 12470 AMERICA'S TROPHY COMPANY 83006 MEMORIAL PLAQUE/MARTHA ALICE WADMAN 001-6101-5402 185.64 Total : 185.64 45434 9/21/2006 00407 AVIATION LOCK & KEY 10141 Keys Made/ Aug 06 715-2101-4311 6.50 10172 Keys Made/ Aug 06 001-3302-4305 7.9 10185 Keys Made/ Aug 06 001-2101-4309 92.23 10189 Locksmith Service/ Aug 06 001-2101-4309 10.00 10831 Locksmith Service/ Jun 06 001-4204-4309 66.90 31554 Locksmith Services/ Aug 06 001-2101-4309 144.00 Total : 327.42 Page: 1 vchlist Check Register Page: 2 09/2112006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45435 9/21/2006 13170 BICKMORE RISK SERVICES BRS-0000478 Workers Comp Consult Service/ Aug 06 705-1217-4201 450.00 Total : 450.00 45436 9/21/2006 03190 BLUEPRINT SERVICE & SUPPLY CC 133547 Plan Copies / Aug 06 001-4101-4305 21.110 133759 Plan Copies/ Aug 06 001-4101-4305 16.24 Total : 37.89 45437 9/21/2006 08482 BOUND TREE MEDICAL,LLC 50317877 Medical Supplies - Jul 06 001-2201-4309 336.49 50340663 Medical Supplies - Aug 06 001-2201-4309 209.69 Total : 546.18 45438 9/21/2006 00163 BRAUN LINEN SERVICE 0564427 Prisoner Laundry/ Aug 06 001-2101-4306 73.88 0566108 Prisoner Laundry/ Aug 06 001-2101-4306 62.35 0567983 Prisoner Laundry/ Aug 06 001-2101-4306 55.06 0569774 Prisoner Laundry/ Aug 06 001-2101-4306 87.0 0571406 Prisoner Laundry/ Sep 06 001-2101-4306 60.00 0573065 Prisoner Laundry/ Sep 06 001-2101-4306 82.18 Total : 421.38 45439 9/21/2006 14004 BROWN, JAIME 134 Chevron Surf Camp Photos 001-4601-4308 1,650.00 Total : 1,650.00 45440 9/21/2006 14025 BUDGET 19774 Citation Refund/ # 1506020499 001-3302 65.00 Page: 2 vchlist Check Register 09/2112006 5;59;13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 3 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45440 9/21/2006 14025 BUDGET (Continued) 19797 Citation Refund/ # 1106014075 001-3302 Total : 45441 9/21/2006 00034 BUSINESS SYSTEMS CORPORATIC 285123 PUBLC WORKS RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS 45442 9/21/2006 00016 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 4286211111 001-4202-4201 Water Usage - Jul 06 105-2601-4303 001-6101-4303 001-4204-4303 109-3304-4303 65.00 130.00 845.6. Total : 845. Total : 1,632.14 11,804.14 774.74 128.29 14,339.31 45443 9/21/2006 07837 CHARLES III, WILLIAM 19707 Per Diem/ FTO Class 001-2101-4312 84.00 Total : 84.00 45444 9/21/2006 13361 CINGULAR WIRELESS 556214765X09112006 Cell Phone Usage/ Aug 06 001-4202-4304 249.36 Total : 249.36 45445 9/21/2006 00153 CINTAS CORPORATION 426794358 Uniform Rental - Aug 06 001-4202-4314 117.4) 426797641 Uniform Rental - Aug 06 001-4202-4314 113.21 426800967 Uniform Rental - Aug 06 001-4202-4314 113.21 426804264 Uniform Rental - Aug 06 001-4202-4314 113.21 426807607 Uniform Rental - Aug 06 001-4202-4314 113.21 Total : 570.55 45446 9/21/2006 05935 CLEAN STREET 47087 DOWNTOWN & UPPER PIER CLEANING/AUG C Page: 3 vchlist Check Register Page: 4 09/21/2006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45446 9/21/2006 05935 CLEAN STREET (Continued) 109-3301-4201 001-6101-4201 47088 CITYWIDE STREET SWEEPING/ AUG 06 001-3104-4201 45447 9/21/2006 04928 COLEN & LEE AS AGENT FOR THE 91206 Reimburse Liability Acct/ 9-12-06 705-2024 8,991.28 2,997.05 16,541.16 Total : 28,529. Total : 89,062.96 89,062.96 45448 9/21/2006 10241 COOLIES 33220 Rashquards/ Chevron Surf Camp 001-2024 402.50 Total : 402.50 45449 9/21/2006 07809 CORPORATE EXPRESS 72935344 Office Supplies/ Aug 06 001-4601-4305 75.45 Total : 75.45 45450 9/21/2006 03674 CPS HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICE: SOP19074 Clerk Typist Test Materials 001-1203-4201 45451 9/21/2006 08855 D & D SERVICES, INC. 1746 Dead Animal Disposal/ Aug 06 001-3302-4201 45452 9/21/2006 11398 DE BILIO DISTRIBUTORS,INC 235847 Prisoner's Meals/ Sep 06 001-2101-4306 236681 Prisoner's Meals/ Sep 06 001-2101-4306 Total : Total : 1,035.00 1,035.00 295.0 295.00 145.79 246.63 Total : 392.42 45453 9/21/2006 13766 DISPENSING TECHNOLOGY COPR. MN34414 Traffic Paint/ Aug 06 001-3104-4309 774.57 Total : 774.57 45454 9/21/2006 04394 DIVERSIFIED IMAGING SUPPLY 449777 Photographic Supplies Page: 4 vchlist Check Register Page: 5 0912112006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45454 9/21/2006 04394 DIVERSIFIED IMAGING SUPPLY (Continued) 001-2101-4305 175.93 Total : 175.93 45455 9/21/2006 13559 DTG OPERATIONS, INC. 19775 Citation Refund/ # 1306016754 001-3302 120.00 Total : 120.. 45456 9/21/2006 00122 DUNCAN PARKING TECHNOLOGIE: 27970 REPLACEMENT PARTS FOR PARKING METER 001-3302-4309 922.26 Total : 922.26 45457 9/21/2006 00181 EASY READER 90106 Legal Ads/ Aug 06. 001-1121-4323 1,161.61 Total : 1,161.61 45458 9/21/2006 10039 EMERGENCY SPEC.PHYS 00259124 First Aid/Greg Miller - 7-10-06 001-2101-4201 208.00 Total : 208.00 45459 9/21/2006 12474 EXTREAM SAFETY 00041848 GLOVES 001-2101-4306 636.61 Total : 636.61 45460 9/21/2006 06293 FEDEX KINKO'S INC. 101600001416 McCarthy Manual Copies 001-2101-4305 499.6 101600001423 Survey Copies 001-1101-4305 240.87 101600001424 Binders for Survey Copies 001-1101-4305 29.71 101600001433 Copies/ Aug 06 001-2101-4305 59.43 101600001489 Office Supplies/ Aug 06 001-2101-4305 127.20 101600001509 Movies in the Park Supplies 001-4601-4308 22.46 Page: 5 vchlist Check Register Page: 6 0912112006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45460 9/21/2006 06293 FEDEX KINKO'S INC. (Continued) Total : 978.97 45461 9/21/2006 14024 FIRESTONE VINEYARDS 19726 Santa Ynez Trip/ 9-23-06 001-4601-4201 45462 9/21/2006 11715 FRAZEE INDUSTRIES, INC. 597225 Paint Supplies/ Aug 06 001-4204-4309 Total : Total : 371.00 371.6 339.31 339.31 45463 9/21/2006 10933 FROST, HELENE 19772 2005 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 24.61 Total : 24.61 45464 9/21/2006 14023 GAINEY VINEYARDS 19725 Santa Ynez Trip/ 9-23-06 001-4601-4201 636.00 Total : 636.00 45465 9/21/2006 08652 GAROFANO, MICHAEL 996 Per Diem/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 250.00 Total : 250.00 45466 9/21/2006 11578 GOMEZ, JERRY 997 Per Diem/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 150.aik Total : 150. 45467 9/21/2006 12311 GREMAUD, MARIE BAPTISTE 19758 Instructor Pymt/ # 11267, 11271 001-4601-4221 315.00 Total : 315.00 45468 9/21/2006 06518 HAYER CONSULTANTS, INC. 2634 Plan Check/ Aug 06 001-4201-4201 255.31 2636 Fire Dept Plan Check/ Aug 06 001-4201-4201 375.00 2637 Fire Dept Plan Check! Aug 06 001-4201-4201 825.00 Total : 1,455.31 Page: 6 vchlist Check Register 09/21/2006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 7 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45469 9/21/2006 12968 HERMOSAWAVE INTERNET 1305 COLOR PHOTOGRAPHS OF ELECTED OFFICl/ 001-1101-4305 1,108.79 Total : 1,108.79 45470 9/21/2006 10089 IAFC MEMBERSHIP 19552 MEMBERSHIP/TINGLEY 001-2201-4317 230.00 Total : 230., 45471 9/21/2006 12863 IPMA-HR 24120308 Annual Membership Dues/ M Earl 001-1203-4315 315.00 Total : 315.00 45472 9/21/2006 06100 IRON MOUNTAIN OFF-SITE DATA 101146952 Off Site Storage/ Aug 06 715-1206-4201 198.33 Total : 198.33 45473 9/21/2006 14021 J J KELLER & ASSOCIATES 006425711 On-line Resource Training Guide 001-1203-4317 400.00 705-1209-4317 400.00 705-1217-4317 395.00 Total : 1,195.00 45474 9/21/2006 12852 J.C. CHANG & ASSOCIATES, INC. 05034-1B MASTER PLAN OF PW MAINT YARD/PROG #2 715-8612-4201 10,670.00 05034-2A MASTER PLAN OF PW MAINT BLDGS/PROG #: 715-8612-4201 2134:3707000 4, 13,370.700. Total : 45475 9/21/2006 12151 JAHNG, CHRISTOPHER Y. 19713 Instructor Pymt/ # 11309, 11307 001-4601-4221 3,192.00 Total : 3,192.00 45476 9/21/2006 04908 JAMESTOWN PRESS 8723 CORRECTION NOTICES 001-4201-4317 599.71 8740 PERMITS/INSPECTION CARDS 001-4201-4317 210.81 8807 Business Cards/ Aug 06 001-1208-4305 60.89 Page: 7 9 vchtist Check Register Page: 8 09121!2006 5:59;13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45476 9/21/2006 04908 JAMESTOWN PRESS (Continued) Total : 871.41 45477 9/21/2006 10820 JENKINS & HOGIN,LLP 13707 Legal, RE: General/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 4,280.40 13708 Legal, RE: Land Use/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 1,948.0 13709 Legal, RE: Pitchess Motions/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 47.40 13711 Legal: Fed Lawsuit -Tattoo Parlor/Aug06 001-1131-4201 10,273.20 13712 Legal, RE: Stop Oil/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 189.60 13713 Legal, RE: Union Cattle/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 993.60 13714 Legal, RE: Cable TV/ Aug 06 001-1131-4201 1,440.00 13743 Legal, RE: Code Enforcement/ Aug 06 001-1132-4201 354.40 Total : 19,527.40 45478 9/21/2006 14028 KOMICK, KIM 19773 Citation Refund/ # 1606021535 001-3302 10.00 Total : 10.1 45479 9/21/2006 11065 LAOLAGI, ROSE 19759 Instruct Pymt/11042,45,48,51,54,57,60 001-4601-4221 2,226.00 Total : 2,226.00 45480 9/21/2006 02175 LIEBERT, CASSIDY WHITMORE 69471 Legal, RE: HE050 00001 RK/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 514.49 69472 Legal, RE: HE050 00029 RK/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 879.94 69473 Legal, RE: HE050 00032 RK/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 26.95 69474 Legal, RE: HE050 00034 RK/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 24,217.40 Page: 8 0 vchlist Check Register Page: 9 0912112006 5:59;13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45480 9/21/2006 02175 LIEBERT, CASSIDY WHITMORE (Continued) 69475 Legal, RE: HE050 00037 RK/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 69477 Legal, RE: HE050 00039 RGU/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 45481 9/21/2006 08445 LITTLE CO OF MARY HOSPITAL Q017256441 Blood Alcohol Draw/ Q017256441 001-2101-4201 Q017284282 Blood Alcohol Draw/ Q017284282 001-2101-4201 Q017287966 Blood Alcohol Draw/ Q017287966 001-2101-4201 Q017313606 Blood Alcohol Draw/ Q017313606 001-2101-4201 Q017336592 First Aid/ A Parente/ 8-20-06 001-1203-4320 45482 9/21/2006 12739 LONG BEACH BMW BCCS450018 Motorcycle Maint/ Aug 06 715-2101-4311 BCCS451709 Tire and Maint/ PD Motorcycle 715-2101-4311 45483 9/21/2006 14026 MARCO'S PAPER 19770 Centennial Marketing Materials 109-4603-4201 45484 9/21/2006 07060 MARKS, AARON 999 Per Diem/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 45485 9/21/2006 12167 MARSH RISK & INSURANCE SERVI( 445918 Auto Physical Damage fns/ FY 06/07 705-1210-4201 Total : 463.00 343.99 26,445.77 41.9 41.00 41.00 41.00 222.42 Total : 386.42 152.00 228.12 Total : 380.12 • 74.45 Total : 74.45 150.00 Total : 150.00 11,107.00 Total : 11,107.00 Page: 9 7 IN vchlist Check Register Page: 10 09/21/2006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45486 9/21/2006 14022 MELVILLE VINEYARDS 66 Santa Ynez Trip/ 9-23-06 001-4601-4201 529.96 Total : 529.96 45487 9/21/2006 07634 MUSIC ROOM PRODUCTIONS HB082606 VHS Copies/ Aug 06 001-2101-4201 1,998. Total : 1,998.1 45488 9/21/2006 13114 OFFICE DEPOT 349624020-003 Office Supplies/ Aug 06 001-4601-4305 13.80 351403897-001 Program -Class Supplies/ Aug 06 001-4601-4308 73.10 351403898-001 Beach Clean-up Supplies 001-4601-4308 50.13 Total : 137.03 45489 9/21/2006 08878 PARADISE AWARDS 607005 Surfer's Walk of Fame Plaques 001-2130 1,607.51 Total : 1,607.51 45490 9/21/2006 14020 PARENTE, ANTHONY 19706 Per Diem/ FTO Class 001-2101-4312 84.00 Total : 84.00 45491 9/21/2006 14027 PEA SOUP ANDERSEN'S 19727 Santa Ynez Trip/ 9-23-06 • 001-4601-4201 1,065.83 Total : 1,065.83 45492 9/21/2006 02190 PRECISION DYNAMICS CORP 120333 Colored Wristbands 001-4601-4308 151.10 121972 Colored Wristbands 001-4601-4308 217.06 Total : 368.16 45493 9/21/2006 11539 PROSUM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 18805 Computer Support/ Aug 06 715-1206-4201 12,300.00 Total : 12,300.00 Page: 10 vchlist 09/2112006 5:59:13PM Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 11 Bank code :. boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 45494 9/21/2006 13631 RADISSON HOTEL Description/Account Amount 19711 Lodging/ Charles & Parente/ FTO Class 001-2101-4312 45495 9/21/2006 13301 RESOURCE COLLECTION, THE 0131797 -IN 45496 9/21/2006 05379 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 147928 45497 9/21/2006 03726 RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING 148975 45498 9/21/2006 03353 S.B.C.U. VISA 45499 9/21/2006 09951 SANTA ANA COLLEGE 45500 9/21/2006 09656 SHRED IT CALIFORNIA 043625100404200510. 215625182002216828: 262623463500208522. 262623463500218839• 262624962442563503' 369625154273897269* 900624191000633690' 19754 333438920 JANITORIAL SERVICES - AUG 06 001-4204-4201 Legal, RE: Stop Oil III Jul 06 001-1131-4201 Quarterly AC Service/1st Qtr 06/07 001-4204-4201 Total : Total : Total : Total : Lodging/ M Garofano/Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 9/11 VICTIMS POSTER 001-2201-4305 Air Fare/ M Garofano/Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 Air Fare/J Gomez/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 Air Fare/ A Marks/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 9/11 MEMORIAL DECALS FOR FIRE DEPT 001-2201-4305 Wetskins."Dockside" Rainsuit 001-2201-4350 Tuition/ J Crawford 001-2201-4317 Shredding Services/ Aug 06 Total : Total : 587.40 587.40 7,718.00 7,718.04 19.50 19.50 434.38 434.38 53.41 36.00 132.10 122.10 137.• 55.72 155.07 691.50 140.00 140.00 Page: 11 , vchlist Check Register Page: 12 0912112006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45500 9/21/2006 09656 SHRED IT CALIFORNIA (Continued) 001-2101-4201 100.00 Total : 100.00 45501 9/21/2006 02250 SO. CAL SHARPSHOOTER, INC. 5641 Ammo/ Aug 06 001-2101-4201 560.410 5642 Ammo/ Aug 06 001-2101-4201 560.00 Total : 1,120.00 45502 9/21/2006 00341 SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF 80806 Energy Controller for Vending Machines 109-3301-4309 6.68 Total : 6.68 45503 9/21/2006 00113 SOUTH BAY FIRE EXTINGUISHER 91747 Fire Extinguisher Maint/ Aug 06 109-3304-4231 180.00 Total : 180.00 45504 9/21/2006 10532 SOUTH BAY FORD 100225 Auto Parts Purchase - Jul 06 715-2101-4311 73.57 100834 Auto Parts Purchase - Aug 06 715-2101-4311 47.40 100838 Auto Parts Purchase - Aug 06 715-2101-4311 35.5 72196 Auto Parts Returned - Sep 05 715-2024 -80.11 Total : 76.79 45505 9/21/2006 09955 SOUTH BAY PIPELINE 61506 Emergency Sewer Repair/ Apr 06 160-2024 45506 9/21/2006 00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 2-26-686-5930 Electrical Billing -Aug 06 105-2601-4303 45507 9/21/2006 10098 SPRINT/NEXTEL COMMUNICATION 269424317-057 Cell Phone Usage - Aug 06 15,485.30 Total : 15,485.30 2,134.88 Total : 2,134.88 Page: 12 vchlist Check Register Page: 13 09/21/2006 5:59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45507 9/21/2006 10098 SPRINT/NEXTEL COMMUNICATION (Continued) 001-2101-4304 45508 9/21/2006 10412 STERICYCLE. 0003711743 SHARPS CONTAINERS 001-2101-4201 45509 9/21/2006 11102 TORRANCE WHOLESALE NURSER' 194520 Landscape Materials/ Aug 06 001-6101-4309 45510 9/21/2006 09078 TRUGREEN LAND CARE REGIONAL 2455187171 LANDSCAPE MAINT/ PARKS/JUL 06 001-6101-4201 105-2601-4201 109-3301-4201 2455187172 LANDSCAPE MAINT/ JUL 06 105-2601-4201 109-3301-4201 45511 9/21/2006 13865 UNDER PRESSURE, INC 2041 Taste of Hermosa Cleaning/ Comm Ctr 109-3301-4201 45512 9/21/2006 08207 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 820060310 Underground Service Alert/ Sep 06 160-3102-4201 45513 9/21/2006 08097 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 315414 Safekeeping Fees/ Aug 06 001-1141-4201 45514 9/21/2006 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 310 318-0200 880930 Phone Charges/ Sep 06 1,628.70 Total : 1,628.70 71.29 Total : 71.24 195.93 Total : 195.93 14,335.64 695.25 257.50 2,575.00 927.00 Total : 18,790.39 675.00 Total : 675.00 65.10 Total : 65.60 291.67 Total : 291.67 Page: 13 vchlist Check Register 09/21/2006 5:59;13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 14 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45514 9/21/2006 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA (Continued) 001-1121-4304 10.58 001-1132-4304 5.60 001-1141-4304 2.70 001-1201-4304 8.1 001-1202-4304 34. 001-1203-4304 34.8 001-1208-4304 1.37 00.1-2101-4304 263.27 001-2201-4304 155.21 001-4101-4304 23.58 001-4201-4304 39.84 001-4202-4304 123.81 001-4601-4304 60.48 001-1204-4304 36.96 001-3302-4304 3.76 715-1206-4304 11.74 310 406-2462 060808 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 59.40 45515 9/21/2006 12899 WESTERN STATES INFORMATION 135 E -Newsletter Services/ Sep 06 001-1101-4319 45516 9/21/2006 00135 XEROX CORPORATION 019665834 Copier Maintenance / Aug 06 715-2101-4201 1859956 9/20/2006 00243 HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCO 09152006 Payroll/9-1 to 9-15-06 Total : 875.63 500.4 Total : 500. 175.34 Total : 175.34 Page: 14 1c vchlist Check Register Page: 15 09/2112006 5;59:13PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 1859956 9/20/2006 00243 HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCO (Continued) 301-1103 5,571.15 001-1103 449,679.25 105-1103 4,126.23 109-1103 1,614.30 117-1103 1,421.19 145-1103 63.5 152-1103 44. 156-1103 2,961.7 160-1103 7,371.70 705-1103 3,786.47 , 715-1103 5,320.37 Total : 481, 960.58 1865746 9/21/2006 14008 SO CAL RISK MANAGEMENT 09212006 Workers Comp Claims - 9/09 - 9/15/06 705-1217-4324 Total : 90 Vouchers for bank code : boa Bank total : 90 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 19,797.24 19,797.24 815,256.51 815,256.51 • Page: 15 , // vchlist Check Register Page: 1 09126/2006 2:52:53PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45517 9/26/2006 11355 DE LOS SANTOS, JIMMY 1003 Per Diem/ Firehouse Conf 001-2201-4317 1 Vouchers for bank code : boa Total : Bank total : Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 150.00 150.00 150.• 150.00 • Page: 1 vchlist Check Register Page: 1 09128/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45518 9/28/2006 02744 A & E TROPHIES 45519 9/28/2006 00029 A-1 COAST RENTALS 45520 9/28/2006 08955 AAE INC. 0806-16 618612 15035 15035-A 45521 9/28/2006 11437 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CO -01197991 45522 9/28/2006 12403 AGUILAR, ALMA 130535 45523 45524 9/28/2006 11837 AJILON OFFICE 9/28/2006 00321 AT&T T000391523 T000396481 T000401671 331 254-6071 301 5 333 267-6155 686 9 333 267-6160 767 0 Mayor's Plaque 001-1101-4319 Equipment Rent/Handwash Station 001-2101-4201 Total : Total : TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES/AUG 06 001-3104-4201 Pier Ave Trafiic Counts/ Aug 06 146-8116-4201 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM/ AUG 06 145-3404-4201 Rental Deposit Refund 001-2111 Temp Services/Week end 9-3-06 001-4601-4201 Temp Services/ Week end 9-10-06 001-4601-4201 Temp Services/ Week end 9-17-06 001-4601-4201 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Total : Total : Total : Total : 92.01 92.01 92.1 92. 1,260.00 540.00 1,800.00 3,594.10 3,594.10 250.00 250.00 387.15 333.. 409.40 1,130.30 57.54 187.96 59.32 Page: 1 vchlist 09128/2006 4:35:06PM Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 2 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45524 45525 45526 45527 45528 45529 45530 9/28/2006 00321 AT&T 9/28/2006 05253 9/28/2006 08482 9/28/2006 .12100 9/28/2006 00262 9/28/2006 07611 9/28/2006 10547 BECKER SURFBOARDS BOUND TREE MEDICAL,LLC BROWN, CHRISTOPHER KYLE CALIFORNIA MARKING DEVICE CARMEN'S UNIFORM CBM CONSULTING, INC. 45531 9/28/2006 09632 CDWG (Continued) 333 267-6161 416 3 333 267-6164 193 5 333 267-6165 717 0 7.754 50349545 19771 41 42903 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Cicuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Sep 06 001-2101-4304 Rashquards/ Chevron Surf Camp 001-4601-4308 Medical Supplies - Sep 06 001-2201-4309 Instructor Pymt/ CBVA Volleyball Tourn 001-4601-4221 Photo Name Plates/Tucker, Bobko 001-1101-4319 Uniform Boots/ Scott 001-2201-4314. 10105 ENGINEERING SERVICES/ AUG 06 301-8120-4201 10132 ENGINEERING SERVICES/AUG 06 301-8117-4201 BTK4593 Toners/ Sep 06 715-1206-4305 Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : 59.32 50.. 50.57 465.28 3,125.72 3,125.72 100.27 100.27 1,491.00 1,491.00 17.32 17.1110 213.09 213.09 2,418.75 750.00 3,168.75 1,045.28 Page: 2 vchlist Check Register 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 3 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptionlAccount Amount 45531 9/28/2006 09632 CDWG (Continued) Total: 1,045.28 45532 9/28/2006 05595 COACH USA 152053 Transport/Summer Blast -Mud Playground 145-3409-4201 540.24 152054 Transport/Summer Blast -Leeway Sailing 145-3409-4201 630.30 152055 Transport/Summer Blast -El Capitan Theat 145-3409-4201 1,136.5 152058 Transport/Summer Blast -Skate Zone 145-3409-4201 612.75 152060 Transport/Summer Blast -LB Aquarium 145-3409-4201 567.73 152062 Transport/Summer Blast -Soak City 145-3409-4201 860.41 152082 Transport/Teen Extreme -Skate Zone 145-3409-4201 534.09 152083 Transport/Teen Extreme -Hollywood Sport 145-3409-4201 553.89 152084 Transport/Teen Extreme -Soak City 145-3409-4201 751.91 152130 Transport/ Pageant of the Masters 145-3409-4201 949.62 152131 Transport/ Hollywood Bowl 145-3409-4201 691.90 Total : 7,82910 45533 9/28/2006 05970 COLLINS, DENNIS 19805 Instructor Pymt/ # 11254, 255 001-4601-4221 3,458.00 Total : 3,458.00 45534 9/28/2006 07809 CORPORATE EXPRESS 71715764 Office Supplies/ Jul 06 001-1208-4305 11.79 73050933 Office Supplies/ Sep 06 001-1208-4305 55.35 Total : 67.14 45535 9/28/2006 13925 CORPORATE MOTIVATORS 55818 DECALS FOR HB ENVELOPE OF LIFE Page: 3 n.. vchlist Check Register Page: 4 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45535 9/28/2006 13925 CORPORATE MOTIVATORS (Continued) 001-2170 2,747.82 Total : 2,747.82 45536 9/28/2006 14031 CULLIGAN, RINA 130528 Class Refund 001-2111 116. Total : 116.0 45537 9/28/2006 12856 CYGANY, INC. 3483 DOG BAGS FOR DISPENSERS IN CITY PARKS 001-6101-4309 932.50 Total : 932.50 45538 9/28/2006 14037 CZAPLICKI, PIOTR B 19811 Citation Refund/ # 1706015352 001-3302 30.00 Total : 30.00 45539 9/28/2006 00364 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 586071 Employee Fingerprinting/ Aug 06 001-1203-4251 352.00 Total : 352.00 45540 9/28/2006 00193 EMBLEM ENTERPRISES 357185 COMM SERVICE PATCHES 001-3302-4314 Total : 45541 9/28/2006 14033 EMERGENCY SPEC PHYS T017286145 First Aid/ Diego Mejia 001-2101-4201 Total : 45542 9/28/2006 07853 EMPIRE PIPE CLEANING & EQUIP 7278 CLEAN AND VIDEO SEWER SYSTEM/ AUG 06 160-3102-4201 Total : 45543 9/28/2006 05509 ESCALANTE, RICK 19801 Instructor Pymt/ # 11063, 064 001-4601-4221 Total : 45544 9/28/2006 10668 EXXON MOBIL FLEET/GECC 11374295 Gas Card Purchase/ Aug 06 319.79 319.79 • 184.00 184.00 7,062.10 7,062.10 420.00 420.00 Page: 4 vchlist Check Register 0912612006 4;35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 5 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45544 9/28/2006 10668 EXXON MOBIL FLEET/GECC (Continued) 715-2101-4310 5,174.04 715-2201-4310 463.13 715-4201-4310 195.70 715-4202-4310 255.75 715-6101-4310 294.26 715-3302-4310 444.63 715-3104-4310 542.9 715-4601-4310 222. 715-2601-4310 416.16 715-3102-4310 18.93 001-1250 100.86 Total : 8,128.08 45545 9/28/2006 01962 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. 8-400-39850 Express Delivery/ Aug 06 001-4202-4201 001-1121-4305 001-4601-4308 Total : 19.89 19.89 13.69 53.47 45546 9/28/2006. 11715 FRAZEE INDUSTRIES, INC. 615775 Paint Supplies/ Aug 06 001-4204-4309 59.70 Total : 59.70 45547 9/28/2006 14029 GEISMAR, JOSEPH 19806 Citation Refund/ # 1606020124 001-3302 25.4h Total : 25. 45548 9/28/2006 06518 HAYER CONSULTANTS, INC. 2644 Plan Check/ 9-1-06 001-4201-4201 500.00 2646 Plan Check/ 9-1-06 001-4201-4201 2,070.42 Total : 2,570.42 45549 9/28/2006 00065 HERMOSA BEACH CAR WASH, ZIPI 90106 City Car Washes/ Aug 06 Page: 5 vchlist Check Register Page: 6 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45549 9/28/2006 00065 HERMOSA BEACH CAR WASH, ZIPf (Continued) 45550 9/28/2006 13986 HILL, KEVAN 45551 9/28/2006 12990 HYDRO SCAPE 715-2101-4311 715-3302-4311 715-4201-4311 715-4202-4311 19613 Instructor Pymt/ # 11386, 388 001-4601-4221 02157310-00 287.25 23.80 11.90 34.1 Total : 357. 294.00 Total : 294.00 EV WEATHER CENTER/IRRIGATION CONTROL 125-6101-5402 001-2021 001-2022 45552 9/28/2006 02458 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTF 209391-00 Electrical Supplies - Aug 06 105-2601-4309 001-2021 001-2022 209459-00 Electrical Supplies - Aug 06 105-2601-4309 001-2021 001-2022 209704-00 Electrical Supplies /Shipping/ Jul 06 001-6101-4309 209795-00 Electrical Supplies - Sep 06 105-2601-4309 001-2021 001-2022 209796-00 Electrical Supplies - Sep 06 105-2601-4309 001-2021 001-2022 Total : Total : 4,701.56 88.50 -88.50 4,701.56 85.00 1.60 -1.60' 243.10 4.� 11.00 270.94 5.10 -5.10 353.81 6.66 -6.66 963.85 Page: 6 vchlist Check Register 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 7 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45553 9/28/2006 13046 INTERNAL AFFAIRS CONNECTION; 9HBFD06 Pre-employment Screening/ Aug 06 001-1203-4201 2,400.00 Total : 2,400.00 45554 9/28/2006 13741 JAS PACIFIC, INC BI9014 Interim Sr Bldg Inspector/ Aug 06 001-4201-4201 11,375.00 B19028 Interim Assoc Planner/ Aug 06 001-4101-4201 11,050. Total : 22,425.0 45555 9/28/2006 10334 JENSEN, GLENN 19802 Instructor Pymt/ # 11215 001-4601-4221 961.80 Total : 961.80 45556 9/28/2006 13840 JOHN N M CRUIKSHANK 6203 DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES/AUG 0 301-8104-4201 3,562.50 Total : 3,562.50 45557 9/28/2006 12162 JOL DESIGN 91406 HB Neighborhood Watch Supplies 001-2101-4201 683.33 Total : 683.33 45558 9/28/2006 14042 KAY, SHANNAN 19833 PERMIT REFUND/ # 7278 001-3815 101.00 Total : 101.00 45559 9/28/2006 10677 LAWRENCE ASSOCIATES 90206 Staff Support Services/ Aug 06 • 140-4707-4201 501.50 140-8644-4201 467.50 117-5301-4201 518.50 Total : 1,487.50 45560 9/28/2006 10045 MAIN STREET TOURS 33677 Transport/Norton Simon Museum 001-4601-4201 900.00 33808 Transport/ Getty Villa & Gladstone's 001-4601-4201 1,514.00 33809 Transport/ Getty Villa 145-3409-4201 600.00 Page: 7 vchlist Check Register 09128/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 8 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 45560 9/28/2006 10045 MAIN STREET TOURS 45561 9/28/2006 10681 MAYNOR, DONALD H. Description/Account Amount (Continued) Total : 3,014.00 DHM 3413 LEGAL SERVICES - UUT AUDIT/1ST QTR 001-1202-4201 Total : 45562 9/28/2006 13658 MBF CONSULTING, INC. 200-210 ENGINEER & CONST SUPP SER/AUG 06 160-8418-4201 6,002.00 Total : 6,002.00 1,250.00 1,250.0 45563 9/28/2006 10324 MBIA MUNI SERVICES COMPANY INV -12571 UUT AUDIT SERVICES/1ST QTR 001-1202-4201 1,560.19 Total : 1,560.19 45564 9/28/2006 14032 MC GUINESS, NICOLE 130766 Class Refund 001-2111 78.00 Total : 78.00 45565 9/28/2006 07816 MCCOLGAN, LANCE 19782 Per Diem/Delinquency Control Class 001-2101-4312 240.00 Total : 240.00 45566 9/28/2006 01911 MEDICAL INSTITUTE 544607 First Aid/ A Janulewicz 001-1203-4320 34.1 Total : 34. 45567 9/28/2006 14038 MILLER, JAMES W 19810 Citation Refund/ # 1606020099 001-3302 60.00 Total : 60.00 45568 9/28/2006 13791 MONTROSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 23656 AV Serv/ Council Chambers/ Sep 06 715-4204-4201 500.00 Total : 500.00 45569 9/28/2006 09715 NEW PIG CORPORATION 4337842-00 55 GAL POLY DRUMS AND FUNNELS 715-4206-4309 719.28 Total : 719.28 Page: 8 vchlist Check Register 0912612006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 9 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45570 9/28/2006 13114 OFFICE DEPOT 351588790-001 Inks/ Sep 06 001-2101-4305 70.12 352181365-001 Office Supplies/ Sep 06 001-2201-4305 31.33 Total : 101.45 45571 9/28/2006 10139 PARKING CONCEPTS INC. 284 0806 OPERATING EXP - PKG STRUCTURE /AUG 06 109-3304-4231 14,584. 285 0806 OPERATING EXP - LOT A /AUG 06 109-3305-4231 9,992.23 Total : 24,576.80 45572 9/28/2006 12161 PROGRESSIVE MEDICAL, INTERNA 0078011 -IN EMS Supplies/ Aug 06 001-2201-4309 143.79 Total : 143.79 45573 9/28/2006 05379 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 148186 Legal, RE: Landscape&Lighting/Jul 06 001-1131-4201 52.50 Total : 52.50 45574 9/28/2006 03726 RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING 2615303 HVAC Upgrades - PD/ Progress Pymt # 3 001-8645-4201 5,824.05 301-8645-4201 16,190.79 715-8645-4201 7,714.86 Total : 29,729.70 45575 9/28/2006 09951 SANTA ANA COLLEGE 19783 Tuition/M Garofano/ Mgmt 2D Class • 001-2201-4317 140.00 Total : 140.00 45576 9/28/2006 04187 SHARP SEATING COMPANY 225 Final Pymt/ Rose Parade '07 Tickets 001-4601-4201 2,760.00 Total : 2,760.00 45577 9/28/2006 14030 SIEGEL, ROBERT 130300 Rental Deposit Refund 001-2111 277.00 Total : 277.00 Page: 9 vchlist Check Register 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 10 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45578 9/28/2006 00118 SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 19804 CITATION SURCHARGE/ AUG 06 001-3302 20,432.50 19808 CITATION SURCHARGE/ JUL 06 001-3302 18, 761.00 Total : 39,193.1, 45579 9/28/2006 08812 SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC CO 200506532 MDC Computers/Shipping 150-2204-5405 85.92 001-2201-5405 4.52 200506546 Mounting Brackets for MDCs 150-2204-5405. 384.41 001-2201-5405 20.23 200506548 NIGHT/DAY CAMERA 715-2201-5403 1,568.48 Total : 2,063.56 45580 9/28/2006 07704 SOUTH BAY YOUTH PROJECT 72806 FY 06/07 Contribution 001-2101-4201 3,000.00 Total : 3,000.00 45581 9/28/2006 12930 SPANGLER, DANIELLE 19803 Instructor Pymt/ # 11397 - 399 001-4601-4221 11;663388.r , 1,638638.00 Total : . 45582 9/28/2006 00146 SPARKLETTS 0906 2553313 447278. Drinking Water/ Aug 06 001-4601-4305 46.11 Total : 46.11 45583 9/28/2006 13952 STRUCTURAL COMPOSITES IND 20147 SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS C 001-2201-4350 2,476.14 Total : 2,476.14 45584 9/28/2006 14036 T. H. CONSTRUCTION 19787 Work Guarantee Refund/ # 6910 001-2110 1,600.00 Total : 1,600.00 45585 9/28/2006 10653 TRAUB ASSOCIATES, NORMAN A. 658 Admin Investigation/ Sep 001-1203-4201 1,298.95 Page: 10 vchlist Check Register Page: 11 09/28/2006 4;35;06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 45585 9/28/2006 10653 TRAUB ASSOCIATES, NORMAN A. (Continued) Total : 1,298.95 45586 9/28/2006 09078 TRUGREEN LAND CARE REGIONAL 5240469 LANDSCAPE MAINT/ PARKS/AUG 06 001-6101-4201 14, 335.64 105-2601-4201 695.25 109-3301-4201 257.50 5240470 LANDSCAPE MAINT/ AUG 06 105-2601-4201 2,575.10 109-3301-4201 927. Total : 18,790.39 45587 9/28/2006 13865 UNDER PRESSURE, INC 2047 DOWNTOWN STEAM CLEANING/ AUG 06 109-3301-4201 4,010.00 109-3304-4201 450.00 Total : 4,460.00 45588 9/28/2006 04768 UPTIME COMPUTER SERVICE 20006 Printer Maintenance/ Oct 06 715-1206-4201 908.07 Total : 908.07 45589 9/28/2006 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 310 197-3683 Phone Charges/ Sep 06 715-1206-4304 207.81 001-3302-4304 61.89 001-2101-4304 1,223.86 001-4204-4321 56.82 001-2201-4304 232. 001-4601-4304 147. 001-4202-4304 122.25 001-4201-4304 83.94 109-3304-4304 103.24 001-1204-4304 29.50 310 372-6373 040311 Personnel Fax Line/ Sep 06 001-1203-4304 29.66 Total : 2,298.78 45590 9/28/2006 10703 WILLDAN 061-21132 Labor Standards Comp/ Aug 06 140-8644-4201 12.50 Page: 11 vchlist Check Register Page: 12 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 45590 9/28/2006 10703 WILLDAN 45591 9/28/2006 14034 WILLIAMS, DAVID & LYNNE 45592 9/28/2006 01206 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES (Continued) Description/Account Amount 19786 Work Guarantee Refund/ # 5553 001-2110 0089075 0089243 0089244 0089245 1884533 9/28/2006 14008 SO CAL RISK MANAGEMENT 09282006 76 Vouchers for bank code : boa Street Sign Maint 001-3104-4309 Street Sign Maint 001-3104-4309 Street Sign Maint 001-3104-4309 Street Sign Maint 001-3104-4309 Material/ Aug 06 Material/ Aug 06 Material/ Aug 06 Material/ Aug 06 Workers Comp Claims -9/18 & 9/22/06 705-1217-4324 Total : Total : Total : Total : Bank total : 76 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 12.50 1,600.00 1,600. 236.69 878.99 878.99 565.07 2,559.74 16,993.93 16,993.93 259,057.80 259,057.80 • Page: 12 vchlist Check Register Page: 13 09/28/2006 4:35:06PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages / to 3v inclusive, of the check register for gift " R/..41411 ccurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Date Finance Director '6/-* Page: 13 October 03, 2006 Honorable Mayor and For the Meeting of Members of the City Council October 10, 2006 CANCELLATION OF CHECKS Please ratify the following request for cancellation of the check listed below: #45319 — 9/07/06 — Holiday Inn Express — $51.70 Check not needed. The check was not mailed. #45383 — 9/14/06 — Jill Field — $123.23 Check issued in error. The check was not mailed. • Concur: I.r,i4. Steen Burrell, City Manager TC4A^A LUYI/VAAA4AA- (gy 'Wk-rr(-) John M. Workman, City Treasurer Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director • October 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council /V//d/'Q� Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Administrative Penalties Municipal Code Amendment Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of October 18, 2006. Community Development Director Public Works Director Review of a Text Amendment for lot merger ordinance Community Development Director City Council Meeting Schedule For 2007 City Manager :. NOVEMBER'28 006 Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of November 7, 2006. Community Resources Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of October 3, 2006. Community Resources Director Holiday Parking Program City Manager Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 17, 2006. Community Development Director Activity Reports — September 2006 All Depaitments Administrative Penalties Municipal Code Amendment Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of October 18, 2006. Community Development Director Public Works Director Review of a Text Amendment for lot merger ordinance Community Development Director City Council Meeting Schedule For 2007 City Manager :. NOVEMBER'28 006 Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of November 7, 2006. Community Resources Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of November 21, 2006. Community Development Director Activity Reports — November 2006 All Departments October 2, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members For the City Council Meeting of the City Council of October 10, 2006 ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council accept donations received by the City to be used as follows: Donor Amount Purpose Bartel Associates (City's outside actuarial consultant) Diane Garsen Respectfully submitted: Valerie Mohler Accounting Supervisor $200.00 To be used for repairs and maintenance on the Veteran's Memorial. (recorded in the Veteran's Memorial account.) $100.00 To be used for Fire Department equipment purchases. Concur: Viki Copeland Finance Director 4at,,,,&11) S en Burrell City Manager 2d • Honorable Mayor and Members of The Hermosa Beach City Council /Df/0A-6, actober 3, 2006 Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 PROJECT CIP No. 05-643 PIER CONCRETE DECK TREATMENT — ACCEPTANCE Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: Accept the work by KC Industries, Inc. for Project No. CIP 05-643 Pier Concrete Deck Treatment; 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Notice of Completion; and 3. Authorize Staff to release payment to KC Industries, Inc. (10% retained; 35 days following filing of Notice of Completion). Background: On May 9, 2006, City Council approved the award of the construction contract for Project No. 05-643 Pier Concrete Deck Treatment to KC Industries, Inc. The work included the removal of all existing coatings by shot blasting, various concrete and joint repairs, and the application of "Surtreat" to protect the concrete and steel reinforcement from corrosion Analysis: The project was constructed according to the plans, specifications and change orders prepared by Staff. Therefore, Staff recommends acceptance of the work as complete. The remaining punch list items have all been completed. The project was completed on schedule. Start date: Contract time: Time Suspended: Date of completion: May 30, 2006 14 calendar days 0 days June 17, 2006 Fiscal Impact: The project was completed under budget and the remaining unexpended project balance is approximately $18,585. Attachment: Notice of Completion Respectfully submitted, Frank Senteno, P.E. Associate Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Richard D. Director of Concur: ublic Works/City Engineer 11HBAPPS011Vo111B951PWFILES\CCITEMS105-643 acceptance 10-10-06.doc RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO fi r City of Hermosa Beach Office of the City Clerk 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDERS USE NOTICE OF COMPLETION Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093, must be filed within 10 days after completion (See reverse side for Complete requirements.) Notice is hereby given that: 1. The undersigned is owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate slated below in the property hereinafter described: 2. The full name of the owner is City of Hermosa Beach 3. The full address of the owner is 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is; In fee. N/A (If other than fee, strike in fee and insert, for example 'purchaser under contract of purchase,' or 'lessee') 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: NAMES ADDRESSES City of Hermosa Beach A Municipal Corporation 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described, was completed on June 17, 2006 The work done was: Removal of all existing coatings by shot blasting, various concrete and joint repairs, and the application of a penetrant ('Surtreat") to protect the concrete and steel reinforcement from corrosion 7. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was KC Industries, Inc. 1534 N. Moorpark Rd. #199 Thousand Oaks, CA 91360 May 9, 2006 (If no contractor for work of improvement as a whole, Insert 'none.) (Date of Contract) 8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the city of Hermosa Beach County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows: CIP 05-643 Pier Concrete Deck Treatment (City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Pier) 9. The street address of said property is "none" Dated: Verification for Individual Owner ( If no street address has been officially assigned, insert 'none.) Mayor VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say: I am the Mayor of the City of Hermosa Beach the declarant of the foregoing notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contents thereof, the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 10 2006, at Hermosa Beach, California (Date of signature.) Mayor of Hermosa Beach /2/0-O4, •BLIC WORKS COMMISSIO WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2006 CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1315 VALLEY DRIVE 7:00 P.M. MINUTES The meeting was called to order at 7:11 p.m. 1. Roll CaII Present: Public Works Commissioners Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek Also. Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Present:. Greg Savelli, Chief of Police Michael Flaherty, Public Works Superintendent Rhea Punneo, Administrative Assistant, Public Works Department Stephen Hilton, Contract Traffic Engineer 2. Flag Salute Chairman Winnek led the flag salute. 3. Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of August 16, 2006 were approved as written. 4. Public Comment Howard Longacre, Hermosa Beach Said the streets are falling apart that there's a gigantic Utility Undergrounding District proposed for an area off Aviation Boulevard — the largest planned to date — has been in the process for three to four years and no cost yet determined; said needed street repairs aren't being done in anticipation of the undergrounding and streets are getting spongy; El Nino condition expected this winter and water won't drain; suggested temporary asphalt patches; asked that 16th and Gentry, and 80, Street be checked; also said that streetlights on PCH south from Aviation approximately 19 lights aren't functioning. Kathleen Midstokke, Hermosa Beach Said lack of nuisance abatement on plaza at former Sharkeez site is inexcusable that hasn't been cleaned up, asbestos removed, investigation completed; City has the authority under health and safety codes; is dangerous — rainy season coming. Patty Egerer, Hermosa Beach Wanted to bring to attention of commission there is no credible traffic survey on 16th Street; has requested back up documentation for report presented at last meeting and not received yet; gave commissioners copy of letter submitted May 18th 5. Correspondence None 2f 6. Items for Commission Consideration At this time Chairman Winnek admonished the audience against boos and jeering during the presentation. • • a. Pier Avenue Improvement Project Trial Striping Mr. Morgan presented the item; said appreciates everyone's patience over the summer for the test then presented a brief overview why at commission; reviewed original plans for design from 1994; explained Proposition C funding and reserving of funds for Pier Avenue improvements; noted that time lapse camera was put on fire tower to record traffic [results on screen during presentation]staff presented as information the item at the previous evening's Planning Commission meeting; Planning Commission sub -committee members Hoffman and Pizer were in attendance this evening and that Commissioners Brittain and Marinelli were on the Public Works Commission sub -committee; said no action item other than taking to Council recommendation to establish Pier Avenue Enhancement Committee — ad hoc committee with specific task; goal has always been to link upper Pier Avenue with Plaza; said whether two or four lanes, will want to add amenities to Pier Avenue; showed photos of similar cities with two lanes leading to pier and showed rendering of new look for Pier Avenue. Mr. Morgan noted that he's always been concerned about safety of diagonal parking which would be aided by slowing of traffic; said traffic counts taken the previous day were the highest count ever recorded demonstrating that the reduction of lanes did not divert drivers; said construction on Manhattan Avenue is causing higher counts on Hermosa Avenue. Mr. Steven Hilton of AAE presented the video time lapse photography and will burn copies for the Public Works Department. He reviewed the video twice looking for backups and their duration; found three eastbound on Pier Avenue all due to fire truck leaving or returning and lasted very short periods of time; observation was that traffic slowed due to pedestrians or the fire truck leaving or returning. Highlights of the presentation also included: • Councilmember traveled Pier Ave. from Hermosa Ave. to PCH and worst delay was two minutes • Congestion at Valley/Ardmore intersection not included • Backup issues improved after moving traffic merge to location after STOP on Bard St. • Camera was positioned to see if congestion was at the merge point • Safety is the highest priority — safer for pedestrians to cross two lanes than four lanes • Number of accidents on Pier Ave. appear to be lower • Count on 8th Street lower than when last counted • Construction on Manhattan Ave. may be causing diversion of traffic to other streets • Staff doesn't see major diversion to other streets from Pier Ave. due to high counts • Taping and counts done at same time Discussion and questions among commissioners included: • Five-year extension possible with MTA Prop C funding, currently about two years into City's five-year extension — could ask for additional extension if necessary • This is called a legacy project — won't change main street more than once in a lifetime — worth taking time to do right-of-way • Ad Hoc committee to provide additional input from viewpoints • General curve of traffic counts indicate increase • Interesting to note that reduction of lanes from two to four has not reduced the traffic on Pier Ave. • Counts for one day may not indicate complete picture — not clear foundation for changes • Do not have capability to time lapse photography to establish counts for over a year • Understood resident suspicion of data — said counts not conclusive but may be making decision partially based on inconclusive data • Reasons for project include: o Pier Ave. has been in poor condition for a long time o Biggest issue is drainage — standing water in gutters o Flooding problems o Is a gateway street for the City • Counts are good — done by a tube that counts — no hidden agenda • Staff concerned about diagonal parking and safe speeds • Community will decide • Original plan led to Pier Plaza improvements • Council will make final decision on whether or not ad hoc committee is established PW Commission 2 9/20/06 • • • Until final decision from Council on direction of project, will not go forward with design which includes street repairs • Comments from commissioners will be brought to Council • Sole purpose of this item is fact finding regarding the Pier Ave. re -striping trial • Feedback from Police and Fire Departments noted delay concerns when trucks parking in median • Emergency evacuation planning part of reformulating of 1992 plan • Stop at Bard primarily benefits mobile home park access as well as police and fire At this time Mr. Winnek opened the floor to public comment; admonished gallery will be keeping comments to three minutes and requested no outbursts from the audience. Gary Brutsch, Hermosa Beach Said plan is a failure and should end as soon as possible; data in original report is now twelve years old, biased in favor of businesses; lives on 8th St. and now uses 8th instead of Pier Ave.; said should talk to people who are impacted; feels commission should advise Council test has failed. Caroline Petty, Hermosa Beach Said numbers, snapshots in time, won't tell anything; said thank you - appreciates Mr. Morgan's being really communicative; said really need to focus on traffic increases since plan originally done; noted traffic is sure to increase due to two new projects on Pier Ave.; told commission needs to look to future traffic issues; if no other gateway street, there will probably be greater traffic issues in future; said believes the counts, has felt them; intention to reduce cars on Pier Ave. is disturbing to her as she has to use it — lives south of Pier Ave. Pat Price, Hermosa Beach Eighth Street resident; quoted from Easy Reader article, saying police said lane reductions slowed response time in western part of town during peak traffic hours; wouldn't be there if no problem; increase in traffic has to stop; she is for four lanes. Eric Bails, Hermosa Beach Said that at January 18th meeting asked what problems the Pier Avenue Improvement Project was going to solve; appears scope of project is greater than drainage issues; last comment, fix drainage and enforce traffic laws. At this time Chairman Winnek asked speakers to stay on point, topic this evening is re -striping. Steven Pinard, Hermosa Beach Said can't speak to Pier Ave. re -striping but can speak of own experiences on 8th between Ardmore and PCH; people forced to walk in street due to planting and cars parked across sidewalk — increase in 8th Street traffic linked to Pier Ave. changes. Joan Arias, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St.; has seen distinct increase in traffic since re -striping; said cars make her house tremble during morning and evening rush hours; said can't look at Pier Ave. traffic without looking at 8th Street; has seen traffic increase on 8th Janice Yates, Hermosa Beach President of Marineland Homeowners Association; surveyed residents results indicated complete support for STOP sign at Bard St.; majority in favor re -striping — has slowed people. PW Commission 3 9/20/06 • • Gary Kazanjian, Hermosa Beach Business owner on Pier Ave. as well as resident; commended Mr. Morgan for being great communicator; in favor of four lanes but if had to choose, would choose the first two-lane configuration; cars are going around trucks making deliveries and cars stopped, waiting for someone to pull out of a parking space; is different than Manhattan Beach, there the businesses have alleys for deliveries; traffic and back up worse now that school is in session; likes STOP at Bard; Valerie Pickard, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St., re -striping has definitely changed life; hard to back out due to line of cars; concerned for daughter's safety; strongly opposes striping. Katherine Pinard, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St.; said 8th St. has taken a major hit; hasn't seen anything good about the re -striping; suggested that if go back to four lanes, consider lights in pavement for pedestrian safety on Pier Avenue. Ann Sullivan, Hermosa Beach Definitely against this plan; plan as stands is for business owners to expand on sidewalk to make more money; many trust issues; apologized to 8th St. residents — uses 8th St. Robert Hoffman, Hermosa Beach Said lives three doors from Pier Ave. and re -striping has made it difficult for him to get to and from PCH; he and all his neighbors hate striping. Nancy Mazza, Hermosa Beach Said is an 18 -year resident; concerned about safety being jeopardized every day striping in place; said in Easy Reader article police acknowledged slower response time; doesn't see how people could speed before; agrees has created hazard on 8th Street; urged give all communication with item to City Council. Shirley Mayer, Hermosa Beach Resident of 8th St.; said is a nurse; noted there's great impact to health and safety at stake; pollution increased due to thedust in the air; can't speak neighbor -to -neighbor due to the noise; can't allow kids or pets to go outside; need to make 8th Street not a main street to beach; resents looking at stuff from '92; home has been vandalized three times since striping; said commission has to pay attention to residents. Carla Merriman, Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau Representing the Chamber et al, said city's business community is very interested in beautification of Upper Pier Ave., R/UDAT objectives could be realized by this project complete with new infrastructure, i.e., new streetlights, sewer system, improved sidewalks and street re -paving; believe additional landscaping would enhance the downtown business district for all; business owners haven't complained; applaud effort to slow speeders; care about safety of pedestrians; hope project comes to fruition. Sandy Pfister, Hermosa Beach Said doesn't live near Pier Ave., would like commission to consider when making recommendation to Council that R/UDAT recommendations are not in stone — were for time when written to be implemented soon; updated study needed; why asking for reduction in traffic; only businesses that can use sidewalk will benefit; said two-lane configuration not working, please recommend it go back to four lanes. PW Commission 4 9/20/06 • • Lisa Moore, Hermosa Beach Said there are lots of positive aspects — safer for walking, bike riding, driving; lives on Monterey and has been afraid to cross Pier Ave. — now finds it more pleasant; need to work out bugs; thinks density issue has brought change; hasn't noticed big increase since June on Monterey; agrees first striping was horrible; apologized for using 8th St. but has been using for eighteen years; working with school district on a walk campaign, get people out of cars to walk, ride bikes. Patty Egerer, Hermosa Beach Said R/UDAT never dealt with feasibility issues; residents not being considered; imperative to understand if sidewalks expanded, commercial impact on traffic to residents in area; increase in business bringing noise, traffic flow, congestion, parking issues; is against re -striping; feels City should look at downsizing businesses on Pier Ave. Gary Mallette, Hermosa Beach Is against the project; speeding is not a concern; sidewalks are walkable; 1992 study has no relevance to today; there's more pollution due to more idling vehicles; can't prepare well enough for an emergency. Howard Longacre, Hermosa Beach Said it's been established no problem on Pier Ave., have one on 8th St.; no report from public safety officials indicates opinion wasn't favorable so isn't in report; said Mr. Morgan's been amazing taking brunt of comments; participated in R/UDAT; should preserve the four lanes; noted that at last Council said would be initiating comprehensive review of upper Pier Avenue that should be linked to any street improvements; said supports ending the test. Roder Bacon, Hermosa Business Owner Has been in business in Hermosa Beach for 57 years; doesn't like Pier Ave., Von's doesn't like it; new regional shopping center going in at new center at Sepulveda and Rosecrans will be major competition for this area; said majority of people want four lanes; said change is a liability. At 9:00 pm, Chairman Winnek called a recess; meeting restarted at 9:17. Steven Domingue, Hermosa Business Owner Has been in business here for 15 years; striping done 7:00 pm to 6:00 am and no one could park at 7:00 am; believes rent will go sky high if change goes through — will put him out of business; is against the change. Steve Heuer, Hermosa Beach Said merge is at a crosswalk — need more care for pedestrians; many cars backed up at STOP signs, specifically at Monterey; diagonal parkers having difficulty getting out of spaces near STOP signs; sketchier to ride bikes in that area now; thinks putting lights in street brilliant idea; sees STOP at Bard as a good thing; if speeders on Pier, why not more enforcement out there; population growing by leaps and bounds — absurd to reduce from four lanes to two; evacuation route important. Linda Campbell, Hermosa Beach Said she loves the re -striping; safer for pedestrians; longer wait times small price to pay for safety. Kathleen Midstokke, Hermosa Beach Thanked the commission for listening to a lot of speakers; was involved in R/UDAT study and doesn't remember any emphasis on upper Pier Ave., was on lower Pier Ave. at the time; outer lane was used to hunt for parking, other lane to speed through; already outside dining on Pier Ave.; believes sidewalks are for pedestrians, baby strollers and wheelchairs, not for outdoor dining or display of merchandise. PW Commission 5 9/20/06 • Frank Hallstein Hermosa Beach Said he likes the STOP at Bard, doesn't care for rest of change; thinks is like putting carriage before the horse; need parking before making this.a destination, shouldn't send to City Council, should dump right here. At this time the item was brought back to the commission for discussion. Highlights of the discussion included: • Ad Hoc committee will be comprised of two members of both Planning and Public Works Commissions, two Council members, two local representatives or architects. • Public Works Commission looks at infrastructure issues, not planning or financial issues • How commission feels about having the ad hoc committee will be brought to Council • This evenings meeting is a way to collect information; it is not a political situation • Maybe re -striping isn't best from an emergency or evacuation perspective • Chief Savelli advised no official department statement has been made regarding Pier Avenue; statement in Easy Reader was the officer's personal observation only; many of his personnel have said are in support of STOP at Bard. • Memo had been received from Fire noting problem with trucks in median; staff will ask for a more thorough • Would be good if Council moves forward quickly — drainage and safety issues are important • Impact of striping could not have been imagined — good idea to do test • Distinct opinions and important issues voiced this evening • Commissioners in general glad test was done • R/UDAT report dated • Streets impacted by traffic not traveling Pier Ave. must be included in a more comprehensive plan if go forward with two lanes • Pedestrian safety another issue that should be addressed — not done in current • Signals at Monterey, Valley/Bard could be added to move vehicles safely • Sometimes changes are necessary to improve safety • Doing the study better than reading a report • Funding will be available when ready to begin construction on project • Action to be taken was to receive public comment, pass to Council MOTION by Commissioner Winnek to receive and record public comment and pass on to the City Council or via ad hoc committee to be formed. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Additional discussion included: • Second item in recommendation is to provide Commission opinion on striping and ad hoc committee • May want to make into one motion that includes: o Returnto four lanes o Retaining STOP at Bard o Focus effort on increasing safety in crosswalks • Form ad hoc committee for importance, significance of project MOTION by Commissioner DiVirgilio that Commission recommend to Public Works Staff and City Council end the test with exception of keeping STOP at Bard. After discussion, seconded by Commissioner Beste. At this time a gentleman came forward attempting to speak to this item but was told he was out of order. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None PW Commission 6 9/20/06 ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION by Commissioner Brittain to for an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Planning Sub -committee, Council Sub -committee, local architects, to meet regarding revitalization of Upper Pier Avenue, to provide oversight for design of project and do this as quickly as possible. After some discussion, motion was reworded as: MOTION by Commissioner Brittain to support staff recommendation to establish an Ad Hoc Committee. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. At this time the same gentleman, who identified himself as Dean Francois, attempted to speak to this motion and was again told he was out of order — was told could speak later at Item 11, Public Comment. AYES: Beste, Brittain, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: DiVirgilio ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Additional discussion included: • Want to move traffic in a. safe manner • Should identify traffic safety in a separate motion to Council • Additional requirements could hold project up for years • Should formerly acknowledge many safety issues that need to be addressed • Don't have to push forward, could make statement to Council that want to further investigate, do broader discussion that supersedes downtown enhancement • Public safety is larger than this project • Safest design possible — can be added as item on future commission agenda • Every safety improvement possible will be included in project • Is realistic to put the infrastructure in place when do improvements for possible future signals — allowing for future options so don't have to tear up what's in place — could' look at that • Citywide circulation study that looks at entire situations to significantly change anything — big challenge to made significant changes — all will impact side streets • Have options to do more later MOTION by Commissioner Winnek that members of Pier Avenue Subcommittee represent the Public Works Commission at the Ad Hoc Committee. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None At this time Mr. Francois again attempted to address the commission and was again told this was per time to address the commission. 7. Commissioners' Reports None at this time. 8. Public Works Department Reports a. Monthly Activity Report — July b. Project Status Report — July, PW Commission 7 9/20/06 • The above items are submitted for information purposes only. 9. Items Requested by Commissioners None 10. Other Matters Commissioner DiVirgilio congratulated Kiwanis, MOMs, all involved in "Show of Hands" for recent event — donations were for Centennial events. Commissioner Brittain thanked and commended Public Works team for their involvement in the event. 11. Public Comment Kathleen Midstokke, Hermosa Beach Has worked with the Brown Act since 1984 — believes Mr. Francois misstated the intent of the act giving the public the right to speak to every item on the agenda and commission generously gave the public almost two hours to do so; motions were relevant to the item and commended the chairman for holding to his position. Patty Egerer, Hermosa Beach Would like to have residents involved in process on these committees; have way of communicating to them when meetings are so they may attend. Mr. Morgan advised it is all part of the Brown Act as part of public notification. 12. Adjournment Commissioner Winnek adjourned the meeting at 10:18 pm to the meeting of Wednesday, October 18, 2006. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Public Works Commission of Hermosa Beach at the regularly scheduled meeting of September 20, 2006. Victor Winnek, Chairman Richard D. Morgan, P.E., Secretary Date F:1B951PWFILES\PW Commissionlminuteslminutes 9-20-06.doc PW Commission 8 9/20/06 October 4, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of The Hermosa Beach City Council • '7/0 Regular meeting of October 10, 2006 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CARDIAC CARE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING AGREEMENT FOR PREHOSPITAL PARAMEDIC TREATMENT OF STEMI PATIENTS RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that council: 1. Approve the agreement with the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services — Emergency Medical Services. Agency, and 2. Authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement, and 3. Appropriate $51,000 for the reimbursable purchase of the equipment not to exceed $17,000 per unit, and 4. Approve estimated revenue of $51,000 from the County . of Los Angeles. BACKGROUND On September 5, 2006, the Board of Supervisors approved the ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Receiving Center Program. The goal of this program is to identify 9-1-1 cardiac patients experiencing a STEMI in the prehospital setting and transport them to an approved STEMI Receiving Center (SRC) hospital for definitive diagnosis and treatment. Each advanced life support (ALS) unit must be equipped with 12 -lead electrocardiogram (EKG) capability and staffed with paramedics trained in its use. The Board of Supervisors approved the reimbursement to our agency for the purchase of (3) 12 -lead EKG equipment and associated training. 2g • • • FISCAL IMPACT The 12 -lead EKG equipment, not to exceed $17,000 per unit, will be reimbursed by the County of Los Angeles within (90) days of receipt of invoice per the agreement and associated training will also be reimbursed per the agreement. There is no cost to the city for this program. Respectfully submitted, Russell Tingley Fire Chief Concur: Ste j' - c urrel l City anager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AGENCY LOS ANGELES COUNTY Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Gloria Molina First District Yvonne B. Burke Second District Zev Yaroslaysky Third District Don Knabe Fourth District Michael D. Antonovich Fifth District Carol Meyer Director William Koenig, MD Medical Director 5555 Ferguson Drive, Suite 220 Commerce, CA 90022 Tel: (323) 890-7500 Fax: (323) 890-8536 To improve health through leadership, service and education September 21, 2006 Russell Tingley Fire Chief Hermosa Beach Fire Department 540 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Chief Tingley: RECEIVED SEP 2 2008 I am pleased to announce that on September 5, 2006, the Board of Supervisors approved the ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Receiving Center Program. As you know, the goal of this program is to identify 9-1-1 cardiac patients experiencing a STEMI in the prehospital setting and transport them to an approved STEMI Receiving Center (SRC) hospital for definitive diagnosis and treatment. Each advanced life support (ALS) unit must be equipped with 12 -lead electrocardiogram (EKG) capability and staffed with paramedics trained in its use. Attached is the adopted Board letter to be used by your department as verification of the County's intent to reimburse your department for the purchase/upgrade of 12 -lead EKG equipment for two EMS Agency approved ALS units and one assessment unit. The reimbursement includes payment for training 14 accredited paramedics aswell as all EMTs in your department. Agreement Attached is the Cardiac Care Program Equipment Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors that must be executed by the EMS provider and/or city in order to qualify for reimbursement. This will cover the cost of 12 -lead EKG equipment purchased/upgraded by December 31, 2006 and training completed by June 30, 2007. It is a limited term contract for the reimbursement of applicable equipment and training and expires June 30, 2007. No substantive changes to the agreement will be accepted. In order to expedite the agreement execution, please provide the following information to Anna Farias at afarias(a�ladhs.orq by December 1, 2006: • The name of the agency (fire department or city) that should appear on the first page of the agreement as the "provider" • The name of the agency, the individual, and the address to which notices regarding the agreement should be sent ■ The preferred city official on the signature page (fire chief, city manager, or mayor) ■ The name(s) and title(s) of the individuals who will sign the agreement • • Chief Tingley September 21, 2006 Page 2 Reimbursement To qualify for reimbursement, the encumbrance/purchase order/purchase agreement for applicable EKG equipment must be dated no later than December 31, 2006. Please refer to Pages 5 through 9 of the attached agreement for a detailed outline of the purchase and reimbursement responsibilities of the Provider and the County. The paid invoices submitted for reimbursement must clearly provide verification of expenditures for the purchase of 12 -lead EKG equipment and must be submitted within 30 days after purchase of said EKG equipment. The 12 -lead EKG purchase should include transcutaneous pacing (TCP) and waveform capnography cabilities. The maximum reimbursement will be $17,000 per unit. All vendor credit for exchange of existing equipment for new 12 -lead EKG equipment shall be applied to the purchase cost prior to County'sreimbursement to Provider. Reimbursement for training shall be made upon receipt of rosters with the names and signatures of attendees and the number of course hours completed. Reimbursement will be for full hour increments only. The training rosters should be grouped and submitted on a monthly basis. Training Training for paramedics shall be either an ACLS course that includes in-service on the 12 -lead EKG equipment, not to exceed sixteen (16) hours or specific training only on the equipment, not to exceed six (6) hours per individual. EMTs will be paid for training on the application of the 12 -lead equipment not to exceed two (2) hours per individual. ACLS training is not mandated. The six hour training should include, but is not limited to, the following subjects: • Policies and procedures related to the SRC program (attached) • Training on TCP and waveform capnography • Review of chest pain of suspected cardiac origin • Care of the cardiac patient • Overview of the anatomy and physiology of the heart • Application of the 12 -lead EKG equipment • The rationale for utilizing rapid primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) A more detailed outline of the 6 -hour course will be provided by the EMS Agency within 30 to 60 days. Prehospital 12 -Lead EKG Transmission to the SRC As part of the application process to become an EMS Agency approved SRC, hospitals have received letters detailing the required criteria (sample attached). Providers should consider consulting with the likely SRC(s) in their local geographic area to determine whether they will accept the computer analysis of the prehospital EKG or require transmission to the facility. The monies allocated from the Measure B Fund do not include any hospital costs. If the SRC plans to require EKG transmission, the transmission capability for the provider will be covered but not the cost of the hospital's receiving equipment. Chief Tingley September 21, 2006 Page 3 Important Deadlines • December 1, 2006 • December 31, 2006: • January 31, 2007: All information required to modify the agreement to each city's preferred agreement style should be provided to Anna Farias. All purchases of 12 -lead equipment (waveform capnography and TCP recommended) should be complete. All equipment purchase invoices should be submitted to the EMS Agency. • June 30, 2007: All paramedic and EMT 12 -lead training should be complete. • December 31, 2007: All training rosters should be submitted to the EMS Agency. If you have any questions, please contact Christine Bender, Chief, Prehospital Care Operations, at (323) 890-7576 or Paula Rashi, Facilities Programs Manager, at (323) 890-7581. Verjruly yours, Carol Meyer Director CM:cb 09-14 Attachments AtitAY c: Medical Director, EMS Agency Paramedic Coordinator, Hermosa Beach Fire Department Health Services LOS ANGELES COUNTY Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Gloria Molina First District • Yvonne B. Burke Second District Zev Yaroslaysky Third District Don Knabe Fourth District Michael D. Antonovich F'Rh District Bruce A. Chemof, MD Director and Chief Medical Officer John R. Cochran III Chief Deputy Director William Loos, MD Acting Senior Medical Outer 313 N. Figueroa Street, Suite 912 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Tel: (213) 240-8101 Fax: (213) 481-0503 www.ladhs.org To improve health through leadership, service and education. www.ladhs.org September 5, 2006 The Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Los Angeles 383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Dear Supervisors: ADOPTED BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 26 SEP 2003 SACHI A: HAMAI EXECUTIVE OFFICER APPROVAL OF ST ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION RECEIVING CENTER STANDARDS, MEASURE B SPECIAL TAX FUNDING ALLOCATION, CARDIAC CARE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT AGREEMENT, AND APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT (All Districts) (4 Votes) IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD: 1. Approve the attached 2006 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Agency ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Receiving Center Standards, substantially similar to Exhibit I, and instruct the EMS Agency to approve and: designate qualified private and public hospitals as STEMI Receiving Centers to provide optimal care for 9-1-1 STEMI cardiac patients in Los Angeles County, with implementation of STEMI Receiving Center standards, effective upon Board approval. 2. Approve $4 million in Measure B Trauma Property Assessment (TPA) funding one-time only to reimburse the paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B for initial purchase of 12 -Lead electrocardiograph (EKG) machines and initial training of paramedic and emergency medical technician (EMT) personnel on the use of 12 - Lead EKG machines. 3. Approve and instruct the Director of Health Services, or his designee, to offer and execute Cardiac Care Program Equipment Agreements (Agreement), substantially similar to Exhibit II, with the paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B, to provide reimbursement of equipment and training costs for paramedic first responders in local fire departments in order to ensure 12 -Lead EKG capability in prehospital care for 9-1-1 patients in Los Angeles County, at a maximum reimbursement rate of $17,000 per 12 -Lead EKG machine and $45.00 per hour per attendee for training, for a total maximum obligation of $4 million, effective upon Board approval through June 30, 2007. 4. Approve the attached appropriation adjustment to reallocate $4 million in Measure B TPA funds from Appropriation for Contingencies to Services and Supplies (S&S) in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2006-07 Department of Health Services (DHS) Adopted Budget. The Honorable Board of Supervisors September 5, 2006 Page 2 PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION OF THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The purpose of the recommended actions is to: 1) authorize the EMS Agency to approve and designate qualified private and public hospitals in Los Angeles County as STEMI Receiving Centers (SRC). This will enable the transport of 9-1-1 STEMI cardiac patients to a SRC for earlier definitive diagnosis and treatment improving patient outcome; 2) approve DHS EMS to reimburse 30 paramedic service provider agencies in Los Angeles County a total maximum aggregate amount of $4 million, for the expense incurred for equipping their paramedic units with 12 -Lead EKG machines and for training paramedic and EMT personnel on the use of such equipment; 3) approve DHS EMS to offer and execute cardiac care program equipment agreements with the paramedic service provider agencies, identified in Attachment B, who comply with respected medical community recommendations to equip paramedic units with 12 - Lead EKG machines for the early diagnosis of 9-1-1 patients with acute myocardial infarction; and 4) approve an appropriation transfer in the amount of $4 million within the FY 2006-07 DHS Adopted Budget to enable DHS EMS to reimburse the paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B who equip their paramedic units with 12 -Lead EKG machines and, train their paramedic and. EMT personnel in the use of such machines. FISCAL IMPACT/FINANCING: The maximum obligation for the agreements with the local and County paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B will not exceed $4 million, for the period effective upon Board approval through June 30, 2007. This is 100% funded by Measure B TPA funds and is a one-time only expenditure. The appropriation adjustment to reallocate $4 million from Appropriation for Contingencies to S & S in the FY 2006-07 DHS Adopted Budget is necessary to cover these obligations. Any Measure B TPA funds unused at the end of FY 2006-07 will remain in the Measure B Special Fund, pending additional uses recommended by DHS and approved by your Board. FACTS AND PROVISIONS/LEGAL REQUIREMENTS: Acute myocardial infarction (heart attack) remains the leading cause of death of adults in the United States. Survival from a heart attack is largely dependent on prompt recognition and rapid intervention. Data show that the faster a patient can be identified as having an acute heart attack, the corresponding faster intervention can be delivered in an effort to reduce death of cardiac tissue and save lives. Increasingly, there is national interest in developing a systematic approach to the prehospital care of STEMI cardiac 9-1-1 patients supported by organizations such as the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (AHA). In enacting their Advance Cardiac Life - Support Guidelines, the AHA advocates a 12 -Lead EKG machine as standard equipment on all paramedic units that handle acute coronary syndrome patients. The United States Senate, in a letter dated May 31, 2005, also recommended that anyone with symptoms of a possible heart attack obtain a 12 -Lead EKG as soon as possible and that EMS should transport patients with heart attack symptoms to specialized facilities. In Los Angeles County, the EMS Agency is working closely with the medical community to develop these recommendations into a cardiac care program that includes rapid acquisition and interpretation of a 12 -Lead EKG. The Honorable Board of Supervisors September 5, 2006 Page3 The Los Angeles County and City Fire Departments have been integral in the development stages of the cardiac care program, as recipients of an Annenberg Foundation grant which partially offsets the cost of 12 -Lead EKG equipment and training for theirrespective agency's paramedics. The paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B are expected to purchase 12 - Lead EKG equipment by December 31, 2006, with the intent to provide associated training by June 30, 2007. A one-time allocation, not to exceed $4.0 million in Measure B TPA funding, would cover equipment and training costs for paramedics and EMT personnel in the 30 paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B to ensure the implementation of the cardiac care program for STEMI patients. Per terms of the Agreement, the County will not reimburse for equipment and training previously funded by other grant funds. Studies have shown that morbidity and mortality due to a STEMI can be reduced significantly if patients activate the EMS system early, thereby shortening the time to treatment. Paramedics currently transport all cardiac patients to the nearest hospital. If the receiving hospital does not have the SRC capability some of the patients may require secondary transfer to a STEMI facility. However, under the new cardiac care.program they would transport the 9-1-1 STEMI cardiac patients to EMS Agency -approved receiving centers. As with all other patient destination policies, the paramedics will utilize the EKG equipment on patients based on established medical criteria, including County responsible indigent patients. Under the authority granted. by Title 22, California Code of Regulations, and as outlined in the EMS System Guidelines -issued by the State EMS Authority, the EMS Agency Medical Director will approve and designate qualified public and private hospitals in Los Angeles County as STEMI receiving centers. Approved SRCs will meet specific standards as outlined in Exhibit I, and include required equipment and personnel to provide rapid intervention. There are at least 36 hospitals in Los Angeles County that have the capability to participate as SRCs and have expressed high interest in the program. Participation in the SRC program is voluntary. The SRC Standards were developed by the Cardiac Technical Advisory Group, under the leadership of the EMS Agency Medical Director and was comprised of cardiologists, emergency physicians, fire department personnel, an EMS Commissioner, nurse managers from emergency departments and cardiac catherization laboratories, and a representative from the Hospital Association of Southern California. The SRC Standards have been fully approved by the County-ordinanced Emergency Medical Services Commission. On July 30, 2002, the Board adopted a resolution for the Measure B special tax ballot initiative. The resolution provides that Measure B TPA funds will be used to pay for the cost of prehospital care, including care provided in, or en route to, from or between acute care hospitals or other health care facilities. The resolution also established that the special tax is for the purpose of purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment or materials. In accordance with Measure B objectives, $4 million in Measure B TPA funds will be used to reimburse the paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B for the initial purchase of 12 -Lead EKG machines and related training. County Counsel has approved Exhibits I and II as to use and form. Attachments A and B provide additional information. The Honorable Board of Supervisors September 5, 2006 Page 4 CONTRACTING PROCESS: The paramedic service provider agencies executing the attached agreement are current. participants in the County's EMS System and satisfy County criteria and conditions for participation. It is not appropriate to advertise this agreement on the Los Angeles County On - Line Web Site, IMPACT ON CURRENT SERVICES: The designation of STEMI SRCs, allocation of Measure B TPA funding, Cardiac Care Program Equipment Agreements with local and County paramedic service provider agencies and approval of the appropriation adjustment will help to ensure the delivery of timely and definitive emergency medical care to 9-1-1 STEMI cardiac patients in Los Angeles County. When approved, this Department requires three signed copies of the Board's action. Respectfully submitted, Bru A. ' n ernof, D. Director . Chi dical Officer BAC: • Attachments (5) c: Chief Administrative Officer County Counsel Executive Officer, Board of Supervisors Auditor -Controller • •► ATTACHMENT A SUMMARY OF AGREEMENT I. Type of Service: This agreement provides for paramedic service provider agencies to be reimbursed by County for equipment and training costs to ensure 12 -Lead electrocardiograph (EKG) capability in prehospital care for 9-1-1 patients in Los Angeles County. 2. Address and Contact Person: Department of Health Services — Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Agency 5555 Ferguson Drive, Suite 220 Los Angeles, California 90022 Attention: Carol Meyer, Director Telephone: (323) 890-7545 Fax: (323) 890-8536 Email: cmeyer@ladhs.org 3. Term: Effective upon Board approval through June 30, 2007. 4. Financial Information: The maximum obligation for the agreements with the local and County paramedic service provider agencies identified in Attachment B will not exceed $4 million. This is 100% funded by Measure B Trauma Property Assessment funds. The appropriation adjustment to reallocate $4 million from Appropriation for Contingencies to Services & Supplies in the Fiscal Year 2006-07 Department of Health Services Adopted Budget is necessary to cover these obligations. 5. Primary Geographic Area to be Served: -Countywide. 6. :Accountable for Program. Monitoring: The County's local EMS Agency, i.e., the Department's EMS Division 7. Approvals: Emergency Medical Services Agency: Carol Meyer, Director Contracts and Grants Division: Cara O'Neill, Chief County Counsel: Edward A. Morrissey, Deputy County Counsel CAO Budget Unit: - Leticia Thompson • • ATTACHMENT B PARAMEDIC SERVICE PROVIDER AGENCIES THAT REQUIRE CARDIAC CARE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT AGREEMENT 1. Alhambra Fire Department 2. Arcadia Fire Department 3. Beverly Hills Fire Department 4. Burbank Fire Department 5. Compton Fire Department 6. Culver City Fire Department 7. Downey Fire Department 8. El Segundo Fire Department 9. Glendale Fire Department 10. Hermosa Beach Fire Department 11. La Habra Heights Fire Department 12. La Verne Fire Department 13. Long Beach Fire Department 14. Los Angeles City Fire Department 15. Los Angeles County Fire Department (Memorandum of Understanding) 16. Los Angeles County Sheriff Department (Memorandum of Understanding) 17. Manhattan Beach Fire Department 18 Monrovia Fire Department 19. Montebello Fire Department 20. Monterey Park Fire Department 21. Pasadena Fire Department 22. Redondo Beach Fire Department 23. San Gabriel Fire Department 24. San Marino Fire Department 25. Santa Fe Springs Fire Department 26. Santa Monica Fire Department 27. South Pasadena Fire Department 28. Torrance Fire Department 29. Vernon Fire Department 30. West Covina Fire Department par Arra on � stment Erb eYar icu n# of $4,i3001)001V: tad daget t�easute- ,Tray ma Pro erty assri'ment n res46!P4:45"-q? -F2PF..RRF_D CHI 2. bhitNISW1 _a1= PEA oFz• COMMENDATION'S CHIEF- AC31Vi1NIS'ERA ' ' FFIGER ` • • Contract No. CARDIAC CARE PROGRAMS EQUIPMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this of , 2006, by and between COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES (hereafter "County"), and EXHIBIT 11 day (hereafter "Provider") WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted under the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act (Health and Safety Code, sections 1797, et. seq.), ("Act") County has established and maintains an Advanced Life Support ("ALS") system providing services utilizing Emergency Medical. Technicians -Paramedics (hereafter "paramedics") for the delivery of emergency medical care to the sick and injured at the scene of an emergency, during transport to a general acute care hospital, during interfacility transfer, while in the emergency department of a. general hospital, until care responsibility is assumed by the regular staff of that hospital, and during training within the facilities of a participating general acute care hospital; and WHEREAS, under the Act County has designated its Department of Health Services (hereafter "DHS") as the local Emergency Medical Services Agency (hereafter "EMS Agency"); and WHEREAS, the EMS Agency approves paramedic provider agencies, to render through licensed and accredited paramedic personnel, ALS level patient care in accordance with policies and procedures established by the EMS Agency and the State Emergency Medical Services Authority; and WHEREAS, the Fire Department (hereafter "Provider") is an approved primary provider of prehospital emergency medical services with the City of , and is staffed with certified Emergency Medical Technician -Is ("EMT") and licensed and accredited paramedics; and WHEREAS, under Title 22, California Code of Regulations sections 100144 and 100169, the Medical Director of the local EMS Agency ("Medical Director") may approve policies and procedures allowing a paramedic to initiate a 12 -Lead electrocardiogram (12 -Lead EKG) on a patient experiencing chest pan in the prehospital setting, provided that continuous quality improvement ("CQI") measures are in place as specified in section 100167 of such regulations; and - 2.- WHEREAS, the EMS Agency has established a systemwide CQI program as defined and required under Title 22, California Code of Regulations sections 100136 and 100172; and WHEREAS, the Medical Director, in consultation with the Cardiac Technical Advisory Group, has approved and recommended Countywide implementation of 12 -Lead EKGs for prehospital emergency medical care, and the addition of 12 -Lead EKG equipment to the ALS Unit Inventory; and WHEREAS, Provider desires to utilize 12 -Lead EKG equipment for Provider ALS units in accordance with prehospital emergency medical care policies and procedures established by the local EMS Agency; and WHEREAS, the EMS Agency agrees to reimburse Provider for the cost of the initial purchase of 12 -Lead EKG equipment and the initial training associated with the equipment's use, unless previously funded by other grant funds; and WHEREAS, the parties agree to cooperate with each other and with paramedic base hospitals within the County for the development and implementation of approved ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Receiving Centers which will serve as a destination for 9-1-1 patients who are experiencing a STEMI as determined by a 12 -Lead EKG administered in the field by an ALS Unit; and -3 WHEREAS, County's authority for this Agreement is found in Health and Safety Code section 1797.252, Title 22, California Code of Regulations section 100169, and Government Code section 26227; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that Provider does not waive its "grandfather" status, if applicable, under California Health and Safety Code section 1797.201, and that this agreement is solely for the purpose of establishing terms and conditions of reimbursement by County to. Provider for the initial purchase of 12-Lead EKG equipment and associated training, and does not impact any of Provider's present or future rights under Health and Safety Code section 1797.201. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. BASIS AND PURPOSE: The basis of this Agreement is the desire and intention of the EMS Agency to cooperate in the operations of each party's component of the emergency medical care delivery system, consistent with each party's other health services activities and fiscal requirements and the duties and responsibilities of the County and its EMS Agency. The Agreement's purpose is to establish, in a manner reflective of such cooperative basis, the designated rules, duties and responsibilities of the parties with respect to the matters addressed herein. 4 • • 2. TERM: The term of this Agreement shall commence upon Boardapproval and shall continue in full force and effect to and including June 30, 2007. In any event, this Agreement may be canceled at any time' by either party by the giving of at least one -hundred -eighty (180) calendar days advance written notice thereof to the other party. 3. ADMINISTRATION: The Director of DHS or designee shall have the authority to administer this Agreement and subsequent amendments, if any, on behalf of County. The Provider's Fire Chief or designee is authorized to administer this Agreement and subsequent amendments, if any, on behalf of Provider. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY RELATING TO THE PURCHASE OF 12 -LEAD EKG EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING: A. County agrees to reimburse Provider for the initial purchase of 12 -Lead EKG equipment and for the initial training of paramedic and EMT personnel in the use of 12 -Lead EKG equipment, at the rates and per terms specified in Subparagraphs B and C, hereinbelow. B. REIMBURSEMENT FOR 12 -Lead EKG PURCHASE: Reimbursement shall be made by County to Provider within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete and correct invoice from Provider for the initial purchase of 12 -Lead EKG equipment in accordance with the rate of reimbursement 5 • • specified hereunder. Reimbursement by County to Provider shall be limited to the purchase of one (1) 12 -Lead EKG machine per approved ALS Unit, to be purchased by Provider no later than December 31, 2006_ County's reimbursement to Provider shall not exceed a total maximum amount of Seventeen Thousand Dollars ($17,000) per 12 -Lead EKG machine, excluding any vendor credit for exchange of existing EKG equipment. All vendor credit for exchange of existing equipment for new 12 -Lead EKG equipment shall be applied to the purchase cost prior to County's reimbursement to Provider. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the County shall not reimburse Provider for the purchase of a 12 -Lead EKG machine if Provider has already received funding from a grant or any other third party source to. offset the cost of such machine. C. REIMBURSEMENT FOR INITIAL TRAINING: Reimbursement shallbe made by County to Provider within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete and correct invoice from Provider for initial training of Provider's paramedic and EMT personnel in the use of 12 -Lead EKG equipment. Such invoice must include rosters from initial training that identify each attendee, each attendee's classification (paramedic or EMT),date of training, and 6 total hours of initial training. Reimbursement by County to Provider shall be limited to the initial training completed no later than June 30, 2007, and as described herein. County's reimbursement to Provider shall not exceed a total maximum amount of Forty -Five Dollars ($45.00) per hour of initial training per attendee, limited to one category of training per attendee, for the following maximum hours,: TRAINING CATEGORY ATTENDEE MAXIMUM HOURS ACLS Paramedic 16 (includes 12 -Lead EKG training) - OR - 12 -Lead EKG Paramedic 6 - OR -. 12 -Lead EKG EMT 2 D. Reimbursement by County to Provider shall be made in the order that invoices are received from all Providers under this Agreement (first-come, first-served basis). Providers that have not received previous grant funding for reimbursement of expenditures described in Section 4, Subparagraph A of this Agreement, shall have priority for reimbursement. Reimbursement shall be made by^County to Provider for 12 -Lead EKG equipment purchased by Provider no later than December 31, 2006, and for initial training of -7- Provider's paramedic and EMT personnel on the use of such equipment that is completed no later than June 30, 2007. S. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROVIDER RELATING TO THE PURCHASE OF 12 -LEAD EKG EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING: A. Provider shall be responsible for the selection of a vendor and the initial procurement of 12 -Lead EKG equipment under the terms of the group purchase plans developed by the Los Angeles Chapter of the California Fire Chiefs Association. Provider agrees to equip each approved ALS Unit within its agency with each 12 -Lead EKG machine purchased under terms of this Agreement. Purchase of said equipment must be made by Provider no later than December 31, 2006, to qualify for reimbursement by County. B. Provider shall coordinate and arrange for the initial training of paramedic and EMT personnel in the use of 12 -Lead EKG equipment. Such training must be completed no later than June 30, 2007, to qualify for reimbursement by County. C. Provider shall submit an invoice to Countythat clearly reflects and provides reasonable details for said purchase of 12 -Lead EKG equipment. Reimbursement by County will be subject to the terms as set forth in Section 4, Subparagraphs B, C, and D of this Agreement. Invoice(s) 8 shall be forwarded by Provider to the EMS Agency, 5555 Ferguson Drive, Suite 220, Commerce, California 90022. All invoices shall be submitted by Provider to County within thirty (30) days after purchase of said EKG equipment, with respect to the purchase deadline as set forth in Section 5, Subparagraph A of this Agreement. D. Provider shall submit an invoice to County that clearly reflects and provides reasonable details of the initial training of paramedics and EMT personnel on the use of 12 -Lead EKG equipment. Reimbursement by County will be subject to the terms set forth in Section 4, Subparagraphs C and D of this Agreement. Invoice(s) shall include roster(s) from initial training that identify each attendee, each attendee's classification (paramedic or EMT), date of training, and total hours of initial training per attendee. Invoice(s) shall be forwarded by Provider to the EMS Agency, 5555 Ferguson Drive, Suite 220, Commerce, California 90022. Invoice(s) shall be submitted by Provider to County within thirty (30) days after training is completed, with respect to the training deadline as set forth in Section 5, Subparagraph B of this Agreement. 9 E. Provider shall submit upon request by the EMS Agency, accurate and complete data pertaining to prehospital emergency medical care of STEMI patients. F. Provider shall be responsible for: (1) all maintenance of 12 -Lead EKG equipment purchased under terms of this Agreement and beyond, (2) expenditure for purchase of all replacement 12 -Lead EKG equipment, (3) expenditure for additional and/or future 12 -Lead EKG equipment purchased after December 31, 2006, and (4) expenditure for training on the use of 12 -Lead EKG equipment that occurs after June 30, 2007. G. Provider agrees to utilize any 12 -Lead EKG equipment subject to this Agreement in a manner consistent with standards, policies, and procedures of the_EMS Agency. Provider agrees that in such utilization it shall provide prehospital care as needed without regard to a person's ability to pay. 6. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS: This Agreement is by and between County and Provider and is not intended, and shall not be construed, to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association,. between County and Provider. Provider understands and agrees that all the Provider employees performing services on behalf of Provider -10- • • under this Agreement are, for the purposes of worker's compensation liability, employees solely of Provider and not of County. 7. INDEMNIFICATION: Each party (Indemnifying Party) shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other, and the other's Special Districts, elected and appointed officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all liability, including but not limited to demands, claims,fees, actions, costs and expenses (including attorney and expert witness fees) arising from or connected with the Indemnifying Party's acts and/or omissions arising from and/or relating to this Agreement. 8. MAXIMUM COUNTY OBLIGATION: County has allocated a maximum total amount of Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00) for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred by all Providers under terms of this Agreement. The parties acknowledge that this funding is comprised by revenue generated by Measure B, Preservation of Trauma Centers and Emergency Medical Services annual special tax as allocated by the County Board of Supervisors (Measure B Trauma Property Assessment [TPA] Funds). The parties further acknowledge that, following all due payment by County to all Providers under terms of this Agreement, any Measure B TPA funds unused at the termination of this Agreement -11- shall remain in the Measure B Special Fund, pending additional use subject to approval by the County Board of Supervisors. 9. MERGER PROVISION: The body of this Agreement, and any exhibits attached hereto, fully express all understandings of the parties concerning all matters covered and shall constitute the total Agreement. No addition to oralteration of the terms of this Agreement, whether by written or verbal understanding of the parties, their officers, agents, or employees, shall be valid unless made in the form of a written amendment to this Agreement which is formally approved and executed by the parties. 10. COMPLIANCE WITH HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996: The parties acknowledge the existence of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and its implementing regulations ("HIPAA"). Provider understands and agrees that as a provider of medical treatment services, it is a "covered entity" under HIPAA and, as such, has obligations with respect to the confidentiality, privacy and security of patients' medical information, and must take certain steps to preserve the confidentiality of this information, both internally and externally, including the training of its staff and the establishment of proper procedures -12- • • for the release of such information, and the use of appropriate consents and authorizations specified under HIPAA. The parties acknowledge their separate and independent obligations with respect to HIPAA, and that such obligations relate to transactions and code sets, privacy, and security. Provider understands and agrees that it is separately and independently responsible for compliance with HIPAA in all these areas and that County has not undertaken any responsibility for compliance on Provider's behalf. Provider has not relied, and will not in any way. rely, on County for legal advice or other representations with respect to Provider's obligations under HIPAA, but will independently seek its own counsel and take the necessary measures to comply with the law and its implementing regulations. Provider and County understand and agree that each is independently responsible for HIPAA compliance..and agree to take all necessary and reasonable actions to comply with the requirements of the HIPAA law and implementing regulations related to transactions and code set, privacy, and security. Each party further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the other party (including their officers, employees, and agents), for its failure to comply with HIPAA. -13- 11. NOTICES: Any and all notices required, permitted, or desired to be given hereunder by one party to the other shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the other party personally or by United States mail, certified or registered, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the parties at the following addresses and to the attention of the person named. The Medical Director shall have the authority to issue all notices which are required or permitted by County hereunder. Addresses and persons to be notified may be changed by one party by giving at least ten (10) calendar days prior written notice thereof to the other. A. Notices to County shall be addressed as follows: 1. Department'of Health Services Emergency Medical Services Agency 5555 Ferguson Drive, Suite 220 Commerce, California 90022 Attention: Director 2. Department of Health Services Contracts and Grants.Division 313 North Figueroa Street, 6th Floor East Los Angeles, California .90012 Attention: Division Chief 3. Auditor -Controller Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street, Room 525 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: Director -14- • • B. Notices to Provider shall be addressed as follows: 1. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles has caused this Agreement to be subscribed by its -15- Director of Health Services and Provider on its behalf by its duly authorized officer, the day, month, and year first above written. CITY OF By COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES By Bruce A. Chernof, M.D. Director and Chief Medical Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO PROGRAM: CITY ATTORNEY Department of Health Services By By City Attorney Carol Meyer, Director Emergency Medical Services Agency APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL Deputy APPROVED AS TO CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION: Department of Health Services By Cara O'Neill, Chief Contracts and Grants -16- DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SUBJECT: ST ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL (PARAMEDIC, MICN) INFARCTION PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 513 PURPOSE: To ensure that 9-1-1 patients with ST -elevation myocardial infarction are transported to a facility with cardiac catheterization/surgical capabilities. AUTHORITY: Health & Safety Code, Division 2.5, Sections, 1798 DEFINITIONS: ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI): An acute MI that generates ST - segment elevation on the prehospital 12 -lead electrocardiogram (EKG). STEMI Receiving Center (SRC): A facility licensed for a cardiac catheterization laboratory and cardiovascular surgery by the Department of Health Services License and Certification Division and approved by the Los Angeles County EMS Agency as a SRC. PRINCIPLE: 1. The 12 -lead EKG in the prehospital care setting is a key component to the early diagnosis and ongoing definitive treatment for patients with acute myocardial infarction. 2. In all cases, the health and well being of the patient is the overriding consideration in determining patient destination. Factors to be considered include: severity and stability of the patient's condition; current status of the SRC; anticipation of transport time; and request by the patient, family, guardian or physician. POLICY: 1. Responsibility of the Provider Agency A. The 12 -lead EKG shall be acquired on patients who complain of chest pain/discomfort of suspected cardiac etiology and/or patients who the paramedics suspect are experiencing an acute cardiac event. Note: Standing Field Treatment Protocol (SFTP) providers will contact for notification and destination. B. Contact the assigned Base Hospital for medical direction and destination for all patients whose 12 -lead EKG demonstrates "acute MI" or the manufacturer's equivalentreading of an acute STEMI. C. Determine destination of the STEMI patient when for whatever reason base hospital contact cannot be made. EFFECTIVE: 05-15-06 . REVISED: ? SUPERSEDES: APPROVED: ��lJ l�G `d Director, EMS Ag cy Medical Dipector, EMS icy • • SUBJECT: ST ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 513. D. Transmit (if capable) the 12 -lead EKG demonstrating "acute MI" or "acute Ml suspected" to the receiving SRC if requested. E. Label each prehospital 12 -lead EKG performed with the corresponding EMS Report Form Sequence Number. F. On the EMS Report Form, document that a 12 -lead EKG was done. ll. Responsibility of the Base Hospital A. Provide medical direction and destination for all patients whose 12 -lead EKG demonstrates STEMI. Note: Provide destination and obtain patient information in such a way as not to delay transport. B. Determine patient destination via the ReddiNet system. C. Notify the receiving SRC if the base hospital is not the patient's destination. Ill. Transportation of STEMI Patients to a SRC A. Ali STEMI patients shall be transported to the most accessible open SRC if ground transport is 30 minutes or less regardless of service agreement rules and/or considerations. Note: This includes hypotensive patients with signs and symptoms consistent with cardiogenic shock. B. If ground transport time to a SRC is greater than the maximum allowable time of 30 minutes, the patient shall be transported to the most accessible receiving facility. IV. Diversion of STEMI Patients to a SRC The SRC may request diversion of 9-1-1 ALS units only when: A. The hospital is unable to perform emergent percutaneous coronary intervention because the cardiac cath staff is already fully committed to caring for STEMI patients in the catheterization laboratory; or B. The facility is on internal disaster. Note: ED diversion does not prohibit a STEMI patient's transport to an open SRC. CROSS REFERENCE: Prehospital Care Policy Manual: Ref. No. 501, Hospital Directory Ref. No. 502, Patient Destination Ref. No. 503, Guidelines for Hospitals Requesting Diversion of ALS Units Ref.. No. 808, Base Hospital Contact and Transport Criteria DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES (EMT-I,PARAMEDIC,MICN) SUBJECT: PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 502 PURPOSE: To ensure that 9-1-1 patients are transported to the most appropriate facility that is staffed, equipped, and prepared to administer emergency and/or definitive care appropriate to the needs of the patient. AUTHORITY: Health and Safety Code, Division 2.5, Section 1797.220 California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Section 1105 (c) PRINCIPLES: 1. 9-1-1 patients shall ordinarily be transported to general acute care hospitals with a basic emergency department permit. Transport to other medical facilities (hospitals with a stand-by permit, clinics and other medical facilities approved by the EMS Agency) shall be performed only in accordance with this policy. 2. In the absence of decisive factors to the contrary 9-1-1 patients shall be transported to the most accessible medical facility equipped, staffed, and prepared to receive emergency cases and administer emergency care appropriate to the needs of the patient. 3. Themost accessible receiving (MAR) facility may or may not be the closest facility geographically. Transport personnel shall take into consideration traffic, weather conditions or other similar factors, which may influence transport time when identifying which hospital is most accessible. 4. The most appropriate health facility for a patient may be that health facility which is affiliated with the patient's health plan. Depending upon the patient's chief complaintand medical history, it may be advantageous for the patient to be transported to a facility where they can be treated by a personal physician and/or the individual's personal health plan and where medical records are. available. 5. ALS units utilizing Standing Field Treatment Protocols (SFTPs) shall transport patients in accordance with this policy. 6. Patients shall not be transported to a medical facility that has requested diversion due to internal disaster. 7. Notwithstanding any other provision of this reference, and in accordance with Reference No. 503, Guidelines for Hospitals Requesting Diversion of ALS Units, final authority for patient destination rests with the base hospital handling the call. Whether diversion request will be honored depends on available system resources. EFFECTIVE: 7-20-84 REVISED: 08-24-0 SUPERSEDES: 1 APPROVED: Director, EMS Ag PAGE 1 OF 5 a-Z/Z4' a/ - Medical DI tor, EMS Age • • SUBJECT: PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 502 POLICY: Transport of Patients by EMT -I Personnel A. EMT -I personnel shall transport 9-1-1 patients deemed stable and requiring only basic life support (BLS) to the MAR, regardless of its diversion status (exception: internal disaster). For pediatric patients, the MAR is considered to be the most accessible Emergency Department Approved for Pediatrics (EDAP). For perinatal patients, the MAR is considered to be the most accessible perinatal center. B. EMT -I personnel may honor patient requests to be transported to other than the MAR provided that the patient is deemed stable and requires basic life support measures only and the ambulance is not unreasonably removed from its primary area of response. C In life-threatening situations (e.g., unmanageable airway or uncontrollable hemorrhage) in which the estimated time of arrival (ETA) of the paramedics exceeds the ETA to the MAR, EMT -Is should exercise their clinical judgement as to whether it is in the patient's best interest to be transported prior to the arrival of paramedics. D. EMT -I personnel may transfer care of a patient to another EMT -I team if necessary. II. Transport of Patients by Paramedic Personnel A. . Patients should be transported to the MAR unless: 1. . The base hospital determines that a more distant hospital is more appropriate to meet the needs of the patient; or 2. The patient meets criteria or guidelines for transport to a specialty care center (i.e., Trauma, Pediatric Trauma, ST -Elevation Myocardial Infarction Receiving Center, EDAP, Pediatric Medical Center, Perinatal); or 3. The patient requests a specific hospital; and a. The patient's condition is considered sufficiently stable to tolerate additional transport time; and b. The EMS provider has determinedthat such a transport would not unreasonably remove the unit from its primary area of response. If requests cannot be honored, the provider should attempt to. arrange for alternate transportation, i.e., private ambulance, to accommodate the patient's request; and c. The requested hospital does not have a defined service area. (For hospitals with a defined service area, refer to Section V of this policy_) PAGE 2 OF 5 SUBJECT: PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 502 4. The medical facility has requested diversion to 9-1-1 patients requiring advanced life support (ALS) as specified in Ref. No. 503. ALS units may be directed to an alternate open facility provided: a. The patient does not exhibit an uncontrollable problem in the field as defined by unmanageable airway or uncontrolled hemorrhage. b. The involved ALS unit estimates that it can reach an alternate facility within fifteen (15) minutes, Code 3, from the incident location. If there are no open facilities within this time frame, ALS units shall be directed to the MAR, regardless of its diversion status (exception: Internal Disaster). B. Paramedic personnel may transfer care of a patient to another paramedic team if necessary. If base hospital contact has been made, the initial paramedic team shall advise the base hospital that another paramedic team has assumed responsibility of the patient. C. BLS patients transported by ALS personnel may be transported to an alternate open facility if the MAR has requested diversion. NOTE: On an "as needed" basis, the EMS Agency may extend the maximum transport time. lll. Destination of Restrained Patients A. Restrained patients shall be transported to the most accessible basic emergency. department facility within the guidelines of this policy. Allowable exceptions: 1. Patients without.a medical complaint with a 5150 order written by a designated Department of Mental Health Teams when transport to a psychiatric facility has been arranged. 2. A law enforcement request for transport to medical facilitiesother than the closest may be honored with base hospital concurrence. IV. Transport to Health Facilities without a Basic Emergency Department Permit A. Hospitals with a Stand-by Emergency Department Permit: Patient requests for transport to hospitals with a Stand-by Emergency Department Permit may be honored by EMT -1 or paramedic personnel if base hospital contact is made; and 1. The base hospital concurs that the patient's co.ndition is sufficiently stable to permit the estimated transport time; and 2. The base hospital contacts the requested hospital and ensures that a physician is on duty and willing to accept the patient. B. Other medical facilities approved on an individual basis by the EMS Agency: 9-1-1 patients may be transported to medical facilities other than hospitals (i.e., clinics) only when approved in advance by the EMS Agency. PAGE 3 OF 5 SUBJECT: PATIENT. DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 502 V. Transport to Health Facilities with a Designated Service Area (Service Area Hospitals) A. Patients shall be transported by EMT -I or paramedic personnel to hospitals with a designated service area whenever the incident location is within the hospital's defined service area (exception: diversion to Internal Disaster). In most instances, the service area hospital is also the MAR. B. If a patient within the defined service area meets criteria or guidelines for a specialty care center not provided by the service area hospital, this patient shall be transported to the appropriate specialty care center. C. Patient requests for transport to: 1) a service area hospital when the incident location is outside the hospital's defined service area or inside the service area of another hospital or; 2) arhospital without a service area when the incident location is within another hospital's defined service area, may be honored by: 1. EMT -I personnel if it is a BLS patient, the receiving hospital is contacted and agrees to accept the patient, and the transporting unit is not unreasonably removed from its primary response area. 2. Paramedic personnel if the base hospital is contacted and concurs that the patient's condition is sufficiently stable to permit the estimated transport time, the requested hospital agrees to accept the patient, and the transporting unit is not unreasonably removed from its primary response area. The receiving hospital may be contacted directly if the ALS unit is transporting a BLS patient. VI. Transport to Specialty Care Centers A. Trauma Center and Pediatric Trauma Center: Transport of trauma patients shall. be in accordance with Ref. Nos. 504, 506 and 510. Requests for diversions due to trauma care may be honored as outlined in Ref. No. 503. B. Pediatric Medical Center (PMC): Transport of pediatric patients shall be in accordance with Ref. Nos. 504, 506 and 510. The MAR for the pediatric patient is the most accessible EDAP. C. Perinatal Center: Patients meeting Perinatal Center. criteria shall be transported in accordance with Ref. No. 511. The MAR for the perinatal patient is the most accessible Perinatal Center. D. STEMI Receiving Center (SRC1: Patients who are experiencing an ST -elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as determined by a field 12 -lead EKG should be transported to an approved STEMI Receiving Center, regardless of service agreement rules and/or considerations. CROSS REFERENCE: • Prehospital Care Policy Manual: . Ref. No. 503, Guidelines for_ Hospitals Requesting Diversion of ALS Units Ref. No. 504, Trauma Patient Destination PAGE 4 OF 5 SUBJECT: PATIENT DESTINATION REFERENCE NO. 502 Ref. No. 506, Trauma Triage Ref. No. 508, Sexual Assault Patient Destination Ref. No. 510, Pediatric Patient Destination Ref. No. 511, Perinatal Patient Destination Ref. No. 512, Burn Patient Destination Ref. No. 513 ST -Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patient Destination Ref. No. 519, Management of Multiple Casualty Incidents Ref. No. 838, Application of Patient Restraints PAGE 5 OF 5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMS AGENCY MEDICAL CONTROL GUIDELINES ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLE: 1. The 12 -lead electrocardiogram (EKG) in the prehospital care setting is a key component to the early diagnosis and ongoing definitive treatment for patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). 2. 12 -lead EKGs are used with a variety of patients. The goal is to incorporate the 12 -lead EKG into the decision making about the ST -elevation MI (STEMI) patient. The transmission or reporting of the STEMI should decrease "door -to -intervention" times in 9-1-1 receiving hospitals. 3. Only paramedics who are employed by a provider agency with a 12 -lead EKG program and who have received the required training may perform a 12 -lead EKG. 4. The 12 -lead EKG should be performed as part of a complete assessment for a patient with chest pain/ discomfort or a patient suspected of experiencing an acute cardiac event. 5. Necessary medical treatments shall not be delayed in order to obtain a 12 -lead EKG. GUIDELINE: 1. Apply standard Lead II monitor. Treat rhythm as appropriate. Perform 12 -lead EKG in conjunction with applicable treatment guidelines. 2. A 12 -lead EKG shall be acquired on patients who complain of chest pain/discomfort of suspected cardiac etiology and/or patients who the paramedics suspect are experiencing an acute cardiac event. 3. Paramedics should utilize the computerized analysis of the EKG machine. If the computer analysis of the 12 -lead EKG indicates an acute STEMI or the manufacturer's equivalent of STEMI, this information shall be conveyed to the base hospital. Transmit, if capable, the 12 -lead EKG demonstrating STEMI to the receiving STEMI Receiving Center (SRC) if requested. 4. Every effort should be made to maintain patient's privacy and dignity while obtaining 12 -lead EKG readings. 5. Label the 12 -lead EKG with the sequence number from the patient's EMS Report Form. ALS 12 LEAD EKG October 3, 2006 Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council REPORT OF CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEYS/COMPLAINTS Recommendation: To receive and file the report. Complaint/Survey Summary This summary report includes three surveys and one letter that were received in the City Clerk's office from the 1st of August through the 30th of September, 2006 — all concerning the Finance Cashier's (FC) office. No complaints were received during the specified time period. The following summarizes the 3 surveys and 1 letter received: Dept(s) Date Rec'd Service Additional comments FC 07-31-06 Excellent Commended staff for friendly, helpful, excellent service FC 07-31-06 Excellent Commended staff for patient, kind, helpful and professional service FC 08-10-06 Excellent Commended helpful staff, but did not think citizens with residential parking permits should have to once prove residency to obtain "event" passes FC 09-18-06 Excellent Commended helpful staff Noted: Stephen Burre I(''►�" anager Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk 2h • Qte.piro' 4:ko&- V/r)jo, HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the IIERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 5, 2006 Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 SUBJECT: FINAL MAP NO. 62912 (C.U.P. CON NO. 05-14, PDP NO. 05-16) LOCATION: 83.6 AND 838 BARD STREET APPLICANT(S): BARD PARTNERS LLC ATTN: KIM KOMICK 120 5TH STREET MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 REQUEST: TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP FOR A TWO - UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Final Parcel Map No. 62912 which is consistent with the approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and recommends the City Clerk be directed to endorse the certificate for said map. Background The Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit for a two unit condominium project and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No.62912 at their June 21, 2005 meeting. The project is currently under construction. Process Once a map has been tentatively approved by the Planning Commission, copies of the tentatively approved map must be submitted to the L.A. County Engineer, who is contracted by the City, to review the map for its technical correctness (pursuant to Section 66442(a)(4)of the Subdivision Map Act). An applicant has two years from the date of tentative map approval to submit for final map approval. Typically applicants have not submitted for final map approval until projects are near completion and ready to be sold. Final maps must be submitted to the City Council and must be approved by the City Council, "...if it conforms to all the requirements of [Subdivision Map Act] and any local subdivision 2i • • ordinance applicable at the time of approval or conditional approval of the tentative map and any rulings made thereunder...." pursuant to Section 66458(a) of the Subdivision Map Act. Analysis The staff has reviewed the Final Map and found it substantially consistent with the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map approved by the Planning Commission and in conformance with the State Subdivision Map Act. CONCUR: k Sol : lumenfel Community D , Di ector velopment epartment Stephen City Mauer Respectfully submitted, Senior Planner y/f:fm836 Bard 2 3 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 62912, FOR .THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM, LOCATED AT 836 AND 838 BARD STREET IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, on June 21, 2005,, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application of Bard Partners Lie (the "Applicant" hereinafter) for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 62912 and, upon conclusion of said public hearing on June 21, 2005 the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 05-37 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 62912. WHEREAS, on October 4, 2006, the Applicant filed an application for approval of Final Parcel Map No. 62912 (the "Application" hereinafter), as described in the title of this Resolution. WHEREAS, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.08.040, the City Engineer has reviewed Final Parcel Map No. 62912 and determined that the map is technically correct, conforms to the approved Tentative Parcel Map and is in compliance with applicable provisions of Title 16 of the Municipal Code and of the Subdivision Map Act. WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 16.08.040 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, the City Council finds the Final Parcel Map to be in substantial conformance with the Tentative Parcel Map, with Title 7, Division 2, Chapter 3 of the California Government Code and with the applicable provisions of Title 16 of the Municipal Code. Based on the foregoing finding, the Council hereby approves. Final Parcel Map No. 62912 as presented. The Council further authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreement for 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 installation of public improvements required by Tentative Parcel Map No. 62912 and not yet completed as of the date hereof. SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to: a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and b. Transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the Applicant. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of October, 2006. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney 2 f;b95\cd\frn836 Bard rs • idegfoL- is/i/-4, October 5, 2006 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the Regular Meeting of HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 10, 2006 SUBJECT: FINAL MAP NO. 62913 (C.U.P. CON NO. 05-17, PDP NO. 05-19) LOCATION: 842 AND 844 BARD STREET APPLICANT(S): BARD PARTNERS LLC ATTN: KIM KOMICK 120 5TH STREET MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 REQUEST: TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP FOR A TWO - UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Final Parcel Map No. 62913 which is consistent. with the approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and recommends the City Clerk be directed to endorse. the certificate for said map. Background The Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit for a two unit condominium project and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No.62913 at their July 19, 2005 meeting. The project is currently under construction. Process Once a map has been tentatively approved by the Planning Commission, copies of the tentatively approved map must be submitted to the L.A. County Engineer, who is contracted by the City, to review the map for its technical correctness (pursuant to Section 66442(a)(4)of the Subdivision Map Act). An applicant has two years from the date of tentative map approval to submit for final map approval. Typically applicants have not submitted for final map approval until projects are near completion and ready to be sold. Final maps must be submitted to the City Council and must be approved by the City Council, "...if it conforms to all the requirements of [Subdivision Map Act] and any local subdivision 2j • • ordinance applicable at the time of approval or conditional approval of the tentative map and any rulings made thereunder...." pursuant to Section 66458(a) of the Subdivision Map Act. Analysis The staff has reviewed the Final Map and found it substantially consistent with the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map approved by the Planning Commission and in conformance with the State. Subdivision Map Act. CONCUR: dariiimair of Blumen leld, I irector Communit Development Department Stephen R. City Mana Respectfully submitted, en Ro s ertson Senior Planner y/f:fm842 Bard. 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • • RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 62913, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM, LOCATED AT 842 AND 844 BARD STREET IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS,. on July 19, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application of Bard Partners Llc (the "Applicant" hereinafter) for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 62913 and, upon conclusion of said public hearing on July 19, 2005 the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 05-44 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 62913. WHEREAS, on October 4, 2006, the Applicant filed an application for approval of Final Parcel Map No. 62913 (the "Application" hereinafter), as described in the title of this Resolution. WHEREAS, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.08.040, the City Engineer has reviewed Final Parcel Map No. 62913 and determined that the map is technically correct, conforms to the approved Tentative Parcel Map and is in compliance with applicable provisions of Title 16 of the Municipal Code and of the Subdivision Map Act. WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 16.08.040 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, the City Council finds the Final Parcel Map to be in substantial conformance with the Tentative Parcel Map, with Title 7, Division 2, Chapter 3 of the California Government Code and with the applicable provisions of Title 16 of the Municipal Code. Based on the foregoing finding, the Council hereby approves Final Parcel Map No. 62913 as presented. The Council further authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Clerk, to execute the Subdivision Agreement for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 28 • • installation of public improvements required by Tentative Parcel Map No. 62913 and not yet completed as of the date hereof. SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to: a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and ' b. Transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the Applicant. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of October, 2006. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney f;b95\cd\fm842 Bard rs October 3, 2006 City Council Meeting October 10, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 06-1273 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING GRAFFITI REMOVAL AND AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE." Submitted for waiver of full reading and adoption is Ordinance No. 06-1273, relating to the above subject. At the meeting of September 26, 2006, the ordinance was presented to the City Council for consideration and was amended to eliminate the provision requiring businesses to keep aerosol paint spray cans and wide blade markers in a locked area. The ordinance, as amended, was then introduced by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Elaine Doerfling, City CI Noted: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 06-1273 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REGARDING GRAFFITI REMOVAL AND AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Title 9 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is amended by adding thereto a new Chapter 9.36 to read as follows: Chapter 9.36 Graffiti Removal 9.36.010 Short title. This chapter of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code may be referred to as the "Graffiti Removal Ordinance" of the City. 9.36.020 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide for the prompt abatement of graffiti from public and private properties in the city and to regulate the sale of materials used in acts of graffiti to minors. 9.36.030 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, certain words and phrases used in this chapter are defined as follows: "Defacement" means the intentional altering of the physical shape or physical appearance of property without prior consent of the owner of the property. "Graffiti" means any painting, marking, symbol, design, inscription or other defacement which is written, sprayed, painted, scratched, etched, engraved, or placed without the prior consent of the owner or person in possession thereof. "Responsible adult" is a parent or guardian of an individual under eighteen (18) years of age and includes an agent of the parent or guardian, provided the agent is over the age of eighteen (18). 1 06-1273 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • • "Wide blade marker" means any marker, pen or similar implement which contains a fluid which is not soluble in water, or which cannot be removed with water after drying, and has a flat, pointed or angled writing surface of a width of four millimeters or greater. 9.36.040 Declaration of graffiti as a public nuisance. The City Council finds and declares that appearance of graffiti on public and private properties within public view is obnoxious and constitutes a public nuisance, the abatement of which shall be provided as set forth herein. 9.36.050 Permitting graffiti to remain prohibited. No person shall permit any graffiti that may be viewed from the public right-of-way or other public property to remain on any building, structure, tree, shrub, sidewalk or curb owned or possessed by such person. 9.36.060 Notice to owners or possessors of private property. Whenever the City Manager, or his or her designee, determines that graffiti is being maintained upon the premises within the City in violation of Section 9.36.050 of this chapter, the City Manager, or his or her designee, shall send written notice to the owner or possessor of the premises of such condition and shall require that the graffiti be removed. The notice and order shall be sent to the owner as shown on the most recent equalized assessment roll and a copy shall be posted on the subject property. The notice shall state that the owner must remove the graffiti or consent to its removal by the city within fourteen (14) days from the date the notice was mailed. 9.36.070 Removal by City with owner consent. Whenever the City Manager, or his or her designee, determines that graffiti is located on public or private property so that graffiti may be viewed by a person using any public right-of-way or other public property, the City Manager, or his or her designee, is authorized to provide for and use public funds, if necessary, to remove graffiti by City crews or contractor upon the following conditions: A. Public Property. Whenever the City Manager or his or her designee determines that graffiti exists upon property owned by the city, it shall be removed as soon as possible. When the 2 06-1273 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 property is owned by a public entity other than the City, the removal of the graffiti is authorized after securing written consent of the public agency having jurisdiction over the property. Private Property. Where the subject property is privately owned, the removal of graffiti is authorized after the City Manager, or his or her designee, secures the written consent of the owner of the property and the owner executes a release and waiver approved as to form by the City Attorney. 9.36.080 Removal by City without owner consent. A. The City Manager may initiate proceedings to abate any graffiti maintained contrary to the provisions of this chapter without the consent of the owner only after the following has occurred: 1 The City Manager has determined that graffiti within public view exists on particular premises in the city; 2. A notice of such condition has been sent to the property owner pursuant to Section 9.36.060; and 3 The property owner has failed to either remove the graffiti or consent to its removal by the City within the time period specified in the notice. B. Prior to the City abating graffiti on private property without the consent of the owner, a hearing shall be conducted by the City Manager or his or her designee serving as hearing officer, at which time the property owner shall be given an opportunity to be heard regarding the proposed abatement. A notice of the time, place and subject of the hearing before the City Manager or his or her designee shall not less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing be sent personally or by first class United States mail to the owner's address as shown on the latest equalized tax assessment roll of the affected premises and shall be conspicuously posted on the affected premises. Proof of posting and serving of such notice shall be made by declaration under penalty of perjury filed with the hearing officer. The failure of any person to receive the notice shall not affect the validity of any proceedings under this chapter. C. At the hearing, the hearing officer shall receive and consider all relevant evidence. Any interested person shall be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in conjunction 3 06-1273 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • • therewith. Based upon the evidence so presented, the City Manager shall determine whether a nuisance within the meaning of this chapter exists and whether an abatement is appropriate. D. Within ten (10) days after the hearing, the City Manager, or his or her designee, shall give written notice of the decision to the owner and to any other person requesting the same personally or by first class United States mail, postage paid. If a nuisance is determined to exist and abatement is determined to be appropriate, the notice shall contain an order of abatement directed to the owner of the affected property or the person in the control and/or charge of the property, and shall set forth the nature of the graffiti, its location on the premises and the maximum number of days, time and manner for its abatement. The City Manager may impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to abate the graffiti. The decision of the City Manager may be appealed to the City Council by the filing of a written request for appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after the City Manager's notice of the decision to the owner. In the event of an appeal, the decision of the City Council shall be final. E. If the City Manager's decision is not appealed and the nuisance is not abated within the time set by the order of abatement, the City Manager, or his or her designee, is authorized to enter upon the premises and to abate the graffiti nuisance through utilization of labor, equipment and materials as directed by the City Manager. The graffiti shall be removed as authorized herein, but the removal shall not involve the painting or repair of a more extensive area than is necessary for such removal. The City Manager shall then prepare a statement of the fact of such abatement and of the expense incurred in abatement and shall file the statement with the City Clerk. Such statement shall identify the premises including more than one lot, each separate lot, or all of the lots may be set forth in the same statement. F. Upon completion of the work required to abate the graffiti, the cost to the City to perform such work shall be assessed against the property owner pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 8.28.080 of this code. 9.36.090 Signs required. Any person doing business in the City displaying, selling or otherwise providing any of the substances referred to in Section 9.36.090 shall prominently display at the location of sale and/or 4 06-1273 f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • • delivery a sign(s) clearly visible to employees and customers which states in writing, in both English and Spanish, "It is unlawful for any person to sell, lend, or give to any individual under the age of eighteen (18) years, aerosol spray paint cans or wide blade markers." 9.36.100 Posting on City property. The City Manager or his or her designee is hereby authorized to post a notice at appropriate locations indicating that pursuant to California Penal Code Section 594.1 no person shall carry any aerosol can of paint or wide blade marker into or upon any city -owned building, grounds, park or other City facility without the permission of an authorized City officer. 9.36.110 Reward. The City may pay to any person who provides information which leads to arrest and conviction of any person who applies graffiti to any public or private property in the City visible to the public a reward as established by City Council resolution. The amount of any reward paid pursuant to this section may be sought from the person arrested and convicted as restitution in addition to any other restitution associated with the removal of graffiti. 9.36.120 Remedies cumulative. The remedies provided in this chapter are in addition to other remedies and penalties available under the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California, including but not limited to California Civil Code Section 1714.1, California Penal. Code Section 594 et seq. and California Vehicle Code Section 13202.6. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated, in the City of Hermosa Beach in the manner provided by law. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the 5 06-1273 • • passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th of October 2006 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney 6 06-1273 October 3, 2006 City Council Meeting October 10, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 06-1274 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3.32 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE." Submitted for waiver of full reading and adoption is Ordinance No. 06-1274, relating to the above subject. At the meeting of September 26, 2006, the ordinance was presented to the City Council for consideration and was introduced by the following vote: AYES: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Noted: Stephen R. Bu ger Elaine Doerfling, City Cle 3b 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 06-1274 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3.32 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 3.32.110 of Chapter 3.32, Title 3 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is amended to read: "It shall be the duty of every operator liable for the collection and payment to the city of any tax imposed by this chapter to keep and preserve, for a period of four years, all records as may be necessary to determine the amount of such tax as the operator may have been liable for the collection and payment of to the city, which records the Tax Administrator shall have the right to inspect at all reasonable times." SECTION 2. Section 3.32.125 is added to Chapter 3.32, Title 3 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to read: 3.32.125 Change of Ownership --Tax Clearance Certificate A. Pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7283.5, and as that section may from time to time be amended, a purchaser, transferee, or other person attempting to obtain ownership of a transient occupancy facility, may request in writing from the Tax Administrator the issuance of a tax clearance certificate stating the amount of tax and any accrued penalties and interest due and owing, if any. B. The Tax Administrator shall, within ninety days of the receipt of the written request for a tax clearance certificate issue the tax clearance certificate, or may conduct an audit of the subject transient occupancy facility. Any such audit must be completed within ninety days after the date the records of the 1 06-1274 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1S 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • • subject transient occupancy facility have been made available to the Tax Administrator and a tax clearance certificate issued within thirty days of the completion of the audit. C. If following an audit the Tax Administrator determines that the current operator's records are insufficient to assess the amount of tax due and owing, the Tax Administrator shall, within thirty days of making that determination, notify the prospective purchaser, transferee or other person that a tax clearance certificate will not be issued. D. If the Tax Administrator does not comply with the request for a tax clearance certificate, the purchaser, transferee or other person that obtains ownership of the transient occupancy facility shall not be liable for any transient occupancy tax obligation incurred prior to the date of the purchase or transfer of the property. E. The tax clearance certificate shall state the following: 1. The amount of tax, interest and penalties then due and owing; 2. The period of time for which the tax clearance certificate is valid; and 3. That the purchaser, transferee, or other person may rely upon the tax clearance certificate as conclusive evidence of the tax liability associated with the property as of the date specified on the certificate. F. Any purchaser, transferee, or other person who does not obtain a tax clearance certificate under this section, or who obtains a tax clearance certificate that indicates that tax is due and owing and fails to withhold, for the benefit of the county, sufficient funds in the escrow account for the purchase of the property to satisfy the transient tax liability, shall be held liable for the amount of tax due and owing. G. The fee for issuance of a tax clearance certificate shall be established by • resolution of the City Council. 2 06-1274 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • S SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of October 2006 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney 3 Ofi-1274 Honorable Mayor and Members of the cOr_d- /01 )12,c> • /e7//&A)-6 October 2, 2006 Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council October 10, 2006 SUBJECT: RECONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSIONAPPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-4 FOR "ON -SALE" ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT, "STILLWATER CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN BISTRO,"AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT 06-2 TO MODIFY THE ALLOCATION OF THE USES WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY #170 APPLICANT: TRAVIS W. JONES/GENE SHOOK Planning Commission Recommendation To sustain the Planning Commissiondecision to approve the request subject to conditions of approval as contained in the attached resolution. Background: PROJECT INFORMATION: ZONING: GENERAL PLAN: EXISTING RESTAURANT AREA: PROPOSED NEW RESTAURANT AREA: PARKING PROVIDED IN HERMOSA PAVILION ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: SPA 8 -Specific Plan Area Commercial Corridor 912 Sq. Ft. (Stillwater Bistro) 7,038 Sq. Ft.' 540 spaces, 454 standard, 42 tandem, and up to 44 parallel parking spaces Categorically Exempt At their meeting of August 15, 2006, the Planning Commission approved the request for on -sale alcohol at Stillwater Bistro, and approved the modified allocation of uses within the Pavilion to allow a larger proportion of restaurant use within the building, subject to standard conditions for restaurants with on -sale alcohol, and including some additional site specific conditions to ensure the continued use of the premises as a restaurant with ancillary retail uses, as follows: • Midnight closing time • No live entertainment or dancing • No televisions • No outdoor seating or waiting • No cover charge • Off -sale wine limited to 11:00 P.M. in appurtenant retail shop Pavilion Project History/Chronology: • February 19, 2002: The Planning Commission approved a Precise Development Plan, Parking Plan for shared parking and Variance for expansion and remodel to the Hermosa Pavilion to accommodate a health and fitness center and expanded retail floor areaand to allow enclosure of the upper deck to exceed the height (Total square feet 105,378 -office 48,990, health club 44,300 and retail 12,088) • On Reconsideration and after three continued public hearings April 9, May 28 and June 11, 2002 the City Council approved the requested Precise Development Plan, Parking Plan and 1 a • • Variance for a modified development program (Total square feet 108,430 -office 25,380, health club 68,000 and retail 15,050). • August 19, 2003: The Planning Commission approved an amendment to the Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan (PDP 03-11 and PP 03-4) to modify the allocation of proposed uses within the Pavilion (Total square feet 105,000 -office 26,000, health club 46,500, retail 28,500 and restaurant 4,000). • February 15, 2005, C.U.P. granted for Kids Kabaret — Music and Performing Arts Academy and updated shared parking analysis to allow minor modification to allocation of uses to include 3,000 square foot auditorium use. • May, 25, 2005 Updated shared parking analysis and modification to striping plan for V.I.P. lockers for the health club. • February, 2006 Updated shared parking analysis submitted per Conditions of Approval of 03-45, based on existing and anticipated allocation of uses. Neighborhood parking analysis and evaluation of spillover parking included in report. • April 18, 2006: The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 06-16 modifying the Parking Plan at the Hermosa Pavilion to require the owner to provide two hours of free parking for customers with validation and to re-evaluate the effectiveness of the validation program in six months. The applicant requested an appeal on this decision to the City Council. • July 11, 2006: The City Council sustained the decision of the Planning Commission to require 2 -hour free validated parking, and 6 -month re-evaluation of the program. • July, 2006: The building owner implements the 2 -hour validated free parking. The implementation includes prominently displayed signs advertising the 2 hour validated free parking in all public areas and at entry locations. Analysis: The applicant, Still Water Contemporary American Bistro, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant pursuant to Section 17.40.080 of the Zone Code. A Parking Plan Amendment is also being requested to modify the allocation of uses to increase the proportion allocated for restaurant. from 4,000 square feet to 8,000 square feet. A retail wine and cheese shop will occupy approximately 1,500 square feet of the restaurant square footage. The proposed restaurant and retail wine and cheese areas are located on ground floor of the Hermosa Pavilion and will feature: a public dining area; "private dining rooms"; bar and lounge; foyer/hostess area; patio with seating areas; wine/cheese retail displays; pantry; cook -line; prep area; service area; scullery/storage area and kitchen/storage/coolers for restaurant facility. The seating plan identified 35 tables with 178 seats. The applicant indicates that the hours of operation will be 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. for the retail wine and cheese sales and the lunch and dinner hours for the restaurant (11 a.m-2:00 p.m. & 5:00 p.m. -10:00 p.m.). The original request included lounge hours until the 2:00 a.m. Off -sale wine sales is a permitted use by -right until 11:00 p.m., and the applicant indicates that it will not be open later than 10:00 p.m. Staff recommended that the C.U.P. establish one set of operating hours from 7:00 A.M. to 12:00 midnight which was incorporated into the Planning Commission approval, with the retail wine shop limited to 11:00 P.M. 2. • The applicant has also represented that wine tasting services will be provided in the wine retail areas but will not provide any fixed seating in this area. Regarding entertainment, no entertainment will be provided according to the applicant. The floor plan identifies no stage, and any future events or modifications to the floor plan identifying a stage area for playing music requiring amplification will require an acoustical study and a Conditional Use Permit Amendment application. The proposed restaurant is part of a multi -tenant building with secured parking and access from the central building lobby on Pacific Coast Highway and the parking garage. The restaurant is proposed to be an upscale, full service -dining establishment with ancillary retail wine and cheese tasting. These uses and the proposed business operations are consistent with the goals of the General Plan which call for "affirming the commercial character of the highway" and the general definition of the C-3 zone which is intended to provide " opportunities for the full range of office, retail and service businesses for the city and appropriate for the Pacific Coast Highway". (Page 105, Land Use Element, General Plan). The full service restaurant will complement the other uses within the commercial building and is consistent with the character of the commercial corridor. Though bars and restaurants serving alcohol have been a permitted use for many years along the commercial corridor, the area is not heavily impacted with these uses. Staff surveyed the commercial corridor and found that of the 306 business along the corridor there are sixteen restaurants. Of the sixteen restaurants located on Pacific Coast Highway, only nine have CUP's for "on -sale" beer/wine, and two have CUP's for full alcohol. (See attached survey). Further, the proposed business is not considered a bar or lounge use as less than 643 square feet of the restaurant is allocated to the bar area, representing less than 10% of the floor area. The restaurant is entirely enclosed within a secured and insulated building and should not negatively impact abutting commercial and residential uses. Therefore the proposed restaurant is appropriate to the zone, a fitting use for the area, compatible with other uses in the multi -tenant building and consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. Parking Plan: The proposed Parking Plan amendment is required to update and modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion including the proposed restaurant. The potential parking impacts associated with the requested restaurant changes from 4,000 square feet of restaurant, space to 8,000 square feet of restaurant was addressed in the latest Parking Study Report/Shared Parking Analysis for the Hermosa Beach Pavilion, prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers on February 13, 2006. In addition to updating the allocation of uses to reflect actual tenancy, including all the latest modifications, and evaluating the day spa uses, the report identified and assessed future restaurant space of 8,000 square feet (the proposed restaurant and the existing cafe), and found that weekday peak shared parking demand of 426 spaces can be accommodated by the 454 standard spaces and 42 tandem spaces as provided with the latest revised striping layout plan. Thus the study indicates that proposed uses do not significantly impact the supply of parking (Pgs. 4, 27 & 28, LL & G Study). Resolution No. 06-16 (which pertains to the entire Hermosa Pavilion) addressed detrimental effects of spillover parking and was sustained by the City Council. Given that the proposed restaurant intensifies the demand for parking in the building and that the required parking is based upon a shared parking analysis, staff has included conditions of approval to require free 2 -hour validated • • parking for customers of the restaurant consistent with the decision of the City Council and review of the CUP if there is a problem identified with the building parking adequacy or efficiency. In order to monitor the applicant's performance relative to the modified Parking Plan, staff conducted an informal survey of the parking garage and surrounding streets on August 2, 2006 at 6:00 P.M.. Staff observed significant use of the parking garage and did not observe large volumes of cars parking on 16th Street east of Pacific Coast Highway or within the surrounding residential streets and did not observe people leaving their cars and walking to the Pavilion Health Club facility. Staff did observe several cars parking on the west side of Pacific Coast Highway with drivers leaving their cars and walking to the health club, however, many club users were also observed entering the parking garage from Pacific Coast Highway via the 16th Street entrance. CONCUR: Sol Blumenfe Community d, Director evelopment Stephen R. Burrell City Manager Attachments: 1. Proposed Resolution sustaining the Planning Commission 2. Parking Study excerpts 3. PCH Restaurant/Bar Survey 4. Correspondence F:1B951CD\CCICUP 1601 PCH -Stillwater: doc obertson, Senior Planner I The latest plan submitted by the applicant shows a total floor area for the restaurant as 7,372 square feet rather than the 7,038 as originally submitted, when added to the approximate 900 square foot bistro, the total slightly exceeds 8,000 square feet which is not a material change to the allocation as documented in the parking study. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT AND APPROVING A PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT MODIFYING THE ALLOCATION OF USES WITHIN THE "HERMOSA PAVILION" INCLUDING 8,000 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT (INCLUDING APPURTENANT FOOD RELATED RETAIL USES) AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY # 170 AKA 1605 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed by Stillwater, LLC, on behalf of Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro, seeking approval for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a new restaurant proposed in the Hermosa Pavilion, and amendment to the Parking Plan (P.C. Resolution 03-45) to modify and update the allocation of uses approved as part of the shared parking analysis. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearings to consider the application for the Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan Amendment on July 18, 2006, and August 15, 2006, at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission, and based on said evidence the Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions as set forth in P.C. Resolution 06-22 Section 3. On September 12, 2006, the City Council, pursuant to Section 2.52.040, initiated review and reconsideration of the decision of the Planning Commission. Section 4. The City Council conducted a duly notice public hearing to review and reconsider the decision of the Planning Commission'on October 10, 2006, at which the record of the decision of the Planning Commission and testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council Section 5. Based on evidence received at the public hearing, the City Council makes the following factual findings: 1. On August 19, 2003, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution 03-45 to approve Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan to remodel and expand an existing commercial building and to allow shared parking to accommodate a new allocation of uses within the building including a health and fitness facility, office, retail and restaurant uses. The approval included an allocation of 4,000 square feet for restaurant use. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 • 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 2. The proposed restaurant will increase the allocation for restaurant use to 8,000 square feet, and proposed changes also include updates in the allocation of uses to reflect other minor modifications that have occurred since 2003 in the allocation of uses within the building. 3. The site is zoned SPA -8, Commercial, allowing restaurant uses, and on -sale general alcohol with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the revocation or modification of the Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan on April 18, 2006, pursuant to Section 17.70.010 of the Zoning Ordinance (sub -sections E and F), and adopted Planning Commission. Resolution No. 06-16 (which pertains to the entire Hermosa Pavilion) to address detrimental effects of spillover parking and which supersedes P.C. Resolution 03-45. Section 6. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the City Council makes the following findings pertaining to the application to amend the Conditional Use Permit: 1. The site is zoned S.P.A. 8 which permits on -sale alcohol in conjunction with restaurant uses, and the site is suitable for the proposed use; 2. The restaurant is located entirely within a secured, sound insulated building with entry only from a common lobby accessible only from Pacific Coast Highway and no outdoor use is permitted for the business; 3. The restaurant is separated from adjacent residential uses by the Hermosa Pavilion's fully enclosed parking garage to the west, the width of Pacific Coast Highway to the east and more than 100 feet of building frontage to the north, thereby mitigating potential noise impacts from the business; 4. The proposed use is compatible with the commercial uses within the Hermosa Pavilion, consistent with the commercial character of the highway corridor and sufficiently secured within a multi -tenant building to be compatible with adjacent residential uses; 5. The imposition of conditions, including a limitation on the hours of operation, no outdoor dining and the requirement for free validated parking, as required by this resolution will mitigate any negative impacts on nearby residential or commercial properties; 6. This project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303c of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the findings for the Conditional Use Permit, and the updated shared parking analysis prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan; Parking Study Report, dated February 13, 2006, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining the application to amend the Parking Plan to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 1. The Parking Study Report identified and assessed all updated allocations including future restaurant space of 8,000 square feet (therefore including the entire approximate square footage of the proposed restaurant facility), and found that weekday peak shared parking demand of 426 spaces can be accommodated by the 454 standard spaces and 42 tandem spaces as now provided with the latest revised striping layout. 2. Thus the study indicated that the shared parking impacts were immaterial to the supply of parking (Linscott Law and Greenspan; Parking Study Report, pg. 27). 3. The detrimental effects of the spillover parking which has occurred at the Hermosa Pavilion, documented in the Parking Study Report , and potentially exacerbated with a new restaurant, will be mitigated with the condition requiring free validated parking applicable to the restaurant and to the entire building. Section 8. Based on the foregoing, the City Council sustains the decision of the Planning Conunission and hereby approves the Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant and approves the amendment to the Parking Plan to modify the allocation of uses, subject to the following Conditions of Approval. 1. Interior and building alterations and the continued use and operation of the restaurant with appurtenant wine and cheese shop shall be substantially consistent with the plans submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 15, 2006 and the City Council on October 10, 2006. a. The Conditional Use Permit is for on -sale alcoholin conjunction with a restaurant and ancillary uses designated on the floor plan for ( wine and cheese shop closing before 11:00 p.m. ). Any intensification of use involving live entertainment, such as providing a disc jockey or other forms of amplified music for customer dancing, any type of live entertainment (i.e. live music whether acoustic or amplified, comedy acts, or any other type of performances) or extended hours of operation beyond what is specified requires amending this Conditional Use Permit. b. If the Conditional Use Permit is amended to provide dancing, live music, or other live entertainment as noted above, an acoustical analysis shall be conducted to verify compliance with the noise ordinance, demonstrating that the noise will not be audible from any adjacent residential use. Mitigation measures to attenuate noise may include sound baffles, double glazing and other methods specified in the acoustical study. The scope of the acoustical study shall be approved by the Community Development Director 2. The hours of operation for all operations of the restaurant, including the lounge area, shall be limited to between 7:00 A.M. and 12:00 Midnight. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 3. The wine and cheese shop retail uses are appurtenant to the restaurant and shall only operate in conjunction with the restaurant, but shall close at 11:00 P.M. The kitchen shall remain open during operating hours to ensure that the use is maintained primarily as a restaurant. 5. No televisions are permitted in any part of the restaurant. 6. The exterior access at the south east corner of the restaurant shall be use for emergency exiting only with appropriate signage and panic hardware. 7. The business shall not operate in a manner as to have and adverse effect on or interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of neighboring residential and commercial property. 8. The business shall provide adequate staffing, management and supervisory techniques to prevent ongoing and disruptive loitering, unruliness, and unduly boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business. 9. Noise emanating from the property shall be within the limitations prescribed by the City's noise ordinance and shall not be plainly audible from any residential use, and shall not create a nuisance to surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. a) Outside dining and/or waiting areas are prohibited 10. The restaurant shall not require any cover charge or fee for general entry into the restaurant or appurtenant areas. 11. The Police Chief may determine that a continuing police problem exists, and may authorize the presence of a police approved doorman and/or security personnel to eliminate the problem, and then shall submit a report to the Planning Commission, which will automatically initiate a review of this Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. 12. The applicant shall submit a detailed seating and occupant load plan prepared by a licensed design professional, which shall be approved by the Community Development and Fire Departments prior to implementing the restaurant use. An approved occupant load sign must be posted in the business. 13. The Fire Department shall maintain a record of the posted allowable occupant load for the business and regularly check the business for occupant load compliance. The Fire Chief may determine that there is a repeat pattern of occupant load violations and then shall submit a report to the Planning Commission which will automatically initiate a review of this Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. 14. The exterior of all the premises shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and maintained free of graffiti at all times. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 15. Any significant changes to the interior layout, which alter the primary function of the business as a restaurant, (i.e. increasing floor area for bar seating, or adding a dance floor) or increasing the designated floor area of restaurant seating shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission and require amendment to this Conditional Use Permit. 16. The project and operation of the business shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Municipal Code. 17. The Planning Commission shall conduct a review of the restaurant operations for compliance with the terms of the Conditional Use Permit in 6 months, and in response to any complaints thereafter. 18.Two hour free validated parking shall be provided for patrons of the restaurant within the Hermosa Pavilion parking facility and signs shall be prominently displayed at the entry and within the restaurant to promote the two-hour free validated parking program; 19. The Parking Plan approval, as set forth in P.C. Resolution 03-45, as amended by P.C. Resolution 06-16, and sustained by the City Council on July 11, 2006, is amended with respect to the allocation of uses, which shall be substantially consistent with or less than the following allocation: Allocation (in square feet) Health and Fitness Facility (including a 46,000 basketball court and pool) Office 20,400 Day Spa 13,000 Retail 9,600 Restaurant (Including food related retail 8,000 sales) Auditorium 3,000 Storage 10,600 Total 110,600 Any material change to this allocation requires amendment to the Parking Plan, and approval of the Planning Commission. 20. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to Planning Commission review 6 months after commencement of business operations and annually thereafter. Section 8. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owners of the property involved have filed a the office of the Planning Division of the Cornmunity 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. The Conditional Use Permit and Precise Development Plan shall be recorded, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if one of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employee to attack, set aside, void or annul,this permit approval, which action is brought within the applicable time period of the State Government Code. The City shall promptly notify the permittee of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any claim, action or proceeding, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall no thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a. result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this grant. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition. The subject property shall be developed, maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or other regulation applicable to any development or activity on the subject property. Failure of the permittee to cease any development or activity not in full compliance shall be a violation of these conditions. The Planning Commission may review this Conditional Use Permit and may amend the subject conditions or impose any new conditions if deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental effects on the neighborhood resulting from the subject use. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 2006, PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY F:\B95\CD\CC\CUPr 1601 PCH-stillwater.doc MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON AUGUST 15, 2006, 7:00 P.M., AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The meeting was called to order at 7:02 P.M. by Vice -Chairman Allen. Alan trusser led the Salute to the Flag. ROLLC• L Present: Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Vice -Chairman Allen Absent: Hoffman Also Present: •I Blumenfeld, Community Development Director Ke Robertson, Senior Planner Deni - Bothe, Recording Secretary ORAL/WRITTEN COMMU ATIONS Alan Strusser, resident, thank:d the Commission for ' s involvement in some minor improvements being enjoyed with . e Pavilion activities stating that a flashing light invites pedestrians to go a block south to the , 6th Street crosswk; and mentioned that the free parking program has had some positive effect o he neighbor ood. CONSENT CALENDAR For the benefit of the audience members, V a -C' _ir Allen advised that Item Nos. 9 and 10 will be continued. 4. Approval of July 18, 2006 utes Commissioner Kersenboom rrected Page Nos. 8 an 9 to reflect "Commissioner Kersenboom" rather than "Vic -Chairman Kersenboom." MOTION by Commissio -r Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Kers- boom, to APPROVE the July, 18, 2006, Minute -s amended. The motion carried as follows: AYES: All , Kersenboom, Pizer NOES: one ABSTAIN: Perrotti ABSENT: Hoffman 5. esolution(s) for Consideration one. PUBLIC HEARING(S) 6. CUP 06-4 -- Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant, Still Water Contemporary American Bistro, and Parking Plan amendment Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 jj • • to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway #170, AKA 1605 Pacific Coast Highway (continued from June 20 and July 18, 2006 meetings). Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate from the following alternatives: 1) Approve the request subject to the conditions of approval contained in the attached resolution; or 2) Consider the building parking problems that have occurred over the last six months and advise the applicant to resubmit the project permit application once it has been demonstrated that building spillover parking has been resolved. Director Blumenfeld noted that a lengthy staff report was presented at the previous meeting on the nature of the business and application; he briefly reiterated that this is a proposed parking plan amendment and a conditional use permit for on -sale alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant; advised that the proposed restaurant will occupy approximately 7,038 square feet; that there is an existing cafe on the first floor of the Pavilion, where this project will be located; and that there is also a retail and wine shop that will occupy 1,535 square feet, as part of the business. He clarified for Vice -Chairman Allen that the actual footprint of the restaurant is 7,038 square feet; and of that, there are other related retail uses that are located within the restaurant -- a wine and cheese shop that occupies 1,535 square feet. He advised that the applicant is requesting a midnight closing for the entire facility; noted the restaurant will be a full-service restaurant; that it provides seating in a bar area, provides a retail area for wine and cheese — noting that this area contains no fixed seating; that the owner is not proposing amplified live entertainment; and that in the future if they were to propose that use, it would require a CUP amendment. Director Blumenfeld pointed out this restaurant is proposed within an enclosed building that fronts on a commercial corridor; that it's complimentary to the other uses within the building; advised that staff surveyed the highway and found there are approximately 306 businesses -- about 16 restaurants, 2 of which serve full alcohol, and approximately 3 percent of the businesses within the commercial corridor serve alcohol, or beer and wine. He noted the commercial corridor is not heavily impacted with alcohol related use; pointed out there is approximately 10 percent of floor area in the business for the bar area, stating this is primarily a restaurant; and concluded that the useis appropriate to the zone, to the area, consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, compatible with the zoning and the businesses within the multi -tenant building. Director Blumenfeld advised that with respect to parking, staff has been monitoring affects of parking in the garagesince modification of the building parking plan and found improvement along adjacent streets and along the highway and increased parking in the garage. He reviewed the recommendations for the Commission to consider; stated if the Commission chooses to approve the on -sale alcohol permit, that the CUP for the restaurant be based on conformance with the Pavilion Parking Plan; noted that violations of the Parking Plan are cause for submittal of a report to the Planning Commission, which would automatically initiate a CUP review; and the restaurant use is tied to the operation of the parking facilities within the building. He indicated the operating hours should be noted as 7:00 A.M. to 12:00 midnight daily; recommended that the allocation of uses shown in the shared parking analysis attached to staff report should be part of the draft resolution, as indicated in staff report; that the kitchen shall remain open during operating hours; if there are repeat violations of noise orsecurity or nuisance conditions or excessive occupancy of the establishment, he advised that would be grounds for either the police chief or fire chief to report to the Planning Commission, initiating an automatic review by the Planning Commission. He stated that the 2 hour free parking validation �2. Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 • • program shall be instituted for this business as it has been for the rest of the building; that parking signs indicating these parking arrangements shall be displayed within the restaurant; and that the CUP be subject to Planning Commission review after 6 months based on the date of the business opening. Each Planning Commissioner present this evening advised they were contacted by Gene Shook and that they met with him and his consultants to discuss this project; and Commissioners Allen and Perrotti advised they had also talked with various residents about this project. Commissioner Perrotti questioned when the building housed the AMC Theatres, was there a record of any violations from that former business. Director Blumenfeld advised that staff checked the records and found no violations on record. Vice -Chairman Allen opened the public hearing. Gene Shook, applicant, provided a slide presentation of what is proposed for this business, highlighting the ceiling designs, elaborate/high-end materials, exposed kitchen, chandeliers, specialized lighting, wine bottle walls, etc.; stated that with the free 2 -hour parking program, he will be losing anywhere from $300,000 to $1 million in lost revenue; stated that he has seen a decrease in on -street parking on the neighboring streets; and that there has been an increase in the number of people parking inside the structure. He advised that he is trying to gain the support of 24 Hour Fitness to get the parking issue out to their clients. He mentioned that he is seeking a midnight closing time for the business, but added that for very special occasions, he would like to stay open later if the need arises, such as a Christmas party. Mr. Shook pointed out that his CUP is one of the most restrictive in the City and that he does not want this business to turn into a bar or nightclub, that he is only interested in providing an upscale restaurant that serves full alcohol. He advised that approximately 8,300 invitations were sent to the City's residents, inviting them to an open house for this restaurant; stated that a couple hundred people attended the open house; and that an overwhelming majority had positive responses to the proposed restaurant. Mr. Shook urged the Commission to correct the square footage for the allocation of uses. Director Blumenfeld explained for Vice -Chairman Allen that the allocation of uses which are shown in staff report are also the allocation of uses that were quantified in the parking study by LLG; that if there are to be some other uses considered,they would need to be quantified; advised that he and Mr. Shook had a lengthy discussion regarding this issue earlier today; that he told Mr. Shook he would share Mr. Shook's concerns with the City Attorney; that they will review what the Commission and City Council had previously reviewed and approved with respect to the business and then make a recommendation; advised that if there is a need to make some change, staff will need to bring that forward to the Planning Commission. Mr. Shook stated that these items were addressed in the LLG parking report, but that there wasn't square footage established to go with them, that it was only verbiage; and that he is seeking only to clarify those numbers so that someone does not confront him with any problem regarding those exact numbers in the future. He mentioned that the VIP lockers have already been approved and the health and fitness club have been built exactly to the plans and that he is not seeking additional square footage. Director Blumenfeld recommended that the Planning Commission not act on the applicant's request to change the allocation square footage at this time until staff has discussed this issue �3 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 • • with the City Attorney; stated that the Planning Commission has a resolution which shows 105,000 square feet of approved area related to the original Parking Plan approval; noted that staff has quantified through a parking analysis the uses that are shown in staff report; that the matter Mr. Shook wants to address needs to be taken up by the City Attorney; and that if a change needs to be made, then it can be handled as a separate matter. He added that these other allocations are not the subject of this application; that the only issue under consideration is the restaurant CUP and the restaurant parking demand. Mr. Shook reiterated he is not going to build the buildingwider, change the square footage or footprint of the building, but he does not want the Commission to approve something then have a resident come in and say it was built larger than plans allowed. Director Blumenfeld explained that the allocations shown in the resolution are the operating conditions for the applicant; stated Mr. Shook processed an application and originally received an approval for 105,000 square feet; that increased over the course of Mr. Shook's approval process, he's added close to 30,000 square feet of floor area within this building. He added that the Commission's concern primarily with this business is not so much how it'smodified on the interior, but with how the modifications affect parking and whether the uses within the building are allowed within the. zone. He stated it's important to keep track of the use allocations, and quantify every proposed change.. He reiterated that if there is a significant change that will affect parking, then the Commission should review the CUP or Parking Plan because the Commission would want to make sure there is an adequate balance between the supply of parking and parking demand. He reiterated that other allocations are not the application before the Commission this evening. Mr. Shook urged the Commission to simply change something from 20,3.00 to 20,400 square feet, to change 9,600 to 10,000 square feet; pointed out that the walls are already up and that there is no increase to be done. Larry Hospensen, resident, requested this matter be continued until after the Public Works Commission consider how the signal and the parking conditions are working on 16th Street and PCH; and he expressed his belief the input 'from that meeting may materially adjust how the Planning Commission will make its decision. Leslie Neff, resident, stated she attended the open house and said everything looked grand; advised that around 6:00 P.M. there was limited parking on all levels; and stated there still remains a big problem with on -street parking. Ron Newman, resident, expressed his support for the applicant's proposal; and stated that the restaurant patrons are likely to use the valet parking services. Lee Grant, resident, expressed belief that the traffic study is incomplete and full of errors; that the proposed restaurant will create too much of a traffic and parking burden; and stated that this City has exceeded the allowable number of alcohol businesses. Alan Strusser, resident, noted his opposition to this application; stated this application should be put on hold until the City can come up with plans to solve the nuisance problems to the neighbors. He stated he would then welcome this restaurant; and he asked for a parking district. Eric Riley, resident, stated he would support a nice restaurant, but that he would prefer it be iy Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 i • • open no later than 11:00 P.M.; and expressed his belief 2 hours of free parking is not enough. He stated that people are starting to use the parking structure more, but stated that more time is necessary to see a large impact. Elsie Kushner, resident, noted her opposition to more alcohol businesses in this City; stated that the alcohol sales inthis community has had a negative impact upon the residents' serenity and quality of life; and she expressed her belief this restaurant is out of scale with the affordability of this City's residents. Ron Miller, resident, stated he lives in the unit closest to the parking garage; advised that he submitted a letter which discusses the issues of cars and traffic affecting the peace and tranquility of the neighbors; advised that he is aware of two times when the lot has placed signs out front indicating the lot was full and that the motorists are continuing to park in the neighborhoods; and he noted his support to continue this matter until the Public Works Commission has dealt with the parking and traffic issues related to this building. He stated the horns honking, loud car music, speeding vehicles, loud voices are negatively impacting the neighbors. Greg Sampson, resident, asked that this matter be tabled for one month until a full Commission is present to vote on this issue and until the Public Works Commission addresses the traffic and parking issues related to this site. Mike Borgen, resident, stated he is looking forward to seeing this high-end restaurant built in Hermosa Beach. Gary Brusshard, project architect, stated that patrons of this restaurant will comefrom all over Southern California and he offered to answer any questions with regard to the space of this restaurant. Mindy Brown, resident, stated that she likes the idea of this scale restaurant, but noted that this area is heavily impacted by speeding traffic, loud pedestrians, parking problems, and noted her opposition to this restaurant being placed at this location. Rosalind Bender, resident, stated that a restaurant of this size should not be permitted this close to a residential area; expressed her concern that taxi businesses. will be patrolling the neighborhoods for restaurant customers; and explained that it is currently burdensome to obtain a parking ticket for this facility. She urged the City to take into consideration the residents' objections. Alan Tillman, resident, asked that this matter be continued until a full Commission is present to vote on this matter; advised that a traffic and parking problem still exists; and urged, the City's support and help. Morty Benjamin, resident, stated that too many residents are opposed to this restaurant and additional alcohol sales in this City; and asked that this matter be deferred until after the Public Works Commission meeting. Carl Newman, resident, noted his opposition to the application for alcohol sales, believing there are too many alcohol permits in this City; and noted his opposition to a restaurant staying open until midnight. He stated that the gym patrons are continuing to park in the neighborhoods and jaywalk on PCH. Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 • • Carla Merryman, representing the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce, noted the Chamber's support of this application; and stated that the size of this restaurant is not out of scale with others in the City. She stated that many residents were impressed with the open house and stated that the neighborhood parking has improved. Bill Hedrick, resident, stated he does not believe this restaurant will compare with The Bottle Inn. Patty Egerer, resident, stated the City has exceeded its share of alcohol licenses; and noted that Hermosa Beach has a tremendous problem with the proliferation of alcohol outlets and the patrons that disturb and degrade the tranquility and quality of life for the residents. She pointed out that the summer months are not the peak business, period for the gym; and asked if mutual aid will be required. Gary Davis, resident, urged the City to consider the residents' concerns before business interests; he noted his concern with traffic and pedestrian safety and limited parking; and noted his opposition to another liquor license in this area. Mr. Shook stated there are 540 parking spaces; explained that the parking facility has a flow in and out of the building; stated to his knowledge the parking facility has not been full; and he urged the Planning Commission not to delay this matter, noting that work needs to get under way. There being no further input, Vice -Chairman Allen closed the public hearing. Commissioner Perrotti expressed his belief there will be no noise coming from inside, the building, this restaurant; stated he would like to see only have one entrance to the restaurant interior; recommended there be no outdoor use of any type, no outside dining, waiting or loitering; and that that the door on the southeast side of the building be an emergency exit only with panic hardware. He stated there are legitimate concerns with the potential for restaurants morphing into bars/clubs, but expressed his belief staff has done a thorough job in drafting a comprehensive resolution; reminded the audience that the CUP is subject to Planning Commission review 6 months after initial operation and every year thereafter; pointed out that some of the. traffic problems are motorist behavior issues that Mr. Shook should be not be held accountable for; and he expressed his belief there have been some improvement with parking in the neighborhoods as a result of the free validated parking plan. He expressed his belief patrons of this restaurant will use the parking structure and valet service;. stated there is an adequate number of garage parking spaces; urged the City and the applicant to improve getting the word out about the parking garage availability; and he mentioned that residents often complain to him they are tired of leaving the City to go to an upscale restaurant. He mentioned this is a commercial corridor; and stated he will be voting in favor of the resolution with the recommendation that the Commission add a condition concerning no outdoor use and for the southeast door to be an 'emergency exit only. Commissioner Pizer statedit is the Commission's job to be fair to the residents' desires and the property owners' rights; .expressed his belief the patrons of this restaurant will not be creating a nuisance to the neighbors; and stated this restaurant will have a positive effect in. the City. Commissioner Kersenboom stated this building is beautiful and that it will be an asset to the community; and pointed out that the issue withrude behavior of the building patrons is not the 110 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 • • responsibility of Mr. Shook's. Vice -Chairman Allen stated that he spent a lot of time speaking with the residents, including those who live next to this facility; and advised that everyone had varying opinions on this restaurant and its approval. He stated he is impressed with the operation of this facility and that it will be an asset to the community; suggested adding the following language: that under no circumstance should there be any cover charge; that no televisions be permitted; and expressed his belief the parking issues will be solved with a parking district. MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti to APPROVE CUP 06-4 -- Conditional Use Permit for on - sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant, Still Water Contemporary American Bistro, and Parking Plan amendment to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway #170, AKA 1605 Pacific Coast Highway; approve the resolution with the following modifications: no dining, waiting, or loitering be permitted outside; that the southeast door only be used as an emergency exit and have panic hardware installed; that there be no cover charge; and that no televisions be permitted. Commissioner Pizer offered a friendly amendment on page 7, Condition of Approval No. 2, to read "the hours for all operations of the restaurant shall be limited between 7:00 A.M. and 12:00 midnight." Commissioner Perrotti accepted that friendly amendment to his motion. Commissioner Pizer seconded the motion. The motion carried as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer None None Hoffman RECESS AND RECONVENE The meetinas recessed at 8:53 P.M. and reconvened at 9:02 P.M. 7. PDP 06-4/PAF( 06-1 -- Precise Development Plan and P Eng Plan for a new 14,688 -square -foo - • mmercial building containing offic and retail uses using a combination of on -s = parking and parking in- i u fees to meet parking requirements, and adoptio • f an Environmental egative Declaration at 338 and 400 Pier Avenue (continued fro une 20 and u y 18, 2006 meetings). Staff Recommended Action: To approve said r- o -st Senior Planner Robertson advised that e Planning Co 'ssion had directed the applicant to either increase on-site parking ort• odify the proposed use n�order to minimize the parking, deficiency, and to minimize th- eed for parking in lieu fees; stathat over the last several weeks in response to the o mission's direction, the applicant has be- • working on revisions to the project to provthe required parking on site; and that severa .Iternatives were considered. He no - . that the applicant has chosen to modify the uses and to • htly modify the buildings, s also modified the parking structure to increase the total capa ' ofthe parking fro 34 to 37 parking spaces; noted that the proposed combination of use- as changed nd no longer includes a restaurant use; that the revised project includes 5,692 squa Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 2006 M b Chairman Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPRO Resolution P. 8 amending the development standards of the R-1 zone • - : ing to the exceptions for small lots. ion carried as follows: AYES: Allen, Hoffman, Kersen NOES: None ABSTAIN: Perrotti PUBLIC HEARING(S) 6. CUP 06-4 -- Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant, StillWater Contemporary American Bistro, and Parking Plan amendment to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway #170, AKA 1.605. Pacific Coast Highway (continued from June 20, 2006 meeting). Staff Recommended Action: Direct staff as deemed appropriate from the following alternatives: 1) Approve the request subject to the conditions of approval contained in the attached resolution; or 2) Consider the building parking problems that have occurred over the last six months and advise the applicant .to resubmit the project permit application once it has been demonstrated that building spillover parking has been resolved. Director Blumenfeld stated that the applicant is requesting a CUP for on -sale alcohol in conjunction with a full-servicerestaurant, which is located in the Hermosa Pavilion; and that the applicant is also requesting an amendment to the Parking Plan that controls the operation of the building. He noted that the restaurant contains 7,038 square feet; in addition, with approximately 1,500 square feet of appurtenant wine and cheese retail shop — noting that the overall net restaurant area is 5,503 square feet; and advised that the plan shows 35 tables with seating for 178 people. He stated that the owner is requesting restaurant operating hours from 11:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., with the lounge area closing at 2:00 A.M.; and stated that consistent with the recent Planning Commission and City Council action, staff is recommending if this item is approved, that the Commission restrict the business hours to 12:00 midnight. He advised that there is no proposed live entertainment and mentioned that any request for live entertainment would require an amendment to the CUP; advised that the wine shop is permitted by right in this zone so long as it closes by 11:00 P.M., which is what the owner is proposing to do. Director Blumenfeld stated that the restaurant is part of a multi -tenant building - the Hermosa Pavilion - which was approved for renovation and reuse under a shared parking analysis; advised that last week, the City Council amended the Hermosa Pavilion Parking Plan to require 2 hours of free validated parking for building customers in order to resolve inefficiencies in parking operation that were creating spill-over parking in the neighborhoods; and noted that the effects of this recent amendment will be evaluated in 6 months to determine whether any other measures are required to deal with this spill-over parking. issue. Director Blumenfeld advised that the owner has also started to implement some of these requirements under the amendment by posting permanent signs at the main building entries and within the building garage, indicating the availability of this free validated parking. He mentioned that the 24-hour Fitness management has indicated they will promote the free validation parking program for their clients; and he mentioned that staff visited the parking garage and was able to confirm that the parking validation program is in effect and operating; and he expressed his belief the owner is tQ Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • making a clear attempt to implement the requirements of the parking amendment. Director Blumenfeld stated that the proposed restaurant use is located in a secured building, which has access from the garage and from a central lobby that fronts on Pacific Coast Highway (PCH); explained that the proposed business is an upscale, full-service restaurant with no live entertainment; and that the use and the proposed business operations are consistent with the goals of the General Plan in the C-3 Zone, which affirms the need for a full range of office, retail, and services, businesses which are appropriate for the highway. He stated that this full-service restaurant compliments the other uses in the building, both from a parking demand and a use standpoint; and advised that the shared parking analysis indicates that during peak periods, there are between 235 and 397 surplus parking spaces available in the garage. He mentioned that in terms of the commercial area compatibility, there are 306 businesses that are located along the commercial corridor - 9 restaurants that offer beer/wine and 2 that offer full alcohol, representing 3 percent of the highway businesses, and that from a land use standpoint, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan, with the zone, that it is compatible with other uses in the building and in the commercial area. Chairman Hoffman questioned if the automobile spa issue has been resolved. Director Blumenfeld stated that staff has been in discussions with the operator of that use to advise a CUP is required; that the business has indicated intent to apply for a CUP; and that the business will stop operations until the proper permits are issued. Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing. Eddie Benton, restaurant project designer, highlighted a number of high quality restaurant projects his firm has designed in the South Bay area; stated that the owners are committed to spending approximately $3 to 4 million in making this a world-class operation; and with the aid of a power point presentation, he addressed the proposed floor plan and restaurant design. He advised that the entry into the restaurant will be through the existing Pavilion; stated there will be a private wine room and dining room; and that the bar area will be approximately 10 to 15 percent of the overall restaurant area. Raymond McBermer, executive architect with SAA, stated that Mr. Shook will be developing the front space into a. men's and women's retail store and a high-end salon; stated that the design will compliment the City's environment and that the design will. be vibrant and unique, but elegant. Chef Chauchereau, partner with Mr. Shook, distributed to the Commission menus from one of his restaurants; stated that this restaurant will serve high quality, organic food and merchandise; commented on his experience in the 4 -star restaurant business; and reiterated that he will be bringing to this community a fine dining experience. He mentioned that he regularly participates in community events. Gene Shook, property owner, highlighted his attempts to put in place quality tenants that work well in this environment; commented on the large expensive to build this type of space, noting that approximately $4 million will be invested in this project; and mentioned that this restaurant will house over 100,000 bottles of wine in a temperature controlled storage area. He stated that because of this large expense, he would like to have better language in the proposed CUP so that the City cannot shut down these operations due to events beyond his control; and noted his concern with the 6 -month review process, pointing out that it will take at least 7 months to 19 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • • construct this project. He addressed his concern with Condition No. 17 in that it is too restrictive of the square footage — noting that it is easy in a building of this size to miscalculate the square footage and that it is easy to be up or down a bit in square footage. He stated that this building was approved for 100,005 square feet plus 11,000 square feet in storage area, but that this approval is showing 100,000 plus 10,600 on the storage; reiterated his concern that sometime down the road another Commission or City Council will say he's over by a very minute amount and shut the operation down; and he urged the City to provide him with a workable CUP. He stated that everything is in place and that he is ready to start construction and that he is opposed to waiting 6 months to determine if parking is still a problem. Mr. Shook explained that the auto spa business uses steam to clean the cars and that this information was placed in the February report; and stated that he gains one parking space with this use because of its ability to stack the cars in a triangle and its service to mostly people already patronizing the building. Ron Miller, resident, noted that he lives adjacent to the parking structure; he passed out photographs taken from his balcony of the parking lot activities; and stated that he does not yet see any change in 'the problems concerning spill-over parking and speeding and noisy traffic and pedestrians. He addressed his concern and opposition to serving alcohol until 2:00 A.M.; and stated that the noise has become a huge nuisance for the residents. Lee Grant, resident, stated that the people who patronize this building have flooded his neighborhood with parking, increased traffic, speeding and noise; and that it has ruined the tranquility of his neighborhood. He noted his opposition to this establishment serving alcohol and opposition to the large square footage of this restaurant; stated this area is above the license limit for alcohol service in this City, according to ABC's guidelines; and he asked the City to discontinue issuance of liquor licenses. Jim Lissner, resident, recommended that the hours for alcohol sales be restricted during the weekdays. Larry Hopkins, resident, stated that Friday and Saturday nights are the most problematic and require more policing and he questioned if this area will assigned additional public safety service if this project is approved. He stated that the noise has become a big nuisance for the residents; and expressed his belief the 2 hours of free validated parking is ineffective; and he stated that the restaurant activities should be restricted to no later than 10:00 P.M. Leslie Neff, resident, suggested placing speed bumps on 16th Street to slow the traffic; she thanked Mr. Shook for the big improvement to what was previously a blighted building; noted her support for a high-end restaurant, but that she is not supportive of a lounge because of the nuisance to the neighbors when the patrons leave the establishment. Carla Merryman, representing the Chamber of Commerce, expressed the Executive Committee's support for the upscale StillWater Cafe in the Hermosa Pavilion; noted that other restaurants with food in this price range and upscale quality in the City close at midnight and have perfect police records — noting that those other restaurants do not provide free parking; and stated that all 3 of these upscale restaurants are geared for young professionals, older residents and family dining and that she believes the type of customers who will patronize this business will be of the caliber this City needs. She stated it is important to recognize that the sales and property tax generated by the local businesses accounts for a major portion of the City's General Fund, which is spent by the City on street lights, street repairs, sanitation and 20 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • • signage for the residents; and stated that the more upscale businesses are approved, the more attractive this City will become to other neighborhood friendly companies looking to relocate and that this will bring positive changes to this community. Carl Niven, resident, stated he is opposed to any alcohol sales because of the on-going noise problem from the current patrons of this facility — noting he has made numerous calls to the police regarding the noise nuisance; stated that the City is well over the limit for ABC licenses in this area; and that these sales are negatively impacting many neighborhoods in this City. He commented on the problems with parking, noise, hazardous traffic, garage exhaust; expressed his belief the free parking is not working; and noted his belief this business will turn into a late night club. Howard Longacre, resident, reiterated his concern that policing activities of restaurant/bar businesses is draining the City's funds, noting these businesses are very small tax revenue generators for the City; and stated that many times, restaurants eventually fail and morph into night clubs and bars. He stated that the City needs to develop an SPA for this area; and noted his opposition to granting another alcohol license in this community. Alan Thomen, resident, highlighted the large percentage of restaurants that have failed in this community; and stated that the patrons who use this building create huge impacts to the quality of life to the residents, such as speeding traffic, lack of parking and noise. He expressed his belief that if alcohol is served at this location, it will create the need for taxi service; that the taxis will be cruising the neighborhood for drunken patrons; stated there is currently inadequate policing in this area; and noted his opposition to more alcohol sales in this community. Patty Egerer, resident, stated that research indicates the high concentration of alcohol outlets in a location can hamper the economic development; that while such businesses can be heavily patronized, they add very little intrinsic value to the community as a whole and they make the area less attractive to other types of retail business; and she stated there are too many bars and night clubs in this community. She stated that more police service is needed in this community and stated that according to ABC standards, this community is over -saturated with alcohol outlets. She stated that the entry to the restaurant appears to be located off PCH, noting this will create a traffic hazard; and advised that she provided staff with some correspondence, asking that the issues outlined in this correspondence be addressed. Linda Miller, resident, stated that policing in this area is already too limited and noted her opposition to approving another alcohol license. She stated that the Pavilion traffic has had a huge impact on the residents. Nathan Koher, administrative assistant to Mr. Shook, highlighted some of the neighboring communities which compare to the Hermosa Pavilion and the close proximity to residential areas, pointing out that these successful locations don't provide free parking. Ms. Lesiow, resident, addressed her concerns with the noise and speeding traffic coming from this facility; and noted her opposition to approving alcohol sales. Karen Carr, project director for the South Bay Coalition, a substance prevention collaborative, commented on the abundance of alcohol establishments in Hermosa Beach, believing this can send the wrong message to kids that alcohol is essential and necessary to having a good time; and advised that research shows if youth start drinking before the age of 14, they are 4 times more likely to become alcoholics later in life; and noted her opposition to more alcohol Zl Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 sales/business in Hermosa Beach. Gregg Sampson, resident, noted his frustration with having to continually attend meetings and piecemealing together some resolve for the residents who are negatively impacted by the Pavilion business; and stated he would support for alcohol sales up to 10:00 P.M., no later. Eric Riley, resident, stated that alcohol is not necessary at this facility, but that if it is approved, they should not be permitted to sell alcohol past 10:00 P.M.; expressed his belief the two-hour parking has not curbed the parking problem on 16th Street; and stated that this project should be put on hold until the parking and traffic issues are solved in this area. Rosalind Bender-Thomen, resident, stated that the residents' safety and satisfaction should take priority in this community; addressed the growing problems with traffic safety, parking and noise in this area; and noted her opposition to more bars in this community. Mark Hopkins, resident, stated that he and his neighbors have had their vehicles and property struck by drunk drivers; and noted his concern with bringing in more bars to this community. Mr. Shook asked that this business be permitted to operate the same hours as other restaurants in the area, noting that midnight is an acceptable hour; clarified that the substantial amount of wine inventory is for patrons wishing to purchase bottles that will not be consumed in the restaurant, noting that by right, these sales are permitted without a CUP; and stated that the restaurant occupies less than 5,500 square feet. With regard to the noise level, he advised that Schaffer Acoustics conducted testing and provided a noise report, after which he replaced all of the parking lot exhaust fans and spent a substantial amount on acoustic noise dampeners. He stated that the doors to the restaurant off PCH is a front fire exit and is legally required by the Fire Department. He added that this restaurant will be offering vehicles to transport its patrons. There being no further input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing. Chairman Hoffman requested staff to provide clarification on the square foot allocation as in the ordinance versus the various approvals. Director Blumenfeld explained that the condition in this resolution is the same condition originally approved in 2003 and which Mr. Shook agreed to abide by. The wording in it is identical to the wording in the original Precise Development Parking Plan. He stated that Mr. Shook committed to that condition by affidavit; that the condition has not changed except for the allocation numbers. He noted that because staff recognizes it's difficult to track the various uses as they come and go, the condition has some latitude. It says "the allocation of uses shall be substantially consistent or less than the following allocations," which gives room for interpretation; also at the end of Condition No. 17, it says, "any material changes to this allocation will require an amendment," which means a substantial change. He reiterated that this wording has always been in place; and stated that if there is an issue relative to allocation, Mr. Shook can always petition the Commission for a change, as he has previously done. Vice -Chairman Allen questioned if ABC would consider this area over -concentrated in terms of alcohol licenses. In response to Vice -Chairman Allen's inquiry, Director Blumenfeld stated he is not sure how ABC would characterize the area; explained that staff simply looked at the number of uses on the highway, the area most affected; that based on the over 300 businesses along the highway, ZZ Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • approximately 3 percent of the businesses, are restaurants serving alcohol, noting there is not evidence to indicate these businesses along the highway create any nuisance. Vice -Chairman Allen questioned if the police are consulted on all projects. Director Blumenfeld stated that staff does not consult with the police department on all new projects; that staff will consult with the police and fire department when dealing with specific security and safety issues; and mentioned that staff is involved on an intradepartmental basis in looking at all the Downtown businesses and all the bars and restaurants, that the City is working on a multi -agency review of these uses in the City. With regard to the net effect to the City and the cost benefit, he explained that as a practical matter, food service has helped make up for some of the loss in City revenue with the relocation along the highway of major auto dealerships; stated that auto dealerships were the larger sales tax producers; and noted that hotels have come to replace these businesses, which have provided substantial increases in transient occupancy taxes (TOT) over the last 10 years, starting with the opening of The Beach House. He stated the City does not do a cost benefit analysis on every project, that one has not been done that for this business; noted that staff believes there will be an economic benefit; and pointed out that the City has already enjoyed the benefit of eliminating a blighted building that existed along this highway for almost 15 years. He pointed out that staff has been working with the owner to get solid uses in this building. Commissioner Pizer asked for clarification on the spa car wash business. Director Blumenfeld explained that the similar use provision says that if the use is no more intensive than a use that's already identified on the permitted use list, then that use can be approved through a consent review by the City Council; in the case of the car wash, he noted that this use clearly, as defined by the City, is a car wash, but using different technology. He stated the owner would need to process a CUP. He pointed out that the auto spa is a collateral issue, but that the resolution, if approved, reflects the fact the use must be addressed. Vice -Chairman Allen stated the design of the restaurant is nice; questioned whether its use will further complicate the parking problems in this area; and expressed his belief the City is going in the right direction to solve the parking problems and that it's unreasonable to expect it would be solved over night by putting up placards in the last two days, that's it's going to take some time to get the word out. He stated that if the restaurant were to be approved, there would be a lot of conditions these residents would want to see, believing the 2 -hour validated parking for a lounge is not enough; and noted his concern that if this restaurant were to fail, it may become another nightclub, suggesting that a condition be added that no cover charge be permitted. He noted his preference to solve the parking problem before adding in this business; and stated he is generally opposed to another alcohol license in this City; however, people should be permitted to enjoy wine with an expensive meal. Commissioner Pizer highlighted the blighted condition of this site for many years, noting that Mr. Shook has invested a lot of time and energy into making this an asset to the community; pointed out that Mr. Shook is bringing in quality businesses to this location; but noted his concern with granting an alcohol license and the possible future use of the restaurant as a bar/nightclub; and he suggested that the conditions limit the operating hour to 12:00 midnight, no amplified music, live entertainment, or dance floors. He expressed his belief the customers of this restaurant will use the parking structure, that the type of clientele will not be looking to save a couple dollars on parking; he recognized the impact on the residents' daily lives is a major concern, but stated he does not think the impacts from this project will be serious. He suggested amending Condition 23 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • • 5, limiting the hours of operation and no outdoor dining, adding that "...no outdoor dining or drinking allowed." Commissioner Kersenboom stated that Mr. Shook is doing all he can to make this venture a success; pointed out that the problems are from those using the gym; and expressed his belief this upscale restaurant will only impact the City by improving the quality of food service in this community. He stated that Public Works and City Council need to become more involved in dealing with proactive and effective policing of the city streets, with the issue of people improperly parking on the streets and racing up and down the streets; stated he would expect a fine dining establishment to offer wine; suggested putting more teeth into the conditions to keep control of this if it changes ownership in the future; and expressed his belief this restaurant will be a good asset for the City and that he does not believe this business will compound those problems. Commissioner Pizer reiterated his suggestion for a 12:00 midnight closing time in the conditions, believing this time limit assures future night club control. Commissioner Kersenboom mentioned that Mr. Shook's letter indicates he does not want the CUP reviewed annually. Director Blumenfeld stated that the Commission always has the authority to review and modify a CUP; however, it is correct that a CUP runs with the land, not with the business. He added that Condition No. 1 says, "the interior and building alterations in the continued use and operation of the restaurant with appurtenant uses shall be substantially consistent with the plans submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission"; noted that if a use presented is substantially changed or the layout of the business is substantially changed, it is subject to Commission review; and similarly, if the function changes, then the parking may change, which also causes a review of the parking. He added that the Commission always has the ability to review relative to conformance with a project approval; and stated that the Commission must be satisfied that the approval gives the Commission enough latitude to adequately regulate the business. Chairman Hoffman stated that the seating plan calls out approximately 175 seats, questioning what the occupancy load would be; and asked for further clarification on the waiting area requirement. Director Blumenfeld stated that the owner is required to submit an occupant load and seating plan; stated that code allows 3 square feet per person for waiting; otherwise, the area is occupied based on the number of seats; noted that the Building Code indicates the waiting area must be used for that purpose; that if it's a retail area, it's a general occupancy load of 1 person per 15 square feet of floor area and it's seating or the use classification that dictates the occupant load number. Chairman Hoffman pointed out that Mr. Shook has created a project that is too successful, having created too much traffic, noise and parking impacts; stated he is not yet convinced the validated parking will solve the problem; and stated the Commission cannot consider this application in isolation of the rest of the businesses in this building. He noted that a lot of fine dining establishments have failed in this town which have morphed into bars; expressed his belief the City has. created a business environment in parts of this community where fine dining restaurants cannot succeed because the clientele is not willing to come to that location,' and stated there are valid concerns for the potential of a future bar. He noted his support for restricting the hours and not allowing entertainment; expressed his belief that the square Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 footage of this restaurant should be decreased; and stated that even an upscale restaurant will create some impacts to this neighborhood, questioning how many cabs/cars will be circulating that building to serve the clientele. He stated he will be voting against this project because the scale of the proposed establishment is too large. MOTION by Vice -Chairman Allen to DENY the proposal and moved to monitor the parking problems. Chairman Hoffman seconded the motion, with a clarification that the parking problems will be monitored for the next 6 months regardless of this motion. The motion failed as follows: AYES: Allen, Hoffman NOES: Kersenboom, Pizer ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Perrotti MOTION by Commissioner Pizer to APPROVE CUP 06-4 -- Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant, Still Water Contemporary American Bistro, and Parking Plan amendment to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway #170, AKA 1605 Pacific Coast Highway. This motion failed due to the lack of a second. MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom to CONTINUE this case for six months following a parking report to determine if the 2 -hour free validated parking has had a positive impact. This motion failed due to the lack of a second. MOTION by Chairman Hoffman, seconded by Vice -Chairman Allen, to DENY the proposal as submitted and that it be revised prior to re -submittal, and that the applicant work with staff to address the issues presented to the Commission this evening. This motion was ultimately rescinded. Chairman Hoffman stated that he will not be present at the next Commission meeting and that a full quorum will not be possible for August. Commissioner Pizer pointed out that the 8,000 square feet includes space for retail and stated it's not out of scale. Director Blumenfeldstated that while there still is some disagreement in the calculation of the square footage, staff believes the restaurant is approximately 5,000 square feet. Vice -Chairman Kersenboom noted that the free validated parking should be given a chance to see if it solves the parking issues before this project is approved; and suggested consideration of a continuance. Director Blumenfeld stated that a case can be continued for 3 consecutive meetings before a new notice is required. MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Chairman Hoffman, to CONTINUE this matter to the next Planning Commission meeting. This motion carried as follows: 25 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 AYES: Allen, Hoffman, Kersenboom, Pizer NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Perrotti Director Blumenfeld noted that the City website will be updated and the onsite posting will be updated to reflect the continuance. 7.\PDP 06-4/PARK 06-1 -- Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan for a n 4,688- square -foot commercial building containing office and retail uses usi g a cbination of on-site parking and parking in -lieu fees to meet rking req 'rements, and .adoption of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 38 and 400 Pi =r Avenue (continued from June 20, 2006 meeting). Staff Recommenced Action: To continue to the August 15, 2006 meeting. Director Blumenfeld-•vised that the applicant has requested this matter b continued; and that responding to prior de'.erations of the Commission, they've decided revise their parking program. Chairman Hoffman opened t public hearing. There being ,o input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing. MOTION by Commissioner Kersen� om, seconded by Co' missioner Pizer, to CONTINUE to the August meeting PDP 06-4/PARK.-1 -- Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan for a new 14,688- square -foot commercial •uilding cont ping office and retail uses using a combination of on-site parking and parki . in -lieu ees to meet parking requirements, and adoption of an Environmental Negative Declatio at 338 and 400 Pier Avenue. This motion carried as follows: AYES: Allen, Hoffman, Kersenboom, NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Perrotti izer 8. LLA 06-1 -- Lot line adj stment to reconfigure th- properties at 726 Prospect Avenue and 1120 8th Str-et into three parcels fronting o 8th Street. Staff Recommended Actio . To approve said request. Commissioner Kersen proximity of this proj Director Blume lots that front that both pr contains the su thes ap om recused himself from consideration of this m. ter due to the close t to his residence. Id stated that the purpose of the request is to adjust the lot line for 3 existing n Prospect Avenue and thereby create 3 lots fronting on 8th Street; : nd advised perties are occupied by single-family dwellings, although the property a 726 also. garage apartment unit. He noted that the two existing lots on Prospect Aven►e were ct of a lot merger hearing in January wherein the Commission decided not to •serge ots based on neighborhood compatibility issues; and advised that a neighbor is curre,tly aling the Commission decision buthas indicated agreement with this propose 26 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2006 • PARKING STUDY REPORT HERMOSA BEACH PAVILION City of Hermosa Beach, California February 13, 2006 Prepared for: Shook Development Corporation 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 300 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 Under the Supervision of.• Clare M. Look -Jaeger, Principal 20' LINsCOTT LAW & -GREENSPA engineer Linscott, Lew & Greenspan. Engineen 234E Colorado Bhrd. Suite 400 .Pasadena; CA 91101 626.796.2372 626.792.0941 F www:1Igengineers.com PARKING STUDY REPORT HERMOSA BEACH PAVILION City of Hermosa Beach, California February 13, 2006 1.0 INTRODUCTION This parking analysis of the Hermosa Beach Pavilion (HBP) project has been prepared to provide an update to the previously approved project shared parking demand analyses, document existing parking demand at the site, and identify any project -related parking in the neighborhood.. The Hermosa Beach Pavilion is located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Hermosa Beach, California. The project site is bounded by existing development to the north and west, 16th Street to the south, and Pacific Coast Highway to the east. The HBP project site and general vicinity are shown in Figure 1-1. The preparation of this parking analysis complies with the project's Condition of Approval, whereby a parking study update (Le., an update to the study prepared as part of the entitlement process for the project), including a determination of parking demand, must be provided within six months of the occupancy and subsequent operation of the 24 -Hour Fitness facility (a tenant of HBP). Shared parking demand analyses have been prepared to reflect existing occupancy at HBP in terms of square_footage-and_land..use...types,.. aswell as for ..the ..pllarmed. fiiture occupancy ...at._build-out...of...the . facility. Parking accumulation surveys of on-site parking demand have been conducted to document existing parking demand based on existing occupancy. In addition, IBP patron intercept surveys have been conducted along with visual observations of on -street and off-street parking near the site to identify existing project -related parking in the neighborhood. This study i) updates the shared demand analyses based on existing and future occupancy at HBP, ii) documents existing parking demand at the site, iii) provides a summary of the HBP patron intercept travel surveys, iv) identifies project -related parking within the neighborhood, and v) provides recommendations to address existing parking conditions, where necessary. UNSCOIT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 1X 1 -IBP Parking Study Report 0:110EI_ FILE136^-5lcpartUo25-Rpa.Joc • Kids Kabare . As this auditorium type use is e o providefacility desi� a for children's events, booked events typically do not conflict with school times. Based on the experience of the operator, the facility typically closes at 7:00 PM on Mondays and a greater number of events are booked towards the latter part of the week or on weekends (e.g., during Friday or Saturday evenings). A letter from the tenant representative is included in Appendix A and provides further clarification regarding existing operations. The letter shows a substantially lower parking demand than what is included in the shared parking analysis. 2.1.2 Future Building Occupancy As indicated in the lease data provided in Appendix A, the HBP project at full occupancy consists of a total of 99,980 net square feet of building floor area. This square footage total excludes the planned kiosks (i.e., 360 square feet of space) and areas G401, G402, and G403 which are designated storage areas and total approximately 10,583 square feet of space. At future project build -out, the following land use and square footages are anticipated based on the leasing information.: • 24 -Hour Fitness: 46,049 square feet • Spa: 13,038 square feet • General Retail: 9,554 square feet • Restaurant: 7,950 square feet • General Office: 20,353 square feet • Auditorium: 3,036 square feet A large component of the restaurant square footage is attributable to the future occupancy of the StillWater Bistro restaurant. The 7,950 square feet of restaurant space includes 912 square feet associated with the existing StillWater Cafe (i.e., formerly Kelly's Coffee) and over 1,000 square feet of planned retail square footage within the StillWater Bistro restaurant. Therefore, the analysis contained herein can be considered conservative in that restaurant parking ratios are higher than retail parking ratios. The weekday shared parking analyses contained in this report reflect typical restaurant weekly patronage fluctuations. A letter from a StillWater, LLC., representative has been prepared which summarizes typical weekly patronage levels and is also included in Appendix A. As noted in the letter, the Monday patronage levels are roughly 50 percent of that experienced during peak times (i.e., during Friday and Saturday evening conditions). 2.1.3 Existing and Future Project Parking Supply As indicated in LLG Engineers' May 16, 2005, update to the project shared parking analysis, a total parking supply of 540 spaces is provided within the HBP parking garage. Of this total, 454 standard spaces, 42 tandem parking spaces and up to 44 parallel parking spaces are provided. It is important to note that the shared parking analyses reflect a supply of 496 spaces as it is assumed that the proposed project will utilize the 454 first access parking spaces and the 42 tandem employee only UNscorr, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP Parking Study Report ONOb P11.EU62Sre?4nJ625•Apa.doc As indicated in Table 4-2A, a shared parking demand of 368 spaces is forecast for the future Monday weekday condition. As indicated in Table 4-2B, a shared parking demand of 369 spaces is forecast for the future Friday condition. As indicated in Table 4-2C, a worst-case theoretical shared parking demand of 426 spaces is forecast for the future conditions assuming concurrent peak utilization of all HBP land uses. All three analyses indicate that the project's parking supply of 496 spaces (excluding the 44 parallel parkingspaces), is more than sufficient to satisfy parking demand based on the future tenant occupancy. LINSCOrr, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP-Parting Study Report o:UOP_En.EIS i S rivortutizsapa_dor • 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This parking analysis of the Hermosa Beach Pavilion (HBP) project has been prepared to provide an update to the previously approved project shared parking demand analyses, document existing and future anticipated parking demand at the site, and identify any project -related parking in the neighborhood. A total parking supply of 540 spaces is provided within the MBP parking garage. Of this total, 454 standard spaces, 42 tandem parking spaces and up to 44 parallel parking spaces are provided. It is important to note that the shared parking analyses reflect a supply of 496 spaces as it is assumed that the proposed project will utilize the 454 first access parking spaces and the 42 tandem employee only parking spaces. As a contingency, should additional parking spaces be needed in the future, 44 parallel (i.e., aisle parking spaces) can be made available for use with attendant assistance. The project's parking supply has been determined to be more than adequate to meet current and future parking demands. Based on the patron intercept surveys and the visual observations of weekday and weekend conditions, neighborhood on -street parking has been documented. It is recommended that HBP representatives initiate an informational program to encourage HBP patrons to park on-site within the parking garage, emphasizing the safety and convenience of doing so. In addition, any validation program is determined by each individual tenant (e.g., the 24 -Hour Fitness facility currently provides a parking validation which results in a $1.00 fee for the first two hours), however, monthly parking passes to 24 -Hour Fitness members are currently offered and will continue to be promoted. It is important to note that other 24 -Hour Fitness facilities throughout Southern California charge for parking. It is also recommended that the City of Hermosa Beach, along with HBP representatives, consider implementation of a residential street permit parking program (e.g., for local residential streets situated east of Pacific Coast Highway) in the immediate vicinity of the IBP site. These types of programs are common in beach communities, downtown areas, and near educational/institutional facilities, and would preclude non -permitted vehicles from parking on -street. The City may also consider parking removals or limited parking through the installation of parking meters or further restrictions (e.g., one-hour parking restrictions) along various street segments. UNSCo7T, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP Parking Study Report o:uaR I ILc'•.46=5 ortU62S-R$.doc PCH RESTAURANTS & BARS HERMOSA BEACH CITY LIMITS Name and Address Bar w/Conditional Use Permit (2) Restaurants w/CUP for On Sale Beer/Wine (9 ) 1. McDonalds 1107 PCH No 2. Rocky Cafe 1025 No 3. CA Sushi 429 Yes 4. Poulet Du Jour 233 Yes 5. Domino's Pizza 201 No 6. Round Table Pizza 2701 Yes 7. IHOP 1439 No 8. Rosa's 322 Yes 9. Oki Doki Sushi 442 Yes 10. Town & Country Pizza 446 No 11. Maui Rose 450 No 12. Pachanga 500 Yes 13. Skooby's 502 Yes 14. El Pollo Inka 1100-2 Yes 15. Fusion Sushi 1200 Yes 16. Chong's 2516 No 17. Hermosa Saloon 211 Yes 18. The Pitcher House 142 Yes OCT 2 2006 COMM DEV. DEPT 1600 Pacific Coast Hwy. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 September 29, 2006 Community Development Department Planning Division do City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA. 9.0254 Council Members, In response to a Notice regarding a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 about a Conditional Use Permit for Still Water Contemporary America Bistro to be located in The Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254, please be advised that we, as owners of property located at 1600 Pacific Coast Highway, Hermosa Beach, are in favor of the Planning Commission decision on August 15, 2006 which would allow Still Water to proceed with their project. Thank you, illis D. Hayes James M. Welch October 3, 2006 Sol Blumenfeld City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 RECEIVED OCT 3 2006 COMMUNITY DEV DEPT. Re: Conditional Use Permit for on -sale alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant at the Hermosa Beach Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Sol Blumenfeld: Enclosed are 10 sets of plans for restaurant for the City Council October 10th meeting. We do need the midnight close 7 nights per week. The CUP has no use of TV's in restaurant. Many high end restaurants have the use of TV's in discrete areas (for example Fleming's has flat screen TV at the bar area). We would also like to have the ability to use a TV in our retail area's to show information on the products we will sell and in our private dining rooms. We would ask that this provision is removed or reduced to no TV's in main dining area. Sincerely, Gene Shook President Shook Development Corporation 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Suite 300 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Phone 310 698-0700 Fax 310 698-0701 Email. gshook@shookdevelopment.com l �� H® E R .M O S A www.hermosapavilion.coin • • Tuesday, October 03, 2006 City of Hermosa Beach 1316 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RECEIVED OCT 4 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. RE: The Pavilion Public Hearing, October 10, 2006 Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council, We wish to go on record as opposed to the issuing of a Conditional Use Permit for the general on -sale of alcohol in conjunction with the building of a restaurant in the Pavilion for the reasons/issues raised in the remainder of this letter. A simple solution is to deny the CUP and correct the current problems. The plans call for a mega bar/restaurant - - 8000 sq. ft. of it. The local area surrounding the Pavilion contains high density housing for residents. This bar will impact the lives of all the residents living within a 5 block area. The addition of a bar which can contain some additional 400+ patrons at any given time from 6 pm to 12 pm will create major issues for the area. The parking garage already has the `garage full' sign out around 6 pm sometimes in the evening. Where are these additional 200-300 plus cars for the restaurant going to park. Evidently the Pavilion was soliciting $10 for `event parking' during the Labor Day weekend. Does this violate their CUP, Parking Plan and Municipal Code (reducing available parking)? The new bar/restaurant will be within 600 feet of the Hermosa Valley Elementary School. School children flow up and down 16th street going to and returning from school. Passing a liquor establishment with your kids is not high on parents/residents priority lists. Fast driving and increased traffic on 16th and Ardmore place children at risk. Suggestion: 1. Find way to reduce traffic on 16`h street and Ardmore. 2. The city should make sure that the bar/restaurant is within State law for distance from a school. If not deny license. The new bar/restaurant will become another drinking hole if the restaurant does not work out. If we have to live with a bad decision granting the license then limit the project so that: 1. Liquor may not be sold unless consumed on-site. No bottle sales. 2. Outside tables/chairs for dining/liquor consumption will never be allowed 3. Restaurant may not have any form of live or video entertainment 4. No noise will be heard outside the building 5. Liquor license only valid until 9 pm. That way the patrons may leave earlier so that major noise and issues from patrons drinking too much will not violate HB Municipal Code regarding noise after 10 p.m.. • • What is the density of liquor serving establishments in Hermosa Beach? Some number mentioned is 90+. Putting another liquor license in a residential area is a flag to the home owners that Hermosa Beach is supporting business not residents and in the long run will encourage residents to leave for a quieter environment. Rumors has it that the license for Club Saffire is being revisited by the City. This club is a disgrace for Hermosa Beach Residents and families have observed semi-nude dancing in the front windows in order to draw people in. People drinking and hanging out in the Ardmore parking garage at 1 am. or so and disturbances in that garage have increased Police responses. Because there probably is not enough business to support a high end restaurant, we believe that at some point in the next year or so this new restaurant will go the same way as Club Saffire. 1. Only issue a new liquor license when one expires or is abandoned and only after extensive public hearings. 2. Reduce the number of licenses to a number more realistic for Hermosa Beach. We would like to think that the residents count, but as one attends the various City Commissions and Committees it is easy to lose faith. The Pavilion has consumed hundreds if not thousands of hours of time for city employees as well as residents. The Pavilion project is oversized and one wonders how the owner was able to increase the usable inside space by more than 40% from 1998. We really would like some quality of life type of businesses in the building. The will never happen because the building owner has a financial interest in the new businesses including the new bar/restaurant. During Planning Commission meetings a large number of residents clearly detailed the many problems that the Pavilion has brought to the area. I actually presented pictures of the traffic and parking problems and later was rebuffed by a Planning Commission member for staging the pictures. They were not staged and were snapped at random from my patio. The Pavilion owner, Shook, had an opportunity to meet with each of the Planning Commission members outside of the public hearing (as stated by them in the Planning Commission public meeting) and subsequently they approved the license request. The residents were not offered such an opportunity. We thank the City Council for allowing us to provide input for the October 10th meeting. Also: 1. We invite each of the City Council members to come to 16th street and spend a couple of hours (try 5-7 pm) viewing and listening to the noise from the Pavilion Parking Structure and the traffic on the street. The installation of the traffic light at PCH/16t street has routed thousands of cars down 16th street (west of PCH) so they can avoid the congestion created by the traffic light at 16th and PCH and the traffic light at Pier Ave and PCH. Traffic counts taken by the city Public Works and the consultant's report did not consider 16th street west of PCH; only east of it. The counts from the Public Works consultant indicated that some 4000+ cars a day use the one block long 16th street west of PCH. Traffic counters were removed last week so new counts should be available now. • • Speed levels have increased on 16`h street. At times during the day, namely 5 pm — 8 pm., the traffic is so heavy that cars turning into the Pavilion parking garage are blocking 16th street. Tonight at one time I counted 32 cars trying to move on the street. The traffic light at PCH and 16th street creates long lines on 16th street. The north most lane (turning lane) on 16th street along side of the Pavilion Parking structure is not usable by cars turning into the Pavilion parking garage because of the tight turns necessary to enter the narrow openings of the garage. Some suggestions: 1. Remove street light next to entrance of Pavilion garage entrance. 2. Widen the entrances to the garage. 3. Make the north turn lane the only lane to enter the garage from. 4. No left turn into the Pavilion parking garage for cars going east on 16th street Note photo of pickup and auto turning into the Pavilion parking garage from center lane: Opening up the parking garage with 2 hour free parking was supposed to reduce parking problems locally but can not work when the `parking full' sign is posted outside of the entrance. Traffic is so bad that parking elsewhere and walking is easier than waiting to enter the parking garage. The Pavilion Parking Garage has increased the noise levels from the street dramatically, and at all hours. The new restaurant will only add to that noise. A simple solution is to deny the CUP and let us correct the current problems/issues. We personally are getting pricing for installation of sound reduction door/windows for our condo. Maybe the Pavilion would opt to pay for them. Suggestions: 1. Make valet parking available (free) when general parking is full 2. City should not allow Pavilion `event parking' which reduces available parking. 3�" • • 3. Review the CUP and the Parking Plan to find out why the Pavilion garage open parking is full and only valet parking is available. Maybe an allocation problem? If a parking problem exists now how can an additional 200-400+ cars (over several hours) be figured in the building planning without impacting the local parking or increasing the traffic on 16th street. Solutions do exist. 1. Deny the CUP request for a liquor license 2. Create a parking district requiring stickers for resident cars. 3. Place speed strips on 16th street. 4. Consider making 16th street one-way Thank you for your consideration, Ron and Linda Miller 1600 Ardmore #213 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310-937-9052 ron_wamba@verizon.net 3$ City of Hermosa Beach Mayor and Council Members 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 September 12, 2006 SEP 1 2J65 RE: REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF CUP 06-04 "PAVILION" 1601 PCH. Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of Council: I respectfully disagree with the assessment made by the Planning Commission on August 15, 2006. An appeal is requested. There are a combination of variables that require consideration; 1. The general plan fails to protect residential neighborhoods or acknowledge the concentration of alcohol outlets within our community. The "plan" is an inadequate planning tool, because its outdated. This proposed usage is not "compatible" with our neighborhood. (Tavern style restaurants, entertainment venues, late night clubs with disc jockeys, amplified music and dancing all of which are allowed along PCH poses conflict with residential.) 2. Public safety is reduced by the proliferation of alcohol outlets. Our police services are burden with alcohol related disturbance calls. Thiscreates a dependence on "mutual aid" support, when a disturbance call is received. 3. Misrepresentations are contained in the CUP. Statements that purport existing and future impacts to the surrounding neighborhood have been mitigated, lack basis and must be stricken. 4. The "conditions of approval" contained in the CUP are inadequate in scope. 5. The restaurant's scale is excessive. If alcohol is permitted at this location nuisance conditions will develop. These negative impacts will create turmoil, and progressively threaten the quality of life for surrounding residents. 6. The parking structure still operates in violation of municipal code 17.44.050. A reconfiguration of the Parking Plan is necessary. The lack of standard parking stalls needs study. Question: How does a "non -conforming" building that was originally overbuilt in 1986 expand its leaseable sq.ft. by 51%? Thank you for allowing these issues surrounding PC Resolution 06-04 to be heard on appeal. Respectfully Py Eger U7/ UO/ GUUD 1 ! : )U UUUMMUUUU MIUMWHYKUMILKY . Nt 1 l'AUt 151 • • FACSIMILE COVER SHEET AND MESSAGE Total number of pages including this cover sheet 10 Date WED 9-6-06 Time To Hermosa Beach City Council Fax number 372-6186 From James.Lissner, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Fax number: (310) 376-2287 Voice number: (310) 376-4626 Venue: Council Meeting of 9-12-06, Consent Calendar., Planning Commission Action Minutes Subject: 1601 PCH, CUP for Restaurant with Alcohol Honorable Councilmembers: At their August 15 meeting the Planning Commission recommended 12 midnight, 7 -days -a -week closing hours for Stillwater. That • decision will become final unless the City Council holds an appeal hearing. . Some argue that a midnight closing is early enough to guarantee no impact on the city or the neighborhood. I believe that there is a good argument that at least the weekday closing times could be earlier. At an earlier meeting, the applicant partners distributed copies of a Mother's Day Brunch menu from one partner's restaurant in San Juan Capistrano. They also brought with them their French chef, in full chef's regalia. Recently, I obtained a copy of the regular dinner menu from their San Juan Capistrano branch. I have attached a copy of it as well as of the Mother's Day menu they previously distributed. When I reviewed those. menus, they reminded me of the sophisticated menus submitted by some other CUP applicants in Hermosa Beach. I keep a file folder with old menus and have attached, for your review, copies of.old menus from Patrick. Molloy's and Pointe 705.. The similarities (other than the prices) are striking. . lb tip • • My point, in case it is not already clear, is that a sophisticated menu provides us no assurance as to how the place will be operated later on. But if we accept, for sake of argument, the developers claim that 1601 PCH will remain a fine -dining restaurant, then based upon his statement it would be fair to compare the proposed hours to the actual operating hours of other fine dining restaurants in the South Bay. Fleming's Steak House: open 'til 11 weekends, 10 weekdays. Chez Melange: open 'til 10, seven days. We can also look at the closing times Manhattan Beach has set for its four most -recent new full.liquor approvals. Shade hotel: open 'til 12 weekends, 11 weekdays. ..Juniors DeliBoys.: open. 'til 12 weekends, 11 weekdays. Petros Greek Cuisine: open 'til 12. weekends, 11 weekdays. Corkscrew Cafe: open 'til 11, seven days. The Planning Commission has recommended midnight hours, seven days a week. .1 would like to suggest that those hours be only on weekends, with earlier. closing during the week, like Manhattan Beach is doing. Specifically, 1 would suggest a three-tier arrangement, like Manhattan used with Fonzs, with these hours: Sun - Wed close at 10 pm Thu - close at 11 pm Fri - Sat close at 12 mid Thank. you for your. consideration. Sincerely, Important: The pages comprising this facsimile transmission contain confidential information. mom James Lissner. 'This information is intended solely for use by the individual or entity named . as the recipient hereof. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, Copying distribution, or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately so that we may arrange to retrieve this transmission at no cost to you. • 09/06/2006 17:00 @mamma • Baliy ffpinach.Sald4 Dried apricots, pistachios, feta cheese,-cakarnelized onion, rgspkry vinaigrette, • • • . • . HIGHWAyROBBERY. NET PAGE 03 thea q)ay Bhtncfi StOters • (your choice 4.one): • •• Yves' Hothentade Granola Vanilla infused yogurt; fresh berries. . • . Still Water House Salad • . Field greens, Maytag blue cheese. candied pecans, .drifd • Bing cherries. basaltic Innatgrette. • • • qrsLMO • (yaurchoigg of one) - • . • *41( entrees cow with breakfitstPolatOeS :" • Chamomileand Hickory PnokeOlaittba*Tiout • Sweet potato hash, poachgdeggs; chjoilcuiis.• •••• • • . • • • ,.• • . • Eggs Benegict • • Applewood smokedbacon, gogclied..”00.-English.ihuffini blue crab.. •• scr14,..1fpliariciaise. . • ' . • :. • • Noi, iele.444••$041.4.1e • . • . Scrambled. eggs, Andoliille'saascrgg,--ispttiSkr4 bell pepper's; red • • 110n: . • • • . •-• Pa ih.Efts. r4(4.e . • Cgrcundlized-apPlei, vci.nillii-bean infused cream. .•*. • . • . •••ff.'01ghini.•WOOOS • • ... • Fresh strawberries andhanonai;vandlo bean infused c?thani. . . .1-iiplcatjNitipiced:p94:7!-eigtertalp. • • .• . • Bang cherry reduction, iVassied garlic iolato'a.skiirthgt4• '. Harris Ranch. Rilieye and :Frites Maytag blue cheese craMbleS, lemon zest. • • .0asett.. • 'An Asst Fine Ptistri#. . .... • • • • • *All mother'sget. botiomleSs Mimosas . Price: •• • Adults; $55 per. person plat tag- ChIldren(12 and under): 515 per person plus kix(y'ree gad Dessett) ..... V V V V V • nlonwHTRUDDGICT . IVG I • (//4) -ie 'Pah& ream. Beer Battered Green Beans Lemon Zest -Caper Aioli, Spicy Tomato Fondue. $7. BeefSatay Skewers Sweet. Soy Reduction. $9. Maryland Style Crab Cakes Blue Crab, Crawfish Tails, Celeriac Slaw, Cajun Aioli, $11. Shanghai Shrimp in Lettuce Cup .Pan Seared Shrimp, Crimini Mushrooms, Pine Nuts, Cilantro, Soy Lime Sauce. $11. Tomato Basil Bisque Goat Cheese Toast Points. $9. soy etaisa/d French Onion Soup Traditional Favorite. $7. StillWater House Salad Organic Mixed Greens, Bing Cherries, Maytag Blue Cheese, Candied Southern Pecans, Balsamic .Vinaigrette. $8. rl-1uc U4 Caramelized Bosch Pear and Montrachet Goat Cheese Salad. Organic Field Greens, Red Onions, Carrots, Fried -Parsnips, Lavender Infused Ranch. $9.00 Traditional Caesar Salad Romaine Hearts, Parmesan Regianno, Focaccia Croutons,Kris' Caesar Dressing. $8. Lk3 Do C1/ 00/ LYJC)b 1 / : utJ eneaeneden HIGHWAYROBBERY.NET PAGE 05 • • A-DV/1/10d 5 c,006 4r/v44 Pan Seared New Zealand Sea Bass Grilled Corn and Black Bean Relish, Chipotle Beurre Blanc, Seasonal Vegetables. $26. Grilled Organic Australian Lamb Strip Loin Horseradish Mashed Potatoes, Green Bean -Tomato Fondue, Tarragon Demi Glase. 528. Wasabi Root Crusted Alaskan Halibut Pineapple Beurre Blanc, Lemongrass Couscous, Sauteed Spinach. $26. • Organic Chicken Pasta Primavera McGrath Organic Vegetables, Light White Wine Cream Sauce, Spinach Fettuccini. $20. Barbeque Braised Prime Beef Short Ribs Garlic Mashed Potatoes, Tropical Slaw. $25. Natural Omaha New York Steak Melted Blue Cheese, Potatoes O'Brien, Grilled Zucchini $30. Chamomile Smoked Duck Breast and Confit Sauteed Baby Spinach, Mandarin Coulis, Imported Brie Infused Orzo. $28. Grilled Hawaiian Mahi Mahi Indonesian Fried Rice, Roasted Pineapples, Grilled Asparagus, Curry Coconut Sauce. S26. Organic Grass Fed Filet Mignon Mango Steak Sauce, Asparagus Risotto, Seasonal Vegetables. $33. 1/2 Roasted Shelton Chicken Natural Herb Jus, Black Wax Cheddar Macaroni and Cheese, Sauteed Rocket. $20. Pistachio Crusted Wild Salmon Brie and Sun dried Tomato.Orzo, Sugar Snaps, Strawberry Balsamic Reduction: $26. Ve sway•& s;a4 Wildlife Lake Elk Gouda and Andouelle Sausage Gratin, Glazed Carrots, Grilled Onion Demi Glas. $30. Sour Fruit Braised Ono Steamed Rice and Saut6ed Spinach $26. Veal T -.Bone Baked Potatoe, Garlic Green Beans, Exotic Apricot Mushroom Demi. $35. Hearty Seafood Saffron Mussels, Shrimp, Bay Scallops, Calamari, Fish"Stock, Rustic Toast Points. $26. X15 09/06/2006 17:00 0000000000 HIGHWAYROBBERY.NET 7r� aCO/ S • • .i PAGE 07 i Small Plates Coconut Shrimp Skewers with Grilled Pineapple and a Chipotle Vinaigrette $9.95 Barbecue Spiced Scallops, Garlic Mashed Potatoes and a Roasted Corn Sauce $8.95 Miso Soup, Soy Broth served with Tofu, Scallions and Seaweed $2.95 Shrimp Tempura with Sticky Rice and Soy Chili Sauce $7.95 Calamari Roll, Papaya Salsa & Wasabi Creme Fraiche $7.95 Rock Shrimp Potstickers, Vegetable Slaw, Oriental Butter Sauce $9.95 Soft Shell Crab Tempura Style with Minn Glaze $8.95 served with Wasabi Mashed Potatoes Fresh Mixed Vegetable Tempura served with Sticky Rice $4.95 Seared Ahi, Sesame -Chili Noodles, Mirin Glaze $8.95 Crab Cakes with Roasted Red Bell Pepper Cream $12.95 Rainbow Plate- Salmon, Ahi, Shrimp, Yellowtail, $10.95 Sticky Rice with Chili Dipping Sauce Greens Charred Ahi, Baby Greens, Roasted Red Bell Pepper Vinaigrette, Olives; Onions, and Tomatoes $10.95 Baby Greens, Tomato Concasse, Hot House Cucumbers, $5.95 Red Onions, Balsamic Herb Dressing Arugula & Baby Greens- Goat Cheese, Roasted Pecans, $7.95 Tomatoes & An Herb Dressing Romaine and Radicchio, Garlic Bruschetta, Parmesan $6.95 & Romano with Caesar Dressing 705- Baby Greens, Artichokes, Tomatoes, Feta Cheese $7.95 Herb Vinaigrette, Olive Flat Bread Chinois Chicken, Chopped Greens, Vegetables, Wontons, $8.95 Spicy Thai Dressing Pizza Italian Sausage. Caramelized Onions, Tomatoes, Marinara•Sauce $8.95 Margherita Pizza- Basil, Tomatoes, Mozzarella & Tomato Sauce $6.95 BBQ Pizza- Red Onion, Grilled Breast of Chicken, $8.95 z a ells, Topatoes, & Cilantro Leaves Proscutflbza- Mozzarella, Tomatoes, Fresh Black Pepper 38.95 & Basil Oil Thai Chicken Pizza- Scallions,' Carrots & Mozzarella Cheese Pepperoni and Mozzarella $8.95 $6.95 • los ) 4 o t' •-/ • • V I J/f•s• Pastas & Noodles Mired Vegetables, Crushed Tomatoes, Herbs Chili Flakes, Fussih Pasta Lunghi • i5 Szechwan Beef Vegetables & Orzo Pasta $14.95 Charred Ahi with Pasta Puttanesca, Olives Capers, Tomatoes, and Onions $16.95 Chicken Penne, Roma Tomatoes & Romano $12.95 in a Garlic Cream Sauce Spicy Cashew Shrimp, Stir Fry Vegetables, & Noodles $14.95 in a Cilantro Thai Sauce Lobster Ravioli- Pesto Cream, Roasted Red Bell Pepper Coulis $15.95 Large Plates • Filet Mignon, Tempura Onions, Spinach and $19.95 Bordelaise Sauce, Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes Sauteed Barbecue Spiced Salmon, Sauteed M redMushrooms, $17.95 Roasted Corn Salsa, Mashed Potatoes with Barbecue Butter Seared Ahi, Miran-Butter Sauce, Roasted Shiitake Mushrooms, $17.95 Cucumber Relish, Sushi Rice Pave Roasted Scallops over Wild Mushrooms and Cannellini $16.95 Stew, with Creamy Parmesan Asparagus Teriyaki Breast of Chicken, Steamed Rice, Cashew Broccoli $15.95 Five Pepper Roasted Chilean Seabass, Cucumber Tomato Relish, Crab Green Onion Mashed Potatoes $18.95 Sauteed Shrimp. Garlic Mashed Potatoes, Roasted Sweet $16.95 Tomatoes, Spinach, Creole Butter Sauce Mongolian Beef Tenderloin Stirfry, Sizzle Sauce. $14.95 Assorted Vegetables, Steamed Rice Honey BBQ Glazed Chicken Breast, Sauteed Spinach, $15.95 Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes and Mesquite Potato Chips Blackened Ahi: Sake Sauce, Sesame Vegetable Stitjty $17.95 and Wasabi Mashed Potatoes Chef Special: Cucumber Salad, Miso Soup, (2)Coconut Shrimp, Stir -Fried Mixed Vegetables, Steamed Rice and Flavored Mochi Sliced Petite Filet seasoned Mongolian Style $24.95/person Teriyaki Chicken Breast $22.95/person Costsgefee: $10 Wsata aecej%Amara*E Mi, C rlawd V4 %Price Mondays: SaltRice Sushi 5-1e.;* Two fur One II Cmil It Bar INtetdaye: Ptin1e Rib (Haber aur ten S3if Tes.-Sat S:90 -7:O m % price aural Sunday: Alt II Can Rat Scutt $19.95 per porton Shane and Scott McCatpa, Pr ddon Rick Tars, BtonstM COef 1 / tibi '20 b 1 f: bb WM0E100000 HIGHWAYROBBERY. NET PAGE Q9 PATRICK MOLLOY'S Cir-ri 1 ifs APPETIZERS SEASONAL SOUP OF THE DAY 4.25 SWUM" FILLED WONTONS over a,atcu.mber 148.1.4a, 6.00 FRESH BAKED CHICKEN POT PIE with, grated, coir' bread. 5.25 GRILLED CHICKEN KABOB with' a.Thai. peanutsa<.cce. 5.95 'BREADED MARYLAND CRAB CAKES waft, gv41..ed,pear a.Kda,whole, g►uirvnuistmeri.sauce- 8.25 SEARED AHI TUNA a..1.4 two -Ina -4.v salcui, U Lth, ull. greeny 8.75 SALADS SPINACH SA LAD wait, whitt, rrukawoom4,cold/ a, warns/bacon, vwicwrgrett , 6.00 PIER AVE. CHOPPED SA LAD tce.berra- artcL roman lettuce, with. cur44 nber, t:rma.ta nuL4iWOoms; ga,rbowgro' bean* A si<xigo- tee s& fr a, red, wine/ ei vi,na ett' 6.00 WARM GOAT CHEESE SALAD over be y greens.wi#3,,wa.anutj,avid a, c uiotpargrur vi.wizairetiz, . 6.50 pAsrA/RISOTTO CAREL LI NI wuw,yh,ruor»t sw and. wev dried, to mattes, 7.25 SPINACH AND RICOTTA RAVIOLI witivbrown,buttprand pivwrt<tty 7.95 LINGUINI w ttiv i Z1cv downy and/ a. wh w (r.� garlic/ gauze, 8.50 ROAST DUCK RISOTTO wail, a, Rend, of{resh,herbs' 10.95 ENTRIES' GRILLED/STEAMED SEASONAL VEGETABLES wail, herirbaMfna.tt.rice, a vtd., v USht vegettxb1e. p uree, 10.25 FREE -RA NGE CHICKEN served - with, pattxtoey aid. Chef s choice' vegeta. k r 13.50 FRESH GRILLED SALMON w ah, ba smatx, ,ues bila ck. beai.+1.4,, gree", arizo,,,s• and�an,avor-acZo-ci,iau-sa.i.;a, 13.00 SEABASS nta,,tina it'd, Lw rrs:rin, aver stir- - fried, vegetla ble s, a n& curried. rite. 1 4.2 5 CALIFORNIA HALIBUT cruazd wah, hagrelniAty Jail& over a,ttrma tr cou1i y with, stt:a4 ecl. sp+.r v 14.95 RIB -EYE STEAK wi,t3v ricin& rb-a stpota.toeya„r.&b Ia.ice.green,I>ezuve 16.50 RACK OF AUSTRALIAN LAMB with, a, masted, crust; nta,shed, pots bey avid, steamed/ asparrag«y 1 7. 95 Fr LET MIGNON with, ntasheci,Potatoes, a,vd' 'waxy fUwshmomscu ce, 18.25 GRILLED PORTERHOUSE STEAK tut:di/ad to ized bakP,d,potattrand, corn.-on,-the-cob-wi tiv herb- butter 19.95 Exec Chef Ch414,Bcycelt4:41.cr • /176 oy WINE Lrsr 'VINE 8Y THE GLASS Donna in& Ste,. M Brut Chcunpa.g.vi Belvedere, Chardonnay DeLoach• 'Sono»tci Cuivee% Chardonnay Silverado-Satkvig-nory Bia-nc' rove' Street Whcte'Z infanzi.di Sonoina,Creek' Rinot Noir Fete" 'Ea.gle-Peak,' Heriot Segh.eiio-Zin{xnd e.L WINE 8Y ME SOME 'Doinc2r eM u:lielle Brut Roecierer tstate- VecweiCliguat!Yellow Label) Brut Vew,e.'Ctigu.ot'Goid.Label, VintnerfReserve%, 88 Whctp.N/�.n� Robert -Mondavi Fwrte.Bia.t& Ferrar(,-Carano-Fuhne' B 1041C/ tc' Sanford/ Saavigtto-n,BIztno a y wiu4, Sa.aw%gf urw Blanc. Kett -weir Pi tot Urig�,o- Ra ce"-delGn,enti''Fru&; PinotGrigi,o- Bea.ule.eu:Vittyards-'Ca.rrter+o$% Cha,rd.ovu'tay. Ray n on&Cha.rckYnnay Saardd C ha.rdanvux y KevinaiLfacktiarv'Caaneloi' Cha,.-dovu-tay �.irta 1/2 battle' /T 4.75 4.00 4.75 4.75 4.00 4.75 4.75 4.25 19.00 29.00 46.00 24.00 65.00 22.00 25.00 24.00 28.00 16.00 31.00 18.00 22.00 26.00 35.00 Rei;k11)41, Raynt.ond. Rio ,t Nair 18.00 Ken.daZLfa ks 'VintnerrReserve) Pinot Noir 26.00 MixhaLync 1,Bordeau4. 16:00 •CaiwCwvee' 'nerlot-cabernet blend) 28.00 Le*Ja netle*Merlot 17.00 Shafer Merlot • 34.00. Stsag%'Leap 'etite.Syrah' 33.00 Beaulieu,VivvycwcW 'Rutherford; Cabernet 24.00 Kendall/Jacksow'Vintner'v1e/servei Caber►tiet 32;00 Cha.rles'Krug, 'Vintax Seiectto-w' Cabernet, 88 42.00 Far Niente-Cabernet 58.00 Ntat St. George.Bu.rgan iy . 27;0p 1/2bottle, 14.00 Lia "'Please have this communication agenized for the next council meeting on September 12, 2006. September 3, 2006 City of Hermosa Beach Mayor and Council Members. 1315. Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: CODE VIOLATION & RECISSION OF CUP HERMOSA PAVILION, 1601 PCH. Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of Council: the Labor Day weekend, the owner of the Hermosa Pavilion solicited "event parking" for his violates the PDP, Parking Plan, and Municipal Code. A chamber event is not an se to operate this garage as an auxiliary parking lot. Compliance issues have been at issue since August of 2005, and continue. Code prohibits the "reducing diminishing or elimination of existing required off-street parking." Municipal Zoning Code 17.44.050 (Unlawful to reduce available parking) A commission's decision in April of 2006 was upheld in July of 2006. The city required owner to provide 2 -hour free parking to all patrons. SHOOK, owner of the "Pavilion" refused to implement this policy voluntarily. Forcing residents to cope with conditions over an (11) month period. Once again, the owner of the Pavilion is in direct violation of municipal zoning code by diminishing parking availability. Shook's parking garage has created a marked increase in vehicular traffic along 16th Street. A review of the PDP and Parking Plan is essential. Nuisance conditions have become a chronic pattern, action needs expediting. Rescind CUP 06-04 (Conditional Use Permit for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with restaurant, together with amendment to Parking the Plan) of which modifies the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion. This document approved by commissioners contains misinformation. For multiple reasons this proposal for an 8,000 sq ft mega restaurant -bar will burden residents, and is an incompatible use for the area. Rescind CUP 06-04 Parking Plan amendment: The parking plan is flawed by design, and deters and reduces one's ability to self -park their vehicle. The "double parking" or "valet parking" of vehicles is a counter productive strategy. By design it diminishes parking availability on city streets, causing spillover. The general public prefers to retain control over the keys to their vehicle, not valet park, or waste time waiting upon an attendant to retrieve their vehicle, prior to exiting the building. The policy will displace customers who will resort to parking on surface streets within residential neighborhoods. The "approved" parking plan is flawed by design. MODIFY THE PARKING PLAN TO ALLOW ALL CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES TO SELF PARK THEIR VEHICLES. A restaurant usage with alcohol consumption compounds impacts. Hours of operation that extend beyond 9:00pm are undesirable for neighborhood. Tenants should NOT have authority to operate later than 9:00pm, on any night of the week with the exception of the gym tenant due to the building's proximity to residential neighborhoods. So • • A neighborhood street (16th Street) is being converted into a main traffic artery to service the commercial corridor. Chronic impacts such as traffic noise, traffic volume, traffic flow, and parking impacts are progressive, and disruptive. On August 16, 2006, a public works. hearing was conducted. 'A large number of residents from the "Hermosa Hills" attended this meeting. The consultant's report and recommendation defied creditability. The consultant from AAE and the Director of Public Works concluded the installation of the traffic signal had not changed traffic volumes entering 16 Street east of PCH. In addition, "Since NO significant volume changehas occurred further analysis is not warranted." Once again, residents were denied consideration, and resolution. Consistently, the city has acted to accommodate, enhance, and safeguard the economic interests of Mr. Shook, owner of the Pavilion, without consideration to the quality of life or property rights of residents in the surrounding area. The imbalance is very disturbing, and results in negative impact for residents residing in the surrounding area. For over a year, we have invested our time, and have encountered a charade of committee meetings, delays and counterfeit reports. This communication is evidence of a formal written complaint, which requires attention of council at the next meeting on September 12, 2006. Respectfully, Patty Egerer Resident St s Lisa Brannan & DanAlinan 1610 Raymond Ave. (Northeast corner of 16th & Raymond) Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 September 11, 2006 Mayor & City Council: Peter Tucker, Michael Keegan, J.R. Revicsky, Sam Edgerton, Kit Bobko and Steve Burrell, City Manager 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Appeal the Planning Commission Decision Gentlemen, Please consider appealing the Planning Commissions decision to grant the C.U.P. for the Hermosa Pavilion. I am writing to share my thoughts regarding the lack of concern for the residential areas adjacent to the Hermosa Pavilion building. It was clear at the Planning Commission meeting that there was a strong sense among the residents in the adjacent neighborhoods, that we are extremely concerned about the impacted by this building's potential restaurant facility. Our concerns are about the city granting yet one more potential problem in our community a liquor license, lengthy hours of operation, and massive square footage with alack of required parking. It seems that our concerns are not being heard. I am asking again, DO YOU NOT HEAR US? PLEASE LISTEN TO OUR CONCERNS AND ACT UPON THEM WITH THE SAME REGARDS THAT YOU ARE WITH THE OWNER OF THE HERMOSA PAVILION. The problems already exist down at the Pier Plaza and at the nightclub 705 underneath the Vons Parking. Why knowingly would you want another neighborhood to endure the same problems you are currently aware of? I have, in a previous letter, mentioned an incident that occurred at the Kid's Kabaret. My understanding is that multiple bands were invited to perform at the Kid's Kabaret for the younger teenage crowd as this facility appropriately has no liquor license. The word got out about this particular performance on "My Space" on the internet and it brought an older crowd. My understanding is that the owner and the security they hired were unable to handle the swelling crowd. The Fire Department and Police Department were called in. The event was shut down and the owner was fined and arrested for having too many occupants. If this can occur at the Kid's Karbaret without the influence of alcohol, just imagine the chaos that could occur when alcohol is introduced. I urge you to please work with us in keeping Hermosa neighborhoods a great place to live, raise families and feel safe. With Great Frustration, Lisa Brannan and Daniel Brannan SUPPLEMENTAL �k INFORMATION • 944 15TH PLACE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 R : CLOSING HOURS FOR STILLWATER DEAR HIB! CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ; - THE HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION HAS APPROVED 12 MIDNIGHT, 7 -DAYS -WEEK CLOSING HOURS FOR STILLWATER, IN MY OPINION, THE CLOSING HOURS NEED TO BE EARLIER SO AS TO GUARANTEE WW IMPACT ON THE CITY. OR NEIGHBORHOOD! THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPEAL THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION. 1 SEVERAL OTHER FINE DINING RESTAURANTS. IN THE SOUTH BAY CLOSE AT 12 MIDNIGHT ON WEEKENDS AND AT .11 PBM! ON WEEKDAYS! L WOULD LIKE TO SEE STILLWATER'DO THE SAME! =- SINCERELY' • BARBARA Ross SUPPLEMENTAL 9k INFORMATION `-'1‘ ou,vl eA.)r1c14evs l ve CeS Mede rr v10 re 4 Con or S toja,f?,/ �o ✓GlK�� D IQQm Ct-ei 0 r•A Gv " CI 4e, d 1.110 e c lam, II 4.44 74 44 -w‘e cloce 6110. /0 • s . e•St ,..,. frtekek•Cs `•etU&-i- ue /ue an tem* ./ Lti siidii.e»k thyt )#e' wraF ;/ .t /raanr Cadiee iso 17 3f• //0. (h") 9;7 3r62-• SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION k September 13, 2006 Gene Shook, President Shook Development Corporation 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 300 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 City of 2lermosa l�eacly Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3885 RE: REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION ON AUGUST 15, 2006, TO APPROVE, WITH MODIFICATIONS, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT, STILL WATER CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN BISTRO, AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE ALLOCATION OF USES WITHIN THE I-IERMOSA PAVILION AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Dear Mr. Shook: This letter is to inform you that a request for a review and reconsideration before the City Council has been filed by Councilrnember Tucker and Mayor Edgerton of the decision described above by the Planning Commission at its meeting on August 15, 2006. The request, filed September 12, 2006, has been set for a Public Hearing before the Hermosa Beach City Council on Tuesday, October 10, 2006, at 7:30 P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. This hearing will be held in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 1315 Valley Drive. If you wish to submit any written evidence to be considered by the City Council at this meeting, we request that these items be received by the Planning Division of the Community Development Department by noon on Wednesday, October 4, for inclusion in the City Council agenda packets. Legal notification and posting of the property will be handled by staff on or before September 28,2006. A. staff report may be obtained on or about Thursday, October 5, 2006, at the end of the business day, from the Planning Division of the Community Development Department. On or about Friday, October 6, it will be on the City's website at www.hermosabch.org. Please address any questions to the Community Development Department at 310-318-0242. S incerely, ackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk 3 10-318-0204 cc City Council Community Development Director City Manager 55 Charles and Carole Doherty 1600 Ardmore Avenue Unit 234 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310 318 7979 charles.f.doherty@att.net August 14, 2006 Planning Commission Hermosa Beach, CA Re: Making 16th Street one-way west 4/2 sEIVEr: AUG 1 5 2000 COM. DEV DEP I In evaluating the pros and cons of making 16th Street one-way West between Prospect and PCH you should consider the impact on 16th Street between PCH and Ardmore. 1. There has been a significant increase in traffic in both directions since the 24 Hour Fitness Center opened. 2. Southbound drivers on PCH are using 16th Street and Ardmore as a bypass around the light at Pier Avenue. 3. There is a student crossing for Hermosa Valley School at 16th and Ardmore. Any additional traffic increases the possibility of any accident. With all that is going on in this area I think it would be poor planning to reduce the traffic flow options by making 16th Street one-way. Charles Doherty Hermosa Beach Charles Doherty Hermosa Beach, CA 5�O SUPPLE ENTAL. INFORMATION- rage 1 oI Z . • Jackie Drasco From: ronwamba@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 7:02 PM To: Jackie Drasco Subject: Problems on 16th Street I am requesting that the following email and attached pictures be forwarded to the City Manager and if appropriate the City Council. I also request that an agenda item be added to a forthcoming meeting that will deal with the issues contained in this email. The issues below have been brought to the Planning Commission and they indicated that many of these types of issues need to be forwarded to either the City Manager or the City Council. If for some reason the pictures do not appear or there is a problem I can deliver a hard copy to the City Clerk. Therefore, based upon statements at the Planning Commission meeting I am requesting that the following issues be addressed and resolved. am a resident residing at 1600 Ardmore #213 at the Commodore Condo's. My home is the closest to the parking structure of the new building housing the Pavillion's parking structure. Sixteenth street (16th st) has become a virtual drag strip, raceway, and new parking lot. I have attached a number of pictures taken from my balcony which clearly illustrate the increase in the volume of traffic and the disregard for parking regulations. We also see few police patrols on the steet. Last night at 6 pm I turned at the new PCH traffic light west onto 16th street and headed down the hill. I traveled about three car lengths and the traffic was stopped in both directions as people tried to get into the Pavillion parking garage. When I finally had a clear road in front of me, I continued down the hill when a pickup truck heading east and trying to turn into the Pavilion parking garage pulled across the road and blocked the entire road while he waited to get into the parking structure. He tried to block the entire street. I was able to go around the front of his truck and he started swearing at me and was trying to come after me, but traffic stopped him. Cars turning into the Pavillion refuse to let cars going straight down 16th street go through. There is a parking turn lane on the north side of 16th street but it is not used because cars can not make the tight turn into the garage. They think there is a 3 way stop in the front of the Pavillion parking garage. I am 66 and who needs this. Meanwhile, the street remained blocked in both directions and other cars were waiting/parking in the VON's loading area. We are aware that both the Planning Commission and the City Council approved the changes to the parking in the Pavillion that require 2 hours free parking. That was a positive move but it is just not working. It is too hard to enter the Pavillion parking garage. Come out for a few days and see for yourself. The worst time of the day is 5 pm to 7 pm but the problems continue up to 2am in the morning. Customers of the Pavillion's parking garage peal their tires in and out of the parking garage and tear up and down sixteenth street. Car horns are continuously blaring in the early evening and that continues until 2 am in the morning. Truck drivers of 18 wheelers have started blowing their horns (very loud) in order to get cars parking in the Von's loading area moved. This is right outside our windows. Car owners are allowed to run their radios wide open, like boom boxes, while in the Pavillion garage and upon leaving. Night before last someone was working on their car at 2 am which was parked across the street. This woke me up and I watched a person go between the Pavillion garage and the car which was under the street light. The guy working on the car at 2 am in the morning was wearing a shirt that had 'SECURITY' across the back. The Planning Commission was assured both verbally and 7/27/2006 S9 rage L of Z • • in writing that the garage has staff who oversee it. What are these 'parking professionals' doing? Fitnness Center patrons are also walking and standing outside the parking garage on the streets up to and past 2 pm. These people are really noisy and they yell right outside our windows. Can't get much sleep anymore. Last Monday, the HB Police had someone on the curb right outside our window at 11 pm. Guess they were dealing with a drinking issue as we have many that go up and down our streets between 11 pm and 3am in the morning. Another late night for us. The above issues go on every day of the week. The Pavillion Parking Garage has cars on the right side trying to exit to the left and cars from both east and west trying to get into the garage. What a mess. The design of the garage entry is surely lacking and the existing turn lane is not usable. Maybe our city engineer should evaluate the access at 6 pm in the evening and propose a better solution. Cars and semi's trucks park in the red zone on 16th street in front of the Commodore Condo's. Appears there has been little or no effort on the part of the Pavillion ownership to encourage their patrons to use the parking garage. Because of the problems and wait lines getting into the garage, patrons are parking elsewhere. They park all over the streets in front of residences. If the Pavillion has so much parking available why don't the patrons use it? When I place calls to the police they may or may not show up and it might be an hour later. Does not help much when a semi is outside your window with its engine running or cars are in the Von's loading area late at night with their lights on shining in our windows. Parking control has been doing a fair job but many times they also take an hour to show up. If there is an emergency in the city it must come first, but I have seen city police cars go around illegally parked cars and trucks after I have called in an issue and they just continue down the street. Guess that is not their job? I was assured by the Police Chief and Lt. Lance Jaakota that our problems would be addressed in a timely manner when we requested assistance. Service was good for a while but lately response has been very slow or non existant. Unless our area has increased police patrols problems will only increase. We need relief on 16th street right now. Some citizen suggestions: 1. Position an unmarked police car on the street to ticket the speeders, the noise makers, and the drunks. Fines could be used to hire an officer. 2. Lower the speed limit on 16th street to some reasonable value such as 15 or 20 mph and enforce it. 3. Make 16th street a one way street. Not ideal but a solution that has worked in other areas in Hermosa Beach. 4. Require Parking Control to make some passes up/down the street at prime times and ticket people parking in illegal parking areas such in the Von's truck unloading area. 5. Consider placing speed strips/bumps on 16th street so that both the trucks and cars have to slow down. 6. Make parking on 16th street resident sticker parking only and on Pacific Coast Hwy in front of residences/condo's resident sticker parking only. 7. Make 16th street a quiet zone so the patrons of the Pavillion and cars or trucks using horns can be ticketed at any hour and enforce it. S. Make responding to a problem reported by the community regarding parking, speeding or the Pavillion a priority. No one appears to be doing anything right now. 7/27/2006 Page 3 of 28 • • We know that this is not a perfect world and change does take time. We only ask that some cares enough to address issues that are real and continuing and that has been expressed by so many local residents in the last few planning and council meetings. The last Planning Commission meeting brought out at least 40+ people to speak to the parking, speeding, and other issues related to the Pavillion and the area surrounding it, including the request to open a lounge and restaurant in the Pavillion. Right now selling liquor at that location should be the last choice for the City Council. The residents of the area do not support this and seek relief from current problems before addressing any new issues. We want our former quality of life back. Attached are a few pictures taken from my balcony of the numerous illegally parked cars and trucks and the confusion on the street that they cause. Sorry for the quality, but if requested I can provide many more and of a higher quality. 1 provided approximately 70 pictures to the Planning Commission. I would be happy to provide any additional information that is needed and would also be available for more details. Thank you for listening, Ron Miller 1600 Ardmore #213 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310-937-9052 ron_wamba@verizon.net ronwamba@aol.com 7/27/2006 • Traffic at 6 pm or so. Note SUV illegally parked. • rage 4 of 1,?3 One of the many traffic jams on 16th St. 7/27/2006 rage Jot26 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 G► Page 6 of 28 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 LZ Page 7 of 28 Truck blocking the street in the Morning. 7/27/2006 More pictures of the traffic on 16th 7/27/2006 C� Page 9 ot This is part of the 5:30 pm crowd 7/27/2006 6,C Page 10 of 223 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/21/2006 Yage 11 of 12S Car parking illegally in Von's loading area in morning. 7/27/2006 C� Page 12 of 28 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 Page 13 of 28 .1...,.:;•-•.:Fg!.;'?'.9..n'f•;,.?'• • " ?.s "raPitw- - Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 61 l'age 14 ot 223 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 74-6 Page 15 of 28 .s.n. • % <T4,0024,-.0 • - -•• - '14E;J;E:A'A' Truck parking illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 7A1 • rage lb of 2S Car unloading illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 rage i / of Lo Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 �-3 rage 16 of l� Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 rage 19 OT 26 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 • ": r ‘14%.120* iszir 11.12111k* mik, tole rage zu 01 Lo Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 rage Li tit Lo Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 rage LL 01 LO Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 rage Li 01 40 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 qg r d6CL9 Ut .LO Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 ru cLJ01LO Car parking illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 1a6c, Gv lit LU Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 r 4.6c L. Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area and Red Curb zone 7/27/2006 S3 Car parking illegally in Von's loaing area Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free. 7/27/2006 Sol Blumenfeld From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 7:39 AM To: Doug Vikser Cc: Sol Blumenfeld Subject: RE: Attention Planning commission Mr. Vikser - I will forward your email to our Planning Director so that he can provide your email to the Planning Commission for the hearing tonight. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Original Message From: Doug Vikser [mailto:vik.fam@verizon.net] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 5:50 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Attention Planning commission My name is Doug Vikser and I reside at 963 15th Place. I just found out that the Planning Commission is considering granting a CUP to a new restaurant at the Hermosa Pavilion that will have bar service until 2:00 am. As if people from the gym parking on 16th Street and speeding up and down the street isn't bad enough? Now you're going to allow "drunks" to walk our street and scream and yell at all hours of the night (in addition to speeding and driving drunk and endangering our children). What's is it going to take for you people to consider our problems? Does a child need to get killed on 16th Street (the way the 15 year boy was killed crossing PCH at 16th Street) to get your attention! After all the problems the neighborhood has had with the parking on 16th Street you are going to exacerbate it by allowing drunks on the street! You people need to start represent us and not just Gene Shook!! JUN G 2E6 Ce[V+. DEV. DEP [: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION • Stephen Burrell, City Manager • All Hermosa Couxcil Members (PieLv►n, ,z3 Coon.-, css a- A) 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 • JUN 9 9 2KS i!. DEV. DEP[ My name is Rosalind Bender-Thomen and I am a resident at 909 - 16th St. since 1969. My parents owned the International House of Pancakes for 14 years, so I've seen many changes locally. However, Hermosa was always a quiet, safe, and family-oriented city. Residents' safety and satisfaction were always foremost. Thus said, I would like you to please consider my comments, as they are the same feelings as many of my neighbors. June 16, 2006 The whole issue of the traffic light placed at 16th St. and P.C.H. came about quite unexpectedly and without prior notice given to the residents, or there would have been an outpouring of protests right from the beginning. When the residents of (and near) 16th Street did appear at 2 City Council meetings, we were heard, but no actions to resolve the on-going problems have been taken yet. And we now understand that the next Council meeting on June 20th is going to discuss the newly proposed "Alcohol Outlet Bar/Restaurant"??? If you grant license to an Alcohol Outlet Bar -Restaurant, you will be creating even more problems for the residents of 16th St. and surrounding areas !! We already can hear live music coming from Pier Ave. bars, the nearby Hotel, and the beach festivals. If you grant a new alcohol license on P.C.H., we will be dealing with even more noise, loud music, traffic & safety issues, parking problems, and possibly drunk drivers! Currently there are four major issues that we see now facing the residents of 16th Street: TRAFFIC, SAFETY, PARKING, & NOISE. TRAFFIC: Prior to the light, we already had more drive-through traffic going to & from Pacific Coast Hwy. and Prospect Ave. than our narrow, and not safely visible little street could handle! We still have constant traffic from neighboring Coast Pet Clinic, 2 schools' traffic, hotel traffic, and daily work traffic cutting to & from Pacific Coast Hwy. Now that the signal has been installed, we additionally have traffic to & from the Vons Shopping Center and the 24 -Hr. Fitness members, using our street as a thoroughfare. SAFETY: Additional traffic has brought additional safety issues to our street. We are living at the crest of 16th St., which is a "blind spot" for drivers. We already had problems getting out of our driveway, but now, thanks to the traffic light, and the 24 -Hr. Fitness members, people are speeding up & down our street, sometimes reaching 40-50 m.p.h.! We see people turning U-turns in the middle of the street, or in our driveways to get an available parking space. In the past, we lost 2 pets to the drive-thru traffic that unsafely speeds up and down our street at all hours. I can't begin to imagine the constant worry and fear that the parents of our street endure daily concerning their childrens' safety. And drivers ignore the Children Safety signs that have been placed. Additionally, we are a Neighborhood Watch community, but with so many strangers parking on our street now, safety has become an even bigger issue. It is now difficult to know who does not "belong" in our neighborhood, and who should be reported as being "suspicious". One young man was even observed, in the afternoon, completely changing his clothes behind his car! PARKING: We already have an on-going parking problem, as there is parki on onlyone side of the SUPPLEMENTAL 6 INFORMATION street. Many of us have verliall, narrow driveways that were not b>or new & larger vehicles, so we depend upon street parking. Gardeners, service people, contractors, and Coast Pet Clinic employees, already take up most of the available resident parking during the day. Now the 24 -Hr. Fitness Gym members are using our street for parking, and walking across the street at the light!! (see attached listing on last page) NOISE LEVELS: Additional traffic has also brought additional noise issues to our street. Even with dual - glazed windows throughout our home, we still hear traffic noises, car radios, and people standing outside their cars talking at all hours. The peacefulness of our little neighborhood has been invaded by constant noise and traffic. And adding a Bar -Restaurant on P.C.H. will only intensify the noise and traffic problems we are experiencing. The residents of 16th Street already have enough traffic problems, without more being created for us!! By installing the traffic light at the bottom of 16th Street, it is now easier for more people to use our street for parking or drive-through purposes! By doing so, safety, parking, and noise issues have doubled or tripled. We invite any or all of you to physically stand on 16th St. (not use a "box"), and witness for yourselves how much daily traffic and parking problems we are having that impact our lives. The hours of 3:00 - 8:00 p.m. are primetime hours for any of you to come and observe those issues about which we speak. Recently we spoke with Jeff Duclos, a candidate for City Council, who was in our neighborhood. During the 15 minutes that we spoke, he could not believe the amount of traffic and safety issues that we all observed. And twice we were almost run over by speeding drivers, middle-of-the-road drivers, or U-turn offenders racing for a parking space! As a School Counselor, long-time resident, and tax -payer, I believe, vote and support City government. And I strongly believe that the Hermosa Beach City Council can quickly resolve these issues facing 16th St. residents should they choose to do so. The Council has reached speedy resolutions in the past with other Hermosa streets. So please help us now ! Thank you for your time, consideration, and prompt action in this extremely important matter. We hope to see you all at the June 20th meeting. Sincerely, liceo<taix,„4 Rosalind and Alan Thomen 909 16th Street. The following list has been compiled from observations by Rosalind and Alan Thomen, only after observing peoplepark their car on 16th St. or Mira St., walk down the street, cross P.C.H. and walk to the 24 hr. Fitness Centex. All people witnessed had one or more of the following items with them: a towel, a gym bag, a water 2-7 bottle. All sightings were taken leen 2:00 - 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and vends: 1/23/06 Silver Toyota Scion 5KTF816 CA 1/30 Grey Chevy 510 Pickup 7J31163 CA 2/03 Maroon Chevy Impala II KINGS CA 3/02 Silver Isuzu Trooper 4HLU212 CA Yellow Ford Focus 45HP880 CA Silver Toyota Scion 5KTF816 CA 3/07 Silver Honda 4NKW381 CA 4/11 Bm Metallic 1971 Plymouth Duster 1BVR813 CA 4/20 Brn Metallic 1971 Plymouth Duster 1BVR813 CA (again) 4/26 Silver Honda 45ND796 CA 4/27 Silver Honda 4TTS686 CA 5/02 Blue/Gray Ford Explorer 42TM420 CA Dk Gray/Green Toyota T100 6X69138 CA (loitered 1.5 hrs. - HBPD) 5/03 White Ford Mustang 4YOU161 CA (2 hrs.) Red Toyota Celica GTS 4PZL526 CA 5/09 Dk Gray/Green Toyota T100 6X69138 CA White Ford Mustang 4YOU161 CA (again) 5/10 Blk Nissan Armada SE 5M22206 CA 5/11 1973 Plymouth Duster 1BYR813 CA 5/15 White Toyota Corolla 550X045 CA Dk Gray Saab 5MXP047 CA 5/16 Maroon Chevy Impala 5HJW727 CA (2 hrs.) Dk Gray Acura TL 5JFL232 CA White Mustang MAK 103 CA 5/17 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (comes almost every day) White Saturn 4YFY441 CA 5/18 White Dodge Explorer GJH373 CA Maroon Chevy Impala 5HJW727 CA (again) Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) 1973 Plymouth Duster 1BYR813 CA (again) 5/19 Blue Mercury Lynx FBM 191 CA 5/22 Blue Mercury Lynx FBM191 CA (again) Dk Gray/Green Toyota T100 6X69138 CA (again) 5/24 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) 5/25 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) Blk Saab convertible 5DMM037 CA 5/26 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) 5/27 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) 5/31 Silver Mustang convertible YUB214 CA 6/02 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) 6/05 Dk Gray/Green Toyota T100 6X69138 CA (hit Stop sign -HBPD called) BLK Toyota Paseo 2XHL 114 CA 6/09 Blk Hummer DKY1264 NY (again) We have repeatedly contacted the 24 Hr. Fitness Center about this on-going problem, and asked that a sign be displayed prominently, for their members, about the parking situation, Many more sightings have been made that were not written down, with many repeat offenders. Keeping a daily list is impossible, but we're hoping this list will assist you to arrive at a quick and positive resolution. e..�`4�'14....x, • James Lissner 2715 El Oeste Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 8-15-06 . Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Venue: Planning Commission Meeting of 8-15-06 Subject: 1601 PCH, CUP for Restaurant with Alcohol Commissioners: This is my second letter regarding this matter. I also wrote you on the 10th, and a copy of that letter has been included in your packet materials for today's meeting. At an earlier meeting, the applicant partners distributed copies of a Mother's Day Brunch menu from one partner's restaurant in San Juan Capistrano. Recently, I obtained a copy of the regular dinner menu from that restaurant. I have attached a copy of it as well as of the Mother's Day menu they previously distributed. When I reviewed those menus, they reminded me of the sophisticated menus submitted by some other CUP applicants in Hermosa Beach. I keep a file folder with old menus and have attached, for your review, copies of old menus from Patrick Molloy's and Pointe 705. The similarities (other than the prices) are striking. My point, in case it is not already clear, is that a sophisticated menu provides us no assurance as to how the place will be operated later on. Sincerely, SUP PLL d `t INFORMATION us..'ed yog ; ' fy esh bermes:.:. S'tillWat rouse a•'�ad: �Id teens; Maytag ;byre cheese cartidred p.'ecans, afs''pmrvincrlgrete., Baby: Srp ntach;:Sa1:01 `'... �i eil.apricots, ptstachros feta cheese earwnelraed onion,'•raspber'y! *AIl ,etifees rorzie';wth::b .eakfirst 41: .0.6.):0 C/i:ai p nils -art' 1 c%nry 'rrioked aari;ba#v; Trout Stiyeet potato hash poached e s; chr otle-cau1iS >6erYr:Ps Rr1l bananas;` vdnllla; bean infused ceeiiiri:> F i kgi t{ok d f ork= 'end, rIo n re ttctron,; t asted garlic potato; :as aragu . ' `a'rt�is' Rpieli R 6eye grid tis ; ag`blue chees'e,cruirt les;'le iionr lest;:aioli. • 0004 Prices Adults: $55 per person• p,lusttax Clilldrena2 itnd under) $13.per person plus tax(E rrcie.aiid:Dessert.) 7711A-ve ; \srC E Pao % Beer Battered Green Beans Lemon Zest -Caper Aioli, Spicy Tomato Fondue. $7. Beef Satay Skewers Sweet Soy Reduction. $9. Maryland Style Crab Cakes Blue Crab, Crawfish. Tails, Celeriac Slaw, Cajun Aioli. $11. Shanghai Shrimp in Lettuce Cup .Pan Seared Shrimp, Crimini Mushrooms, Pine Nuts, Cilantro, Soy Lime Sauce. $11. Tomato Basil Bisque Goat Cheese Toast Points. $9:. ic;50 oat Said French; Onion Soup Traditional Favorite. $7. StillWater House Salad Organic Mixed Greens, Bing Cherries, Maytag Blue Cheese, Candied Southern Pecans, Balsamic Vinaigrette. $8. Caramelized Bosch Pear and Montrachet Goat Cheese Salad Organic Field Greens, Red Onions, Carrots, Fried.Parsnips, Lavender Infused Ranch. $9.00 Traditional Caesar Salad Romaine Hearts, Parmesan Regianno, Focaccia Croutons, Kris' Caesar Dressing. $8. Q.3fzilio-d. Pan Seared New Zealand Sea Bass Grilled Corn and Black Bean Relish, Chipotle Beurre Blanc, Seasonal Vegetables. $26. Grilled Organic Australian Lamb Strip Loin Horseradish Mashed Potatoes,. Green Bean -Tomato Fondue, Tarragon Demi Glase. $28.. Wasabi Root Crusted Alaskan Halibut Pineapple Beurre Blanc, Lemongrass Couscous, Sauteed Spinach. $26. Organic Chicken Pasta Primavera McGrath Organic Vegetables, Light White: Wine Cream Sauce, Spinach Fettuccini. $20. Barbeque Braised Prime Beef Short Ribs Garlic Mashed Potatoes, Tropical Slaw. $25. Natural Omaha New York Steak Melted Blue Cheese, Potatoes O'Brien, Grilled Zucchini $30. Chamomile Smoked Duck Breast and. Confit Sauteed Baby Spinach, Mandarin Coulis, Imported Brie Infused Orzo. $28. Grilled Hawaiian Mahi Maki Indonesian Fried Rice, Roasted Pineapples, Grilled Asparagus, Curry Coconut Sauce. $26. Organic Grass Fed Filet Mignon Mango Steak Sauce, Asparagus Risotto, Seasonal Vegetables. $33. Roasted Shelton Chicken Natural Herb Jus, Black Wax Cheddar Macaroni and Cheese, Sauteed Rocket. $20. Pistachio Crusted Wild Salmon Brie and Sun dried Tomato.Orzo, Sugar Snaps, Strawberry Balsamic Reduction. $26. `15/7 Stir to &6o c iediao Wildlife Lake Elk Gouda and Andouelle Sausage Gratin, Glazed Carrots, Grilled Onion Demi Glas. $30. Sour Fruit Braised Ono Steamed Rice and Sauteed Spinach $26. Veal T Bone Baked Potatoe, Garlic Green Beans, Exotic Apricot Mushroom Demi. $35. Hearty Seafood Saffron Mussels, Shrimp, Bay Scallops, Calarnari, Fish•Stock, Rustic Toast Points. $26. Q3 C7p/ • • Small Plates Coconut Shrimp Skewers with Grilled Pineapple and a Chipotle Vinaigrette $9.95 Barbecue Spiced Scallops, Garlic Mashed Potatoes and a Roasted Corn Sauce $8:95 Miso Soup, Soy Broth served with Tofu, Scallions and Seaweed $2,95 Shrimp Tempura with Sticky Rice and Soy Chili Sauce $7.95 Calamari Roll, Papaya Salsa & Wasabi Creme Fraiche $7.95 Rock Shrimp Poistickers, Vegetable Slaw, Oriental -Butter Sauce $9.95 Soft Shell Crab Teinpura Style with Mirin Glaze $8.95 served with Wasabi Mashed Potatoes Fresh Mixed Vegetable Tempura served with Sticky Rice $4.95 Seared Ahi, Sesame -Chili Noodles, Mirin Glaze $8.95 Crab Cakes with Roasted Red Bell Pepper Cream • $12.95 Rainbow Plate- Salmon, Ahi, Shrimp, Yellowtail, $10.95 Sticky Rice with Chili Dipping Sauce Greens. Charred Ahi, Baby Greens, Roasted Red Bell Pepper Vinaigrette, Olives, Onions, and Tomatoes $10.95 Baby Greens, Tomato Concasse, Hot House Cucumbers, $5.95 Red Onions, Balsamic Herb Dressing Arugula & Baby Greens- Goat Cheese, Roasted Pecans, $7.95 Tomatoes &An Herb Dressing Romaine and Radicchio, Garlic Bruschetta, Parmesan $6.95 & Romano with Caesar Dressing 705- Baby Greens, Artichokes, Tomatoes, Feta Cheese $7.95 Herb Vinaigrette, Olive Flat Bread Chinois Chicken, Chopped Greens, Vegetables, Wontons, $8.95 Spicy Thai Dressing Pizza Italian Sausage, Caramelized Onions, Tomatoes, Marinara.Sauce . $8.95 Margherita Pizza- Basil, Tomatoes, Mozzarella & Tomato Sauce $6.95 BBQ Pizza- Red Onion, Grilled Breast of Chicken, $8.95 zzarella, Tosatoes, & Cilantro Leaves ' Proscut to'zza- Mozzarella, Tomatoes, Fresh Black Pepper $8.95 & Basil Oil Thai Chicken Pizza- Scallions`'CObts:&Mozzarella Cheese . $8.95 Pepperoni and Mozzarella $6.95 • Pastas & Noodles Mixed Vegetables, Crushed Tomatoes, Herbs, Chili Flakes, Fussili Pasta Lunghi " 'S Szechwan Beef Vegetables & Orzo Pasta $14.95 Charred Ahi with Pasta Puttanesca, Olives, Capers, Tomatoes, and Onions $16.95 Chicken Penne, Roma Tomatoes & Romano $12.95 in a Garlic Cream Sauce Spicy Cashew Shrimp, Stir Fry Vegetables, & Noodles $14.95 in a Cilantro Thai Sauce Lobster Ravioli- Pesto Cream, Roasted Red Bell Pepper Coulis Large Plates Filet Mignon, Tempura Onions, Spinach and Bordelaise Sauce, Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes $15.95 $19.95 Sauteed Barbecue Spiced Salmon, Sauteed Mixed Mushrooms, Roasted Corn Salsa, Mashed Potatoes with Barbecue Butter $17,95 Seared Ahi, Mirin Butter Sauce, Roasted Shiitake Mushrooms, $17.95 Cucumber Relish, Sushi Rice Pan Roasted Scallops over Wild Mushrooms and Cannellini Stew, with Creamy Parmesan Asparagus $16.95 Teriyaki Breast of Chicken, Steamed Rice, Cashew Broccoli $15.95 Five Pepper Roasted Chilean Seabass, Cucumber Tomato Relish, Crab Green Onion Mashed Potatoes $18.95 Sauteed Shrimp, Garlic Mashed Potatoes, Roasted Sweet $16.95 Tomatoes, Spinach, Creole Butter Sauce Mongolian Beef Tenderloin Stirfry, Sizzle Sauce, $14.95 Assorted Vegetables, Steamed Rice Honey BBQ Glazed Chicken Breast, Sauteed Spinach, $15.95 Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes and Mesquite Potato Chips Blackened Ahi, Sake Sauce, Sesame Vegetable Stirfry $17.95 and Wasabi Mashed Potatoes Chef Special: Cucumber Salad, Miso Soup, (2)Coconut Shrimp, Stir -Fried Mixed Vegetables, Steamed Rice and Flavored Mochi Sliced Petite Filet seasoned Mongolian Style $24.95/person Teriyaki Chicken Breast $22.95/person Corkage fee: 310 We gladly accept American Express, Masto,Card and Visa % Price Mondays: Half Price Sushi 5-11;,1st Twofer One Ti C41 It Bar Tuesdays: Prime Rib dinner for two S lues. -Sat 5:004:OOpm % price Sushi Sundays: Mi 13 Can Eat Sushi $19.95 per person Shane and Scott McColgan, Proprietors Rick Reyes, Executive Chef Ls • • PATRICK MOLLOY'S °Jr -c/ I , APPETIZERS SEASONAL SOUP OF THE DAY 4.25 SHRIMP FILLED WONTONS o-vera,cucu,mbersajiia, 6.00 FRESH BAKED CHICKEN POT PIE withgrilieddcorn, bread, 5.25 GRILLED CHICKEN KA130B with,a,Thai.pea.vuctsaticce, 5.95 BREADED MARYLAND CRAB CAKES wit-h.grilec,pecu-a.r►d,a.whole, groan, rnu sta.rd, satiuz 8.25 SEARED AHI TUNA and, two- 7.)ea4v salad. tuctiv fa..a green* 8.75 SALADS SPINACH SA LAD with, white. rfu,vsh+vo,n artd. a, warm, bacon vi,vtauyst-te, 6.00 PIER AVE. CHOPPED SALAD cceberg, art& rcrrnazvtE,Lettuce,wfitlycucctiv 2yer, tona.to; nuu4hroorn* gnu-borvr�o-bea,ws; Asuzgo-cheese, $ a, red, wirte,vu1.aicrette, 6.00 WARM GOAT CHEESE SALAD over baby grezn%wch wainutyand, a, cha,vnpa.gne, vun°' 6.50 PASTA/RISOTTO CAPE LLIN I with, wad, u4 hroin,s,avtaLsunidri.ed,tcrnzccttes• 7.25 SPINACH AND RICOTTA RAVIOLI with, brawn. butterp;,yte mill, 7.95 LINGUINI witty Mani,Aa,dams- an.da,whi.t winecga,riiosauce 8.50 ROAST DUCK RISOTTO uiit1i,a,Rend of fresh,herirs, 10.95 ENTREES GRILLED(STEAMED SEASONAL VEGETABLES with, herb- iiasmat'vrice, artda,Light ve .tabJeipuree- 10.25 FREE-RANGE CHICKEN sewed, with/ 13.50 FRESH GRILLED SALMON with, basmatiprice,, irlack,ireaws g-reen,onions aid a.n. a voca4o"ci2a.rt tnr salsa, 13.00 SEA BA SS marinated, in, wt.ircev over stir- -fried, vegetadries, axtd cu.rried rice 14.25 CALIFORNIA HALIBUT cvwsted,with,haleinut3,andsageovera,tomato- cou,li'ywitivstea.ned spinach 14.95 RIB -EYE STEAK with, rttstta roastpotatoey blue -Lake green, bea.ny 16.50 RACK OF AUSTRALIAN LAMB with,aroasteabcrust, mc7sheci✓ potatoes a41.dsteamed,a4pa.v'acga& 17.95 FILET MIGNON with, vnashed.potatoes- a,,ui, wiidwueskrvv,n,sauce/ 18.25 GRILLED PORTERHOUSE STEAK with'a,twi,ce,baked potato -and corn, on twco$wicilyherb-butter .19.95 Exec ChefChrt.kBecchZtur /2766.__L S" klItlE LIST WI E5YTYEGLASS Doom vne) Ste:. M ichell e' B rut C havrp agn,& 4.7 5 Belved.ere,Chardonna y 4.00 DeLauck 'S& mo/Cwvee) Chardo-r4'4 y . 4.75 Savera.do-Sauvi n,o-wBIa,nc, 4.75 Grote- Street W hite' Z 4.00. Sc to-Ana%Creep Pivot Noir 4.75 Fet3er'Ea. Peak' Merlot - 4.75 Seghe4rio-Zi,vtir nde.L 4.25 wIN��Y7W 13(97-77E C/ran bagne/Sparkl.rnJ ltl Domae,vn&St. M iu:hell& Brut 7Zoederer Estate Vecwe,CU uotLalieV Brut Veuve,Cl gaot'Gold Label Vivitvners-12e erve%, 88 1/2 bottom 19.00 29.00 46.00 24.00 65.00 White) Wile, 12obertMondavv Fume/ Na n& 22.00 Ferrar&-Cara,no- Fume- Bla.n.G 25.00 Sanford/ S ativignon/Blanc, 24.00 Cay into- Sacw n.Bla.nc. 28.00 Kettwve, r P. %vwt Grigio- 16.00 gonco-del 0ne,vvw,'FruityLvwri, io PtG- 31.00 B eaa dLew V fnyards-'C arneros-' Chardonnay 18.00 12.ayn ond.Cha.rdonnay 22.00 Sanford/Chavcion ay 26.00 KendalLJacksow'Cc'.nelot Chas-dovunuy , 35.00 Rea 1ih n� I7 yww&nd..PinotNoir 18.00 Ken.clalbjackson.'Vtntne s- IZe4ewe% PC wt Noir 26:00 Niche... Lynch Bordea:c.w 1600 CaisvCwvee- 'merlot-cahernetblend; 28.00 Les-JQ eU.e,kIvierlot . 17.00 Shaer Mertot - 34.00 Sta:cd%s' Leap Pet✓ite-Syra.h 33.00 BeaalLew.V%nyard,s-'12utherfo-rd: Cabernet 24.00 Kencl alLJa.cksovv'Vintner' k Reserve) Cabernet 32:00 Charles-Kru. ''Vinto Selector) Cabernet, 88 . ; .42.00 Far NCevnte-Cabernet . 58.00 Mit St. Geor B u,r anci y 27.P0 1/2 bottle- 14.00 • • 406 1 5 2006 cam DEV, PEPS. SUPPIEMENITAL. { o -MAT ma_ ..: Eroding welfare Directly and indirectly, the welfare of every Hermosan is eroded by the prolifer- ation of alcohol outlets. The Hermosa Pavilion applicant plans a new '8,000 -square -foot drinking destina- tion that will radiate impact throughout our cherished neighborhoods, degrading our safety and living environment: During a public. hearing in July, 'the ap- . plicant's pitch was full.of fluffy talk about cuisine, decor and culinary expertise, to distract from the inescapable issues. .An 'approval if granted would require evaluation in isolation. Aggregate impacts and high concentration of alcohol busi- nesses within our community to be dis- missed. Risk variables, complaints, public testimony 'and police Service calls (alcohol- related) all to be dismissed as immaterial, to achieve the goal of increasing .alcohol density. What is the benefit of increased alcohol density? The inordinate amount of city staff time to rehabilitate the pink elephant (1601, 1605, 1617 PCH) is a dismal failure if this alcohol land -use per- mit is granted by the city. "In the interest of neighborhood and community, the pending application sub- mitted by the owner of the Hermosa Pavilion requires rejection -denial. This 8,000 -square -foot commercial space then becomes an opportunity for the owner to focus on an ideal leasing option such as a professional (low impact) office tenant to of.s.i t, the popular high-impact°gyin. tenant that operates `247. ` W` The next public hearing'regarding this matter is scheduled Tuesday, Aug. 15, at 7 p.m.;•in City Council chambers. Protect neighborhood. and your safety. -Patty Egerer Hermosa Beach The Beach Reporter • August 10, 2006. 7 REC Vii AUG 1 5 2006 COM. DEV. DEP F. Not enough income Hermosa Beach has a severe imbalance of late-night liquor -consuming visitors when residents are home. Cash from those visitors is going to restaurant opera- tors, cabs and other associated entities, with a tiny trickle reaching the city to pay for the safe environment provided them. City spending for policing and- public safety is now $43,000 per day. Citywide, policing is stretched thin as an increas- ingly large share has to be focused in Her- mosa's bar district to prevent riot, serious injury, death and property damage from the interaction of large crowds of intoxi- cated visitors there. Council members of the last decade continue to be singularly obsessed in hav- ing more restaurant space selling liquor. They refuse to recognize the resident im- pact and simple arithmetic of how the policing and lawsuit costs related to this type of business continues to escalate while city infrastructure and staffing is in decline. The city is receiving just $780 per day total from the city's portion of sales tax from all of the full liquor -selling restaurants citywide, yet still the city ac- cepts and encourages applications for new and existing restaurant/bar businesses that want more square footage and with in- creasingly late liquor -selling hours. Thus removal at election or by recall of those on council with continuing restaurant and liquor expansion voting records may be the only way Hermosa residents take back their cityas this coun- cil and administration is not representing the long-term viability of Hermosa Beach as a residential and daytime beach city. Howard Longacre Hermosa Beach Obi 1b/Lobb 1'L: 15 i1e /yltilb • August 13, 2006 Planning Commission City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa. Beach, CA 90254 Dear Sirs: REcE 9V Ey AUG 1 5 2O136 COM DEV. DEP `. SOUTH SAY C0AI.IT;I0 rt 'working togethor to prevent' atlbntaeco .nose" PAGE ©1 The purpose of this letter is to express our concern over the possible issuance of a Conditional Use Permit at the Pavilion location on Pacific Coast Highway. Our Coalition is a collaborative of many agencies and individuals in the South Bay who are working to prevent substance abuse among youth in our communities. Our members include: the Beach Cities Health District, Thelma. McMillen Center for Chemical Dependency Treatment at Torrance Memorial Medica]. Center, National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependence, ROAD (Reach Out Against: Drugs) El Segundo, school districts, parents, and youth. As you consider the C.U.P. application at the Pavilion, we ask you to think about the message being sent to children and youth in the community with so much alcohol availability and the pro - alcohol attitude conveyed as a result. Leading children to believe that alcohol is essential in order to have fun is dangerous and irresponsible. Research shows that youth who start drinking early in life arc 4 times more likely to become alcoholics and underage drinking costs the U.S: more than 550 billion annually. The consequences of alcohol use affect everyone •- even those who drink rarely or not at all. Alcohol use is responsible for increased violence and crime, decreased worker productivity, higher health insurance premiums, and deaths and injuries from drinking -driving crashes. Drinkers alone do not pay these costs — everyone splits the bill. Finally, based on the number of residents who have spoken passionately against. the C.U.P., it would seem that denying this application would be a prudent and responsible action. We are hopeful that you will take all of this information into serious consideration and vote against the C.U.P. application. Thank you. . Sine ely, a en arr, r9 t Director South Bay Coalition Cc: City Clerk, Hermosa Beach, CA City Manager, Hermosa .Beach, CA 320 Knob Hill Rcdondo Beach, CA 90277 (310) 714-2967(310) 792-8187 (bo SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION • 6 • • Charles and Carole Doherty 1600 Ardmore Avenue Unit 234 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310 318 7979 charles.f.doherty@att.net August 14, 2006 Planning Commission Hermosa Beach, CA like se. Re: Restaurant Liquor License at Hermosa Plaza, 1601 Pacific Coast Highway and Club 705 At your last meeting one of the commissioners commented that upscale restaurants tend to morph into bars in Hermosa Beach and gave the example of Marie Callendar's Restaurant on Pier Ave morphing into Club 705. By the looks, Club 705 is morphing into an adult entertainment venture. Now we have lingerie parties and next we will have Janet Jackson wanna-be's playing peek -a - booby. Maybe it's time to review the CUP to see if this type of entertainment is allowed. Charles Doherty Hermosa Beach, CA SUPPLEMENTAL I JFORM sT]ON ShookDevelopment Corp. To: Sol Blumenfeld From: Nathan Koher �: _ i" ._l 1- I Date: 7-18-06 Regarding: Restaurant & Parking Plan Amendment to modify the Allocation of uses with the Hermosa Pavilion Dear Mr. Blumenfeld, I am writing you this letter stating that.. have. conducted:thisresearch .Thave taken pictures as well as walked the, neighboring' communities of Manhattan, Redondo,.'.:.: and Hermosa Beach. I have found;stunning similarities. The similarities are as follows:. Hermosa Beach: > It takes exactly 2 min 50 sec to legally walk from the front entrance of the erosa Pavilion to get to the parking spaces in front of Pet Care. es exactly 4 minutes (200 paces) to legally walk from the front entrance of e`Hermosa Pavilion to get to the free parking space on 829 17th street. > It takes exactly 118 paces to legally walk from the free parking space by 832 16th street. > 15th and 16th street have free parking in a residential neighborhood > The Hermosa Pavilion has neighboring residential areas that offers free parking HERMOSA AY`, I L I O N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P:iimilarwww.hermosapavilion.com o Z.. • • ShookDevelopment Corp. > The Commodore, which is located directly behind the Hermosa Pavilion, offers no parking for visitors of their building. > The Hermosa Pavilion is located adjacent to a Vons shopping center > There are no restaurants/bars in Hermosa Beach that offer any kind of validated parking. � m Metlock:Center: The Metlock Center is approximately 1.5 miles from the Hermosa Pavilion. I'll also add that the Hermosa Pavilion and the Metlock Center are neighboring businesses to Ardmore Street. It takes exactly 80 paces to legally walk from 1200 12th street to get to the traffic::: signal located on Manhattan Beach Blvd and Ardmore Avenue. It takes 130 paces (2 min 30 sec) to legally walk to the Metlock Center property from 120 12th street. > The Metlock Center Parking Garage has exactly 463 non valet parking spaces. The Parking Garage also has 31 (lower level) valet spaces giving a total of 494 potential parking spaces. > The Metlock Center Parking Garage has metered parking priced at 25 cents for every 15min at a maximum of 8 hours for long term meters and a maximum of 2 hours for short term meters. The meters are enforced from 9am to 8pm. jM AV IL I So N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P:0111111111.1www.hermosapavilion.com /6 3 • • ShookDevelopment Corp. METERS ENFORCED 9 AM TO 8 PM 8 HOUR TIME LIMIT The Parking Garage for the :Metlock Center serves a number of the same businesses as the Hermosa Pavilion. - HERMOSA AVI L I ® N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P: www.hermosapavilion.com /o( w ,..0N f.yn�DDDDA .E 13 '- f+' 'rFk n -. s `PAY S[UDI4.QaS�(N;Sn e; , .t A w . BEA ii 7EErs LA61r `\ Y tUtit`, ... 'r 4,..: " Midi -tail, S.E A' OE.S �s�` n x...--.4'-. i.rl�{A?ERLEAP I010tO • ShookDevelopment Corp. Unique Spin' and Yoga. Studio Come. See Us Upsisirs 6 310-545-4243 �r wuW .spacemb.cam ➢ I will alSo mote that the Metlock Center has multiple restaurants located in their center'` ere is an adjacent condo across the street from the Metlock Center that offers visitor parking. ➢ Ardmore Avenue has parking that is not restricted ➢ The Green Build has metered parking. ➢ The Metlock Center is also located adjacent to a Vons shopping center. HERMOSA AY I LION 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P11111111.11www.hermosapavilion.com (OS— ShookDevelopment Corp. • • ➢ The Metlock Center also has a hotel business that offers parties and functions that can function till 2am. ➢ There is not residential permit parking in the residential areas by the Metlock Center. ondo•Beach: ' The :Gold's•Gym offers discounted parking for their gym members. The price is •':50 -cents for the first 4hrs of parking. Gym members can also buy monthly parking passes for $6 and yearlyparking passes for $72. > Gold's Gym has a car wash center (that uses water, not steam) located in their parking structure. Gold's Gym members also receive a discounted rate on the service. �MS A AY IL I O N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P: 1111111111111111,www.hermosapavilion.com lg6-, • Sti MEMBERS ShookDevelopment Corp °!HAND WAS H'• 5.,12 Cars '>.u-wFtr. s.15.Trucks ,re4??. s.5o Hand wax'.' %v% conclusion, the Metlock Center and the Hermosa Pavilion are similar properties an etloek is not required to validate.,': for restaurants. NHEROSA ,AV IML I O N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P: (ate. www.hermosapavilion.com OS/10/200B 15:31 0b0000131300 HIUHWAYKUbbEKY.NtI HAUL 01 • • FACSIMILE. COVER SHEET AND MESSAGE Total number 'of pages including this cover sheet 3 Date TH 8-10-06 Time To Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Fax number 937-6235 Voice phone number 318-0235' RECEIVES AUG 1 0 zoo6 COM. DEV. DEP is From James Lissner, 2715 El Oeste, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Fax number: (310) 376-2287 Voice number: (310) 376-4626 Venue: Planning Commission Meeting of 8-15-06 Subject: 1601 PCH, CUP for Restaurant with Alcohol Commissioners: Staff is recommending midnight hours, seven days a week. I would like to suggest that those hours be only on weekends, with earlier closing during the week, like Manhattan Beach is doing on its new projects (see survey, attached). I would suggest a three-tier arrangement, like Manhattan used with Fonzs, with these hours: Sun - Wed close at 10 pm Thu - close at 11 pm Fri - Sat close at 12 mid Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Important: The pages comprising this facsimile transmission contain confidential in ormation from James Lissner. This information is intended solely for use by the individual or entity named as the recipient hereof. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying distribution, or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately so that we may arrange to retrieve this transmission at no cost to you. 033/.10/2006 15:31 0000000000 • HIGHWAYROBBERV.NET PAGE 02 SURVEY OF DOWNTOWN EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Establishment Address Hours of Operation Alcohol License 900 Manhattan Club 900 Manhattan Ave. Highland Ave. M -Th 11am-12 am F 11 am -1 am Sat 9am-12am Sun 9am-12am Su -Th 6am-10pm F-Sa 6am-11pm Full Liquor Beer and Wine -grmu, $'' /},r Cdoco Noche%1140 Beaches 117 Manhattan Beach Blvd. M -F 10am-1 am Sa-Sun 8 am -lam Full Liquor Cafe Pierre 317 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 9am-1am Full Liquor Pasta Pomodoro 401 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 7am-11 pm Beer and Wine Ebizio 229 Manhattan Beach Blvd. M -Th 6am - 11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Beer and Wine El Sombrero 1005 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 7am-11 pm F-Sa 7am-12am Beer and Wine 'Ercoles 1101 Manhattan Ave. Su-Sa 11am-2am Full Liquor - Fonzs 1017 Manhattan Ave. Su 9am-9pm M -Th 5:30am-10pm F-Sa 5:30am-11 pm Full Liquor Francesca 1209 Highland Ave. M -Th 11 am-10pm F -Su 7:30am-11 pm Beer and Wine Good Stuff (closed 9/05) 1300 Highland Ave. Su-Sa 24 Hours Beer and Wine Hennesseys 313 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 1lam-2am Full Liquor Fusion Sushi 1150 Morningside Dr. Su -W 9am -11pm Th-Sa 7am-12am Full Liquor Kettle 1138 Highland Ave. Su-Sa 24 Hours Beer and Wine Mama D's 1125 A Manhattan Ave. Su-Sa 7am-2am Beer and Wine Mangiamo 128 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 8am-12am Full Liquor Manhattan Brewing Company 124 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 7am-12am F -Sat 7am-1am Full Liquor Sharks Coveepd,vs 309 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 7am-2am Full Liquor Manhattan Pizzeria 133 Manhattan Beach Blvd. No Reso Beer and Wine Michi 903 Manhattan Ave. Su -T 11am-12am F -Sat 11am-2am Full Liquor Octopus 1133 Highland Ave. M -F 11:30am-2:30pm to 5:30pm-11 pm F-Sa 5:30pm-12am Beer and Wine Old Venice 1001 Manhattan Ave. Su-Sa 10am-12am Beer and Wine Penny Lane 820 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 7am-10:30pm F-Sa 7am-11:30pm Beer and Wine Rock N Fish 120 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su -Th 7am-12am F-Sa 7am-lam Full Liquor Sidedoor Manhattan Ave. M -Th 11am-12 am F 11 am -1 am Sat 9am-12am Sun 9am-12am Full Liquor Shellback `900 116 Manhattan Beach Blvd. No Reso Full Liquor Sun & Moon Cafe 1131 Manhattan Ave.F-Sa Su -Th 6am-11pm 6am-12am Beer and Wine Talia's 1148 Manhattan Ave. Su -W 7am-11 pm Th-Sa 7am-12arn Full Liquor 68/10/2006 15:31 000060060 HIGHWAYROBBERV.NET PAGE 03 Towne 1142 Manhattan Ave. M -W 11am-11pm Th -F 11am-12am Sa 7am-12am Su 7am-11pm Full Liquor Chakra 304 12th Street Su -Th 10am-12am F-Sa 10am-1am Full Liquor Wahoo's 1129 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Beer and Wine Avenue 1141 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 11 am -11 pm F-Sa 11am-12am Full Liquor Shade Hotel 1221 Valley Drive Lobby Bar- daily 5pm-11pm Courtyard Su -Th 6am-11 pm F - Sat 6am-12am Roofdeck daily 6am-10pm Full Liquor Petro's 451 Manhattan Beach Blvd Suite B-110 Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor dr.'s Deliboy 451 Manhattan Beach Blvd Suite D-126 1200 Morningside Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor edR/C 5cg/ u/ 01q0/ i///H-1L/9,✓) -� /1,m , 'LA L/Q G:/Planning/Ledger/Downtown Alcohol & Hrs List 07/11/06 4e6eiVed 7-�,c_-06 hist AV-4ifoie. e -e -m M ad1/ox ct�nVe 1°oi'rnerZ� /To /•v 1, -IOVO, L- IVrI , O,Gre-HYtV 1VIVLL I IN Vl.. • SHEPPARD MULLIN • SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER Ex HAMPTON LIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW ; /14 513 5130 # 1/ 4 • JUL 1 8 ',PPG 4th Floor ( 650 Town Center Drive I Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1993 714-513-5100 office .1 714-513-5130 fax I i eRg'ari(inal)In ;eo n FACSIMILE COVER SHEET * * THIS FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION WILL NOT BE MAILED * * Date: July 18, 2006 Total number of pages: (including 1 -page cover sheet) 4 File Number: OGLC-064504 If all pages are not received, please call Maggie Manns at 714-424-2861 TO: Planning Commission do Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department Facsimile No. Telephone No. 310-937-6235 From: Michael D. Stewart, Esq. Re: Hermosa Beach Pavilion MESSAGE: Letter concurrently being emailed. NOTE: THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED, AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. W02-OC:NA3\41422533.1 / - 1 0-W0 , L . C.1,1V1 fC.�1-'/�.n L/ 1V1V1_L I IN Vl. • ;SHEPPARDMULLIIV RiCtIrER bt ATTORNEYS AT LAW July 18, 2006 VIA FACSIMILE (310) 937-6235 VIA EMAIL sblumenfeld@hermosabch.org ;(14 513 5130 • 4th Floor I 650 Town Center Drive I Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1993 714-513-5100 office 1714-513-5130 fax www.sheppardmullin.com mstewart@sheppardmullin.com sheppardmullin.com Our File Number: OGLC-064504 Planning Commission do Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 JUL 1 8 2ec - . FV. DEP I. Re: CUP 06-4 re Sale of Alcohol, Increasing Restaurant Square Footage, and Parking Plan Amendment at the Hermosa Beach Pavilion at 1605 Pacific Coast Highway # 2/ 4 Dear Honorable Members of the Planning Commission: This firm represents Shook Development Corporation ("Shook") and Stillwater, LLC ("Stillwater").. Shook is the owner of the Hermosa Beach Pavilion located at 1605 Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Hermosa Beach (the "Center"). Stillwater owns and operates the existing Green Bar at the Property, and is owned by, among others, Travis Jones and Gene Shook, the applicants for the above -referenced CUP. Shook has reviewed the Staff Report and the proposed Resolution regarding the CUP, and submits the following comments to be considered at this evening's meeting before the Commission. Unilateral Conditions of Approval Make Shook's Investment Unlikely Shook is faced with lending or investing several million dollars in Stillwater to design and build out the space, purchase a first-class wine inventory, hire employees, and open a high-end restaurant. Shook estimates that its investment will likely be $3 million, which it will only make if the City does not impose the currently onerous and vague conditions proposed in the Resolution. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION • SHEPtARD.111L1LLlN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP July 18, 2006 Page 2 ;114 713 b130 n 3/ 4 As detailed below, several of the Conditions of Approval are onerous, while others are so vague that they allow the City to essentially cease Stillwater's business operations with little showing of any violation. Shook would like to work with the City in crafting a mutually agreeable and beneficial CUP. Absent that, Shook will not go forward with the proposed investment in Stillwater. Condition 5 vaguely states that Stillwater "shall not adversely affect the welfare of the residents, and/or commercial establishments nearby." The Condition does not state that the effect has to be material or significant, nor does it define the term "welfare," and the usage of "nearby" is obviously open to many interpretations. Condition 8 essentially allows the Police Chief to trigger a review upon undefined grounds, with no materiality requirement. The hours and other requirements regarding the wine shop are not consistent with Stillwater's business plan. Condition 19 appears to require Stillwater to require the auto detail business (West Coast Wash & Wax) to cease business or obtain a CUP before Stillwater will be approved. Stillwater does not control West Coast Wash &Wax, and it is unfair to require Stillwater to satisfy such condition. The conditions set forth in this letter (above and below) are merely examples of the unilateral "take it or leave it" approach that the City appears to be making. Shook requests that the parties negotiate a mutually agreeable CUP. Conditions of Approval 15, 16 and 18 Make Shook's Investment Unlikely Conditions of Approval 15, 16 and 18 essentially allow the City to revoke the CUP for a myriad of reasons, some of which are and will be out of Stillwater's control. The City has already made Shook provide two -hours free parking for all patrons of the Center even though the City has admitted that the only patrons at issue are those of 24 Hour Fitness. Now the City wants to condition Stillwater's existence on matters that Stillwater does not control. Stillwater is a tenant. Its CUP should not be conditioned on the entire Center complying with the Parking Plan (as set forth in P.C. Resolution 03-45, as amended by P.C. Resolution 06-16, and sustained by the City Council on July 11, 2006). Stillwater should be treated like any other tenant. It should be subject to the normal restaurant operations restrictions that it can control. Shook recently invested over $10 million in remodeling the Center and parking garage, with a business plan to recoup some of that investment via charged parking — which was disclosed to the City many times over the last several years. The City required Shook to provide ample parking (actually more spaces than necessary), but then changed the rules arguing that charged parking was "not efficient" because 24 Hour Fitness — which repeatedly told its patrons to park off-site — did not want to pay a dollar charge. /-10-VCS; L: 11 IVI;•nCI-YNF/V MVLL II`I Vl: ;714 513 5130 sz 4/ 4 • • SHEPPARD MULLIN l lcwrEll s H:LI1E9'ON LI:P July 18, 2006 Page 3 Now, because the City has repeatedly refused to take any action against 24 Hour Fitness or its patrons, Shook has been ordered to provide two -hours free parking. Shook cannot risk another seven -figure investment in the Center without some type of assurance from the City that Shook will not be blind -sided by the actions of 24 Hour Fitness or its patrons, or the City's reactions thereto. Conditions of Approval 15, 16 and 18 Unfairly Intertwine Stillwater and Shook The proposed Resolution conditions Stillwater's ongoing business upon Shook's compliance with the Parking Plan. Stillwater, the tenant, is owned 55% by Travis Jones, Christine Jones and Yves Chachereau, and 45% by Gene Shook. Shook, the landlord, is owned 100% by Gene Shook. The City already has ruled on the Parking Plan. The City has all the rights, ordinances, and enforcement mechanisms it needs to require Shook (or any subsequent owner) to comply with the Parking Plan. Shook is not aware of the Cityconditioning any other tenant's CUP on a landlord's compliance with a City resolution. Here, the City is unfairly intertwining Stillwater and Shook, even though they are separate legal entities.. While that may appear fair as long as both entities are under common or overlapping ownership, it restricts the value and ability to sell either the restaurant or the Center. Perhaps the City has not considered the fact that Shook may choose one day to sell the Center and keep its investment in Stillwater. Given that the proposed expansion of the restaurant will require Shook to invest several million dollars, Shook's sale of the Property would leave Shook's restaurant investment at risk if the new owner failed to comply with the Parking Plan, or allowed other tenants to violate such plan. Alternatively, perhaps the City has not considered the fact that Stillwater may one day sell the restaurant. If so, the restaurant purchaser would discount its price because its entire investment would be subject on a continual basis to the Center owner's compliance with. the Parking Plan. Again, the City already has all its rights under the Parking Plan. There is no need to now condition a tenant's existence (which, given the language of conditions 15, 16 and 18, is not overstating matters) on the landlord's compliance with that Parking Plan. Thank you for your consideration. W 02-W E ST:NA3140003 83 66. I Sincerely, Michael D. Stewart for SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP City of Hermosa Beach Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 1 Ui V,I.Jl�J _JE: [. July 18, 2006 RE: HERMOSA PAVILION, 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY LIQUOR LICENSE CUP HEARING Dear Mr. Blumenfeld: A hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled July 18, 2006. Include this communication as a supplement in the commissioner's packet. 1. Fact Sheet: Effects of Alcohol Outlet Density on Economic Development, www.public strategies.org. "High concentration of alcohol outlets in a location can hamper economic development. While such businesses may be heavily patronized, they add little intrinsic value to the community as a whole, and they make the area less attractive to other types of retail business." 2. IIB bar plan a threat to public safety, Daily Breeze dated July 16, 2006, letter to editor. "...Weekend policing/patrols and 911 response times are already seriously compromised by the Pier Plaza bar scene, even when things are going smoothly...." 3. Written communication from Patricia Egerer, dated June 13, 2006, RE: I-IERMOSA PAVILION, 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY ALCOHOL CUP, RESTAURANT/BAR. "The economic success of the 8,000-sq.ft. restaurant/bar will hinge upon attracting a bar crowd of non-residents." Residents are robbed of a tremendous value of living at the beach due to the rabid proliferation of bars. The chief promoter of this PARTY -DOWN, GET WASTED, MENTALITY IS THE CITY. Euphemistically this 8,000-sq.ft. project is referred to as an "upscale restaurant" this deviates from the actual character of the operation. This is merely another swinging bar with bottle to go services. Proactive action is needed to rezone the entire business district including upper Pier Avenue to prevent the future growth of more alcohol outlets. Mitigate damage by keeping the bars centralized to the downtown, in an effort to save neighborhood and community. Respectfully, SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ,, c-4) ;'v,Y?tk „ `.Cc�q! 9"'i"".,y "„1^. s::"�. ::a.;..,:4: � % 5r s;;: r.'1;.::c:+, �Y.?'�a"��'`',ztl'=3�r;k>�x.��"�: r.•s� F::�i;.:�%Y�',i'��,': Y>>�::3.'.. �c.r. A C T S H E E T Effects of Alcohol Outlet Density on Economic Development East County Community Change Project • February, 2003 Research shows that a high concentration of alcohol outlets in a location can hamper economic development. While such businesses en. ay be heavily patronized, they add little intrinsic value to the community as a whole, and they make the area less attractive to other types of retail business. In order to ensure the future economic growth of the small business communities of the East County region, as well as preserve the quality of life in the region, limits should be placed on the density of retail alcohol outlets. This requires a collaborative effort among retail business operators, property owners, local residents, community service agencies and local governments. ECONOMIC DECLINE The over -concentration of alcohol outlets is often part of a neighborhood's broad economic and social disintegration. An outlet -heavy area's economic base loses its diversity and becomes less attractive to both residents and potential retail customers. The proliferation of alcohol outlets is thus both a symptom of economic decline and a factor that worsens the decline) NEGATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD CLIMATE High bar density changes the character and environment of the neighborhood and the routine activities of those living or visiting that block. Complaints about alcohol outlets that are most often reported to city planners have to do with noise, traffic or loitering.2, 3 VIOLENCE AND CRIME "Wetter” neighborhoods have higher levels of accidents and violence.4 This includes higher crime rates for murder, rape, assault, robbery, burglary, grand theft and auto theft.' A study done in 1995 in Los Angeles showed that each additional alcohol outlet was associated with 3.4 additional assaults per year. Adding one bar to a block would result in 3.38 additional crimes committed on that block in a year.' AUTO CRASHES According to a study done in Los Angeles, there is a greater number of alcohol-related injury crashes in cities with higher outlet densities. A 1% increase in outlet density means a .54% increase in alcohol- related crashes. Thus a city of 50,000 residents with 100 alcohol outlets would experience an additional 2.7 crashes for each new outlet opened.' This fact sheet was produced by the Institute forPublic Strategies, a nonprofit organization advancing public health through changes in policy and community norms. For more information, call (619) 660-6233, email info@publicstrategies.org or visit zuww publicstrategies. org. ' Maxwell, A. & Immergluck, D. "Liquorlining: liquor store concentration and community development in lower-income Cook County (IL) neighborhoods." Chicago IL: Woodstock Institute, 1997. Preventing Problems Related to Alcohol Availability: Environmental Approaches. U.S. DHHS Pub No. (SMA) 99-3298. ' Runcek, D. & Maier, P. "Bars, blocks and crimes revisited: linking the theory of routine activities to the empiricism of 'hot spots.'" Criminology (29) 4: 725-753. 1991. ' Scribner, Richard: Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, February 2000. LaBouvie, E. & Ontkush, M.: "violent crime and alcohol availability: relationships in an urban community." Journal of Public Health Policy 19(3):303- 318. 1998. "Alcohol availability and homicide in New Orleans: conceptual considerations for small area analysis of the effect of alcohol outlet density." Journal of Studies on Alcohol, May 1999. Scribner, R., Mackinnon, D. & Dwyer, J.: "The risk of assaultive violence and alcohol availability in Los Angeles County." American Journal of Public Health (85) 3: 335-340. 1995. (I ti Your views HB bar plan a threat to public safety This letter represents a plea that the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission and City Council exercise what- ever influence they have to deny a permit for a 15,000-. square -foot restaurant/bar at the Hermosa Pavilion. I cur- rently own a business in Hermosa —'after 33 years in law enforcement for Los Angeles County. There was a time when I didn't think any city could have too many bars. What has happened to our little community shows me I was wrong. The proposed monster bar at the Pavilion is not planned to meet the needs of the Hermosa drinkers. If every resident drank, we'd still have plenty of bars. It's an effort to draw drinkers and their wallets from out of the area. Make no mistake, that effort will'be successful. As a former gang investigator, I found that every unsavory ele- ment.imaginable between here and Riverside would find his way to the 91 freeway and drive toward the sun. That would drop them right here, about six blocks north of the proposed mega -bar. This proposal represents a huge public safety issue ripe for a citizen's backlash. Weekend policing/patrols and 911 response times are already seriously compromised by the Pier Plaza bar scene, even when things are going smoothly. Between 1 a.m. and 2:30 a.m., I have to assume the majority of drivers here in Hermosa are drunk and • trying to find their way out of town. This bar is being planned and bankrolled by a truly interesting character, and local officials know it. He has relied on brinkmanship and foot dragging on other issues with the Pavilion, and the notion of a real, viable, res- taurant is laughable. If the restaurant doesn't make him money — which it won't — he'll have a bigger bar. If he has entertainment, he can charge a cover, which is cash and under the radar as to reportable revenue. In terms of planning, let's make some plans for ourldds and their kids. This is not Moreno Valley. The folks who can afford to live here are bright, successful and obviously did something right with their lives, or have a trust fund. Please don't allow our elected officials to turn their backs on these people and pander to the developer and an army of horny twenty -somethings who will descend on our community. They will not be driving down here for dinner. — RICHARD HALLIBURTON Hermosa Beach Torrance in good hands with Scotto. On Tuesday, it was a privilege to see Frank Scotto . sworn in as the new mayor of Torrance. It was standing room only,.arid the City Council Chamber was packed. The residents of Torrance have.shown they will have zero tolerance for dirty politics. - As I walked a precinct for Scotto, I heard time after time again.. that people were so disillusioned with the political process they did not intend to vote. I feel strongly that we get the politicians and government we deserve. Mayor Scotto has shown us that if you. maintain the highest standard of integrity, you can still win. The city of Torrance is in good hands. = DR. PATTY BOGE Lomita Neighbors reduced illegal fireworks. . I am responding to two.letters' appearing back t� back from fellow San Pedrans on Wednesday: Regarding the excessive level of illegal frreworks.once again experienced by residents on the Fourth of July in San Pedro, I extenda per- sonal invitation to John Fer to attend our next Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting on Aug: 14 at Peck • Park and to join our Fireworks Reduction Task Force. Our first-year goal was tosignificantly reduce the amount of illegal fireworks going off in the weeks both before and after the Fourth, and we believe we achieved that goal. By residents getting the word out to their neigh- bors and these neighbors both appreciating and respond- ing to these concerns, the Los Angeles Police Department was then able to focus on those few residents who did not care about their neighbors' concerns. We are starting to make preparations for a public forum at the end of the summer to address how to Maintain the improvement and assist the LAPD in addressing the Fourth of July weekend itself. But this has to come from 1 r a Reaches Editorial Page Editor Mike Carroll 310-540-5511 Ext. 381 mike.carroll@dailybreeze.com Mail 5215 Torrance Blvd. Torrance, CA 90503-4077 Internet www.dailybreeze.com E-mail letters@dailybreeze.com Guidel Opink ) /rh • • City_ of Hermosa Beach Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 June 14, 2006 JUN 1 4 200 - . D`V. DEP i. RE: HERMOSA PAVILION, 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY PETITION TO LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY Dear Mr. Blumenfeld: A hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled on June 20, 2006, on the above reference property. The applicant's request for an "on -sale" and/or "off -sale" alcohol permit is opposed and contested by residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Residents believe it is essential to preserve neighborhood and safeguard our living environment. Due to the close proximity to residential this business operation would be unsuitable and undesirable. The petition includes 10 signatures of residents in the surrounding neighborhood, east of Pacific Coast Highway. Please include this communication in the commissioners' packet for the upcoming hearing in June: Respectfully, SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION tie • PETITION TU l Ht LR UUK Lit.MPA ,CLIP HU I Hart, r r , vi . , vl- , 1111%01.1,1 VLINOW' RE: 1601 PACIFIC COAST HWY, HERMOSA BEACH "THE HERMOSA PAVILION" Residents oppose the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit(s) at commercial property located at 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy., Hermosa Beach, "The Pavilion" as follows: 1. We oppose: The selling, pouring, and serving of; wine, beer, hard liquor, or drinks mixed with alcohol. 2. We oppose: The retail sale of bottled wine, beer, or hard liquor. It is essential to preserve neighborhood, and safeguard our living environment. Due to the close proximity to residential neighborhoods and schools this type of operation would be unsuitable and undesirable.. RECEPVEE JUN i 4 2006 (70Ml. DEV DEP f • uneH: wgnarure, Lirw O. rnncau rvarrrc, Laic t+: ..41 ',..,,,...,., 1. A.(//it,- B•j'Tg�ll,� /!!,C. �7 �6�c..: , f4 Pac -� meifnlaf42- p;icit1 �� yag)54 2. A. B. / • "X'7+ /r/i/#`7Q C. 717/ f 3. A. B. c• /� J� LI P L6i'-70 Z -C yaI f /, $7 � 64-'374. //, A. B. \ 11,,,----"'".'B. 1 1 1-. {_ I S I- e.: 1005 i i- A: a.g6, 5. A. B. C. • AL44 4*r'L A fto'ft C4`t et. /4e ,., A. (5=•-.,,• , -4 uv-sy 6. A. B. C. .3 Lln+ a tnn.sr.4_ o % , ac 4_�,� Al.- 144-3 CA -1,1.k.° NT) k — 4t C 4 .?c, 2c 7. A. B. C. —` MicL I -7,-;4 /b 0 4 e ilk.14091 p-,./.6 .,„25--/8. A. B. c-_ c LjL) J.Tk1/4-0 cie\i=salJ \' c3 LE— B. c. /4ter � 0 I'�rr�44< i i r -0 -�.e nil�r >�Q�?� 96 .x-44 • PETITION TO THE LIQUOR LICENSING AU I I -101(11 Y, t.l I Y or rit.kmU k CStAVrt RE: 1601 PACIFIC COAST HWY, HERMOSA BEACH "THE HERMOSA PAVILION" Residents oppose the issuance of Conditional Use Permit(s) at commercial property located at 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy., Hermosa Beach, "The Pavilion" as follows: 1. We oppose: The selling, pouring, and serving of; wine, beer,.hard liquor, or drinks mixed with alcohol. 2. We oppose: The retail sale of bottled wine, beer, or hard liquor. It is essential to preserve neighborhood, ands feguard our living environment, Due to the close proximity to residential neighborhoods and schools this iypeopcation would be ar uitaand undesirable. Line A: Signature, Line B: Printed Name, Line C: Street Address 1. A. B. C. , . 'C -c\_.)_ .. Ts L) S . L� - . r • _Z. ( . ` 1 __ Ian. - `_ - 2. A. B. C. 3. A. B. C. 4. A. B. C. . 5. Q cd U 6. A. B. C. 1 7 A. B. C. ' 8. P Pu > 9. A. B. C. • June 13, 2006 City of Hermosa Beach Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: HERMOSA PAVILION, 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY ALCOHOL CUP, RESTAURANT/13AR Dear Mr. Blumenfeld: This letter constitutes objection to the project request for a Conditional Use Permit for the above referenced property, submitted by Travis W. Jones and Gene Shook, dated April 26, 2006. Granting approval of "on - sale" and/or "off -sale" alcohol permit at this location would substantially depreciate property values in the vicinity and interfere with the use and enjoyment of property and neighborhood. Material concerns are outlined below. 1. Proposed Project: Applicant's plan would allow for the consumption of alcohol anywhere within the 8,000 sq.ft area, and provide for a liquor store convenience for "wine and cheese." The owners plans re- define restaurant space 2 -fold. 2. Space Requested: Space requested is inconsistent with the Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan. Also, the application fails to account for 900 sq.ft of existing restaurant -cafe. Allocated usage of restaurant if approved would total 8,900 sq.ft. 3. Sensitive Location: The placement of an outlet in close proximity to sensitive areas is undesirable. a. Valley View Middle School (public school) is within 600', to the west. b. Immediately adjacent, on the north and west side of the building are residential condominiums. c. A large well established residential neighborhood is located east of the building. 4. Intensification: The economic success of the 8,000 -sq. ft. restaurant/bar will hinge upon attracting a bar crowd of non-residents. This creates a high level of (influx) of commercial traffic for extended time frames, into early morning hours. Noise (loud voices, engine noise, & car doors banging) would spill into residential. 5. Saturation of Alcohol Outlets: Retail alcohol outlets within Census Code 6210.01 and throughout Hermosa Beach exceed saturation levels as defined by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. "Iligh bar density changes the character and environment of the neighborhood and the routine activities of those living or visiting that block."1 6. Commercial Intrusion: Presently, Pavilion patrons canvas our neighborhood (east of PCH) searching for parking. This burdens our streets, displaces residents, and compromises our residential environment. Several incidents have occurred where male Pavilion patrons, have boldly, disrobed (to change into gym clothing) while standing in the street in front of homes where children live and play. The activity is occurring in neighborhoods over 600' away from the Pavilion. This matter is a police issue, requiring patrol. 7. Violence, Crime & Disturbance: Approval of alcohol outlet at this location will make neighborhoods vulnerable to negative impact. Those with criminal intent may be prone to hide in the residential neighborhoods, and disappear quickly because of easy access to Pacific Coast Hwy. This degrades the residential environment, placing residents at risk. 8. Police Resources: Police resources are monopolized by the bar district (lower Pier Avenue area.) The heavy concentration of bars, people, public intoxication, criminal activity, and disturbance conditions, are out of control. The city is unable manage control of merchants who actively encourage problems. Consequently, police services are unavailable to patrol and provide police coverage throughout the community. This disintegration of police services heightens residents' vulnerability to criminal activity. An alcohol outlet at this location will add to the decline. • • 9. Pathway to School: Children everyday walk along 16th Street, because it is a direct route to school. An alcohol outlet at this location (1601 PCH) would influence and discourage a portion of residents from feeling safe to travel this pathway. 10. Wine & Cheese Retail Use: The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control pursuant to B&P Code, Section 23817.5 placed a moratorium on the City of Hermosa Beach, for off -sale beer and wine licenses, Type 20. 11. Impact: The neighborhood sustains constant disruption, due to issues unresolved. If granted, this CUP will compound problems. 12. PCH Frontage: The architectural rendering of 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy depicts an outdoor seating area. This concept is non-functional due to the high level of exhaust emissions. Prohibit the serving of food or consumption of alcoholic beverages along this frontage. 13. Parking Plan: Planning Commission (PC 6-16) pertains to mitigation measures that require adoption. Public meetings have been ongoing since December of 2005, to reduce spillover parking. The Precise Development Plan requires revision. Modifications will incorporate safeguards to avoid negative impact to the surrounding neighborhood, as follows: a. No "on -sale" or "off -sale" alcohol licensee to be granted at 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy, "Pavilion." b. Restaurant/Retail space (high intensity) to be redefined as 8,000 sq.ft of office space. The existing cafe which is located on the ground floor, would remain. c. Pavilion tenants to be required to close business operations by 8:00 p.m, 7 days a week. This condition would exclude 24 -Hour Fitness. d. No amplified music, live entertainment, or dance floors. e. No amplified music on exterior of building or in premises. f. All parking to be free, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, for both employees and patrons. g. Tandem parking to be eliminated, this undesirable parking solution discourages parking within structure. h. No loitering in and around premises, including parking structure. Conclusion: This upcoming hearing presents an opportunity to modify the Precise Development Plan. A heavy burden is borne by residents because the city is unable to control liquor licensees. The spreading of more bars throughout the community defies logic. Aggressive policy change, is the only alternative to save our community from the proliferation of adverse impact. The cumulative effect of alcohol outlets has created conditions damaging to the safety, comfort, character of our environment, and walkability of our streets. The city is entrusted to act on behalf of the community not an individual proprietor. To grant approval of this alcohol outlet at 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy, would promote the disintegration of public safety and turmoil for neighborhood. Please place this communication on the agenda for the upcoming Planning Commission hearing, scheduled, June 20, 2006. Respectfully, atty Egerer esident I Preventing Problems Related to Alcohol Availability: Environmental Approaches U.S. DIMS Pub No. (SMA) 99-3298. cc: City Clerk %ZZ-.. Page 2 of 2 l+ QUERENCIA WOODWINDS To the attention of the Commissioners Subject: Proposed Pavilion restaurant/bar TEI JFAX (310) 379-6764 MOBILE: (310) 755-5078 QUERENCIAFLUTES@AOL.COM r 9� eW{d.W _QUIRENCIAWOODWIND.COM JUL 1 2. ZgN Com o l: DE i. DEP i. My name is Richard Halliburton. I live at 1567 Golden Ave. and have been a homeowner here for 31 years, a Hermosa resident for 35 years, and in my youth, vacationed here yearly with my parents, as guests of Paul and Dave Schumacher, (Co-workers of my father) since 1951. ...I've spent some time here. This letter represents a plea that you exercise whatever influence you have to DENY a permit for a restaurant bar at the Pavilion. I currently own a business in Hermosa, after 33 years in law enforcement for Los Angeles County. There was a time when I didn't think any city could have too many bars. What has happened to our little community shows me I was wrong. The proposed monster bar at the Pavilion is not planned to meet the needs of the Hermosa drinkers, If every resident drank, we'd still have plenty of bars. It's an effort to draw drinkers and their wallets from out of the area. Make no mistake, that effort will be successful. As a former Gang Investigator, we found that every unsavory element imaginable between here and Riverside, would find their way to the 91 freeway, and drive toward the sun. ....dropping them right here. This proposal represents a HUGE public safety issue ripe for a citizen's backlash. Weekend policing/patrols and 911 response times are already seriously compromised by the Plaza bar scene, even when things are going smoothly. At between 1:OOAM, and 2:30 AM, I have to assume the majority of drivers here in Hermosa ARE DRUNK. and trying to find their way out of town. This bar is being planned and bankrolled by a truly unsavory character, and you folks know it. This guy is a real piece of work. He has relied on brinksmanship and foot dragging on other issues with that pavilion, and the notion of a real, viable, restaurant is laughable. If the restaurant doesn't make him money....which it won't, ...he'll have a bigger bar. If he has entertainment, he can charge a cover, which is CASH, and under the radar as to reporting issues. In terms of PLANNING. ..... Lets make some plans for OUR KIDS, and THEIR kids. This is not Moreno Valley. The folks that can afford to live here are bright, successful, and obviously did something right with their lives, or have a trust fund. Please don't allow the Council to turn their backs on these people and pander to the developer, and an army of horny twenty -somethings that will descend on our community. They will not be driving down here for dinner. Thanks for taking the time to read this. %�3 • • TO : HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION FROM : ALAN STRUSSER / KAMIVII HOWLETT 824 SEVENTEENTH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA. 90254 PH# ( 310 ) 372 - 3099 JULY 9, 2006 JUL 10 20g6 eig3v,. DEV. DEP r. RE: CONSIDERATION OF A RESTAURANT/LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENT IN THE HERMOSA PAVILLION The approval of this establishment is a continued "green light" for business to infringe on the local community and neighborhood. The assault since the opening of the Pavillion has only increased while nothing has been done to alleviate the existing problems. We, and all of our neighbors feel that Iong list of negatives should be dealt with prior to any other consideration or approval that will definitely add to that list. Not only is our police force presently over extended, and emergency call times increasingly delayed, this approval is only inviting trouble for our community welfare. We feel that until these issues are addressed and solved, it would be very detrimental to the future of our wonderful community. Please consider the residents and the family environment we are working so hard the nurture and protect. This is our future and unless we get control of it and start making decisions that benefit our community and it residents, it won't be long before we forget the magic Hermosa Beach has had and it is lost to Big Business. We already feel our neighborhoods are becoming increasing overrun with transient elements, but now adding liquor to the mix will make our quality of life extremely vulnerable and full of unnecessary stress and continued assault on our once peaceful neighborhoods. 24 Hour Fitness has already overstepped their boundaries making us on alert 24 hour a day, now with the potential of yet another after hours BAR/CLUB in our community, we are feeling like we are always in protective and defensive mode. As members and parents of our community, who have taken on the responsibility of directing the future design of our city, you above all should relate to the concerns of your fellow citizens and make Hermosa Beach a place we are all proud to raise our families. It seems the priorities are catering to the party scene, which includes mostly non residents, instead of the true heart and soul of the community, the residents! Please make us proud of being members of this community once again. We love our schools, our home and our lives in Hermosa Beach but lately it seems like the qualities we once enjoyed and paid for have slipped away to benefit the business and entertainment elements. Please give us back our pride and sense of community. Sincerely, Alan, Kammi, Sage and Stella *Please include this comillation in council's agenda packet for July 11, . City of Hermosa Beach City Council Members 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: P.C. RESOLUTION 06-16, AMENDMENT TO PARKING PLAN; ?�... PAVILION, 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy, H.B. Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of Council: The operational parking plan for business located at 1601 Pacific Coast Hwy, represents a progressive problem for residents in the surrounding area. P.C. Resolution 06-16 provides an opportunity to create an instrument to reduce impact. The resolution requires supplemental changes as identified below. Supplemental Terms to: P.C. Resolution 06-16 a) All employees (full & part time) to receive free parking. b) Patron parking to be free 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. c) The entire parking supply -to be "self -park" no tandem parking or parallel parking spaces allowed. When the building is full, a sign would be posted "Garage Full." d) Parking structure NOT to be utilized as "special event" parking. e) Security: "Active" security personnel to monitor the parking structure, stairwells, and building perimeter 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. Security personnel to be easily identifiable by the public, i.e., security would be uniformed. The security company to be responsible for furnishing HBPD with disturbance reports on regular intervals. f) Red Zones: NO vehicle shall stop, stand, or park for any purpose along the dedicated red zones directly in front of the Pavilion, or along 16th Street, this includes vehicles "for hire." The dedicated right -turn lane along PCH, must be maintained clear, to avoid traffic congestion, and hazardous conditions. g) TAXIS: Service vehicles are NOT to lurk or park in neighborhoods or take up public parking spaces. Service vehicles are to be contained within the commercial building. h) Entry to the proposed "restaurant -bar" to be accessible exclusively via the interior lobby of the main building, not at a side entry located on PCH. This avoids problems with persons congregating outside and causing distraction for motorists. i) Tandem parking is not feasible or desirable for employees. Employees would be required to deposit keys with a parking attendant. This creates undesirable conditions by design. j) Land Use: NO "adult entertainment" allowed. The Pavilion's "high impact tenant" opened in August of 2005 creating an influx of commercial traffic and patron parking in residential neighborhood. The gym -tenant occupies about 46,049 square feet (50%) of the building. The surrounding neighborhood and businesses were immediately impacted. Residents are deprived valuable parking, and safety concerns have manifested. Impact is NOT limited to 16th Street. Other interior streets, connecting with 16th Street, i.e., (15th Place, Mira Ave., Raymond Ave., and Bonnie Brae Ave.) all suffer from the same commercial intrusion. The developer has NOT implemented a single mitigation measure during this 10 -month period. The city's intervention is required, to deter disruption for residents. 1 of 2 gas • • Municipal Zoning Code 17.44.050, Unlawful to reduce available parking. Code specifically prohibits the "reducing, diminishing or eliminating existing required off-street parking." Shook's operational -management policy/plan of the garage structure creates a deterrent preventing the effective usage of the structure. Contrary to representations and assertions made by Gene Shook, the Pavilion's policy is inconsistent and NOT the norm for businesses in the surrounding area. NO other commercial -business location within Hermosa Beach or Manhattan Beach charge customers a "fee" to park. Claims that mitigation measures recommended by the commission "... unfairly deprives me of my investment expectations..." (Shook's letter, April 25, 2006) assumes the development project is entitled to adversely impact the surrounding neighborhoods. The analysis prepared Linscott, Law & Greenspan's engineers is insufficient. Parking demands require recalculation. Parking for this 100,000-sq.ft building to be identified as 100% self -park.. This is the standard, preference, and expectation of our community. The freedom and convenience to self -park can not be undermined. Imposing attendant assist parking on both patrons and employees manipulates the quantity of vehiclesthat can park within the building. The feasibility for "attendant assistance parking" is dubious, at best. Tandem parking imposed upon employees is unrealistic, one can anticipate vehicles to avoid this method of parking. It is my understanding, this indirectly violates the owner's responsibility to contain parking in accordance with code. Linscott,. Law & Greenspan's engineers previously submitted plans on behalf of their client that strategically aim to convert a residential artery to service commercial traffic. Once again, their analysis prepared in February 2006 (LLG Parking Report, Reference 1-06-3625) aggressively advocates Mr. Shook's interests. Conclusions made by the firm undermine residents, and offer no understanding or concept of solutions, acceptable to the residential community. Additionally, the report fails to represent all of the building's business uses (conforming and nonconforming.) The city needs to investigate, review, and assess all noncompliance issues prior to rendering a decision. The proprietor has missed every opportunity to voluntarily implement mitigation measures. ENeryday strangers from the Pavilion case and intrude upon our residential living environment. This destructive intrusion presents dramatic change to the character of our neighborhood. In effort to preserve and protect neighborhood, the supplemental terms defined herein require adoption into P _C. Resolution 06-16. Thank you for your attention to this detail. Respectfully, er each, Resident 2 of 2 LOT FULL in OCT 10 2006 R-0-14/ 411A -e -c- City of Hermosa Beach MEMORANDUM Date: October 5, 2006 To: Steve Burrell From: Rick Morgan, Public Works Director Subject: 16th Street at PCH Traffic Counts Attached are the most recent counts taken from 9/20/06 through 9/26/06, along with the previous traffic survey presented to the community. This previous study compared counts from before the signal (taken on February 7, 2006) to after.the signal is in place (taken on June 23-24, 2006). At the Public Works Commission meeting it was decided to do additional counts during the school year. 5a rbp/c/memo Weekly Traffic Count Summary After PCH & 16th Signal Installation • rDir .'_._s . ? �' s 'Volumes b Dam of Week rMon Ci /25/,O6 ?Tue` x:09/26(06 ; e 09/27/06._ Thu_ O9/28/O6 . f -n r `A9/221O6 *Sat O`�9�/23%O6 Sung ,S Q9'/24/O6; 1 16th Street West of PCH Eastbound 1,584 2,467 2,416 2,460 2,284 2,189 1,800 Westbound 1,786 2,581 2,728 2,763 2,572 2,553 2,024 Total 3,370 5,048 5,144 • 5;223 4,856 4,742 3,824 2 16th Street East of PCH Eastbound 181 202 149 239 212 206 190 Westbound 103 132 219 142 190 155 126 Total 284 334 368 381 402 361 316 3 18th Street East of PCH Eastbound • 206 308 369 377. 272 248 242 Westbound 76 206 114 .::138; 217 224 156 Total 282 514 483 515 489 472 398 • • •••• • • •••• ; •::; . ; ;:•• •• • , •-"•-" • • ,.. • : • : • . • • : • ..• • . • ;•:. • ... '. • •• :::' 1.;•-: • , . ". •-••• „, • :•;• . : • ••• • ' •• • • •. • . • • • • . , • : ; , ;;;:. , • • •• •. : ; • : I . ..11' • .. ..• . • • : • : ; .1; .• • • • • ;::: ••:•• • • . : • • • • • Plesentedipy: AAE 11 [in co hoo ra te4J miimmunswommi 14.41 imilimirmozom mfremaizi urog misamsmaa cimanamigissinmalm (reihtlEi f .f3!s 2,1:11cs11'EMIL L lurr 5 ar1 a4 A gay 16th Street view A follow up study: was:: conducted for the new traffic signal installed at`the i eersection of Pacific Coast Highway and 16th ;Str, The purpose to determine if he existence of a traffic signal increases °traffic volumes intruding on nearby residential street: • • gC:g.,eityyliai}. t WegirlaffinT i ema ?kW -mamma rffifflutTri.! REEMETPfilliiigia 111111iMMEMEMEMO DIZEEZEMI 1111111111MEEZEME IMMERELEMIIININIMI ISZEIJIMENNIMMI 11111111111MMEEEMI • • • liteiMiatffitagArEfTiftD 311 NNW UITe ounts 4 r, 24-hour traffic counts were conducted on both Friday and Saturday to identify peak traffic volumes on area streets The following table presents current daily traffic volumes. Daily Traffic Counts With Signal Installed T ._T . ISII&rOML* IlisiL06 ca}D}reetl.A kF6l2Q.Ci u 5 e }Y�� r�',-},e-, tl�a �i��2»Qg6 16th W/O Prospect Eastbound 72 63 n/a Westbound 77 88 n/a iffi,l,�,` j,}, l 1111111 it 6 J i i 49 ?F? Iii fjllll M 16th E/O PCH Eastbound 550 482 568 Westbound 339 286 254 NMain I!iY £ P E9lt . . lr i411 Cr7 , NMI 16th W/O PCH Eastbound 1927 1588 1478 Westbound 2357 1961 2060 lOM N °=i`.` a .g..fi M 267 242 IV 111111 *MO n/a 17th E/O PCH Eastbound Westbound 121 90 n/a d of YYn �u-, Amordsi.lair 185 160 n I.' '} NM n/a 18th E/O PCH Eastbound Westbound 162 151 n/a Bold Indicates Day With Higher Volume n/a Indicates Count Data Not Available rcwiTi qttirUJEili 4- 21/1 47/75 j 0/0 6/16 51155 51/75 Before Signal Installed Feb. 2006 AM / PM Poek Hour Volume After Signal Installed Jun. 2006 AM / PM Peek Hour Volume NC) N O N - -- rn CP CO N 7 N O) LW) N 0 18/7 37/16 4111■ 11/11 2/0 3/7 1/0 fJ7 O cts 16th St NORTH Schematic Not To Scale MIIIIEEVEMEMIg 11511111i 1611 filfillikOPAUFAIR • arlson Peak Hour Turning Movement Counts Before and After Signal Installation Pacific Coast Highway & 16th Street "I i!.'f i"± ,i:' A1i1� , .Ir ;1[ si3C+. t '� t ~ 4.Ik,Hi�:'1 t . 1 s � I �j '4 I .! +ttl4, ,< i,t't1 t 4 4'fl"4F ,i I lI NORT'H8OUf> d 13I� 11 ,. i t . � � :VIA ti ' Point; Yt4'4 I'Ntr,t.jt..R4t, u `t 'jl TNBQUN© ' nt, �..... .�,� ,k 41,..- I ' ami'" [ d� � 0o.. !..r�.�t.�� T , III -Yyy ! 'ill l; � � ! I•I!`.It[ [� '''[K}itt'ltTAV. Yd$1;[ i a= . illi ST os ND ' �.,I.. s ..�A �I�� ni N:'4rt !.i+4}t �.,i� ! i flit 1i,,. }, i� rt ltf , t� i�{ [t i"h � {t[i�4 ! t S I I fu !�, . !. I i i4lrO !A i�EA� .�I,N tt „ �.4t4 1 4 4 I��DUR[rl . I ,: � . + ,t' Ie!� -'w .h. ..[ ..•..:.: ilea p�I,�g gIt„� l yga,, ,,�, , � i !! HI II:I91;� t?' RlTl � i„F, , ,.0-I�!' BSI r ; ;rte:,, i'rl! ti :Ii•TM n,..l :,J ; � � 4,�t,N ( � 4: G I. i, l iIIM �r,��`:-�'� � iliMi t ..� ....h ,.�",.. k.. 17 ,} � !....!., SUM OR •IIItt. ! t � ,�,. ;. � `✓j �1 � i.4 1- f i,dt . l MIN K� w , MON [ .' TIS r � [ iFd IGN nt �a .,rteu.,_� RT' 11 i •,' ,. s4, Ir l',} i.oto. I , •',:i : , i AM 56 3045 29 4 914 89 21 0 51 1 2 37 4249 PM 49 1248. 19 14 2479 198 1 0 55 0 0 16 4079 -, LAY r_K0, . ti , ' AM 40 2291 6 9 867 89 47 6 51 3 11 18 3438 it PM 55 1303 21 9 2257 176 75 16 75 7 11 7 4012 1'1,, ' 4 AM (16) (754) (23) 5 (47) 0 26 6 0 2 9 (19) (811) • 14 .1 „how PM 6 55 2 (5) (222) (22) 74 16 20 7 11 (9) (67) ;:r,, til :'[ akftl,'t^!ighi During:the AM peak -hours additional vehicles wereobserved entering 16th Street east of: PCH: However, 4 less vehiclestuned 'northbound right from PCH. The net increase is I vehicle during:tF eAM:peak=hour: During the PM peak -hour an iricrOase of 21 vehicles entered 16th Street east of PCH and 13 less vehicles°turned left from southbound PCH: The net increase in traffic on 16th:Street:is:8 vehicles duriing the: PM peak -hour. rmttruzaniemmes siiimimitumamm aftio�'tti rar• t< ro mii l d?e�wl,;it c® ` ri telbaw i`. �7815fi Et"&S4 The table below presents Los: Angeles County roadway capacity values based on roadway type and corresponding Level of Service. Daily Roadway Capacity Values (Los Angeles County) by , EiriV r ' i r .. lifir;'i ;k .a t _,..,,� , , .. ,,v t , .. •-p-:!'el i i , Irl„ ,:: �.rntl s irgi et; . , oiu t e - rml- ne e1111oh Re.#,f-.` � 1� `� p..�, ,,�m.•�,mn,+ pi kl+� TTijp i q.0" d y{��q[tRI rlh,.11l�'nl' �I,I{�{{lttfTlpl�ltHA1�S1�'1171}:tl!i.1f:�, , '1 uS��G'�..Ar�' ; vi� 1{�r.rty �M� dkth✓iP�-�- B a S;.�ilwrK�rn'bl�.�,�.i �' o + 64 `1 t�'�e;:...d:{�r� Yi� �� , i� l� r TR ,i) df . •.lt ;� .RifH� 1i;N ✓{ ji"�1t.UR j�'^Ct' 4' 11'-itii115:41 ��'! . �,�. 4 t 1 {F. � �! it .. � 1. 6 Lane Arterial 33,900 39,400 45,000 50,600 56,300 (Divided) 4 Lane Arterial 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500 (Divided) 4 Lane Arterial 15,000 17,500 20,000 22,500 25,000 (Undivided) 2 Lane Collector 10,000 11,700 13,300 15,000 16,600 (Divided) 2 Lane Collector 7,500 8,800 10,000 11,300 12,500 (Undivided) • 2 Lane Local 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 12,500 (Residential) FM Mr7i -MUM iNtti l G � ��lili31i3�s`SG�- �L Area a16 5 �_- 19�. .Q 151 151 c-) 162 \ n n NA. 15 a 9�� i7th St �� 90 4. I 21-1 O 121 14 N \oc f ounts 1 46129 +9 196 St 2 1147 4 Btyl �12511� 14588 1927 13115 O 11110 a 4 t 77 09h "t6= 3512$ 15131 , 2g6 39 A41A 355 y 15th p1 (5) :9L N % 1,1,�? \3y1 NJp/ Friday Saturday iiiiimmummuntuoi mi(((uw!u:18mamminth maia iiiMmagnmum ETAIL li! oua7l"svR"H! Ilk As shown in the table below, area streets _continue to operate at Level of Service "A" after installation of the traffic signal. Daily Capacity Analysis Traffic Counts With Signal Installed PR', o, f{�u i Fi , % r a i 'v 'Ur33U � iN � �y, t! t3�'� w�a•4 'ra ! t ) N ,{{ � ,�r; "�;:r�� 1 I4JI1, 1a n,1i si1 IUUi IB� !� 9i i�oti.o'n 16th W/O Prospect (Local Residential) Eastbound 72 A Westbound 77 16th E/O PCH (Local Residential) Eastbound 550 A Westbound 339 uiai {r` p, s `rtj'!' 16th W/O PCN (Two -Lane Collector) Eastbound 1 ,927 A Westbound 2,357 r; it ;a t... illi ,,. , , , �;, l `; L.,... 17th E/O PCH• (Local Residential) Eastbound 267 A Westbound 121 18th E/O PCH (Local Residential) Eastbound 185 A Westbound 162 OWN US 819,410$51 7R :,�'P,.s" ltri�myi ifflummormainsma The neighborhood intrusion studyfindings are as follows. • Installation of the traic signal has statistically NOT CHANGED the traffic volumes entering 16thStreet east: of PCH • During the AM peak -hour 5 additional vehicles were observed entering 16th Street east of PCH. However, 4 less vehicles tuned northbound right from PCH. The net increase is 1 vehicle during the AM .peak -hour. • During the PM peak-houran increase of 21 vehicles entered 16th Street east of PCH and 13 less vehicles turned left from southbound PCH. The net increase in traffic on 16th Street is 8 vehicles during the PM peak -hour. • The light traffic volumes on 16th Street west of Prospect indicate that the majority of traffic on 16th Street east of PCH is local neighborhood traffic. • No significant level of residential intrusion has been identified. Further analysis is not warranted: IMINEZEZIESEIN lmnJ B— .UM eimmummitagiti musarim • Recommendations Since no significant volume c analysis is not warranted: e. has. occurred further • EiumlnmmmialEEIMIN® • kargoratrammman • • . . • ,3,34.3.3::::;3.3,,,:,:333:3:::333,3:. • : . • .r. ...... 3::::3.33:11::•:::•:3::::::::::::;:, - . . . 1 .. • • • . . . • • • • pacific coast • • ReSii • , itIVR•urim.1,149 111 11,111411i i*,1!114',.. N ..; 31, .3 Os 11111i1111.1.111.1FT ,L; ., 011114 II.11 li trth, • ;1w:.111111111111111111'111.111111'11111 11111110 1. II 41110 ti 331333313331[3:131.31113111111H0111111i13 1.13 L111111; IQA111111611;jkL ill 11, • . . • • •• 3. •• - • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Rresenteth by: 1AE llndoporateM iiimmulimEmze ginvazommornm Nimismsztithei atmotake ,333,3;3,3331:3i1,31:131:1i1:1i . *3..1 1.113Y3:120.06 11111111MMINEEIMEDIEN inilETENRETIMINEMIGUI Citg of 21ermosa 1r3each Inter Office Memorandum DATE: October 9, 2006 TO: Stephen R. Burrell, City Manager Council Members FROM: Richard D. Morgan, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Agenda Item 5a — Memo regarding 16th Street Traffic Counts The Weekly Traffic Count Summary for Pier Avenue originally submitted with my memo should be replaced with the attached Weekly Traffic County Summary for PCH & 16th Street after signal installation. Weekly Traffic Count Summary After PCH & 16th Signal Installation _1 � $ S. ;,, .:-,.:..� 1.i�'%<-- .a l .j' ,. sF- "`" s�n. ' mo ;. 3 Location ry�� ti: r fi7 u, : �� ; '�� .. p'{� f f .0 �v4 Stk.F1,.�, l'l Y. f"h G ';"�'^ ,;, w>... ri F�� '? "' v '+� sa .S . �Oir4 ?�, y,u � -. �""} `�;'�....^ . a+r s'i. :. 1.r^ll�,Y(".f'. <. � �+.1 :.; i'�,.i2� .sal^` 3" 2.� 'WI �J��- � cSY' �Y 4rYt!,s.. .. _ �` =� �rtt}+.ei�.lN �.'Y+'• �a ��R Valuer es by Dv o NW+ ek s u o`tk 3 .�+s 'kX", ,4; .�$j��.iy -5 1 �ti� ,5 ... : ' « 1,....' :� i+. -.�� S ,�ii1.< , 2Mpn. # k:, a�i>'C�.kvYt'-�-.`E:�t _: ,.0.9/25'/_06 y1.re : , ,,, r . �^ �.-.^4.��-,. ....*t:,�c�}, aR '3F; 0.9 26106f.g 4Mj�� ., 1 t�,...., r `�ss�ye.. �"�:_ I .- 4K' 09/271.06 :*<` z. Th,. �`� .., ..n�� Lstf %.. ly r'�: �vri 1 c 0903/06 ,, :n' "' ? ' Fn•e x 3 S i liV 09/22/06 ' .r. y. �� r`i.y $lx �7 �i` ,.4/rFwi',"+ , o9/23/Q6. s _,�z ;��.SU s:�rA , �::r r; 09.0/0e 1 16th Street West of PCH Eastbound 1,584 2,467 2,416 2,460 2,284 2,189 1,800 Westbound 1,786 2,581. 2,728 2,76.3 2,572 2,553 2,024 Total 3,370 5,048 5,144 5,223 4,856 4,742 3,824 2 16th Street East of PCH Eastbound 181 202 149 239 212 206 190 Westbound 103 132 219 142 190 155 126 Total 284 334 368 381 402 361 316 3. 18th Street East of PCH Eastbound 206 308 369 377 272 248 242 Westbound 76 206 114 ..138. 217 224 156 Total 282 514 483 51.5- 489 472 398 • City of Hermosa Beach Mayor and City Council 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: PAVILION TRAFFIC ISSUES, PCH/ 16TH STREET Dear Mr. Mayor and Council: It is a "free for all" at the intersection of 16th Street/Pacific Coast Hwy. On October 3, 2006 at 6:OOpm, as I drove westbound on 16th Street between PCH and Ardmore. More than 6 vehicles in the traffic lane (closest to the curb) were unable to advance forward to enter the Pavilion due to delays with the mechanical gate. This creates unsafe conditions for everyone plus congestion. The parking plan inadequately services the building. Complications such as delayed access discourage use and encourage spillover traffic into residential neighborhoods. Recommendation: 1. Do NOT intensify this commercial building with more high -impact usage. 2. Require the mechanical gate to remain in the "up" position to allow full access to the parking structure. 3. Allow 100% standard self -parking. Unresolved issues and the intensification of this building undermines residents and creates nuisance conditions. Respectfully, Patty Egerer SUPPLEMENTAL �a INFORMATION City of Hermosa Beach MEMORANDUM Date: October 10, 2006 To: Stephen R. Burrell, City Manager Council Members From: Rick Morgan, Public Works Director C� Subject: Agenda Item 5a — Memo regarding 16th Street Traffic Counts The Weekly Traffic Count Summary for Pier Avenue originally submitted with my memo should be replaced with attached Weekly Traffic Count Summary. Also attached is the Week Long Speed Survey. The traffic engineer will be present at the Council meeting to answer any questions. Attachments; Traffic volume counts Speed survey SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a Weekly Traffic Count Summary After PCH & 16th Signal Installation • • T, �E �'. ,, � ; . #Yz„ a.1: ^ J 6 .•}3 'd�'t'., io c� - ; : L ocat[on> - Vw. ,"I`=',p .. ]+ ,, , , ':"...m.: yz ;`a +-vert `r.. y..•• ^ t;� k 'w�iJs ;fir x d s�^'� R'ia> *. .w •xF�n-. kZKv! Vo a .�iJaThr.. ..�p6 ^a "m1 : '.Ty.? 21y�' '+.. F`"°i't �Uolumes.by ay of`Week�4� ,r ' ' ��w� �''�•'� .,� s�.�� q,.'�,;�}�� z•_ =• -- , r `= irtun_�w :�� '�^� .._ v_ ak c R��•��-:a�`��-�=r.kt.:.�,,�W�'d'*,� 4,09/25/06, x09/26/06 _"09%27/,06 ?09%28/06 K.,Fn;• 09/22/06„ :t:� Sats ,, ??'t09/23/O6 4tt cs'� ��;Sun{ 1 16th Street West of PCH Eastbound 1,584 2,467 2,416 2,460 2,284 2,189 ,0942416�:-: 1,800 Westbound 1,786 2,581 2,728 2,763 2,572 2,553 2,024 Total 3,370 5,048. 5,144 5,223 4,856 4,742 3,824 2 16th Street East of PCH Eastbound 384 501 520 571 514 388 344 Westbound 360 365'. 268 234 344 226 234 Total 744 866. 788 805 858 614 578 3 16th Street West of Bonnie Brea Eastbound 508 589 610 629 621 429 394 Westbound 298 290 237 193 248 127 127 Total 806 879 847 822 869 556 521 4 17th Street East of PCH Eastbound 181 202 149 239 212 206 190 Westbound 103 132 219 142 190 155 126 Total 284 334 368 381 4.02 361 316 5 18th Street East of PCH Eastbound 206 308 369 377 272 248 242 Westbound 76 206 114 13.8 .217 224 156 Total 282 514 483 515 489 472 398 • • S - - Week -Long -Speed Survey (7 days) September 22 - 28, 2006 Speed`Category,, 16th: Street. Eastof PCH" West Bonnie'Brea Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound 15th Percentile Speed * 16 * Median Speed (50th percentile) 16 16 21 18 Average Speed - All Vehicles 20 20 22 21 85th Percentile Speed 21 20 25 23 95th Percentile Speed 23 23 28 27 10 MPH Pace Speed 16-25 16-25 16-25 16-25 Number of Vehicles in Pace 2,095 1,184 2,856 1,093 Percent of Vehicles in Pace 97.08% 95.64% 82.23% 89.59% Number of Vehicles > 25 MPH 62 53 616 126 Percent of Vehicles > 25 MPH 2.87% 4.28% 17.74% 10.33% * = Less than 15 MPH • October 4, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council /D//o/04, Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BANNER PERMIT FEES FROM THE HERMOSA BEACH WOMAN'S CLUB FOR THE ANNUAL PANCAKE BREAKFAST Recommendation: That the City Council waive the $245 banner fee for the pancake breakfast on October 22, 2006. Background: I have attached a request to waive the banner fee for the pancake breakfast on October 22, 2006. The City Council has waived this fee in this past. Respectfully submitted, Ste en ' . Burrel City Manager t.)ul .Annuai rancaKe breaiaast Page I ot 1 • • Steve Burrell From: Susan Blaco [susan.blacolzu2@statefarm.com] Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:16 .AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: 15th Annual Pancake Breakfast Dear Steve: The Woman's Club of Hermosa Beach requests that the fee be waived for the banner advertising the 15th Annual VVornan!s Club Pancake Breakfast. The banner is scheduled for Pier/Valley 'Oct. 1.6-23. The breakfast will be held Sunday, Oct. 22. Thank you, Susan Blaco 817/2006 0 44?) Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council PIER AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: October 2, 2006 /'1/,i Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 1. Form a design oversight committee comprised of two members of the Public Works Commission, the Planning Commission and City Council, 2. Review public comment regarding the trial striping layout on Pier Avenue between Hermosa Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway; 3. Direct staff to either terminate the test striping and return to four lanes of traffic or to leave the two lane option in place; and 4. If the direction is to return to four lanes, authorize staff to issue a change order to PCI, Inc. in an amount not -to -exceed $20,000 to remove existing pavement markings and provide new striping. Background: The Public Works Commission, at its meeting of September 20, 2006, held a public meeting to receive public comment and make a recommendation to Council regarding the test striping of Pier Avenue (Attachment 5). The test striping project has been in place throughout the summer. Traffic counts were presented which were taken in February, 2006, in June, 2006, and finally in September, 2006 (Attachment 1). On September 18th, while the traffic counters were in place, a time-lapse video was recorded of traffic on Pier Avenue. The camera was mounted on the Fire Tower and observed Pier Avenue from Bard Avenue looking west to Monterey Boulevard. The video was shown to the Commission. On that date the traffic counter recorded an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) amount of 15;110 vehicles. This is the highest ADT ever measured for Pier Avenue, which was measured at 14,769 in 2005 and at 10,500 in 1998. During this same time period no significant traffic congestion was observed in the time-lapse. video. Only three occurrences of traffic back-up were observed, each for east bound traffic at the Bard stop sign. In each instance the back-up was due to a fire truck halting traffic while backing into the fire station. Based upon observations throughout the test period and traffic data, the City's traffic engineering consultant found the two-lane option to be acceptable for the existing traffic volume. They also determined that there was significant capacity for future growth. Additionally, the very high total traffic count measured seems to allay concerns that there was significant diversion of traffic to the parallel side streets. Traffic counts were also taken on 8th Street, which did show a significant increase in volume near Hermosa Avenue, but actually went down between Ardmore Avenue and PCH. Staff observations are that reducing the number of travel lanes has slowed travel speeds on Pier Avenue and believes the crosswalks and diagonal parking have been made safer by the slowed speeds, shortened crosswalk lengths, and widened parking aisle. Police and Fire were asked to comment on the temporary striping (Attachments 2 and 3). The concern expressed by Fire was that trucks parking and off-loading in the median, which serves as an emergency lane during peak traffic hours, was causing delays in emergency response. Police reported that back-ups have caused them to use alternate routes but do not feel that response times have been increased. Both departments were strongly in favor of keeping the stop sign at Bard Street, which has greatly improved access to Pier Avenue. 6b • • The traffic accident history from January 1, 2003 through March 31, 2006 shows a total of sixteen accidents, three of which involved pedestrians struck by vehicles in a crosswalk (two of these pedestrians were skateboarding and determined to be at fault. From April 1, 2006 to present there have been five accidents, four of which occurred east of Valley and one minor fender bender at Palm Drive. Many communications, both written and verbal, have been received on both sides of the issue (Attachment 4) but the strong majority of communications received have been opposed to the change. After listening to the staff report and receiving public testimony, the Public Works Commission voted 5-0 in favor of discontinuing the striping test and returning the lane striping to four lanes as existed before, with the exception that they voted in favor of keeping the stop sign at Bard Street. They also voted 4-1 in support the formation of the design oversight committee. This CIP Project No. 04-116 Pier Avenue Street Improvement Project was approved by City Council for design to begin this fiscal year. Prior to beginning design of these improvements, the trial striping project was done to test reducing the number of travel lanes from four lanes to two lanes, as recommended in the Downtown Implementation Plan, approved by Council in 1994. The goal of this plan was to implement traffic calming measures to improve pedestrian safety and to provide amenities creating a comfortable shopping environment for the community and visitors. Whether the new street improvement includes the two lanes or four lanes, this project proposes to install street trees, street furniture, old fashioned street lights plus other improvements which will enhance the aesthetics of this downtown corridor. It is recommended that the City Council form a design oversight committee comprised of two members of the Public Works Commission, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, to provide design oversight for this "Legacy" project. The Planning and Public Works Commissions have already identified the subcommittee members who would participate in the ad hoc committee. Council may also wish to consider adding two representatives of local architects to also participate on this committee. For design to begin, it is requested that Council select one of the following options. Options: 1. Direct staff to restore stripingto four -lanes and authorize staff to enter into a change order with PCI, Inc. to remove existing markings and re -stripe at a not -to -exceed cost of $20,000, and direct staff to begin the design of street improvements with four -lane configuration; or 2. Approve the two-lane option and direct staff to begin the design of street improvements with the two-lane configuration; or 3. Request further study by staff and refer the issue of two lanes vs. four lanes to the newly formed ad hoc committee. Fiscal Impact: If option 1, above, is selected, then a not -to -exceed amount of $20,000 from CIP 04-116 (146-8116-4201) will be expended to re -stripe traffic lanes. Attachments: 1. Traffic Comparisons 2. Memos from Police Department 3. Memo from Fire Department 4. Correspondence 5. Excerpts from PW Commission Meeting Minutes 2 Respectfully submitted, Ale Richard /Morgan, P.E. Directo of Public Works/City Engineer Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director 3 Concur: Stephen City Manager F:1B951PWFILES\CCITEMS\pier ave imp project 10-10-06.doc • Table Traffic Count Comparison Before and After Lane Reduction ATTACHMENT 1 pja/�vonuo West of Valley Eastbound 2.348 3,2U1 7.2S2 4,944 Westbound 6,859 9,344 7,818 959 Total 9.207 12,545 15.110 5,903 10.500 14,769 2 Pier Avenue Eastbound 4'AG4 5S46 ' 5O2O ' 56 WestboundEaotofHonnooa ootbound 4,653 7,213 5,310 657 Total 9,617 12;859 10.330 713 13.000 11,436 3 Loma Drive North ofPier Northbound 170 cmf nc n/a Southbound 355 umf no n/a Total 525 cmf nc n/a 4 16th Street Eastbound 157 695 nc 538 WestboundEautofHennooa Westbound 541 519 nc -22 Total 698 1,214 no 516 5 10th Street East of Hermosa Eastbound 812 1430 ' nc 618 Westbound 632 721 nc 89 Total 1,444 2,151 nu 707 6 11th Street Eastbound 890 680 nc -210 Westboundyyostcfya||oy *oU�ound 274 187 nc -87 Total 1,164 867 nc -297 ' 8th Street Eastbound 939 148O ' 2O21 ' 1O82 ' WestboundEastofHonnuua Westbound 1,098 1,044 2,101 1,003 Total 2,037 2,504 4,122 2,085 8 8th Street Eastbound 2,188 2,465 277 Westboundyyautufya|/ Westbound 2,310 1,992 -318 Total 4,498 4,457 -41 9 8th Street Ardmore to PCH Eastbound 2,325 ' Westbound 2,271 Total 4,596 5.000 7,251 Feb -06 Traffic counts BEFORE lane reduction Jun -06 Traffic counts collected AFTER lane reduction but before July modifivaUono Sep -06 Final Traffic counts Increase or decrease of most recent traffic counts compared to BEFORE lane reduction cmf Counter malfunction nc Not counted this period n/a Not applicable ATTACHMENT • • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 t From: G. Savelli [gsavelli@hermosapolice.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 5:03 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. Rick, As you know, I was not here when Pier Ave. was four lanes so I can not comment. I did question officers and supervisors about their thoughts on the striping. They have indicated that the time it takes to travel Pier Ave has been increased by reducing to two lanes. They report some back-ups in peak times during events or week -end evenings when people are arriving downtown and during school crossing times. (Back-ups were reported from Valley to Loma during school times) Some officers have chosen to use alternate routes to avoid the delays on Pier Ave.(some even mentioned using 8th st) however our response times have not increased. Based on their own need to use Pier Ave. (constantly) versus the average daily traveler they would prefer it be four lanes. Again this is just based on preference due to their high use of the street. All officers and supervisors supported the stop sign and after a "warning period" began issuing citations to gain compliance and this has helped PD and FD enter and exit the departments. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Greg ATTACHMENT 2 10/4/2006 From: Russell Tingley Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:42 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FD Comments re PierAve Stripping Rick; On 09/13/06 the following comments were made by staff re the Pier Ave. stripping: Center lane median is not always accessible due to delivery vehicles parked to load/off-load. West bound "left -turners" at Monterey often are backed -up and block center lane during peak traffic periods. Several times this has occurred resulting in response delays of 15-20 seconds per Captain Crawford. West bound stop sign at Bard in front of fire station — stopped driver cannot easily see west bound departing fire engine leaving fire station. Russell Tingley, Fire Chief City of Hermosa Beach 540 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Telephone: 310-318-0303 Fax: 310-379-7725 E-mail: rtingley@hermosabch.org ATTACHMENT 3 • Attention: Marineland MHP Reents Please telt us your: opinion:about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and-re-striping-enay be removed. 1. ;Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re-striPed to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider tideliialks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. VAgree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: • , . • Space #: a. SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICEBY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will, be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this rnatter by: f Contacting RichardMorgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rrnoroanhernio§ab6h.Orti • Attending Public Woiks Commission • Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hail. ATTACHMENT 4 Ref: P*AvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marjpeland HOA 8/28/06 1110 • Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. StopSigns at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. :Agree with the stop signs ❑ Disagree with the stop signs Comment: Glk e*i( S16 it) PLi/1<e641, eAa/ 2: Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue hasbeen re -striped. to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down.The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comment: gree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Name: Space #: bo SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICEBY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted.forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at -phone 310-3.18-0262 or email rmorgan(c�herrnosabch. orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenuebpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Regents Please tell us your opinion:about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support •the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Ere with the stop signs •0 Disagree with the stop signs Comtnent: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lane% (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow dOwn. The-widei. sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. gree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: . Space #: 0 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE By NOON, SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 . . Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly Oh thiS mafter: by: • Contacting Richard:Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rrtiordanhernibSabch.or4 • • Attending PublioWorks Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: Pierk.fenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 •• Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop:signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenueare a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard .& Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and. Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. VAgree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: VE4. oo1 TI -660•1 i< go CoNS(i1€72A T E PtACiN G OF `n S'tE5P SIGNS 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes.) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 1E Agree with re -striping ID Disagree with re -striping Comment: TKA KIK tf 0 U So Nt U C t-{ Name: V.000TUU Space #: 58 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works,.at phone 310-318-0262. or email rmorgan(a�hermosabch. org • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doo :• . Sponsored byMarineland HOA 8/28/06 k tentio : Marineland arine(and MHP Rents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. (Agree with the stop signs ❑ Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes). with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. KAgree with re -striping ❑ Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: ejJKdr /6/':7/1<0 Space #: `5 3 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 II/Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. %Agree with the stop signs ❑ Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. PierAvenue Re -striping Pier Avenue hasbeen re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow •down. • The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: (1.1)61-riph.„- P,-9-ko Space #: 53 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a�hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 4 Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs andre-striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street; Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier. Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes. (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles haveto slow down. jhe wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Space #: r SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorganCc�hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and :re -striping may be removed. The new 4 -way stop signs made it safer for Marineland Agree with the Comment: i[ n . i , 1. Stop Signs at Bard at the intersection of residents to enter and stop signs 11' 4.4 & Bard Street exit • Disagree ,_ V_ Pier and Pier Avenue have the park from Bard Street. with the stop signs ' A 0� s^n,E CV r•4 LO 0 CJr%bs 54 rer E I A: a - 0\-OLIv% o v,r-. Pier Avenue widen the slow down. Comment: : 2. Pier Avenue;Re-striping has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for:pedestrians The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood Agree with re -striping lanes) with plans to eventually because vehicles have to closest to Marineland. • Disagree with re -striping Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICEBY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting RichardMorgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a�herrriosabch.org • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by MarinelandHOA 8/28106 V Attention: Marineland MHP Resents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. . 4ree with the stop signs Comment: 0 Disagree with the stopsigns f oma: AZ, -7f Pie r Ave a e -strip Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will -improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 0 Agree with re -striping Disa ree with re -striping Comment: '&'rq Name: .17 Space #: ��- SUBMIT FORM TO MHP.O:FFICE;BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be: provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter.by: •. _ Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgantc7i hermosabch.org • Attending Public -Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • SAttention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. ::Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. '4 Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2... Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has • been •re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widenthe sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: ' y i Qk1k- R Leo, Space #: ;3 SUBMIT FORM, TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of.Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorganCa�hermosabch.oro • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20', 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA . 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Re ents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it saf f for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. 'Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with,the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has een re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the side alks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. e wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comment: gree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Name: Space #: 5 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE.'BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly onthis matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmoroanCa)hermosabch.org • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm,at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinionabout new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down.. The der sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comment: gree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Name: Space #: 3 ,. SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of > Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a�hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 •Attention: Marineland MHP Regents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are .a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may b& removed. 1. Stop'Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the -intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. ij IV Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re-striped6.linge (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comment: Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Name: Space #: SUBMIT.FORM:170 NIIIP‘'2OFFICEi.BY NOON, SaPTEMBER11TH, 2006 ; . Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may commerit direCtOrl triiknitter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director ofPublic Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmoroanAhertho'Sabch.orO • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 2e, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • • Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us youroPinion.about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and'i-6-Striping::ifiay be removed. • 1. :Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. . Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has be'eti ‘reL'Strid•to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider' Sidewalks will imp6ve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Agree With..retriping • 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Space #: SUBMIT:F:00*TO MHP OFFICE:BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard:Morgan, Director ofPublic Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorcian@hermosabc-h.oro • Attending RibliC.Wbrks COmriiissiOn Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PietAvenue0pinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Refill/lents Please tell us, your opinion -about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop,$ight at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs El Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier'AVehtie hasbeer6`.e.-StriP4i-ifilandi (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the Sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow own: T e'vAdeYSitleW6ik6 vilI implaiive neighborhood closest to Marineland. gree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Com ent: • Name: SUBMIT FORM"TO OFFICE43Y NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Space #: Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment direoilkori fhimatt'er by: • - Contacting Richard Morgan, Director otPublic Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmoroanehertridtaboh.Orti • Attending Public -Works Commission Meeting on September nth, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref:.1?iesrAverigeOpinion.0.C..,. . Sponsored by Maririelancl HOA 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. i i Comment: ree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. Jf he wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. ree with re striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: • Name: J.C4 i c 4-77/lef Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP. OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310=318-0262 or email rmorgan@hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 V Attention: Marineland MHP Regents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs arid re:striping may be' removed. 1. Stop 'Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenuehave made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. lye Agree with the stop signs Comment: 0 Disagree with the stop signs 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to.2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. [Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: Space #: SUBMIT FORM' TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER. 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be. provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this:matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director ofPublic Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a herniosabch.orq Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree 0 Disagree Comment: �,-t7O)9 ,/Ly�i2� ./ N E AL t 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks.. The, re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles are forced to slow down instead of speeding through crosswalks; and the wider sidewalks will improve the neighborhoods closest to Marineland. Al Agree 0 Disagree Comment: Name: tyf9-j c . 14-0 Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: 1 Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone.310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(chermosabch.orq Attention: Marineland MHP Re dents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs ❑ Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks.. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians becausevehicles have to slow down. The widersidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comm ❑ Agree with re -striping 'Disagree with re -striping Name: Space #: /. SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE: :BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of -Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorganc hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 S . Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: P / _J iLe 1r1 � .�xPr 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) • with plans to eventually widen the sidewal s. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The Ader sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 0 Agree with re -striping Comment:. Disagree with re -striping btfo Name: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(c�hermosabch.org • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA '8/28/06 • Attention: Marineland MHP Reents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be: removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: W ST/�L Nem Pet -./CC eppWg f1EN7 of g7 f' __ • 1L _ Por •1 fo t •�rli 2: Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland.. 0 Agree with re -striping ' Disagree with re -striping Comment::SjL ;G�l $ pd ijt% ivx -r& 136 by; Iva ' 136776A >� MLLE' 5 iv vSG L 1-44,43titij Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • . Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorganahermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • °Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 3 C��-Q ,-PCQ_AAn2. a0-114 ryncx1� m� '1 C3ZD C.L.. C.J Q cJ� i l c L,r-, �.,- crQ1 1 I 1 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment ( ve ktLAP S ! y\ )c `fit SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of. Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a�hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • Attention: Marineland MHP Reents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. C1 Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pi.e.r Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has. been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 0 Agree with re -striping Q".Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: -Yoe_ Otc, Space #: 5 SUBMIT FORM TO MHP.Of.FI.CE`_BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will bei provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan(a hermosabch.ora • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 Attention: Marineland MHP Residents Please tell us your opinionabout new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at °Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs 0 Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 1 Agree with re -striping 0 Disagree with re -striping Comment: Name: J-w:cc Ttit-JA,e Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE'BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmoroant�hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8128106 Attention: Marineland MHP Rents Please tell us your opinion about new stop signs and re -striping on Pier Avenue. The changes to Pier Avenue are a test. Without public support the stop signs and re -striping may be removed. 1. Stop Signs at Bard & Pier The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street. Agree with the stop signs ❑ Disagree with the stop signs Comment: 2. Pier Avenue Re -striping Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider' sidewalks, will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. Comm Agree with re -striping ❑ Disagree with re -striping nt: Name: Space #: SUBMIT FORM TO MHP OFFICE.BY NOON, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2006 Submitted forms will be provided to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Commission. You may comment directly on this matter by: • Contacting Richard Morgan, Director of Public Works, at phone 310-318-0262 or email rmorgan hermosabch.orq • Attending Public Works Commission Meeting on September 20th, 7pm, at City Hall. Ref: PierAvenueOpinion.doc Sponsored by Marineland HOA 8/28/06 • September 12, 2006 Marineland Home Owners Ass/tion 531 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Richard Morgan Director of Public Works City of Hermosa Beach Re: Pier Avenue Re -Striping Dear Rick, RECEIVED SEP 1 2 2006 PUBLIC WORKS A few weeks ago 1 distributed surveys to Marineland Residents regarding the Pier Avenue Re -stripping Project. Enclosed are the completed surveys. The tally is as follows: Survey Statement Agree Disagree Total 1. The new 4 -way stop signs at the intersection of Bard Street and Pier Avenue have made it safer for Marineland residents to enter and exit the park from Bard Street 25 0 25 2. Pier Avenue has been re -striped to 2 lanes (from 4 lanes) with plans to eventually widen the sidewalks. The re -striping is safer for pedestrians because vehicles have to slow down. The wider sidewalks will improve neighborhood closest to Marineland. 20 5 25 Total Surveys 25 In addition to checking "Agree" or "Disagree" many residents also wrote comments. I hope that this is helpful. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Janice Yates President, Marineland HOA 310-937-7177 zapzap@earthlink.net ATTACHMENT 41 • TOd irh Ste Power* Owners K..., From Pablo's Hogs 719 8 " $t needsirsievtIoxia its reacklits to advise -01e trffir WOrks:Depattmeetof tho added traffic. that 'era aro ' ' lr Sta. Phone $$.103:'0214, k added 1 hat been inicroattlia oft 841% mug ld lana chaile6 000111ffeli =Fier A I*Ito adytoed 'gym • O# tho Fire department, poirmoilke a pont* daPaltmenre Inns i Usama l' a tense i .Pier Jerre. ism I *per With City Ifirollitit this gate and requeotod that .eY have 04IrtnIftra ntonitomtby"th0-0Ounting ntochineville hadrible deho.storooal Teem; ego and. at that tip ag 'h td trixt . waa advised that Ine'eakg comma *ill be haviii0mustratatia SoPteelher and the Pros nod Com will detennine ®rw I vtittakti046. i .to: add thaftwitbrthavaddad traffic tbo.pasterWold0 b : into Ada two. . PtOtse U: atitbellittontid.Idgetings ire®mher Andbit 146. Please ca*citifW : advig;*.thotit 'a Our probInm..Let% Set that ib :GOi nit !' be readYlOr the Cuuncat.. Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Don Karasevicz [dkarasevicz@adelphia.net] Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 5:33 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. re -striping Hi Rick Morgan, In regards to the re -striping of Pier Ave. the left turn on to Pier Ave. from south bound Monterey Blvd. is very sharp .and does not appear practical for trucks and emergency vehicles to navigate. I trust this is only temporary due to the fact the build out plan calls for having the center turning lane only 10 ft. wide. In any case the turn is sharp due to the angle of the intersecting streets and hopefully the permanent turn will take this into account. I hope the experiment works: and improves Pier Ave. Good luck, Don Karas.evicz done.southcalhomes (310)376-7621 direct • Rick Morgan Page 1of1 From: Rashel Mereness [rashelm@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 6:10 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: Randy LaFaye; Sam Edgerton; jbrhbcc@aol.com; michaelkeegan@rrmanhattanbread.com; peter@electpetertucker.com Subject: Pier Avenue Renovation It was very thoughtful. of your office to send out the information regarding the plan for upper Pier Avenue. I have two questions/comments that I hope you can address: (1) I live on Cypress Avenue south of Pier Avenue. This street is badly in need of repair. Itis completely cracked and pot -holed and driving on it feels like driving on a 4WD road. From what I understand neighbors have made several requests for repairs over the years, so it's a bit frustrating to see so much effort and money put into upgrading Pier Ave before our street receives necessary repairs. Are any funds earmarked to repair Cypress Avenue? (2) I think the idea of increasing sidewalk space on Pier only makes sense if you allow the restaurants on upper Pier to increase their outdoor seating. The poor little crepes place has to stick tables wherever they can up and down the street because of the high demand to sit out there. I know as a resident of the upper Pier area, I would appreciate being able to enjoy patio dining at a larger variety of restaurants than just those that are on the Pier Plaza. Are you considering allowing the restaurants to expand with outdoor seating? I don't otherwise see much value in just making larger sidewalks. There is not that much foot traffic on the current sidewalks. Please let me know if you have any responses to the above at your earliest convenience. Best Regards, Rashel Mereness 1134 Cpress Ave #2 310-463-8953 Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com . 9/1,4/901)6 Message Rick Morgan • Page l of 1 From: jgoodlett [jgoodlett@adelphia.netj Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:42 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: test traffic lanes I first learned about the traffic lanes reconfiguration when my neighbor asked if I had been, to the area of Pier and Valley. He had just dropped his kids off at Valley School and stated the situation made the kids late for school. On Wednesday evening I made a trip to Vons and must say I agree with my neighbor (it's a mess). I will make an effort to go down to the corner of Pier and Valley over the week -end (I'll be on a bicycle) to check it out. I invite you to do the same. Okay so these are my thoughts. Can the city afford to spend money for this and what is the return? Who are we accommodating? I have lived in HB for over 35 years and do not recall a drainage issue on Pier Ave. Do we really want more restaurants and bars in HB? Will we need more Police to control the patrons? Can the Fire trucks enter and exit the Fire station on busy week -ends with only two lanes? Why do we need to make a change? I am curious on why a normal everyday citizen would find this a good idea. • Rick Morgan Page 1 of I From: Shauna Valenzuela [shaunaval@mac.com] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 12:20 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: street reconfiguration/HB HATE IT .1!!.!!! 1111 A1'111114 Rick Morgan. From: Jim Schoen pim.schoen@verizon.net] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 10:57 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Restriping of Pier Avenue As a homeowner at 539 2nd Street,•I greatly support the single lane initiative on Pier Avenue. Thanks for doing 'a great job in communicating the citywork initiatives. Jim Schoen 539 2nd Street HB, CA 90254 310-379-7994 39 Rick Morgan From: Jeremy Berman Bjerem.y_berman@yahoo.corrij Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 12:44 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier We are residents of the area and are excited about the possible change. in street conditions. We are wondering if the possibility of a signal has been considered for pier and the two greenbelt streets. The stop sign is terribly ineffective for the volume of cars and the striping will only add to the flow problems at that intersection..Manhattan has a signal to correct this problem so should we. The test is doomed to fail unless that factor is.considered. Also the forced turn at a stop sign is only going to cause backups. removing the stop sign will have a dramatic increase in flow. Just a residents opinion. Jeremy Berman Cypress Ave 38 Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Sam D'Amico [sam.damico@verizon.net] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 4:52 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Striping Project I think the traffic is AWFUL! I appreciate the idea of beautifying Pier Avenue, but not at the expense of local traffic. Aiready, even at off peak'hours the traffic is insane. [cannot begin to imagine how bad it will be on weekends in the summer month. In the last few days, l have used 8m street and taken Arrdmore to get off of Monterey. This is ridiculous. Please plant flowers or trees, but open up Pier Avenue to 2 lanes once again. Stop the madness! Joanne & Sebastian D'Amico 1101 Monterey Page l .of 1 Rick Morgan From: Steve Brown [sbrown@sddb.net] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 11:30 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Hermosa Pilot Striping Project Hello, I••have••been a Hermosaresident for.over 20•ye.ars and have•watched this city grow from a sleepy beach community to,a overcrowded circus with all the annual events and ridiculous festivals that bring beer swilling hooligans to our city. • Now the council in it's infinite wisdom decides to make a major change to the only artery to the beach which by the way is backing up traffic all the way to PCH and making it impossible to residents to make it to their house. Here's a little advice... Other city's decide to conduct traffic studies and flow analysis before making such a drastic change in the middle of the busiest travel season. It's bad enough that every couple of months there is some bicycle marathon or festival that makes driving to our residence bad enough, now you are proposing that we make it permanently impossible for people to get home!!! Do you want people to move out of Hermosa? I guarantee, I have lived here longer than most of the geniuses that are making these decisions and take it from a local - LEAVE OUR•CITY ALONE! This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, andis believed to be clean. MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. n/1 A 1/1/64/ Rick Morgan From: Robert C. Aronoff [Robert@Aronoff.com] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 7:47 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue restriping The reconfiguration of upper Pier Avenue is horrible. Traffic is backed up. People are causing gridlock at Valley and Armore as they try to squeeze into one lane. Traffic is going into residential areas as motorists try to find alternative paths. Each time a a car parks, traffic backs up. Rush hour was bad enough without intentionally trying to limit traffic flow. Robert C. Aronoff 124 The Strand Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Telephone: 310/318-2222 Facsimile: 310/943-1400 37 • Rick Morgan Page 1. of 2 From: The Andersons [hfa3@adelphia.net] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 9:33 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Fwd: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice HATE the new configuration of Pier Ave. Understand the thinking behind it, but find it extremely frustrating when trying to turn from Valley onto Pier in the morning after dropping the kids at school. The traffic in the new single lane on Pier between Valley and is backed up to such an extent that turning west onto Pier from Valley becomes impossible. The intersection is already frightening: heavy traffic at the 4 -way stop, the crossing guard trying to do his job, groups of school children, other pedestrians it's daunting on a daily basis. Hardly seems like an improvement, to reduce an already crowded two-lane street to a doubly crowded single lane of travel. Begin forwarded message: From: hermosabch@e-govmail.com Date: June 9, 2006 5:15:03 PM PDT To: hfa3(c�adelphia.net Subject: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice Reply -To: webmaster a@.hermosabch.org IMPORTANT PUBLIC NOTICE PIER AVENUE PILOT STRIPING PROJECT On Wednesday, June 7, 2006, Pier Avenue was re -striped from two lanes of travel in each direction to one lane in each direction with a center turning lane from Bard Avenue to Hermosa Avenue. Stop signs were also added at Bard Street to safely facilitate the westbound merge from two lanes to one. These changes were made on a trial basis in advance of beginning design to reconstruct Pier Avenue from PCH to Hermosa Avenue. THIS IS ONLY A TEST! The. City has set aside Proposition C Funding to reconstruct this street in Fiscal Year 06-07. Scopeof work for this project includes reconstructing sidewalks, curb Qn aionnV • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Terri Dinubilo on behalf.of Web Master Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 7:42 AM To: Rick Morgan (Rick Morgan) Cc: Steve Burrell (sburrell@hermosabch.org) Subject: FW: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice Here are some emails I received that were sent to our web site. FYI —Terri From: Jb573@aol.com [mailto:Jb573@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 9:05 AM To: Web Master Subject: Re: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice Thank you for the email. I saw the changes this week when I tried to get downtown. It was horrible. The cars were backed up from upper Pier Ave near Vons. And that was during the daytime. I imagine nighttimes and weekends will be worse with people going to restaurants, to the beaches, shopping, or just trying to get home. I was headed to The Bike Shop but gave up when I saw the difficulty of getting there.. I decided not to try the beauty supply store by the Post Office and went to another one near Vons. I think it is a poor decision to try to imitate the 1 -lane that Manhattan beach has. They have a bottle neck on upper Man Bch Blvd each day above Ardmore and to Pacific. We don't need longer parking spaces for Hummers, etc--- we need smaller cars. We are not in support of this at all. Jacki and Bernie Friedman Rick Morgan Page 1. of 1 From: Terri Dinubilo on behalf of Web Master Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 7:46 AM To: Rick Morgan (Rick Morgan) Cc: Steve Burrell (sburrell@hermosabch.org) Subject: FW: Pier Avenue Traffic Test Another view.... -Terri From: Lisa Gevov [mailto:Lgevov@adelphia.net] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 11:14 AM To: Web Master Subject: Pier Avenue Traffic Test Thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns regarding the Pier Avenue Traffic Test. Of course, all changetakes time to get used to, however, I'm not clear on why- this change was considered. Two lanes was not accommodating.:the traffic up and down Pier Avenue prior to; the test, so now a lane from each side . isremoved? Howls this better? The flow of traffic is slowed, the congestion is increased, and people are driving around Hermosa looking for parking that doesn't even exist for the residents. of the -city; let alone visitors. I'm sure I'm not the only one who couldn't believe that it could take 15 minutes. to get from Hermosa Avenue to Von's, with 2 lanes going. The idea to: update Pier Avenue to invite more people to experience Hermosa is great, except where are all of these people going to park once they finally make it down Pier Avenue? Hermosa doesn't have the parking . availability like Manhattan and Redondo. Doesn't that have to be pait.of the.plan? Looking forward to the next concept. Thank you, Lisa Gevov (ill n 11!1114 • Page 1 of 2 Rick Morgan From: The Andersons [hfa3@adelphia.net] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:28 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice Thanks, Rick - realized I left out the street name, as I was unsure of it - but after driving by this morning, the street is Bard. Lois On Jun 12, 2006, at 9:23 AM, Rick Morgan wrote: Thank you for your comments, l assure you they are being considered as part of this test...Rick From: The Andersons [mailto:hfa3©adelohia.net] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006, 9:33 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Fwd: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice HATE the new configuration of Pier Ave. Understand the thinking behind it, but find it extremely frustrating when trying to turn from Valley onto Pier in the morning after dropping the kids at school. The traffic in the new single lane on Pier between Valley and is backed up to such an extent that turning west onto Pier from Valley becomes impossible. The intersection is already frightening: heavy traffic at the 4 -way stop, the crossing guard trying to do his job, groups of school children, other pedestrians it's daunting on a daily basis. Hardly seems like an improvement, to reduce an already crowded two-lane street to a doubly crowded single lane of travel. Begin forwarded message: Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:56 AM To:. Cahir, Marylou Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell Subject: RE: Pier Avenue Ms. Cahir - Thank you for your comments. I am forwarding your email to Rick Morgan, Director of Public Works, and to Steve Burrell, City Manager. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Original Message From: Cahir, Marylou[mailto:marylou.cahir@boeing.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:47 AM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Avenue Dear City Clerk, I must tell you that am very unhappy with the changes that have been made to Pier Avenue. The re -lining of the street makes it very difficult to drive through the city. This was especially true this past weekend with all the traffic that was in town for the AVP tournament. To re -line the street to reduce the. number of lanes from two to one makes it impossible for traffic from Valley and Ardmore to turn onto Pier going south. It also makes it incredibly difficult for those parking at businesses along Pier to back out onto the Pier and leave. attempted to go to the dry cleaners on Saturday (Karen's Cleaners) and found it almost impossible to get to the store and equally difficult to get someone to let me out so I could get out of the center of town. If.you are trying to drive residents away from using the businesses in downtown Hermosa you are doing a good job, .I try to patronize local.' stores but if you are going to charge for parking and then make it impossible to get out.of those spaces, I think that I will have to take my business to stores that have easier parking. I strongly urge the city to change the street markings back to what they were at the beginning of the year. MaryLou Cahir 2020 Hillcrest Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 36 Rick Morgan From: Sent: Cc: Subject: Jackie Drasco Monday, June 12, 2006 9:57 AM Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell FW: Pier Ave - One Lane Failure Original Message From: Jackie Drasco On Sent: Monday,. June 12, To: 'Susan Palmer' Subject: RE:.Pier Ave Behalf Of City Clerk 2006 8:06 AM - One Lane Failure I am forwarding your email to Rick Morgan, Public Works Director, and to Steve Burrell, City Manager. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Original Message From: Susan Palmer [mailto:sussssan2005@msn.com] Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 3:17 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Ave - One Lane Failure Hermosa, .What were you thinking when you merged Pier Ave to one lane! I've seen many changes over the 50 years I've been here. and this is one of the worst. decisions T've witnessed. Tell m it's only experimental' only and your going:to change it back next week? Your not only creating a hazard, what about the. congestion in front of the fire station? I love.this town, but boy are you making it more difficult to live here. Susan Palmer Parents: George & Jeanette Prichard' Daughter: Morgan Palmer' 35 • Rick Morgan Page 1• of 2 From: Rashel Mereness [rashelm@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:03 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue Renovation great - thank you! Rick Morgan <rmorgan a@ Jtermosabch.org> wrote: Rashel, I have good news for you...your street will be re -paved this summer. Thank you for your comments and patience with the Pier Ave test...Rick From: Rashel Mereness [mailto:rashelm@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 6:10 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: Randy LaFaye; Sam Edgerton; jbrhbcc@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; peter@electpetertucker.com Subject: Pier Avenue Renovation It was very thoughtful of your office to send out the information regarding the plan for upper Pier Avenue. I have two questions/comments that I hope you can address: (1) l live on Cypress Avenue south of Pier Avenue. This street is badly in need of repair. Itis completely crackedand pot -holed and driving on it feels like driving on a 4WD road. From what I understand neighbors have made several requests for repairs over the years, so it's a bit frustrating to see so much effort and money put into upgrading Pier Ave before our street receivesnecessary repairs. Are any funds earmarked to repair Cypress Avenue? (2) I think the idea of increasing sidewalk space on Pier only makes sense if you allow the restaurants on upper Pier to increase their outdoor seating. The poor little crepes place has to stick tables wherever theycanup and down the street because of the high demand to sit out there. I know as a resident of the upper Pier area, I would appreciate being able to enjoy patio dining at a larger variety of restaurants than just those that are on the Pier Plaza. Are you considering allowing the restaurants to expand with outdoor seating? I don't otherwise see much value in just making larger sidewalks. There is not that much foot traffic on the current -sidewalks. Please let me know if you have any responses to the above at your earliest convenience. Best Regards, Rashel Mereness 1134 Cpress Ave #2 310-463-8953 Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 0/1 A /'1011K • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Sam Perrotti [sperrotti@adelphia.netj Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:37 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Upper Pier Ave Rick, The link on your. -.email message is. not working properly so I am sending this email message without using that link. The Hermosa Beach Art Walk held its second event on Thursday, June 8. During that afternoon: and evening, I had an opportunity to' observe the new stripping on upper Pier Avenue. Traffic was a bit slower but the drivers seemed to have adjusted to the new lanes fairly well. Traffic was slower, which I think is great. • The additional stop sign is long overdue. Whenever I have tried to cross Pier Ave, the drivers not only don't stop but they.generally curse at you and"flip you off ifyou'dare try to cross the street. The stop sign at Bard surely helps the cities fire and. police get through .that intersection. I :had thought the stop sign would be at Cypress• because that is in the middle of the block but any new stop sign is great. I am sure you will get negative responses but traffic in the city has to slow down. Good luck with your project. Take care. Sam Perrotti Rick Morgan Page 1' of 1 From: Dan lnskeep [daninskeep@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:24 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave improvements plan Rick, Thank you for your time on the phone today and for your efforts in regard to enhancing the Pier Avenue pedestrian/parking/street area. I like the plan and hope that an agreeable solution is reached. My only comment: relates to bike traffic. When devising a plan, please try to incorporate somethingthat keeps -bikers in mind. Biking in the only traffic lane and: watching for parked cars backing up is a lithe worrisome. Although I'm not familiar with the final vision, it seems to me that because the middle lane will be the least frequently used I say make it the "tightest" and allocate most of the available width to peds on the sidewalk, parking and bikes/cars in the traffic lanes. Thanks! Dan "the anchor guy" lnskeep 79 16th Street Hermosa Beach CA 90254 (310) 376-9347 Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger nh A/'1,1114 • Page 1 of 2 Rick Morgan From: Chris Gee [cgee@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 4:13 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Hi Rick. Two quick comments and one immedate concern regarding the Pier Avenue striping project. 1.) Does the plan for the FY 06-07 project include any accomodation for bicycles? Will there be a bike lane, shared use arrows, or any sort of additional buffer between the edge of the diagonal parking area and the 12 -foot travel lane? This is particularly important given the high level of bicycle traffic on Pier and the visibility issues associated with diagonal parking, namely that driver about to back out of a space can not easily see an upcoming cyclist, nor can a cyclist easily see whether there is someone in the driver seat of the car. Riding at the right edge of a travel lane against diagonal parked cars is perhaps more dangerous than riding in the 'door zone,' which cyclists and transportaion engineers all agree is a bad thing. 2.) I've noticed a marked increase in the amount of traffic going through the residential areas to get from lower Pier to PCH and beyond (I live on Monterey). In particular I've seen an increase in the number of taxi cabs making shortcuts through residential neighborhoods (more often then not rolling through stop signs and speeding). Does the plan address how to keep Pier -to -PCH traffic flowing through the commercial corridor (Pier) and off of our residential streets? Is there anything that can be done in the short term (during this study period) to get the taxi off of the residential streets and onto Pier? Finally, an immediate concern as a result of the test. This touches on the point I brought up with my first question. As mentioned earlier riding a bicycle too close to a row of diagonally parked cars is unsafe. This week I've seen many bicycles riding to the right of the white line that separates the travel lane from the diagonal parking area. Can this line by moved away from the curb (to create a buffer between the parked cars and the travel lane), or be removed altogether, and the 20 -foot wide central turning median reduced? I consider the current configuartion highly unsafe and an immediate hazard. I am very concerned that a bicyclist will soon be struck by a motorist backing out of a diagonal parking spot. Before the lane reduction, bicyclists could easily 'take' a good part of the right hand lane (which is their right, given the hazards presented by diagonal parked cars) and cars could still move freely in the left lane. Now, due to this restriping test and the unfortunate placement of the white line at the edge of the diagonal parking area bicyclists must either 'block' a car in the single travel lane or ride in the blind spot for drivers backing out of their diagonal parking spot. It's my hope that the City will recognize this danger and take immediate steps to correct the hazard. Thank you, Chris Gee Rick Mor9an From: Scott Brogi [beachbro@mac.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 4:35 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: Tina Brogi Subject: Re: FW: City of Hermosa Beach - important Notice Hi Rick, Just thought we'd drop you a line to let you know that although we like the concept of on lane each way on pier avenue, seems like something would need to be done to allow cars more room to back out of parking spots without completely stopping the now single lane of traffic which seemed to happen all weekend long. we understand part of the idea is to slo speeds on the avenue, but it was more like gridlock even though the hermosa open weekend is certainly busier than most. anyway, hopefully the final plan will compress the middle turning lane as it looks is intended and free up some room in the parking stalls to accomodate this. thanks and feel free to contact us directly if you have any questions tina & scott brogi 1126 19th street hermosa beach, ca 90254 310.619.9999 Original Message >From: hermosabch@e-govmail.com '>Dat.e: Friday., 09 -Jun -2006 5:17:31 pm PT >To: tina@tinahalturin.com . >Subject: City of Hermosa Beach- Important Notice >• IMPORTANT PUBLIC NOTICE PIER AVENUE PILOT'STRIPING PROJECT > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2006, Pier Avenue was re -striped from two > lanes > of travel in each direction to one lane in each direction with a > center turning lane from Bard Avenue to Hermosa Avenue. Stop signs > . were also added at Bard Street to safely facilitate the westbound > merge from two lanes to one. These changes were made on a trial > basis > in advance of beginning design to reconstruct Pier Avenue from PCH > to > > Hermosa Avenue. THIS IS ONLY A TEST! 32 Rick Morgan From: Ted Hauk [thauk@gte.netj Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 11:48 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. Problems Mr. Rick Morgan The problem is that now there is a lot more traffic on Eleventh St. between Valley and Loma. • People are bypassing the back up on Pier by using our street. Most of the traffic is speeding on the street between 35-50 MPH This makes it extremely dangerous for the residents to walking across the street or trying to back out.of our driveways. I think it is time for the police to do something to better control the speed of cars on this street, it has always been a problem, now it is worse due to the changes done to Pier Ave. If yoi need more information I can be reached at 310 372-5933. My address is 511 Eleventh St. # A Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. Ted Hauk 31 Clear Day Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: • Rhea Punneo Tuesday, June 13, 2006 1:38 PM Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. Attachments: Clear Day Bkgrd.JPG Page 1 of 1 Took a verbal message from a doctor who lives in Redondo but takes his dogs to Bow -Wow Boutique on Pier Ave. Said he thinks it's awful! When trying to back out of a space at least 6 cars went by before someone let him out - he'd been inching out and almost got hit 4 times. He also wanted to note that the traffic was backed up all the way to Valley!. Said it's too dangerous for him to continue utilizing the services of the Boutique and that'd he'd recommend that they move their facilities. He also mentioned that he may have to find another place to take his pets. Wasn't threatening, was just matter-of-fact about it. Rhea Punneo Administrative Assistant Public Works Department City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310/318-0222 310/937-5015 Fax 0/141911(14 • Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Clay Baker [claybaker@adelphia.net) Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 2:57 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: PIER AVENUE PILOT STRIPING PROJECT Dear Mr. Morgan I understand that there will be street traffic measurements made and compared with previous studies. The many valley residents on 24th and Power Streets request that the city measure the traffic on 24th Street as well. We have absorbed the increase in traffic since the "speed. bumps" were installed on 24th Place arid our "hill" was designated.an 8% grade. That should be enough. We presumethat there have been previous measurements made: We are also experiencing an increase of heavy trucks on 24th Street (prior to the construction on 21st Street and Valley Vista) and are concerned that the single lanes on Pier Avenue will further increase truck traffic on our street and continue to deteriorate the roadway. How about erecting signs that would limit heavy truck traffic through this residential street? Your support is greatly appreciated by all. Sincerely Clay Baker 546 24th Street HB 310-374-8233 • Rick Morgan From: Kelly Amato [kellyamato@mac.com) Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 3:09 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice Rick - Page 1 , of 1 While I think. it is admirable that.the city wants to increase foot traffic to boost business on upper pier avenue, I think that the impact of the new striping pattern will be a burden to those who are driving,. parking and trying to get out of parking spaces -on upper.pier. Having one lane for.both:east.&'west- bound traffic does not allow for traffic to flow when someone is pulling from a diagonally parked space. . I'm probably not the 'first one to point this out. Kelly Amato Resident of 17 years. On Jun 12, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Amato Family wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: hermosabch(a�e-govmail.com Date: June 9, 2006 5:18:50 PM PDT IMPORTANT PUBLIC NOTICE PIER AVENUE PILOT STRIPING PROJECT 9/1 4./9(1f16 Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 3:31 PM To: St. Cross Office Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue is a Mess I will forward your email to Rick Morgan. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Original Message From: St. 'Cross Office [niailto:info@stcross.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 2:36 PM To: City Clerk; letters@dailybreeze.com; info@easyreader.info Subject: Pier Avenue is a Mess To: Rick Morgan Public Works Commission Yesterday I was on Monterey Blvd. turning left at Pier Avenue.. There was a metal object. sticking up on Pier Avenue about 2 or 3 inches high and Iran over it, which caused me to have a flat tire. A friend of mine, Carol Reznichek almost ran over it too because there was a truck parked on the corner and she had to make a sharp turn. I waited for the Automobile Club to change my tire and then went back to work on Monterey Blvd. By that time someone had the parking sign up and it-no.longer posed a danger. Couldn't there have been a cone placed over the protrusion or it somehow been blocked off I live in. Gardena and work at St. Cross Episcopal Church, 1818 Monterey. I use. Pier Avenue to travel to and from work. Over the .years.I have seen some pretty unique and funky things done to "improve" road conditions. I have never in all my 61 year seen such a mess that pier Avenue has turned in to. Traffic is worse than ever. Before this change it was tolerable, but now it's impossible. I hope you and the other public works people, as well as the mayor and city officials corm to your senses and return Pier Avenue to what it once was. Can't you people come up with something else to spend your money on, rather than turning a small town charming street into a confusing, traffic jammed mess? Good grief. Carol Froom Administrative Assistant St. Cross Episcopal Church .1818 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 30 • Rick Morgan Page l,of 1 From: Kim Foster [fosters3@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 1:18 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: new Pier Ave Dear Mr Morgan: This re -do of Pier Avenue is creating extreme traffic conditions during rush hour. Many commuters use this corridor in and out of Hermosa and they are backing up all the way to PCH. It also impacts the access to the Vons center (which is already a busy area). I think this a a major traffic hazard and cannot be what you intended. Another aspect of this change is the already congested intersections of Valley/Ardmore. Is it really wise to add yet another four way stop 100 feet from two four way stops? This is three four way stops in less than 300 feet! However, I am not one of those commuters; I'm a cranky resident! Should I need to go down to that area of Hermosa in the future I will use 8th Street or 24th Street to avoid the traffic. Hermosa residents in those areas won't care about the increased traffic, will they? Kim Foster 1237 Tenth St • Hermosa Beach CA 90254. 310.374.5471 0/1 A /Inn! • Rick Morgan • Page 1of1 From: Tom1241@aol.com Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:36 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave test Dear Bob: Let me add my strong negative to there -striping of Pier Ave West of Gould. Traffic con9estion after work heading West on. Pier has been unbelievable! When I first saw this I thought maybe it was only for the AVP tournament, I hope thereis enough response to the EASY READER article to return to the old system as soon as possible. The third stop sign almost in front of the Fire House is also a mistake, we do not need three separate stop.. signs within 100 yards:. of each other. As a long time resident of Hermosa Beach I appreciate anything that the city does to improve the downtown area, but this traffic flow test is not the answer! - Thanks for the opportunity to give you my feedback. Tom Elliott 2412 Park Ave Hermosa Beach CA 90254 tom1241@aol.com Rick Morgan • Page T of From: Eric Foster [erfoster@verizon.netj Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:39 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Suggestion for Pier. Ave Hi, ! suggest adding bicycle lanes on the outside of each driving lane. This will not only give bicyclists more room & safety spaee-wise, buf will also help make motoristsmore aware of bicyclists to begin with! This could be done by narrowing the. center left turn lane, which is way too wide — impractically wide (I don't think 2 cars would be going in opposite directions in the same turn laneanyways, legally, so it's excessively wide!). I bike to the Pier & strand about 2 to 3 times a week from PCH, and I know many others that do too — and Pier Ave is the only route to get there, as the green belt cuts off any direct routes (along with windy roads thereafter to get to the water): Eric R. Foster International Sales & Trade Consulting 1707 Pacific Coast Hwy # 225 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Tel/Fax: 1-310-798-8208 Mobile: 1-310-877-3822 e rfoster(a)_veri zon. net All A /fIAA/ Rick Morgan From: Mary_Christopherson@hna.honda.com Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 2:08 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Feedback Please reinstate the double lanes on upper Pier Ave. As a resident who walks in this area, not.pnly has traffic been an enormous problem due to the single lanes, is has also adversely affected pedestrian traffic trying to cross Pier Ave as well has provided an added incentive for driver irritation and road rage. 29 Pier Avenue Striping Proj. Rick Morgan • Page 1 -of 1 From: Foster, Sam (US) [Sam.Foster@am.jll.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 2:13 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: Kim Foster Subject: Pier Avenue Striping Project Mr. Morgan: If you're keeping score, and I hope you are, put me down as a "no". If there is a stronger objection column than "no" then put me there. I really - as in really, really, really - don't like it. Honestly, I can't even figure out the purpose it is supposed to serve. But what it will do is two things - slow down traffic on Pier and make a total mess of the double stop sign pattem at Valley and Ardmore and Pier. That intersection is already a fatality waiting to happen without forcing all the right hand lane to merge left soon as they exit the intersection going west. Thanks for your consideration of a voters opinion. Sam Foster Senior Vice President (213) 680-7969 direct sam.foster@am.jll.com This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, disclose, copy or distribute this email without the author's prior permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message. We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. The information contained in this communication may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege. If you are the intended recipient and you do not wish to receive similar electronic messages from us in future then please respond to the sender to this effect. /'.f1 A //1/1( • Rick Morgan Page l of l From: 'Michele Waller [mlwgolfer@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 3:56 PM ' To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Project I have been.:a resident of Hermosa Beach for over 30 years and have seen a lot of changes to our little town, some of them good, some not so good. The current experiment to reduce lanes on Pier Avenue does not impress me as an improvement to our City. I have already witnessed and experienced increased traffic congestion along with a high level of frustration amongst drivers. FEB already has enough frustrations with limited parking. I can't imagine that this change will benefit our City enough to warrant sucha drastic inconvenience. Please put back the 2nd lane! Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Rick Morgan From: cpdesignl [cpdesignl@adelphia.net] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:02 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue as one lane Hi Rick, As a lifelong resident of Hermosa, I am offering my opinion to you regarding the recent temporary change to upper Pier Avenue. .I have discussed this issue with family and friend and they ALL share this same. opinion. I think it is a huge mistake making Pier Avenue only one lane. It would be nice to have wider sidewalks and more outdoor dining on Upper Pier, but funneling the already Oongestei -traffic coming down from PCH into one lane is a huge mistake. The traffic in recent years has become increasingly congested in this city. There are more cars on the roads and,'increasingly, more stop signs and traffic lights have added which congests traffic even more.. For example, the intersection of Herondo and PCH is totally screwed up now and weekend traffic on PCH in Hermosa seems to move at about 5 MPH. Crossing PCH has become a serious hassle as more and more cars line up at the few streets that do cross. It often takes two or more turns at the light to enter PCH from.'8th Street. Additionally, only a few select streets -cross the Greenbelt. Congesting Pier Avenue by reducing the traffic flow only drives more traffic through to those other streets, such a 8th,.16th and 21st and further slows PCH traffic by backing it up on either side of Pier Avenue. Please change Pier Avenue back to the way it was., Sincerely, Chris Prenter 625 Loma Drive Hermosa Beach CA 90254 28 • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:21 PM To: Chris Norman Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue I will forward to Rick Morgan, Director of Public Works. Jackie Drasco, Deputy City Clerk, City of Hermosa Beach From: Chris Norman [mailto:CNorman@getty.edu] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 3:57 PM To.: City Clerk Subject: Pier Avenue I couldn't find a.specefic. Feedback to the Dept of Public Works so could you appropriate person. I'm not sure what the attended effect of the Pier Avenue restriping is but all consider returning to the old 2 lanes in 2 directions... Thanks Chris Norman 817 6th Hermosa Beach please foward I know is it's a if you arent the nightmare. Please Rick Mor9an From: Ugly Single White Guy [uglysinglewhiteguy@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:13 AM To: peter@electpetertucker.com Cc: samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; Rick Morgan Subject: PIER AVENUE RESTRIP1NG Hi Mr. Mayor and Richard Morgan, Thank you for re -striping Pier Avenue for the following reason: It is causing MAJOR (MAJOR} traffic headaches going to and coming from the beach. This is good because this will very quickly keep non -Hermosa Beach residents away, drivin down business, (city revenue too) and it will give us "our" beach back (sooner than September). There are many places in this city of Los Angeles I want to go but I simply do not go because I know traffic is an absolute nightmare: 1. Dodger Stadium is an example, and the 2. Getty Museum on the West -side is another example. Many people will think this way about Hermosa and will switch.to Redondo or Manhattan. Thank you for insuring our beach'community stays small and quaint. A Happy Hermosa Beach Voting Resident. PS. I live steps from the beach in Hermosa and rarely use my.car on the weekends so traffic on Pier Avenue does not affect me. Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 27 Rick Morgan From: millersbay@att.net Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 4:55 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: road test I like the slower small town feel of the one lane on Pier ave. I think it will transform the City in a great way. Now were not just the plaza but a whole town. Long time resident on Loma dr. John Miller. 26 • Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: jim peirce ijpeirce@yahoo.com] Friday, June 16, 2006 5:28 PM Rick Morgan Subject: Pier avenue test striping Page 1 •of 1 The new striping on Pier avenue leaves a lot to be desired. The idea is good, but the execution is poor. The additional stop sign west of Valley has caused large traffic jams, if there is any traffic at all. The need for this sign is not apparent except to allow the mobile home park residents easy access to Pier Avenue. They could just as well go out to valley where the traffic is less. I am opposed to the current configuration. My suggestion is to have a public hearing and take suggestions from the residents and then redesign the street. JIM PEIRCE 2121 Power st Hermosa. Beach Do you Yahoo!? Next -gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. n!1 A /'->nnc • Page•:1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Adrienne Less [adless@verizon.net] Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 5:36 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: pier ave experiment Hi, My name is •Adrienne and l: am a resident of :Hermosa Beach. Your experiment on Pier Ave, well, it's not going very well! The already congested summer traffic is now triplefold. The stop signs in between Ardmore and Valley are now so backed up that even on a.regular day, it is chaos. Add this to the fact that most people do not know how to. "stop" and then "drive" through the: stopsigns, and summer.congestion, and well, it becomes a. mess. In addition, now the trafficwill be driving down my already busy street, 8th Street. I have an alternate plan. As an "experiment," why don't you make people drive the SPEED LIMIT on 8th Street, and then stop everyone from parking on the sidewalks on this street. That way, we can all walk down the street to the strand, beach, shops, etc. without having to worry about getting run over. Sincerely, Adrienne Less • Page l of l Rick Morgan From: BEEBOPBEV@aol.com Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 1:50 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: re -stripping We are 7 year residents of Hermosa Beach and disagree with the City's current plans for Pier Avenue. We do a lotof walking in town and have observed many illegal turns to avoid the backed up traffic, right and left turn lanes -into dead-end streetsor into private lots, bikes almost hit by suv's backing out, angry drivers not able to see around huge FedEx and delivery trucks and most of all the pedestrian like us just trying to walk across the streets: The City of El Segundo had tremendous problem when that city decided to'change the main drag throughtown against the residents wishes. Some change is good and some change is not, it depends on the way the changes are made. Please listen to the residents and take their suggestions to heart. Thank you. 1111 Al r., • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: RJBobbie2@aol.com Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 4:28 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue lane reduction Dear Rick, When I .first encountered the restriped Pier Avenue, I honestly thought it was a joke. After two weeks of dealing with Pier Ave. at many different hours of the day, I am convinced this is the most poorly conceived public works project in Hermosa Beach in many years. One of many differences between Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach is the relative ease of getting around town in Hermosa.. Contrast the four lanes of Hermosa Ave. extending from Herondo to 35th Street with the congested two lanes of Highland: Manhattan Beach Blvd. from Manhattan Ave to Valley can be gridlock. Now we reduce the expansive width of Pier Avenue to two lanes in a manner that no sense whatsoever. The westbound lane reduction and stop sign at Bard defies logic. Traffic turns right into the trailer park and the already crowded conditions around the post office are worsened. I have seen westbound traffic stopped from east of Vons to Bard. If you are unfortunate enough to have parked in the eastbound lane, good luck in backing out into the one lane of traffic. If this was done to allow merchants on Pier Ave. to expand and have al fresco dining space, why don't we afford the same opportunity to the merchants of Hermosa Ave. We could enjoy outdoor dining from Mickey's to The North End. I can just imagine the outdoor experience we could enjoy at The Green Store's expanded outdoor facilities. Hopefully, common sense will prevail and this abomination will disappear as quickly as it appeared. Sincerely, Randy Johnson Hermosa Beach Rick Morgan From: Kimi Bell [beachbabe9689@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:19 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: pier avenue pilot stripping project Having grown up in the city of Hermosa Beach and living here all my life, things have gotten impressed in my mind, like the way streets go and lanes and such. Now I am a new driver and am learning how to make proper turns and merging. When I am driving down Pie I am often confused by the new system since it has been like it was for so long, Having one lane complicates things and slows down traffic. I think it is unnecessary and just causes more problems. I believe that it was working just fine the way it was before. • Thank.you for your time. -Kimi Bell Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid.3963 25 Rick Morgan From: ciri@adelphia.net Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 8:43 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: One Lane NIGHTMARE!!! Importance: High Dear Mr. Morgan, I thank you in advance for giving me the opportunity to voice my opinion about the current lane test. Needless to say I am very frustrated and concerned. I am proud to say that I have been a resident of Hermosa Beach for close. to 10 years. I have enjoyed that fact that I can walk or easily drive anywhere within a couple mile radius. As we all know Hermosa Beach is the center of many year round activities and host to numerous large scale events which generate more then our share of traffic. Due to this fact I am even more confused why a one lane street would even be considered. On a normal day anytime after 2:00pm traffic becomes congested from daily commutes and after school traffic. Yesterday I counted 15 cars in line at the fire station stop sign. Pretty scary considering summer has only just begun. There has'also been backups on PCH all the way to Artesia.at rush hour. There is also absolutely no need for a dedicated left hand and right hand turn lane. This has only caused confusion and more traffic jams with people trying to merge into one lane. It baffles me as to what was to be acheived by this. It has only seemed to cause frustration to both Hermosa Beach residents and tourists. PLEASE BRING BACK OUR MISSING LANE!!! Thank you for your time. 24 • Rick Morgan Page 1 -of 1 From: Gila Katz [gilakl@adelphia.net] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 12:50 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: PIER AVENUE PILOT STRIPING PROJECT Good Morning Rick, Traffic on Pier Avenue is difficult at best. The pilot stripping has made the traffic even more difficult to deal with. I cannot fathom why you would take out a perfectly good traffic lane to make it a right turn lane which does not make good sense. I believe this new trafficpattern does not make anyappreciable improvement on Pier Avenue. Sincerely, Gila: Katz 1125 Ninth Street Hermosa Beach, Ca. 90254 A /1 A 1,1ININ Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:16 AM To: Enrique A. Coello (Cima Mortgage Services, Inc.) Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Ave back to 2 lanes each way! I am forwarding your email to Rick Morgan, Director of Public Works. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach From: Enrique.A:. Coello .(Cima Mortgage Services, Inc.)[mailto:enrique@cimamortgage.com]' Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 1:22 PM To: City Clerk Cc: ssandefur@earthlink.net;.'David Kephart; 'Michael E Williams'; Charles Williams; Mader, Kent.P Subject: Pier Ave back to 2 lanes each way! This is a brief example of some new congestion on Pier ave.... This traffic stop caused the .police to block the ONLY LANE into the downtown area.... Drives hesitant to use the middle lane slowed down traffic.... And this was at a slow time this Wednesday (June 14th).... Imagine what it would be on a weekend day. The quality of the picture might not be the best since I used a cell phone to take the picture. Share this picture with whomever you think mighthelp to turn the street back to original 2 lanes. Enrique Coello 936 18th Street Hermosa Beach Ca 90254 (1/1 A /AAA/. • Rick Morgan Page 1 -of 1 From: Rodney Williams [surfgizmo12321@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 11:06 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: put me in the no column Dear Sir; The reconfiguration of Pier Ave. is a big mistake in my opinion. As a third generation resident (my grandfather was Mr. White of White & Day Mortuary), Pier Ave. is a main thouroughfare to get to the beach. Toscrew up traffic to appease a handful of restaurant owners for sidewalk dining and shopkeepers for sidewalk sales and art walks (which really aren't impressive at all) is just wrong. Is 8th Street, supposed to absorb the overflow. Pm sure those residents will be feeling that pinch. And what about when there are eventsat the Pier. It will only suceed in worsening an already nightmarish traffic problem. If the City goes ahead.with this plan to try to "refine" it's image, I am certain it will fail miserably. Thank you, Rodney Williams nM A lnnni Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: JBALoanman@aol.com Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 1:48 PM To: peter@electpetertucker.com; Samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; JBRHBCC@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; kitonga@adelphia.net; Steve Burrell; Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Dear Sirs, The recent changes to upper Pier Avenue are very inconvenient to me and my family. Turning left onto Pier was a giant hassle with large delays. Can't imagine how bad it will be on a summer weekend. Shopping at Vons just won't happen for us on. the weekends or in any traffic period. Will have to take our shopping needs to the Ralphs in MB. Hopefully you will change it back to the way it was. Thank you, Joe Anderson 65 -17th Street Rick Morgan From: Eric R. Foster [erfoster@verizon.net] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 2:24 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: RE: Suggestion for Pier Ave Hi Rick, A combo of adding bike lanes and some widening of the sidewalks would be great (I do use the sidewalks sometimes when walking, and they are also too narrow, especially during those fairs / art sales on Pier Ave.)...good luck w/ the project! >From: Rick Morgan <rmorgan®hermosabch.org> >Date.: Mon Jun 19 12:31:35 CDT 2006 >To: Eric. Foster <erfoster@verizon.net> >Subject: RE: Suggestion for Pier Ave >Eric, thank you for your comments...themedian is 20 -feet wide to simulate >the impact to travel land and parking bywidening existing walks to 15' >with a 10' median...I agree withyou though that we need to consider bike >safety by widening diagonal parkingaisle and considering widening walks >only 2', see attached for more info—Rick >From: Eric Foster[mailto:erfoster@verizon.net] >Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:39AM >To: Rick Morgan >Subject: Suggestion for Pier Ave >Hi, >I suggest adding bicycle lanes on the outside of eachdriving lane. >This will not only give bicyclists more room & safetyspace-wise, but will also help make motorists more aware of bicyclists to beginwith! This could be done by narrowing the center left turn lane, which isway too wide — impractically wide (I don't think 2 cars would begoing in opposite directions in the same turn lane anyways, legally, soit's excessively wide!). > >I bike to the Pier & strand about 2 to 3 times a weekfrom PCH, and I know many others that do too — and Pier Ave is the only route to get there,as the green belt cuts off any direct routes (along with windy roads thereafterto get to the water). >Eric R. Foster >International Sales & Trade Consulting >1707 Pacific Coast Hwy # 225 >Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 >Tel/Fax: 1-310-798-8208 >Mobile:1-310-877-3822 >erfoster@verizon.net > 23 • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Michael Keegan [michael@manhattanbread.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 4:59 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: Pier Avenue Chaos Original Message From: Tracy McDonald [mailto:tracymmcdonald@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:11 AM To: michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com Subject: Pier Avenue Chaos Michael Keegan, Please tell me that the new lines on Pier Ave. are temporary! Ijust don't get it. With all the traffic that we.already have, how can anyone think that reducing the number of lanes on Pier Ave. is beneficial? Did,.anyone: observe traffic on the weekends, holidays, end of work day or daily when school. gets out? Is there anything We can do to get this' changed back to the way it was? Take Care, Tracy McDonald Hermosa Beach Resident Pier avenue experiment • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Less, Greg (Space Technology) [greg.less@ngc.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 6:28 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: pbobko@rwglaw.com; peter@electpetertucker.com; mailto:samedgerton@aol.com; mailto:michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; mailto:jbrhbcc@aol.com Subject: Pier avenue experiment Dear Mr. Morgan, Reducing the traffic capacity of Pier avenue is a mistake. The increased delay and congestion at the Valley/Ardmore intersection is an un -necessary nuisance. More importantly, anything that causes a shift in the traffic flow from Pier and Herondo/Anita/190th to the residential streets constitutes a significant degradation in an already unsafe pedestrian environment. I live on.8th street. In.its wisdom, the city's master traffic plan intentionally drives.traffic through a residential area, yet we are denied the safety of a serviceable sidewalkk (you should at least. enforce. your own .parking.; code!).. In order to get to the Greenbelt or the beach, my wife and small children are forced into the street, dodging cars that regularly exceed the 25 mph speed, limit. Our neighborhood includes many families with children, all of whom are at risk. Spend<some time on 8th street, between Monterey and Valley. On any weekend you will`watch as a steady stream of beach -goers and other pedestrians vie for space in. the street with pre -occupied drivers searching for parking, speeding taxi -cabs, and on weekend evenings, intoxicated drivers leaving the Plaza bars. I'm all for improving the business climate in Hermosa Beach and I generally whole-heartedly support measures to that effect. However, widening:the sidewalks in the business district, while funneling the excess. traffic onto a residential street with no sidewalks has to strike anyone who cares for the safety of our children as truly perverse. Our City's master traffic plan should route traffic onto Pier, Herondo, and Hermosa.ave's, and away:from. our residential streets. We should be taking all available steps to increase, rather than decrease, the capacity of Pier Avenue while making modifications to our 'residential streets that discourage their use as transient thoroughfares. Greg Less ISR Mission Integration Northrop Grumman Space Technology 310-812-2956 greg.less@ngc.com 011 Allf1AA Rick Morgan, From: rlchin@verizon.net Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:57 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue experiment Dear Mr. Morgan, Thank you for allowing us.to give you feedback. My vote is "no". I like the idea of the center turn lane and the wider sidewalks. But the shrinking from two lanes to one lane just after Valley causes the situation on Pier at Valley/Ardmore to be much worse. It is bad enough at that intersection without it backing up further as cars try to move from the right lane to the single'lane. Plus, drivers face three stop signs within three short blocks. How about leaving two lanes heading west and giving only one lane heading up east on Pier with no center turning median? Best regards, Randall Chin 22 Rick Morgan From: Becher Anderson [res0juns@verizon.net) Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:49 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Test Dear Mr. Morgan, Please return Pier Avenue to it's original state as soon as possible. The present re striping plan is simply not a workable proposition. Respectfully, Becher Anderson 2S -17th. St. Hermosa Beach No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.1/369 - Release Date: 6/19/2006 Rick Morgan From: Tara Cooney [tara_cooney@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:40 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Feedback to the changes to Pier Avenue Hi Rick, I live on Manhattan Avenue and Pier Avenue. Although I do like the idea of some changes to Pier Avenue, the reduction in lanes has become such a nightmare. With the double stop signs causing congestion to begin with, having the lanes merge into one in such a short period of time is making the cars cluster even.more. My vote is to go back to the original four lanes. Sincerely, Tara Casey (Resident of Hermosa Beach for 5 years)' Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 20 Rick Morgan From: gless@verizon.net Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 10:56 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Experiment Dear Mr. Morgan, ,Reducing the traffic capacity of Pier Avenue is a mistake. The increased delay and congestion at the Valley/Ardmore intersection is an unnecessary nuisance. More importantly, anything that causes a shift in the traffic flow'from Pier and Herondo. avenues to the residential streets constitutes a significant degradation in an already unsafe pedestrian environment. I live on 8th street. In its wisdom, the city's master traffic plan intentionally drives traffic through a residential area, yet we are denied the safety of a serviceable sidewalk. The narrow strips of sidewalk that do exist .are blocked by parked cars and rendered useless. In order to get to the Greenbelt or the beach, my wife and small children are forced into the street, dodging cars that regularly exceed the 25 mph speed limit. Our neighborhood includes many families with children, all of whom are at risk. Spend some time on 8th street, between Monterey and Valley. On any weekend you'll see a steady stream of beach -goers and other pedestrians vie for space in the street with pre- occupied drivers searching for parking, speeding taxi -cabs, and on weekend evenings, intoxicated drivers leaving the,Plaza bars. I'm all for improving the business climate in Hermosa Beach and I generally whole- heartedly support measures to that effect. However, widening the sidewalks in the business district while funneling the excess traffic onto a residential street with no sidewalk, has to strike anyone who cares for the safety of our children as truly perverse Our City's master traffic plan should route traffic onto Pier, Herondo, and Hermosa avenues, and away from our residential streets. We should be taking all available steps to increase, rather than decrease, the capacity of Pier Avenue, while making modification; to our residential streets that discourage their use as transient thoroughfares. Sincerely, Gregory Less Gregory.Less.2002@marshall.usc.edu 19 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 5:13 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: slow Pier Ave From: Terilander@aol,.com [mailto:T.erilander@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 4:39 PM To: peter@electpetertucker.com; Samedgerton@aol.com;. michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; JBRHBCC@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; Steve.Burrell; Rick Morgan; don@lacbos.org; res0juns@verizon.net Subject: slow Pier Ave Peter, Sam,•Michael, JR, Kit, Steve Rick and Don, The new Pier Ave is slow morning noon and night. I cross Pier Ave several times a day to drop kids off at both Valley and View schools and it is considerably longer AM and PM. I.had playoff baseball earlySunday morning and was congested. I camehome Friday evening from a family patty in PV and had to wait 3 signals to make the turn on to Pier Ave not to mention the time it took to get to Hermosa Ave. Please go back to the 2 lanes! Thanks, Teri Anderson 65 17th ST HB Rick Mor9an From: gretchen bazela [gretbazela@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 9:33 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: congestion on pier We live at 1126 Cypress Ave: The recent changes on Pier have added time, hassle, and noise to our daily life. I would estimate an extra 5-10 minutes on my commute is added daily. The additional stop sign is causing major congestion and frustration.In addition crossing Pier especially with our two year old son has become more challenging and dangerous. Resident parking on Pier which is already challenging seems to exacerbated by the changes. We are also fearful that the charming and unique businesses that occupy the upper area of Pier will be replaced due to higher rents by more commercial chains. We are adamantly opposed to the changes. As a final comment it seems the last thing Hermosa needs is more liquor licenses. There are certainly enough bars t� choose from: thanks gretchen bazela Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 18 • Page 1 of I Rick Morgan From: Barbara Gunning [barbaramariegunning@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:57 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Traffic Dear Rick, This is a letter in full support of the Pier Ave reconfiguration! As a homeowner (and I feel that residents should decide on this issue) I feel that it will only create a better downtown because it will attract more high-end businesses and lure dinner traffic (if the sidewalks are widened as proposed). Also, 2 lanes will be much safer for pedestrians then the previous 4 lanes. The problem with the current configuration is that the 3 stop signs are so close together that they do indeed clog traffic. We need to combine Valley/Ardmore at a single stop light, mostly for safety reasons because there are so many kids crossing that street all day, but also to rid ourselves of those two stop signs right next to each other. This will alleviate traffic and be much safer. The solution could be to reserve the space between the stop signs for pedestrians; consider it an extra large crosswalk. Please remember that there are many other supporters who don't take the time to let you know! However please consider addressing the stop sign issue before the trial period ends. Thank you! Barbara Gunning 143 First Court Rick Morgan From: Caryn Maresic [caryn-maresic@att.net] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:04 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Re -striping Consider me another resident giving the thumbs down to the Pier Avenue lane reduction. It is terrible and seems dangerous to me too. I often ride my .bicycle up and down Pier Avenue. With two traffic lanes, the cars can move over to the other lane to give me some 'space. With only one lane and cars trying to back out of parking spaces, I fear we are going to see many more accidents. Thanks for listening, Caiyn Maresic Hermosa Resident for 17 years 17 Rick Morgan From: Nancy Colville [njcolville@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:29 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: re: Pier Ave Dear Mr. Morgan, ,Thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion regarding the "new" street design on Pier Avenue. I live at 1430 Bayview just north of Pier and find the new configuration to be about as bad a plan as;anyone could imagine. I would be very grateful to have the street design . returned to it's previous configuration as the new flow creates terrible bottle necks and is just about as bad a plan as I could'possibly imagine. I would even go so far as to suggest it deserves a "Darwin" award. And a suggestion for future consideration; a street light at Valley/ Ardmore and Pier, especially during the hours right before and after school, would probably be a much better solution to facilitate traffic flow as well as safety for the children. I understand this is probably too expensive but thought I would put the idea on the table. Thank you for your time and consideration. Nancy Colville 1430 Bayview Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 16 Rick Morgan From: Jack Stuckey fjack.stdckey@verizon.netj Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:51 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Upper Pier project Hi Rick, I want to weight in with my thoughts on the recent changes to upper Pier Avenue. First.ofI let me say that I've owned a home in Hermosa for 10 years at 1443 Manhattan Avenue. That': a block and a half north of'Pier so I am going to be impacted by whatever happens good or bad. I believe in:change for improvement but not change just for.the sake of change. I moved here shortly before the renovation of lower Pier began and in retrospect that was clearly change for improvement. People should be motivated to visit upper Pier and use it as the main east/west artery, not to avoid it. Adding another stop sign to go with the two we already have within.50 yards makes no practical sense. Taking a lane away just after that atop: sign is a great way to back.traf:fic up,and create gridlock on the north/south:traff=ic on Valley and Ardmore. Making a right turn only lane into a mobile:home park, was not very well thought out. The left turn from Monterey southbound onto Pier eastbound is dangerous with cars backing out parking .dspaces into the only lane available. Once again Rick, I look .forward to an improved upper Pier. This is not it. Thank you. Jack Stuckey 15 Rick Morgan. From: Marguerite Kimball [peggy_legion@yahoo.comj Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 9:47 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: The mess on upper Pier Avenue Mr. Morgan, I was happy to learn that creation'of the nasty traffic quagmire on Pier Avenue was "only a test." Obviously, the idea FAILED THE TEST; now when are you guys going to dismantle the mess? (Here's a better idea for you: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!") For those of us who ABSOLUTELY NEED to drive on upper Pier Ave., it's apparent that the city has made life easier for I0% of the traffic while making it nearly impossible for the other 90%. If you REALLY did a traffic study on upper Pier, I can.only assume that. (1) the study was done at midnight, (2) it was done on a Sunday morning, or (3) the test conditions were otherwise ill-conceived. WHAT WERE YOU THINKING? Peggy Kimball (written in a state of near -homicidal aggravation) Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 14. Rick Mor9an From: Antoinette Empringham [toni635@verizon.net] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 7:29 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Reconfiguration Gentlemen: I am writing to protest the recent reconfiguration of upper Pier Avenue in Hermosa Beach. The resulting traffic nightmare needs to be addressed immediately, and the business owner= and residents in that part of the city need to be given consideration and a voice in. planning decisions from now on. As a 26 -year' resident. of Hermosa Beach, I have watched the detrimental changes to the downtown. area with dismay. I am sure you will agree that neither residents nor visitors are well served by the current gridlock condition of Hermosa's main artery. Al:so'I cannot believe that the street would pass a local, state, or federal safety:inspection for emergency. evacuation. Sincerely yours, Antoinette Empringham 635 10th Street Hermosa Beach 13 Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Gary Mallette [garymallette@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 10:54 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Hey Rick, I enjoyed our visit with each other a few mornings ago. And you said to drop you a note about it. I think the only redeeming point is the longer parking spaceswhen the occasional pick up is parked there. But that is not even close to the zillions of inconveniences every day with all the cars every day running through HB. I.think this project is the worst idea I have witnessed in the 21 years I have been in HB. That is a succinctly and kindly as I can put my thoughts. What I really want to say about this moronic idea and its continuing resurfacing is &%#+ a,_&%%. So let's dump this dumb thing and get back to the old way. There was a great letter to the editor in today's(Sunday) Daily Breeze and another in this week's Easy Reader about reasons not to continue with this disaster. So ad me to the stack of "Hell No". Take it easy. Bost Regards, Gary Mallette Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC -to -Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. Page 1 of 2 Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Subject: Carla Merriman [carla@hbchamber.netj Monday, June 26, 2006 8:59 AM Rick Morgan FW: Upcoming Meetings Attachments: LOGOCo!orNew.jpg A response from Spyder Surf to the Per Avenue re -striping. Carla Merriman Executive Director Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau 1007 Hermosa Avenue Hermosa Beach; California 90254 Phone: (310) 376-0951 - Fax: (310) 798-2594 From: o'reilly's [mailto:rtor4@adelphia.net] Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 8:46 AM To: Carla Merriman Subject: Re: Upcoming Meetings Carla - I will be out of town the week of the 29th thereby missing the board of directors meeting. I would like to express to the city that contrary to what I read in the daily breeze, beach reporter and easy reader, the restriping of pier ave. - as it is right now is definately NOT good for any of the businesses in the region when nobody wants to deal with trying to get to them. The response has been overwhelmingly negative. Wasn't the plan to widen the sidewalks. As it is now it makes it impossible for the parked cars to get out of the spots and wastes all the extra spaces. Just passing along what were hearing from our Retail customers. Thank you for all your help and. support. Richard O'Reilly. ---- Original Message --- From: Carla Merriman To: Albro Lundy ; Angie Moss ; 'Betty Ryan' ; Brian Lindquist ; 'Carla Mack' ; Conn Flatley ; DIANA ALBERGATE ; Gary Wayland. ; 'Gene Shook' ; J. Travers Devine (J. Travers Devine) ;.'Janice Webb' Jed Sanford ; Jonas Russell ; 'Kevin McCarthy' ; 'Linda Monosmith' ; Mary Lou Weiss ; Meredith Zellweger ; 'Mick Felder' ; Richard Di Giorgio ; 'Richard O'REilly' ; Ron Newman ; 'Sandy rohrbach' ; Susan Blaco ; THELBG(cr�aol.com Sent: Friday, June 16,200611:01 AM Subject: Upcoming Meetings The Executive Committee meeting will be held on Monday, June 26 at 9:30 a.m. at the Chamber office. The Board of Directors meeting will be held on Thursday, June 29 at 7:30 a.m. at the Beach House. The Mixer will also be on Thursday, June 29 at the Hotel Hermosa from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Carla Mack will be hosting a Barbeque on the Patio of the hotel. I will be attending the Disaster Preparedness for Businesses seminar next week with Councilman Revicsky. I will be in contact daily with the Chamber staff, • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 9:31 AM To: Gary Herman Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell Subject: RE: Pier Avenue I am forwarding your email to Public Works Director Rick Morgan and City Manager Steve Burrell. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach From: Gary Herman [mailto:cabrnes@adelphia.net] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 9:46 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Avenue The changes recently made to Pier Avenue are ridiculous. You just made the main road going from PCH to Hermosa Ave. a nightmare, and this is just on a normal evening, not on a Holiday or when a major event is happening. To take Pier Ave down from 4 lanes (2 in each direction) to 2 lanes (1 in each direction) is down right nuts. You even have a lane designated to turn into a street that feeds into a trailer park The traffic flow is now horrible and it should be returned to it's previous 4 lanes immediately. This will definitely will be remember inthe next election. Gary Herman 1805 Manhattan Avenue and will be available by telephone to handle anything that the staff requires. Carla Merriman Executive Director Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau 1007 Hermosa Avenue Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Phone: (310) 376-0951 - Fax: (310) 798-2594 Page 2 of 2 Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 9:33 AM To: Shunt@aol.com Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: complaint about pier avenue traffic I am forwarding your email to Public Works Director Rick Morgan. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa. Beach From: Shunt@aol.com [mailto:Shunt@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 5:08 PM To: City Clerk Cc: rickmorgan@hermosabch.org; J9hathaway@aol.com Subject: complaint about pier avenue traffic Please direct this e-mail to'Rick Morgan, Public Works Dear Rick, I have been a homeowner/resident, business owner, and landlord in Hermosa Beach for the last thirty five years. I have spoken with dozens of my tenants andwe unanimously share the opinion that the traffic lanes on Pier Avenue should all be restored back to two lanes. It simply is not worth the extra traffic headaches. Most of us now use Gould or 8th street and try to avoid Pier Avenue eventhough: we are a few blocks from it. I understand public sentiment is mostly in agreement with this viewpoint. Whenwill the streetbe..put . back like it was? Thank you, Steve Hunt Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: John Mullins Cjohnamullins@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 2:04 PM To:. Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Mr Morgan, Thank you for the opportunity to feedback on the Pier Ave re -striping test. Whoever did the study in 1994 proposing this change must have secretly hated Hermosa Beach... Fact of the matter is that lots of people want to visit the downtown and BEACH in our great little town. The only way to get there is via Pier Ave. Herondo is too far south, Artesia is too far north, and 8th St is in such.poor condition west of PCH (and densely populated) as to be almost impassable at times. I have owned a house in the 1400 block of Manhattan Ave for 6.years, ..and like many residents my wife and I commute out of town to work. This change has already increased our commuting time in the mornings and afternoons. Our garage is on Bayview, and at busy times it has become almost impossible to turn left on to Pier without forcing my way in to east -bound traffic. I can't:imagine what 4th of July will be like. I've discussed this with some of my neighbors and they feel the same. Please, please stop the madness! Sincerely, John Mullins 1444 Manhattan Ave • Rick Morgan From: Jack Hoy Jjahoy@gte.net] Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 2:20 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: City of Hermosa Beach - Important Notice This is in response to your request for feedback on the Pier Ave. re -striping I do like it except for the added stop sign at Bard Ave. The added stop sign causes,a backup. If the stop sign at Bard were removed traffic could smoothly quickly merge. If • the stop sign remains I would be against the Pier Ave. project. ***************************************** Jack Hoy 310 379-4489 jahoy@gte.net ***************************************** Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Subject: CHRIS WAGENBRENNER [bustetwagen@verizon.net) Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:34 PM Rick Morgan Pier Ave Pear Mr. Morgan I commend you for trying to be creative in solving a problem, but creating a HUGH!! bottleneck at Pier/Valley/Ardmore and 8th/Valley/Ardmore is not the answer. Has the City done an environmental report to determine the effects that all those idling cars will have on the.,people and animals in the area? Who benefits from this. change? Doesn't the City have enough revenue from the windfall property taxes without our bending over backward so that a few bar owners can put tables on the sidewalk and make a little more money selling drinks? ,Please leave the residents alone. 'Let us live,in peace without the gridlock caused by narrowing the main east west thoroughfare in town.: If this comes up fora vote, I will vote against it and campaign for its defeat. Thank you for listening. Respectfully, James S. (Jim) Wagenbrenner 19 8th Street Hermosa Beach 11 Hermosa Beach StripillOroject Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Sent: Matlock, Laura [LMatlock@RegencyCenters.com] Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:39 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: Legaspi, Enrique Subject: Hermosa Beach Striping Project Attachments: Striping -Hermosa Beach_ 20060627155152.pdf Rick: Please see attached letter regarding the Pier Avenue Pilot Striping Project. You may reach Enrique Legaspi at 213-553-2278 if you have any questions. «Striping -Hermosa Beach_20060627155152.pdf» Thank you, Laura Matlock Regency Centers Los Angeles Phone: 213.553.2267 Fax: 213.624.2279 Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Subject: Amanda Weber [amandaw@klabin.com] Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:43 AM Rick Morgan PIER AVENUE PILOT STRIPING PROJECT I just wanted to say thanks for thinking of us pedestrians and, bike riders. I was . recently run over by a car while crossing Hermosa Ave. on 8th Street. We had purposely taken 8th Street.because there is a stop sign and a marked cross :walk at that intersection. The vehicle that hit me had stopped at the stop sign, saw my boyfriend rid( through and didn't look to see if there was. anyone else. T therefore got hit by the car as he accelerated through the intersection. The result was my two front teeth being knocked out of my head and an evening in the emergency room! I was fortunate that nothin else happened. The story continues that since all the witnesses saw something different, and one said that we ran the stop sign, which we did not, the police put meat fault. $15,000 in medical/dental bills later and I will have front teeth again. • The driver of the brand neti BMW is now coming after me for damages to his car! The point of the story is, I live in Hermosa I love Hermosa, and do everything I can to stay here, and spend my.money in Hermosa to support the city as much as possible. It is such a destination point for many that they do not think about the pedestrians and accidents happen. The widening of the sidewalks is a very brilliant' idea and I think that it will make for. much safer travel as a pedestrian. Thanks for your time. Miss Amanda Weber THE KLABIN COMPANY/CORFAC INTERNATIONAL 6601 Center Drive West, #300 Los Angeles, CA 90045 (310) 743-1318 (310) 337-0078 (Fax) • Arnandaw@Klabin.com 10 Pier Avenue Rick Morgan Page 1 of 2 From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:15 AM To: Susan.Lewis@LW.com Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue I am forwarding your email to Rick Morgan, Director of Public Works. Jackie Drasco Deputy City. Clerk City of Hermosa Beach From: Susan.Lewis@LW.com [mailto:Susan.Lewis@LW.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:01 AM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Avenue Good morning... I'm not sure what is to be gained by turning Pier Avenue into one lane. All it has accomplished is traffic to be backed up. Turning left off of Pier Avenue, has never been a problem. You at least still had the option of changing lanes to go around someone if they were turning left. I don't understand why there would be a "strong merchant/business interest in this project". Parking does not increase, just congestion. Everyone I have spoken to that have experienced the new change, now choose to avoid Pier Avenue at all costs, because of the traffic. That is decreasing the amount of people wanting to shop on Pier Avenue because it has become too congested. Also, that now increases the traffic on 2nd Street and 8th Street or any street for that matter, that goes through to PCH. Valley and Ardmore will be used more, and backed up more to avoid Pier Avenue. Not to mention everyone now cutting down the side streets to avoid Pier Avenue. I can only imagine how it will be when school is back in session. It was bad enough with two lanes, let alone one. Bad idea. One other thing, I was watching the City Council meeting last night, and if I got paid for every time the City Council members and others, said "um", I would be a very rich woman. I would like to think that they would want to project a more professional image since they are running a city. Also the City Attorney, and the grey haired gentleman on his right, should really get some more sleep. Pagelof1 Rick Morgan From: Gary Mallette [garymallette©yahoo.comj Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 7:58 AM To: Rick Morgan; Sam Edgerton; JR; Michael Keegan; Peter Tucker Subject: Pier Avenue Did I just read the Daily Breeze correctly that eventhough the residents of HB overwhelmly do no like the disaster on Pier Ave, we aregoing to continue it and even expand it. ARE YOU LISTENING9?79 I guess not! You are starting to sound like the guy in the White House who does what he damn well pleases despite whatpeople want. Kudos to Michael. Keegan for listening to the people. Pier Avenue is: an abortion with the changes. Quit trying to make us like Manhattan Beach. Gary Mallette • Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better. Pier Avenue Page 2 of 2 ******************************************************************************* To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal tax issues in this e-mail was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you, (i) to avoid any penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) to promote, market or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. For more information please go to http://www.lw.corn/resource/Publications/_pdf/pub1289_1.pdf ******************************************************************************* This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review,reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Latham & Watkins LLP Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Nancy Kames [ndkarnes@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 6:02 PM To: michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue I want to thank you for re -opening Pier Avenue. That was truly a nightmare not having those extra traffic lanes. Living in an very heavily populated city, we need all the traffic lanes possible. Our very safety was areal issue. Please leave Pier Avenue as it is - narrowing that street would be a severe and dangerous detriment to this city and its businesses. I feel most confident my opinion concurs with the vast majority of residents. However, I will also add that it you re-institue your ignorant, irresponsible idea of attempting to narrow Pier Avenue, we citizens will create an uproar like you won't believe. And, we won't stop until a sane mind is found, regardless of how far outside of this community we need to search and fight you. Sincerely, Nancy Mazza 19 4th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business. Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Ryan Retting [rretting@alumni.calpoly.edu] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:54 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Pilot Striping project Please add my vote to return Pier Ave back to the two lane configuration ASAP. Thanks -Ryan Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Nancy Kames [ndkarnes@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 3:21 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: kitonga@adelphia.net Subject: Pier Avenue It just took me 25 minutes to return home from Von's. Pier Avenue was blocked by traffic from Pacific Coast Highway on the east to Hermosa Avenue on the west. I did manage to turn left onto Monterrey and try 8th Street going west. It was also bumper to bumper. What a mess you have created! Who is responsible for this stupidity? Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business. Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Yarema, Geoffrey S. [GYarema@Nossaman.com] Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 10:46 PM To: Rick Morgan while the new striping presents the need of some retraining of drivers i can see the potential good in making upper pier more pedestrian.•friendl.y. why not email out some conceptual plans some can see the benefit? words don't convey the vision well enough particularly since the traffic inconvenience is obvious. i and others are willing to support the changes but need to see what we will get more vividly. geoff yarema 2160 monterey Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Todd Calish [tcalish@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday,July 02, 2006 11:46 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Road Changes Wanted to let you know that I am strongly against the recent street restriping changes to upper Pier • Avenue. The new condition causes unreasonable backups when cars are waiting for parking spaces, when buses stop to pick up passengers, when cars are backing out of parking spaces and when bicycles are in the way. Fewer cars can get through the stop signs at a time. The limited amount of vehicles using the turning only lane does not justify all of the otherimpacts that are created by taking away the second lane. Please discontinue the "test" as soon as possible and restore the original configuration. Thank you. Todd Calish 310-962-7504 (cell) Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 7:23 AM To: may gordon Cc: Steve Burrell; Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue Ms. Gordon - Thank you for your comments. I am forwarding your email to City Manager Steve Burrell and Public Works Director Rick Morgan. Jackie Drasco Deputy city Clerk City of Hermosa Beach --Original Message From: may gordon [mailto:mmg3@adelphia.net] Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:59 PM To: cityclerk@hermosabch.org.; peter@electpetertucker.com; samedgerton@aol.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; michaeikeegan@manhattanbread.com Subject: Pier Avenue Hi, I am a long time resident of Hermosa Beach and really wondering why you are wasting our tax dollars on restriping Pier Avenue. It should have been left as it was originally. You have spent $25000 and are driving your constituents crazy, sitting in traffic. I personally have seen three quasi accidents with cars attempting to back out of spots along Pier Avenue into moving traffic. This truly was a waste of funds. Which special interest group are you catering to? I think everyone would like to know EXACTLY what possessed each of you, so we can vote accordingly in the next election. Regards, M. Gordon ps Will you ever have council meetings on another day of the week, so those of us who work on Tuesdays might be able to attend? Rick Morgan • Page !of1 From: Nancy Karnes [ndkames@yahoo.coml Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 8:11 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Nightmare I wonder how much it is going to cost us to undo your newly created nightmare on Pier Avenue? I thought those funds were supposed to be used to improve transportation - you did the exact opposite! It is ugly, inconvenient & dangerous, as it impairs police and fire department access. Do you Yahoo!? Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta. •W Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Gretchen Karpowich [gkarpowich@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:03 AM To: peter@elecpetertucker.com Cc: %samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; sburrel@herrrmosabch.org; Rick Morgan Subject: PIER AVENUE Dear Mr. Tucker: As a 35 year resident of Hermosa Beach, we are asking that you seriously consider changing the lanes of upper Pier Avenue back to the original design. For the most part, we are very supportive of the changes recommended by the Council for Hermosa Beach, but we fail to see how our city benefits from the recent change down to one lane aside from traffic congestion and confusion on the part of motorist. We have spoken to some of the owners of local businesses on Pier Avenue and found that they shareour opinion as well and have the added concern that long range plans will hinder their business. We have seen Hermosa Beach grow from a 'T-shirt town" to a thriving community and are proud of our small businesses which we support. Please support this decision at your next meeting. Not all changes are for the best. Regards, John and Gretchen Karpowich 590 20th Street Hermosa Beach, CA Pier Ave Restriping Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Specht, Gary A CTR NWDC [gary.specht@navy.mil] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:52 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Restriping Mr. Morgan, Thanks for the opportunity to comment. I ride my bike up and down Pier Ave. almost daily. The following comments are based upon my observations: 1. Full size vehicles, e.g.'Crown Victoria, long wheel base pick ups, etc., slant parked along Pier nearly protrude into the traffic lanes. This makes it lesssafe for bicyclist than it was when there were 4 lanes. 2. Cars passing bicyclist used to have another lane to drive in when there were 4 lanes. Now they closely brush past cyclists — more dangerous. 3. Center turn laneis unusually wide and appears to be rarely used by cars turning left 135 degrees into an opposite side parking spot, into parking lots, or on to side streets. This seems to be a waste of expensive road way. 4. A vehicle stopping to wait for someone to back out of a slant spot on the right hand side of the street stops all traffic in that lane and backs up traffic. When there were 4 lanes, cars simply pulled around the stopped vehicle and traffic continued to move. unabated. I vote for going back to four lanes for increased safety and better traffic flow. Sincerely, Gary Specht Joint Maritime Experimentation and Transformation Navy Warfare Development Command 619 339 4737 Classified email: gary.specht@c3f.navy.smil.mil Unclassified email: gary.specht@navy.mil Rick Morgan From: David Charlton [dcharlton@mac.com] Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 8:46 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Traffic "Test" Dear Mr Morgan, your response to the Easy Reader June 15th re the recent changes made to Pier Avenue traffic lanes was encouraging - in that you were quoted as saying "this is only a test." I say encouraging because I think this test should be ended as soon as possible. I understand that the idea of moving down from two lanes to one, and adding yet another four way stop, was to see if the sidewalks could be expanded on upper Pier to make the area for the merchants and their customers more like Pier plaza ( I am one of those regular customers, and it seems like a nice idea). However I am afraid the increase in congestion simply can't justify such change. Since the one lane and extra stop have been put in place I have frequently found upper Pier to be backed up in ways that I have not seen in the five years I have lived in Hermosa. At times it can be quite bad, almost reaching back to PCH. This is particularly frustrating as one knows that only a few weeks ago there wasn't a problem. It has to be the case that more traffic is now using 8th street - I know I have more than before - and that can't be wise,as that street really isn't suitable for too much traffic. Beyond the inconvenience of a few more minutes waiting, which no doubt some might be want to dismiss as no big deal, is the feeling this gives. one, and the effect it has on the impression of the town and living here. Having spent an hour in traffic getting home fron work, or back from somewhere, turning right on Pier has that rather lovely feeling of "being home" back in the nice, popular, but small down-to-earth beach town. Hermosa is not Manhattan thankfully, nor heaven forbid like a Newport. But now, that whole back-up as you head west on Pier just makes it feel like another congested over- crowded, badly planned urban area. Almost an extension of PCH. This point may seem rather prosaic perhaps, but for me, a happy resident of Hermosa, it's important. I will tell you that when I first experienced the mess of the new traffic system, I had that rather anti -council feeling reaction. "Who do these people think they are?" "How could they be so stupid?" But in reading you) response to the easy Reader, and recognizing that we have to try out some things, I felt reassured. Change is often hard to pull off, and mistakes can be made with good intentions. The critical thing is to accept them, address them, and keep moving forward. To that end, please drop this idea, accept it was a mistake, and move on. I sensed from your response that you acknowledged that was what needed to happen. But it is now several weeks later. What is the status? Are you reconsidering keeping this poor redesign? I would welcome the chance to know where we are with this, and if it is still under consideration, what is being done to solicit feedback from residents? How can I give my opposition more formally? I do hope we can put this behind the town, and get back to the more effective road system. Thanks in advance for your attention. I would welcome a response when you get a moment. Regards, David Charlton 904 Manhattan Avenue Hermosa Beach. 7 Pier Ave lane re -striping Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Kinzel Asst, Carole [CKinzelAsst@caa.com] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 12:00 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave lane re -striping Mr. Morgan, As a resident of Hermosa (1053 Loma drive) I am writing you to express my discontent over the new restructuring of lanes on Pier Ave. I live right off of Pier Ave and Loma Dr and have noticed a serious bogging down of traffic on Pier Ave since the lane re=structuring. Especially during the summer months when there is more traffic coming to Hermosa. Although'I try to avoid driving on Pier Ave anyway, the new lanes make it really backed up on weekends. Another problem I have noticed b/c of this is there is more traffic on my street Loma Dr and' on 8th Ave. People have been speeding down our street and 8th Ave., I think b/c they are trying to avoid the mess that is currently on Pier. This is normally a quiet couple blocks, on Loma, but recently there are way too many motorists,obviously not residents that live on these blocks. There a lot of kids that play in our street and this could become unsafe for them as well. Please reconsider this lane re -structuring as I believe it has more negatives than positives. Thank you for you time. Best regards, Kyle Wilensky Kyle Wilensky Creative Artists Agency (310) 288-4545 office (310) 288-4745 fax This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any usedissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this a -mail in error, please e-mail us at caasecurity@caa.com or call 310-288-4545. striping project Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Karen Carbone [Karen@signalproducts.net] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:35 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: striping project Rick, I am taking a minute to express my opinion about this striping project. As a resident who lives Pier Avenue adjacent, I find this project to be traffic congesting and dangerous for both parked cars backing out into the now one lane of traffic and for pedestrians crossing alleys and intersections. Everyday I see cars veering intothe turn lane to avoid cars backing out and cars passing in the turn lane. In addition, having 2 lanes of traffic merge into one in the short break Valley to Bard does nothing but back all flow of traffic from Ardmore. I understand the want to beautify Pier but please do not do it at the expense of traffic flow and safety. Thank you, Karen Carbone Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, July 10, 20.06 2:33 PM To: genejan7@earthlink.net Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell Subject: RE: Pier Ave Ms. Thomas — Thank you for your comments. I will forward your email to our Public Works Director and City Manager. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach From: Maria Thomas [mailto:genejan7.@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006.2:01 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Ave Pier Ave is a mess. As a resident of the City I have to go out of my way to go South from where I live. This puts me some times on other residual streets and I know it up sets me that traffic from the sand hill cuts down to 20th to get to Valley Drive and now its getting worse. We are Hermosa. Beach and are not like other Beach Cities. Sincerely. Janette Thomas 565 20th Street Hermosa Beach Maria Thomas genelan7(a)earthlink.net Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. Message Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Todd Pearl [t.pearl@verizon.netj Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 4:13 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Striping Project Hi Rick, Since the test began, it seems like there is an endless supply of traffic up and down Pier. Please allow this email to serve as my hope that Pier will be returned to two lanes in each direction. Sincerely, Todd Pearl 735 Manhattan Ave Hermosa Beach No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.10/384 - Release Date: 7/10/2006 Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Subject: George Yenoki [gkyenoki@yahoo.comj Tuesday, July 11, 2006 4:21 PM Rick Morgan Pier avenue Stripping Project OK, the residents have patiently waited for the City to realize that the reduction to a single traffic lane is causing congestion to be unbearable. Any traffic study conducted using only vehicle counts is not measuring the impact to the residents.. A visual survey must be taken into account to determine the length of the queues throughout the newly stripped areas. When the observations are tabulated by time of day you would find that thi lengths of the queues at at their largest whenever Valley School is dismissing students o: during the evening commute time. It is now too late to accumulate accurate results as school is no longer in session and many families have left for vacation. In addition traffic has increased noticeably.on alternative roads leading to PCH. I hear that the City Staff reported that it would be too costly to repaint the street to bring it back to dual traffic lanes. This should have been presented to the public prior to the advertisement that the change was temporary. Perhaps the city is waiting to find out the level of frustration before the residents replace the city council with members that would admit to the mistake and bring back the original configuration. George Yenoki 1550 Loma Dr #C Hermosa Beach; CA 6 Rick Morgan From: George Yenoki [gkyenoki@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 7:21 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: Pier avenue Stripping Project Rick the problem with what was authorized by the council was that the testing,, period only measures the summer vacation traffic loads and will not reflect what happens when there is a significant numbers of school children crossing the street and commuters coming home. Rick Morgan wrote: > George, Council has authorized staff to make certain modifications to > the present test striping scenario, this test will most likely > continue through the summer at which time another public hearing will > be held and the determination to go back to 4 or leave as is will be > decided at that time...thank you for your patience with this > test...Rick > -----Original Message > From: George Yenoki [mailto:gkyenoki®yahoo.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 4:21 PM > To: Rick Morgan > Subject: Pier avenue Stripping. Project > OK, the residents have patiently waited for the City to realize that > the > reduction to a single traffic lane is causing congestion to be > unbearable. Any traffic study conducted using only vehicle counts is > not > measuring the impact to the residents. A visual survey must be taken > into account to determine the length of the queues throughout the > newly stripped areas. When the observations are tabulated by time of > day you would find that the lengths of the queues at at their largest > whenever Valley School is dismissing students or during the evening commute time. > It is now too late to accumulate accurate results as school is no > longer > > in session and many families have left for vacation. > > In addition traffic has increased noticeably on alternative roads > leading to PCH. I heard that the City Staff reported that it would be > too costly to repaint the street to bring it back to dual traffic > lanes. This should have been presented to the public prior td the > advertisement that the change was temporary. > Perhaps the city is waiting to find out the level of frustration > before the residents replace the city council with members that would > admit to the mistake and bring back the original configuration. > George Yenoki > 1550 Loma Dr #C > Hermosa Beach, CA 5 Rick Morgan From: Ron Harrison [rharrison@mysameth.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 7:51 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Single Lane on Pier To whom it may concern: As a homeowner and parent living in Hermosa Beach, I would like to see the single lane on Pier Avenue stay. I believe. that the. single lane has slowed traffic along this roadway which has made the walking areas safer and more enjoyable for my children. It does not seem like a game of '.Frogger when crossing the street as traffic is much slower and more observant. Additionally, as the parking stalls have now been increased in length I don't have to worry about my car's rear end being clipped off my someone speeding to the beach. I support the single lane on Pier Avenue. Ron Ron Harrison rharrison@mysameth.com Home 310.937.5671 Office 310.798.9981 Cell 310.863.4820 4 • Rick Morgan From: vpierce [vpierce@adelphia.netj Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:54 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Page l(of 1 I do not support this restripping project -traffic is horrible and we don't need bigger sidewalks for more bar patrons. Every time I go down to lower Pier, I am dissappointed at what has happened to our downtown area. Drunken people from all over, many covered with tattoos, shaved heads and gang apparel. I tend to go to the neighboring cities which is so sad. Thank you, Valerie Pierce Hermosa Beach, CA Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Ken Newberry [contactkennewberry@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 5:47 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. changes Dear Sir, As a resident of Hermosa Beach I wanted to express my: dislike of the reduction of two lanes to one, on Pier Ave. Though most of theother changesproposed sound like good ideas, the lane changes have definitely created more congestion and more chance for accidents. Thank you, K. Newberry . Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC -to -Phone calls. Great rates starting at 10/min. Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: ken hayes [hayesk@adelphia.net] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 8:43 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Test PIs chnage back to the normal 2 lanes; seems more congested - PCH traffix has increade 4x in the last 10 yrs and I think Pier would be close to 4x too. Why would anyone cut back a lane w/ 4x growth??? sincerely ken hayes 144 1st court Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 7:37 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: Pier Avenue restriping From: Bruce Cook[mailto:bruce.a.cook@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 5:53 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Pier Avenue restriping Dear Mr. Burrell, While I appreciate the City's interest in improving Hermosa Beach by "testing" the Pier Avenue restriping concept, with this email I wish to register my dislike of the restriping and encourage the City to return. Pier Avenue to a four lane roadway. As a Hermosa Beach resident living on a connector road to. Pier Avenue I find the daily traffic resulting from the restriping to be miserable. The traffic has made it difficult to enter Pier Avenue from my street(Cypress Avenue) and impedes the use of Pier Avenue as a common vehicle route for my daily activities. The traffic on Pier Avenue appears to have slowed the transition through the Valley/Ardmore intersection, causing additional traffic on Valley/Ardmore. Additionally, the increased traffic on Pier Avenue appears to encouragevehicles to deviate from Pier Avenue to the adjacent neighborhood streets, including mine, as they make their way through Hermosa Beach. I support the Council's efforts to improve our city, but not every idea is a good one. The Pier Avenue restriping has provided no improvement for me as a Hermosa Beach resident, but rather degraded a bit of the Hermosa Beach quality of life. Bruce Cook 1.136 Cypress Ave. #3 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (310) 372-3985 Page 1 of l Rick Morgan From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 7:37 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: The Pier Ave Pilot Striping current configuration is NOT working! From: Kathy Cook [mailto:kecook@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 6:24 PM To: Steve Burrell; Kit Bobko; JR Reviczky; Michael Keegan; Sam Edgerton; Peter Tucker; Rick Morgan Subject: The Pier Ave Pilot Striping current configuration is NOT working! I have lived in Hermosa Beach for 18 years (just off of Pier Avenue on Cypress Avenue) and there is no doubt in my mind that the Pier Avenue Pilot Striping Test has made traffic and congestion worse, not better. For example, when I am returning home from work it now takes me far longer to travel the last several blocks to get to my home. I have tried alternate routes and found this is true in any case. Also, a previously simple trip to Vons is now a major ordeal. Conceptually I am in favor of improvements to upper Pier Avenue. The wider parking spots have definitely been a long overdo safety improvement. However, there continues to be a blind spot for drivers looking west at the intersection of Cypress at Pier Avenue. But the biggest problem right now is that the Test Striping has caused horrendous traffic problems. This should be a huge yellow flag that this configuration is NOT the solution to the ultimate Pier Avenue reconstruction. Despite what traffic engineering standards may imply, the reality is that traffic volumes. on Pier Avenue are in fact NOT adequately accommodated with the single traffic lanes! Kathy Cook 1136 Cypress Ave #3 Rick Morgan From: alex@manners.name Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 8:23 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: Pier Ave Trial Stiping Dear Mr. Morgan, Although I was not expecting a response to my email sent last week, I just wanted to make sure you had received it, as email can sometimes end up getting filtered. If you would be so kind as to reply that you received my email I would most appreciate it. Alex Manners. >Dear Mr. Morgan, >I wanted to ;pass along. my comments on the re -striping project of Pier Avenue. >As. a resident of Cypress Avenue, close to Pier Avenue, I was initially >concerned about the effect this project would have on traffic backups >on Pier Ave., as well as additional traffic on my street. So far, the >traffic issue has been a lot less of a problem than I thought it might >have been. At times there is a little congestion at the stop signs on >Pier, but not much more'than there was before, and after sitting in >traffic all the way down Sepulveda every day (I commute to Century >City), the additional time spent on Pier is negligible'in comparison to >my overall' commute. On the plus side, the upper Pier section now has a >much•different feel from a pedestrian point of view. I spend a lot of >time walking on Pier Ave. and have' always had a difficult time crossing >Pier at the crosswalks, which I always considered to be very dangerous >(I once witnessed a police car almost hit my'neighbor• while crossing on >the cross walk). Now, upper Pier has much more of a "village" feel to >it rather than the freeway that it used to be, and crossing the street has become much safer due to the traffic moving ata safer speed. >I attended the original Planning Committee meeting at which the >striping project was approved, and then,. as now, I am keeping an open >mind to this project. At that meeting I was surprised at the intensity >of the objections by certain members of the.community, one of which stated to.a supporter of the >project sat near me "you will not get this, you will not stop me. >Obviously,_this person had it in for this project before the pilot. >scheme got underway, and no matter what the results of the.pilot, he, >and probably others like him, are going to object to it. If it turns >out their concerns are real and the traffic problems are unacceptable, >then the City should take the appropriate course of action. However, I >believe the determination of the actual impact of the change to one >lane should be based'on actual traffic counts and observations, rather >than on the'possibly exaggerated claims of a few members of the >cemmunity that were opposed to the project no matter what the result of the pilot projec may be. > >Furthermore, if• additional traffic issues do arise due to the single >1 ane configurations, this alone should not dictate the success or >failure of the pilot., The severity and frequency of these problems >s hould.be weighed against the benefits gained from the changes. Nearly >ail 'roads in Los Angeles County get backed up at one time or another, >b.e it due.to a special event, or an accident. Those instances do not dictate the need fox changes , to the road. >It is the general everyday traffic flow that should be evaluated and >this weighed against the aesthetic and safety advantages of the single lane. 2 >Thank you for taking my comments into consideration. Feel free to >share with members of the Council. >Alex Manners >1207 Cypress Ave. >alex@manners.name >(310) 804-4281 Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Subject: Rick: Tom Utsch [tom@utschresearch.com] Tuesday, July 18, 2006 12:44 PM Rick Morgan Pier avenue traffic pattern - Opposition I would like to formally register my opposition from two lanes in each direction and to the addition of a Also I oppose the change that happened a year ago at (eastbound) from bi-directional to left turn only. Thank you. Tom Utsch Hermosa Beach 1 changing the Pier Ave traffic from new stop sign by the fire station. Pier and PCH turning the center lane Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Reyes, Vanessa [vanessa.reyes@tvland.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 12:36 PM To: Rick Morgan Please alleviate the congestion on Pier Avenue. The re -striping is not working. Thanks. Vanessa Reyes Smith 2901 Hermosa View Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Adrienne Less [adiess@verizon.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:47 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: pier avenue I have been patiently waiting for the traffic to adjust itself, but it has not. Pier Avenue is completely congested, and chaotic. Please put it back the way it was! What was unsafe about the four lanes? As I stated in a previous email; what.IS unsafe is the greater amount of traffic on other streets now, to compensate for the overflow from Pier. One ofthese happens tube my street, 8th. The stop sign' hes helped with the speeding, but there is so much traffic, and LITTLE sidewalk space, that it makes it very dangerous for those of us who want to walk around our neighborhood, i.e. to the beach, pier, shops, etc. There are a lot of families on our street, who have to dodge traffic; and,keep switching from..one side of the street to another, dueto the fact that niost of the sidewalks'on the street: are.take_ n up by parked.care This, to me, is a much.greater safetyconcern than four lanes on Pier Avenue. Arid i dohlt.believe the "iraffc counter" was in place for enough days. to hold'a valid experiment (not even aweek; and: someone knocked it off'the road after a few days}. In addition, there was no traffic counter in place PRIOR to the .Pier Avenue changes, so what were they comparing the findings. to? Adrienne Less Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Neil A. Waldhart [neil@waldhart.us] Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 11:30 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Test Project Mr. Morgan: We live at 625 10th Street, and use Pier Avenue eachday at the beginning and end of our morning walk. This morning, at ten o'clock on a Friday in the middle of summer, traffic was backed up from Bard Street to Monterey when we returned home. We think it is. already clear that the proposed upper Pier Avenue project is a:stupid idea, one:that can only incre.ase:congestion in the downtown area, cause terrible distress for residents. on: adjacent. streets, and only benefit.those.who are. intent:on.expanding;eastward the.outrage.ous barand beer..environment of:PierPlaza. And it really.doesn't:.matter.how many more white stripes are painted on the street, or how: many traffic.: samples are taken, because they are meaningless; it is midsummer; ..school is not in session; and,weekday traffic is etas lowest level of the year. Please register our votes as strongly against this project when you report to the Planning Commission and City Council. Sincerely, Neil and Mary Waldhart Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Kathy Cook [kecook@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 9:32 AM To: Rick Morgan; Fire Department; Hermosa Beach Employees; Police Department; Peter Tucker; samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; dan; jean; Michael; Rob; Vic Subject: Re: Thanks for the update. I am glad to see that there is an effort to try alternatives. I still see a potentially dangerous situation at one intersecti'on'that t hope can be addressed. At the intersection of Pier Avenue and Cypress Avenue, drivers travelling eastbound are very often confused as to whether or not there is a STOP. Many drivers come to a stop and wait for opposing traffic that is turning onto Cypress. This is true regardless of whether pedestrians are crossing. Kathy ---- Original Message ----- From:•Rick Morgan To: Fire Department ; Hermosa Beach Employees ; Police Department ; Peter Tucker ; samedgertonna,aol.com ; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com ; jbrhbcc@aol.com ; kit@kitforcouncil.com ; dan ; jean ; Michael ; Rob ; Vic Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 10:15 AM The test continues....please read attached update on changes to Pier Avenue striping. Thank you for your patience and I welcome your comments. 'Rick Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Heuer [dpsteve@adelphia.net] Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 4:11 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. mess Dear Mr. Morgan, I am writing this letter in response to what has been done to Pier Ave. Quite frankly, I'm totally speechless and at a total loss for words. I can't even, in my wildest dreams, comprehend what you all were thinking. I also am rather insulted and offended that our tax dollars have gone to such a debacle. At a time when all of L.A., including our own little city, is becoming over crowded, should we not be coming up with appropriate ideas to maximize traffic flow and parking? To turn the most popular major artery into and out of Hermosa from two lanes each way to one and add another stop sign in such close proximity to an already rough intersection is just about the most moronic idea I've ever been forced to witness. I'm doing my best to remain polite here, but it's extremely difficult. It is just completely mind boggling as to how this was even considered an option and an option for what?? What exactly was wrong with the way Pier has been setup? You have made a street that used to flow reasonably well, except when the kids go to or from school, into our own little version of the 405 that has enough room down the center now to play a football game or, what the heck, construct some more businesses. You have now created a constant line of cars clogging up Pier and I and all my friends in town are beyond displeased. I have noticed how you recently tweaked the upper west bound portion, which has improved things a TINY bit, but please, we all beg you, waste some more of our tax dollars and just undo the mess you have made. I also wish to express concern over the new stop light that was placed on PCH in front of the 24hr. Fitness. I assume our city has no particular control over thatand the jurisdiction for it is with CalTrans, but it also seems to be causing much more congestion up on PCH now too. I can see how it is rather needed, as far as for safe pedestrian crossing, but let's just make it for pedestrian use and/or perhaps the timings of the four lights in that area along PCH need to be studied and improved. In conclusion, entering and leaving Hermosa has now become a thoroughly un -enjoyable thing to do. Could we please get back to what worked and get traffic flowing again? Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Steven Heuer 1502 Palm Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 dspteve@adelphia.net Message Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: jgoodlett [jgoodlett@adelphia.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 12:43 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Avenue Dear Mr. Morgan: The updates to Pier Avenue are just another example of excessive waste of the Hermosa Taxpayer's money. The majority of taxpayers/residents and regular visitors to out town are not pleased with the changes on Pier Avenue. Theyagree that the changesmake no sense and should bp likes is. Nothing has been improved, or made better. The idea of creatingwidersidewalks. so that business. on Pier can use this area as extended storefronts or dining areas will only add to more congestion. Take a look at the sidewalk in front on Martha's on 22nd street, there are chairs, dogs tied to the street signs, strollers; and. bikes parked, thus blocking the sidewalk and leaving no room for pedestrians. DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO PIER!!!! Keep the sidewalks for walking and not as extended business/storefronts. In addition there is backup of traffic in both directions at peak traffic hours. It took more then 5 minutes to make a left turn on to Pier from Manhattan Avenue the other day because traffic was backed up alf the way down to Herrnosa Ave. More congestion!!! Also to conduct this TEST during the summer will not show the true impact of the change, you need to factor in the school drop off and Pick up traffic. This is a BAD idea. There are other area's in the city where these funds can be put to better use; sidewalk on 24th street .from .Park to Valley, so students can walk safely to and from school, and not in the MIDDLE of the street. How about painting the building at Clark? Or if you want to make it safer for drivers, widen Ardmore about a foot or two between Pier arid 8th street. Increase stearim cleaning'.on the Plaza, scythe smell of dog urine is not so strong, include the alleys for the human urine. Build covers for trash bins in downtwon area, so the smell afresh cooking does not permiate the area. Just a few suggestion. I have morel!!! Regards, Michelle Goodlett 244 24th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Will [williampbrowne@adelphia.net) Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 7:38 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: problems on Pier Ave I grew up in Manhattan Beach and now live in Hermosa for the past 15 years. There has been good and bad changes in our community but I think the recent changes to'Pier Ave needs to be.reassessed. Not only does the change to Pier Ave cause additional delays in the: traffic, especially at the Pier/Ardmore intersection, italso.;has become a safety issue for. pedestrians. Drivers now.b.ecome more. frustrated driving.down Pier Ave because of the delays and subsequently have to fight other drivers for position resulting in less attention to the pedestrians crossing Pier. Most of the time I ride a bike down Pier and have seen many examples•of the situation .described above. , • Please consider another alternative to the current situation.on PierAve. Sincerely. William' Browne (Concerned Citizen) • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: John Buch jjohnflybuch@verizon.netj Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:06 PM To: peter@electpetertucker.com; samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; Steve Burrell; Rick Morgan; don@lacbos.org Subject: "Lane Changes" Dear Council Members and City Managers: • Ideas come and go. Some are productive, some are good and some should not have made it out of the starting gate: The "Lane Changes" that are currently in effect m downtown`Hermosa Beach' on Pier ave is one these bad ideas. •Congestion. and traffic can be slow in. HB but with these changes it can be • horrific. I am confused as to why somebody thought they were necessary. It was. myopic thinking at best. Many cities go to great lengths and expense to add a lane when they only have one and we have REMOVED a lane???? What'in the world? How about the turning lanes dedicated to the. mobile home park at the expense of a driving lane? As John McEnroe would say.."you can't be serious" How many people turn into the Mobile Home Park vs, how many drivers NEED that second driving lane? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Please put the lanes back in the normal configuration on Pier Ave to keep this town flowing well. John Buch 10 year HB resident • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: RJBobbie2@aol.com Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 3:16 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: Pier Ave. restriping 2 P.M. Friday, July28 Eastbound Pier Ave. traffic backed up from Valley almost to Monterey 3 P.M. Sunday, July 30 Westbound traffic on Pier backed up from Monterey almost to the post office. The relatively free flow of traffic we used to enjoy on Pier Avenue is history. It is also a precious commodity that a small congested beach community cannot afford to give away. It is still very difficult at times to back our of the diagonal spaces. This whole experiment is an ill conceived joke! Randy Johnson 2131 Circle Drive Rick Morgan From: ciri@adelphia.net Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 9:38 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Upper Pier Ave. Importance: High In regard to the Pier Ave re -stripping article on June 29th in the Beach Reporter: I was so sorry to read that Michael Keegan .was outvoted to put Pier Ave. back to a four lane road. I was also very confused as to how Hermosa was going to spend over $8,000 to "tweak" the striping but uses the cost of $10,000 as a reason not to put the road back to a four lane road. How does this make any sense??? I think Hermosa could sport the extra $2,000 and save its residents and tax payers the problems this change is causing. I am in total agreement with Keegan that the traffic would overflow to Hermosa private neighborhoods as it is already happening. After taking a look at our visitors on July 4th it was such a relief to be able to go to upper Pier for some peace. Why is Hermosa so insistent on making our town the Party mecca of the beach communities??? Of course Hermosa is catering to the restaurants and bars. Just take a look at lower pier. How many new bars are going to be allowed to open on upper pier?? And would someone please explain what the new Whole Foods market on Rosecrans has to do with anything? I am pretty sure that Alta Dena doesn't have to worry. As a resident of'Hermosa I am continually miffed as to why this city puts more value into our visitors than its residents. Now that the road has been re -stripped there are still backups from Monterey all the way to Bard. why is the OK??? It is my hope that the city council / planning commission is listening to its residents. There has only been complaints and frustrations from the people whom I have spoken to. Please. Lets leave Hermosa as the quant little beach town that it deserves to be. 4 Rick Morgan From: Ugly Single White Guy [uglysinglewhiteguy@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 10:29 PM To: Rick Morgan; Fire Department; Hermosa Beach Employees; Police Department; Peter Tucker; samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; dan; jean; Michael; Rob; Vic Subject: Re: striping failed Restriping is a complete failure for the following reasons: 1. More road rage on pier a. customers can no longer back out due to only one lane of traffic. The people are pissed off because there is traffic so they don't let the customers back up out of the parking spot the drives speed up so the other drivers dont back out. The drivers trying to back out are pissed because no onewill let them back out of the parking space so they speed up. road rage!!!! 2. People race around the other cars due to only one lane each way. Cars race into oncoming lanes to go around other drivers making turns or waiting for others to back out of a parking space. This causes near crashes all the time. IT IS A FAILURE. RESTRIPING IS A FAILURE. and it won't get better when summer is over due to less traffice. PLEASE DON'T USE THAT LINE. I DON'T WANT. TO SEE THAT IN THE NEWSPAPER BECAUSE THAT IS A LIE. CHANGE IT BACK! PLEASE. 3. Pedestrians are almost getting hit because drivers are pissed and speeding up to stop signs and not allowing pedestrians to cross. Will it take a death of a pedestrian to make you change your mind? I bet it will take a death and a multimillion dollar lawsuit (settled out of court) to make you change your mind. Please email me back and tell me the benefits of "restriping"? I read where "someone" thought it would be a benefit to the restaurants / businesses on Pier? • How???? --- Rick Morgan <rmorgan@hermosabch.org> wrote: > The test_continues....please read attached update on changes to Pier > Avenue striping. Thank you for your patience and I welcome your > comments. Rick Do You Yahoo ! ? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 3 • Page lofi Rick Morgan From: Adele Gronbach [amgronbach@cox.net]. Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:55 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Upper Pier Avenue Project I hope that your traffic count test is conducted at night as traffic comes to a crawl and then a stop at night. I am concerned that this will send inebriated people through residential streets. It is tolerable to limit the partygoers that come from other cities and `states to the commercial area, but it is not acceptable to have these same people driving through the residential areas of Hermosa Beach. The crime statistics for our beautiful town have skyrocketed compared to the past relative safety of residing here. In addition, I hope that the traffic counts will be done once school is in session, as traffic was always a problem with two lanes. So far, we are very unhappy with the traffic lane reduction program and have not talked to any other resident who is happy with it. I would hope that the city council' remembers that they are supposed to be representing the members of our community and not adding more businesses that create additional criminal problems. Adele Gronbach 42 -18th Street 372-3494 Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Robin Gose [rgose@turningpointschool.org] Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 12:13 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Hi Rick, I. have been a resident of lermosa Beach for 4.5 years. I love this community and choose to live here for the small town feeling. I have been disappointed by the lanes changes on Pier Avenue. Decreasing to one lane between Cypress and Hermosa Ave. has greatly increased the traffic. Not only does it make it feel more congested, but it is more dangerous for bicyclists. I feel that it detracts from the laid back vibe Hermosa is known for. I am also unhappy with the new stop sign at the fire station. After the two stop signs at Valley and Ardmore, this useless sign also adds to the congestion. I do not feel that it has slowed down traffic or made it more safe; in fact I think the opposite is true. Thank you for allowing citizens to share their comments with you regarding this change. Best wishes, Robin Gose From: Rick Morgan [mailto:rmorgan@hermosabch.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 10:16 AM To: Fire Department; Hermosa Beach Employees; Police Department; Peter Tucker; samedgerton@aol.com; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com; kit@kitforcouncil.com; dan; jean; Michael; Rob; Vic Subject: The test continues....please read attached update on changes to Pier Avenue striping. Thank you for your patience and I welcome your comments. Rick • Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: Grbengtson@aol.com Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 8:43 AM To: Rick. Morgan; kitonga@adelphis.nt; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; peter@electpetertucker.com; JBRHBCC@aol.com Subject: Pier Avenue With all. respects Pier Ave. needs to be restored to 4 lanes. Not sure what the dbjective was in going to 1 lane but, whatever, in my view , it was ill conceived. I would be interested in knowing why and what that decision cost the taxpayers. Gary Bengtson Rick Morgan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Sirs, chin_khan@verizon.net Friday, September 08, 2006 3:10 PM Rick Morgan michaelkeegan@manhattanbrad.com; peter@electpetertucker.com Pier Avenue I just wanted to give some feedback on the Pier Avenue changes. I don't see any benefit at all to reducing the number of lanes. The intersection at Valley/Ardmore is congested enough without the added backup on Pier Avenue. I would like to see things back the way they were before or given some benefit to the changes. Best regards, Randy Chin 2 Page 1 of 1 Rick Morgan From: ginanyman@netscape.net Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 5:56 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Dangerous Pier Avenue Dear Rick, We are homeowners on Manhattan Avenue just south of Pier Avenue. Our garage is on Bayview. For over 11 years, we have headed north on Bayview, turned right onto Pier, and headed east up to PCH. Now, with only one lane in each direction on Pier, it is IMPOSSIBLE to SAFELY turn from Bayview. In order to see around the parked cars to our left and right, we have to pull ALL THE WAY OUT ONTO PIER AVENUE to make a turn. It was safe when there were two lanes in each direction because the cars heading east had another lane to drive in. Now, they drive right into US and we have nowhere to go. The same goes for the residents on Loma and Cypress. However well -intended, the re -striping on Pier Avenue is just NOT safe for residents who use that street every morning and evening. I feel for the residents on 8th Street who have complained: about the increase in traffic on their street. Sorry to say, my husband, my daughter and Iall use 8th Street now to getup to PCH. Many of our friends on Bayview, Manhattan Avenue, Monterey and Loma do the same. Pier Avenue was not broken and you sure didn't fix it. Put four lanes back. If you're worried about pedestrians, paint better crosswalks and put up better signs. Your bad decisions have made many residents miserable. Sincerely, Gina and Tom Nyman Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection. • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Gary Mallette [puckster@adelphia.net] Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 10:36 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave Hi Rick, This upper Pier experiment is still a "crock". I hope the council people and other HB employees listen to the will of the people. Vote NO NO NO. Gary Rick Morgan From: ghggates [ghggates@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 7:21 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Street Striping Mr. Morgan, I wanted you to know that I support the Pier Avenue re -striping project. I believe that the re -striping slows traffic and enhances the pedestrian shopping experience on Pier Avenue. Also, I would like to suggest that the city re -stripe Hermosa Avenue to reduce it to one lane. Such re --striping would reduce speeds on Hermosa Avenue, and could provide a bike lane to move cyclists off of the Strand. Sincerely, George H. Gates 153 Manhattan Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo..com 1 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Jb573@aol.com Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 7:35 PM To: Rick Morgan; kitonga@adelphia.net; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com; peter@electpetertucker.com; JBRHBCC@aol.com Subject: Pier Avenue We have found a way around the Pier Avenue congestion when we go downtown. Since we live near enough, we walk. That's only when we aren't shopping for anything, just taking a walk. When we are going for something specific we sometimes use 8th or weave down thru 1 0th I think it is (by the Farmer's Market) to make our way downtown. If my wife is coming home from work she says she cuts thru Gould to Monterey. Or else we shop elsewhere. I see no advantage to the re -striping of Pier in either the old or the new configuration. If the Fire Dept and Police think the response time is LONGER, then there shouldn't be any further discussion about this. We vote against it. Bernie and Jacki Friedman • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 . From: Andersonng655@aol.com Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:43 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: pier ave I hope you have been reading the letters in the beach reporter and see that the people of HB do not want 2 lanes on Pier. Lets put the residents first for a change and not the tourists and weekend drinkers. The Andersons 655 24th Place HB 10/4/2006 Rick Morgan From: gmalbano [gmalbano@verizon.net] Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 9:08 PM To: Rick Morgan; michaelkeegan@manhattanbread.com Cc: kitonga@adelphia.net; peter@electpetertucker.com; jbrhbcc@aol.com Subject: A Plea To Return Pier Avenue Back To Four Lanes Council Members, I'd like to take this opportunity to urge each and every one of you to consider the sentiments of our community in restoring Pier Ave to the way is was: FOUR lanes. This recent change begs to ask the question..why fix what was not broken? It now will take me, on the average, an additional 2-3 minutes to travel either west or eastbound on the same stretch of pavement which used to flow relatively smoothly and without restriction. With the additional stop sign at the fire station, I cannot figure out the rational behind these latest changes. The amount of tax revenue spent on the research, implementation and then restructuring is astounding. During the weekend crowds, you now have to completely stop to allow each and every vehicle to back out from their parking spots along Pier to join the flow of traffic. I have heard that one reason for the changes was to PROMOTE business in the immediate area. Have you ever gone to a store only to be irritated by the parking and (waste of) time investment? I fear this IS happening, at least with those who should matter most to this Council: the homeowners and residents of Hermosa Beach. Once again, I urge you to reconsider these failed changes. I also ask that you consider the slowed response times our public safety officials will undoubtedly experience as well. I invite any of your responses to my concerns at the following, Gary Albano 1245 Ninth Street, HB (310)374-1218 Sincerely, Gary Albano 1 • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Edith Pfeifer [claysculptor@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:56 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: pier ave. striping Dear Sirs, As a 35 year resident of Hermosa Beach, I thought the idea of changing Pier Ave. from 4 lanes to 2 was ridiculous from the time it was first purposed. I tried to keep and open mind when the first reconfiguration was put in place, but it was a real mess.. Now, even more has been spent to try another option. Again, I tried to keep an open mind, and yes,. there was some improvement. However, this morning at 8 am I drove to the P.O. to drop off a letter. I could not help but notice that the "do not block" area in front of the firehouse, and right by the new stop sign, was kept totally blocked for the entire time it took me to accomplish my mission. I'm sure this must be a problem in the afternoon rush as well. This is a real safety issue; there is no way the truck could have gotten out of there in a timely manner. I am opposed to changing the street to 2 lanes. Do us all a favor and put it back the way it was! Enough time and money have been spent on this ill conceived idea. Edith Pfeifer . 843 Loma Dr. Hermosa Beach 310-376-7671 10(4/2006 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 2 From: Eric Bails [ericbails@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:39 PM To: Rick Morgan Subject: RE: Pier Avenue Improvement Project From Janice Brittain Rick, Thanks for the file. I will do my best to make tomorrow's session, whether I speak or not. Regards, Eric Rick Morgan <rtnorgan@Jiermosabch.org> wrote: Eric, hope this helps, please come to public meeting tomorrow to learn more... Rick From: Eric Bails [mailto:ericbails@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:00 PM To: MisC95@aol.com Cc: Rick Morgan Subject: Re: Pier Avenue Improvement Project From Janice Brittain Janice, Your initial reply to me this morning asked for my ideas about solving "traffic problems." I imagine that The City has some documentation with a more useful definition of the problem than the two words, "traffic problems." All I'm asking for is the authoritative source(s) that define the specific issues the Pier Avenue Improvement Project is intended to address. Perhaps Mr Morgan would be so kind as to email me a link or a set of files that identifies & defines the Pier Ave problem(s). Once I understand the problem space, I'd be happy to cogitate solutions. Without reference to the The City's diagnosis, I'd be offering solutions looking for problems, vhich pretty much sums up The City's approach to Pier Ave so far, & I find that methodology both unwarranted & regrettable. Kind Regards, Eric 11TisC9S@aol.coin wrote: I am not sure what you mean by a link. You can check the "City of Hermosa Beach" web site. Janice 1014/2006 • "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." -Confucius "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." -Confucius 10/4/2006 • Page 2 of 2 , Rick Morgan From: Ugly Single White Guy [uglysinglewhiteguy@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:24 PM To: Ugly -not spam Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell; danie1l8@gte.net; Janice Brittain; mdivir@yahoo.com; Rob Beste; Victor Winnek (Victor Winnek) Subject: RE: Meeting Reminder... I cannot make it to the meeting but please bring my comments: NO NEW STRIPING! PUT IT BACK THE WAY IT WAS! PLEASE! - And, if the article in the local paper was correct, then I say the following: "RICK MORGAN NEEDS TO LISTEN TO THE LOCAL HERMOSA BEACH RESIDENTS AND WHAT "THEY" WANT (THE TAX PAYERS)....NOT HIS "OWN" THOUGHTS. Thank you. (A fellow Hermosa Beach Resident) :) --- Rhea Punneo <rpunneo@hermosabch.org> wrote: > The meeting is Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - my apologies for the > error. > Rhea > From: Rhea Punneo > Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:07 PM > To: Adele Gronbach; Adrienne Less ; Alex Manners; Amanda Weber ; > Antoinette Empringham; Barbara Gunning ; Becher Anderson; > BEEBOPBEV@aol.com; Bruce Cook; Carla Merriman ; Carol Froom; Caryn > Maresic ; Chris Gee ; Chris Norman ; Chris Prenter; CHRIS WAGENBRENNER > • c iri@adelphia.net; Clay Baker ; Dan Inskeep ; David Charlton > [dc harlton@mac.com]; Don Karasevicz ; Enrique A. > Coello ; Eric R. Foster > ; Gary Bengtson; Gary Herman; Gary Mallette; Gary Mallette ; Gary > Specht; Geoffrey Yarema; George Gates; George Yenoki; Gila Katz ; Gina > & Ton Nyman; Gregory Less; Gretchen Bazela ; Gretchen Karpowich ; J. > Goodlett ; Jack Hoy; Jack Stuckey ; Jackie & Bernie Friedman; Jeremy > Berman; Jim Pierce; Jim Schoen; Joanne & Sebastian D'Amico ; Joe > Anderson; John Buch; John Miller; John Mullins ; Karen Carbone ; Kathy > Cook; Kelly Amato; Ken Hayes; Ken Newberry ; Kim Foster; Kimi Bell ; > Kin zel Asst, Carole [CKinzelAsst@caa.com]; Laura Matlock; Lisa Gevov; > Marguerite Kimball ; Maria Thomas; Mary Christopher; Mary Lou Cahir; > May Gordon; Michele Waller ; Nancy Colville ; Nancy Mazza; Neil a. > Waldhart; Randall Chin; Randy Chin; Randy Johnson; Randy Johnson; > Ras hel Mereness ; Robert C. Aronoff ; Robert O'Reilly; Robin Gose; > Rodney Williams; Ron Harrison ; Ryan Retting ; Sam Foster; Sam > Perrotti ; Scott Brogi ; Shauna Valenzuela ; Steve Brown ; Steve Hunt; > Steven Heuer; Susan Lewis; Susan Palmer ; Tara Cooney ; Ted Hauk ; > Teri Lander; The Andersons ; Todd Calish ; Todd Pearl ; Tom Elliott; > Torn Utsch ;,Tracy McDonald ; Ugly Single White Guy; Valerie Pierce; > Vanessa Reyes Smith; William Browne > Cc: Mick Morgan; Steve Burrell; (danie1l8@gte.net); Janice Brittain; > Michael DiVirgilio (mdivir@yahoo.com); Rhea Punneo; Rob Beste; Victor > Winnek (Victor Winnek) > Subject: Meeting Reminder... 1 • > The Pier Avenue striping trial is on the agenda before the Pic > Works Commission on Wednesday, September 16, 2006. > Rhea Punneo > Administrative Assistant > Public Works Department > City of Hermosa Beach > 1315 Valley Drive > Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 > 310/318-0222 > 310/937-5015 Fax Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 2 Rick Morgan From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:17 AM To: Mark Olsen Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell Subject: RE: Pier Avenue Restriping Mr. Olsen - Thank you for your comments. I will forward your email to Public Works Director Rick Morgan and City Manager Steve Burrell. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Original Message From: Mark Olsen (mailto:markolsen@asfla.org) Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 5:24 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Pier Avenue Restriping I'm a Hermosa Beach property owner and I've been reading about all the negative comments regarding the Pier Avenue re -striping project. The re -striping hasn't bothered me at all and I've experienced no inconvenience as a result of the project. I think that the plan to overhaul upper Pier Avenue will create a more vibrant and upscale community center that ultimately will improve our community's living standards and raise property values. Ride the Manhattan Beach horse as far as it will take us. Thanks, Mark Olsen 2411 Prospect Ave. 221 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (310) .770-2774 1 • Rick Morgan Page 1 of 1 From: Jackie Drasco on behalf of City Clerk Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:19 AM To: Erin Ryan Cc: Rick Morgan; Steve Burrell Subject: RE: Please return Hermosa Beach back to normal Ms. Ryan — Thank you for your comments. I will forward your email to Public Works Director Rick Morgan and City Manager Steve Burrell. Jackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach From: Erin Ryan [mailto:aeryno©yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:15 AM To: City Clerk Subject: Please return Hermosa Beach back to normal As a resident of Hermosa Beach for six years, I was completely displeased when the powers that be decided to re -strip Pier Avenue. Just trying to gethome to Monterey and 8th Street from Vons is like taking your life in your own hands now. I have to wait at the stop sign to exit the parking lot of Vons for several minutes. And God forbid residents have to do something on the weekends. I think it is obvious the residents of this once beautiful city are disgusted with the way our responses and insights have been treated on this project. No one is listening to us. Not only is this re -striping project a disaster, Hermosa Beach needs to do away with adding more bars to the Pier. I have not had one Friday or Saturday night's sleep go undisturbed all summer long with drunken patrons of the bar scene stumbling down the alleys and streets and making noise, urinating on the streets and sidewalks, screaming at yelling, all between the hours of lam and 4am. Please pass this message along to the decision makers of this city. What once was a lovely and cozy place to live is quickly becoming a dirty and dreadful place to visit. Listen to those who live here, who pay taxes here, who support the day to day life of Hermosa Beach. We do know what is best for us even if you don't. Sincerely, Erin Ryan Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC -to -Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. 1014/2006 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Maureen Hunt [maureen@hbchamber.net] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:51 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: Pier Ave. Hello, I just wanted to add a little input to the Pier Ave. Project. I take Pier Ave. every day on my way to work and home. 1 am not really pleased with this new single lane idea. All it takes is one slow truck (which are many in the morning) or someone crossing the street, etc,. to back the traffic up. This morning there was a real mess. A tow truck was parked across the entire east bound and middle lane and partially into the west bound lane. He was removing one of the cars that was parked in the "head in" parking on the south side of Pier. This caused a real traffic problem, as traffic eastbound was totally blocked and the westbound was backed up waiting for the cars going east to pass. Since when you are on your way to start work every minute is important, this becomes very frustrating to many drivers. Regards, Maureen Hunt Office Manager Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau 1007 Hermosa Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90257 1(310) 376-0951 Fax (310) 798-2594 10/4/2006 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 10:00 AM To: Rick Morgan Subject: FW: Upper Pier FYI From: Gary Mallette [mailto:garymallette@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:27 PM To: Samedgerton@aol.com; jreviczky@sasco.com; michael@manhattanbread.com; peter@electpetertucker.com Cc: Steve Burrell Subject: Re: Upper Pier Sam, I am sorry, but we cannot all agree that the original striping was terrible. It was not perfect because it would be better if the road was wider, but it's not. The only time it was a problem was when a long vehicle slant parked and stuck out. But that was so rare and the number of cars that pass through our city are many, many. So the ratio of cars passing easily vs.an occasional pick-up truck doesn't make that a good arguement. What most of the city can agree on is that the present striping does suck and no one is listening evidently except for Michael Keegan. Samedgerton@aoL cam wrote: Dear Gary: We can all agree that the original striping was terrible. But I drive this road at least four times a day but do not have the same experiences you do. Pick the worst time you can think of and I will drive it with you next week when I return from Portland. Sam Edgerton How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC -to -Phone call rates. 1014/2006 • Rick Morgan • Page 1 of 1 From: Nancy Karnes [ndkarnes@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 11:24 PM To: Rick Morgan Cc: kitonga@adelph.ia.net Subject: Pier Avenue What more does it take to convince you that the residents want Pier Avenue restored to four lanes. A governing body is by definition to represent the people. You score a big fat ZERO? ? ? } ' I ? Perhaps we need to start a recall petition - for you are the most arrogant and ignorant city council we have ever had. You refuse to admit you made a huge mistake - and you are jeopardizing my safety! Even the police said, "the lane reduction has slowed them (the police) as they respond to incidents in the western part of town during peak traffice hours" There has always been stop signs on practically every corner - what ignorace to say your purpose was to. slow traffice down. What you have done is create a huge traffice congestion problem in a heavily impacted city. Were you paid off by someone to create this mess? You even admitted, according to the Easy Reader that you have created a 300 per cent increase in the time it takes to drive down Pier Avenue. You have noticed less e-mail because the residents have voiced their complaints and you refuse to listen. You are the absolute worst city council we have ever had in this city! ! f H Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com 10/4/2006 a. Pier Avenue Improvement Project Trial Striping Mr. Morgan presented the item; said appreciates everyone's patience over the summer for the test then presented a brief overview why at commission; reviewed original plans for design from 1994; explained Proposition C funding and reserving of funds for Pier Avenue improvements; noted that time lapse camera was put on fire tower to record traffic [results on screen during presentation]staff presented as information the item at the previous evening's Planning Commission meeting; Planning Commission sub -committee members Hoffman and Pizer were in attendance this evening and that Commissioners Brittain and Marinelli were on the Public Works Commission sub -committee; said no action item other than taking to Council recommendation to establish Pier Avenue Enhancement Committee — ad hoc committee with specific task; goal hasalways been to link upper Pier Avenue with Plaza; said whether two or four lanes, will want to add amenities to Pier Avenue; showed photos of similar cities with two lanes leading to pier and showed rendering of new look for Pier Avenue. Mr. Morgan noted that he's always been concerned about safety of diagonal parking which would be aided by slowing of traffic; said traffic counts taken the previous day were the highest count ever recorded demonstrating that the reduction of lanes did not divert drivers; said construction on Manhattan Avenue is causing higher counts on Hermosa Avenue. Mr. Steven Hilton of AAE presented the video time lapse photography and will burn copies for the Public Works Department. He reviewed the video twice looking for backups and their duration; found three eastbound on Pier Avenue all due to fire truck leaving or returning and lasted very short periods of time; observation was that traffic slowed due to pedestrians or the fire truck leaving or returning. Highlights of the presentation also included: • Councilmember traveled Pier Ave. from Hermosa Ave. to PCH and worst delay was two minutes • Congestion at Valley/Ardmore intersection not included • Backup issues improved after moving traffic merge to location after STOP on Bard St. • Camera was positioned to see if congestion was at the merge point • Safety is the highest priority — safer for pedestrians to cross two lanes than four lanes • Number of accidents on Pier Ave. appear to be lower • Count on 8th Street lower than when last counted •. Construction on Manhattan Ave. may be causing diversion of traffic to other streets • Staff doesn't see major diversion to other streets from Pier Ave. due to high counts • Taping and counts done at same time Discussion and questions among commissioners included: • Five-year extension possible with MTA Prop C funding, currently about two years into City's five-year extension — could ask for additional extension if necessary • This is called a legacy project — won't change main street more than once in a lifetime — worth taking time to do right-of-way • Ad Hoc committee to provide additional input from viewpoints • General curve of traffic counts indicate increase • Interesting to note that reduction of lanes from two to four has not reduced the traffic on Pier Ave. • Counts for one day may not indicate complete picture — not clear foundation for changes • Do not have capability to time lapse photography to establish counts for over a year • Understood resident suspicion of data — said counts not conclusive but may be making decision partially based on inconclusive data • Reasons for project include: o Pier Ave. has been in poor condition for a long time o Biggest issue is drainage — standing water in gutters o Flooding problems o Is a gateway street for the City • Counts are good — done by a tube that counts — no hidden agenda • Staff concerned about diagonal parking and safe speeds • Community will decide • Original plan led to Pier Plaza improvements • Council will make final decision on whether or not ad hoc committee is established PW Commission ATTACHMENT 5 9/20/06 • Until final decision from Council on direction of project, will not go forward with design which includes street repairs • Comments from commissioners will be brought to Council • Sole purpose of this item is fact finding regarding the Pier Ave. re -striping trial • Feedback from Police and Fire Departments noted delay concerns when trucks parking in median • Emergency evacuation planning part of reformulating of 1992 plan • Stop at Bard primarily benefits mobile home park access as well as police and fire At this time Mr. Winnek opened the floor to public comment; admonished gallery will be keeping comments to three minutes and requested no outbursts from the audience. Gary Brutsch, Hermosa Beach Said plan is a failure and should end as soon as possible; data in original report is now twelve years old, biased in favor of businesses; lives on 8th St. and now uses 8th instead of Pier Ave.; said should talk to people who are impacted; feels commission should advise Council test has failed. Caroline Petty, Hermosa Beach Said numbers, snapshots in time, won't tell anything; said thank you - appreciates Mr. Morgan's being really communicative; said really need to focus on traffic increases since plan originally done; noted traffic is sure to increase due to two new projects on Pier Ave.; told commission needs to look to future traffic issues; if no other gateway street, there will probably be greater traffic issues in future; said believes the counts, has felt them; intention to reduce cars on Pier Ave. is disturbing to her as she has to use. it — lives south of Pier Ave. Pat Price, Hermosa Beach Eighth Street resident; quoted from Easy Reader article, saying police said lane reductions slowed response time in western part of town during peak traffic hours; wouldn't be there if no problem; increase in traffic has to stop; she is for four lanes. Eric Bails, Hermosa Beach Said that at January 18th meeting asked what problems the Pier Avenue Improvement Project was going to solve; appears scope of project is greater than drainage issues; last comment, fix drainage and enforce traffic laws. At this time Chairman Winnek asked speakers to stay on point, topic this evening is re -striping. Steven Pinard, Hermosa Beach Said can't speak to Pier Ave. re -striping but can speak of own experiences on 8th between Ardmore and PCH; people forced to walk in street due to planting and cars parked across sidewalk — increase in 8th Street traffic linked to Pier Ave. changes. Joan Arias, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St.; has seen distinct increase in traffic since re -striping; said cars make her house tremble during morning and evening rush hours; said can't look at Pier Ave. traffic without looking at 8th Street; has seen traffic increase on 8th Janice Yates, Hermosa Beach President of Marineland Homeowners Association; surveyed residents results indicated complete support for STOP sign at Bard St.; majority in favor re -striping — has slowed people. PW Commission 3 9/20/06 • Gary Kazanjian Hermosa Beach Business owner on Pier Ave. as well as resident; commended Mr. Morgan for being great communicator; in favor of four lanes but if had to choose, would choose the first two-lane configuration; cars are going around trucks making deliveries and cars stopped, waiting for someone to pull out of a parking space; is different than Manhattan Beach, there the businesses have alleys for deliveries; traffic and back up worse now that school is in session; likes STOP at Bard; Valerie Pickard, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St., re -striping has definitely changed life; hard to back out due to line of cars; concerned for daughter's safety; strongly opposes striping. Katherine Pinard, Hermosa Beach Lives on 8th St.; said 8th St. has taken a major hit; hasn't seen anything good about the re -striping; suggested that if go back to four lanes, consider lights in pavement for pedestrian safety on Pier Avenue. Ann Sullivan, Hermosa Beach Definitely against this plan; plan as stands is for business owners to expand on sidewalk to make more money; many trust issues; apologized to 8th St. residents — uses 8th St. Robert Hoffman, Hermosa Beach Said lives three doors from Pier Ave. and re -striping has made it difficult for him to get to and from PCH; he and all his neighbors hate striping. Nancy Mazza, Hermosa Beach Said is an 18 -year resident; concerned about safety being jeopardized every day striping in place; said in Easy Reader article police acknowledged slower response time; doesn't see how people could speed before; agrees has created hazard on 8th Street; urged give all communication with item to City Council. Shirley Mayer, Hermosa Beach Resident of 8th St.; said is a nurse; noted there's great impact to health and safety at stake; pollution increased due to the dust in the air; can't speak neighbor -to -neighbor due to the noise; can't allow kids or pets to go outside; need to make 8th Street not a main street to beach; resents looking at stuff from '92; home has been vandalized three times, since striping; said commission has to pay attention to residents. Carla Merriman, Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau Representing the Chamber et al, said city's business community is very interested in beautification of Upper Pier Ave., R/UDAT objectives could be realized by this project complete with new infrastructure, i.e., new streetlights, sewer system, improved sidewalks and street re -paving; believe additional landscaping would enhance the downtown business district for all; business owners haven't complained; applaud effort to slow speeders; care about safety of pedestrians; hope project comes to fruition. Sandy Pfister, Hermosa Beach Said doesn't live near Pier Ave., would like commission to consider when making recommendation to Council that R/UDAT recommendations are not in stone — were for time when written to be implemented soon; updated study needed; why asking for reduction in traffic; only businesses that can use sidewalk will benefit; said two-lane configuration not working, please recommend it go back to four lanes. PW Commission 4 9/20/06 Lisa Moore, Hermosa Beach Said there are lots of positive aspects — safer for walking, bike riding, driving; lives on Monterey and has been afraid to cross Pier Ave. — now finds it more pleasant; need to work out bugs; thinks density issue has brought change; hasn't noticed big increase since June on Monterey; agrees first striping was horrible; apologized for using 8th St. but has been using for eighteen years; working with school district on a walk campaign, get people out of cars to walk, ride bikes. Patty Eqerer, Hermosa Beach Said R/UDAT never dealt with feasibility issues; residents not being considered; imperative to understand if sidewalks expanded, commercial impact on traffic to residents in area; increase in business bringing noise, traffic flow,.congestion, parking issues; is against re -striping; feels City should look at downsizingbusinesses on Pier Ave. Gary Mallette, Hermosa Beach Is against the project; speeding is not a concern; sidewalks are walkable; 1992 study has no relevance to today; there's more pollution due to more idling vehicles; can't prepare well enough for an emergency. Howard Lonqacre, Hermosa Beach Said it's been established no problem on Pier Ave., have one on 8`h St.; noreport from public safety officials indicates opinion wasn't favorable so isn't in report; said Mr. Morgan's been amazing taking brunt of comments; participated in R/UDAT; should preserve the four lanes; noted that at last Council said would be initiating comprehensive review of upper Pier Avenue that should be linked to any street improvements; said supports ending the test. Roger Bacon, Hermosa Business Owner Has been in business in Hermosa Beach for 57 years; doesn't like Pier Ave., Von's doesn't like it; new regional shopping center going in at new center at Sepulveda and Rosecrans will be major competition for this area; said majority of people want four lanes; said change is a liability. At 9:00 pm, Chairman Winnek called a recess; meeting restarted at 9:17. Steven Dominque, Hermosa Business Owner Has been in business here for 15 years; striping done 7:00 pm to 6:00 am and no one could park at 7:00 am; believes rent will go sky high if change goes through — will put him out of business; is against the change. Steve Heuer, Hermosa Beach Said merge is at a crosswalk need more care for pedestrians; many cars backed up at STOP signs, specifically at Monterey; diagonal parkers having difficulty getting out of spaces near STOP signs; sketchier to ride bikes in that area now; thinks putting lights in street brilliant idea; sees STOP at Bard as a good thing; if speeders on Pier, why not more enforcement out there; population growing by leaps and bounds — absurd to reduce from four lanes to two; evacuation route important. Linda Campbell, Hermosa Beach Said she loves the re -striping; safer for pedestrians; longer wait times small price to pay for safety. Kathleen Midstokke, Hermosa Beach Thanked the commission for listening to a lot of speakers; was involved in R/UDAT study and doesn't remember any emphasis on upper Pier Ave., was on lower Pier Ave. at the time; outer lane was used to hunt for parking, other lane to speed through; already outside dining on Pier Ave.; believes sidewalks are for. pedestrians, baby strollers and wheelchairs, not for outdoor dining or display of merchandise. PW Cornnission 5 9/20/06 • Frank Hallstein, Hermosa Beach Said he likes the STOP at Bard, doesn't care for rest of change; thinks is like putting carriage before the horse; need parking before making this a destination, shouldn't send to City Council, should dump right here. At this time the item was brought back to the commission for discussion. Highlights of the discussion included: • Ad Hoc committee will be comprised of two members of both Planning and. Public Works Commissions, two Council members, two local representatives or architects. • Public Works Commission looks at infrastructure issues, not planning or financial issues • How commission feels about having the ad hoc committee will be brought to Council • This evenings meeting is a way to collect information; it is not a political situation • Maybe re -striping isn't best from an emergency or evacuation perspective • Chief Savelli advised no official department statement has been made regarding Pier Avenue; statement in Easy Reader was the officer's personal observation only; many of his personnel have said are in support of STOP at Bard. • Memo had been received from Fire noting problem with trucks in median; staff will ask for a more thorough • . Would be good if Council moves forward quickly — drainage and safety issues are important • Impact of striping could not have been imagined — good ideato do test • Distinct opinions and important issues voiced this evening • Commissioners in general glad test was done • R/UDAT report dated • Streets impacted by traffic not traveling Pier Ave. must be included in a more comprehensive plan if go forward with two lanes • Pedestrian safety another issue that should be addressed — not done in current • Signals at Monterey, Valley/Bard could be added to move vehicles safely • Sometimes changes are necessary to improve safety • Doing the study better than reading a report • Funding will be available when ready to begin construction on project • Action to be taken was to receive public comment, pass to Council MOTION by Commissioner Winnek to receive and record public comment and pass on to the City Council or via ad hoc committee to be formed. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Additional discussion included: •, Second item in recommendation is to provide Commission opinion on striping and ad hoc committee • May want to make into one motion that includes: o Return to four lanes o Retaining STOP at Bard o Focus effort on increasing safety in crosswalks • Form ad hoc committee for importance, significance of project MOTION by Commissioner DiVirgilio that Commission recommend to Public Works Staff and City Council end the test with exception of keeping STOP at Bard. After discussion, seconded by Commissioner Beste. At this time a gentleman came forward attempting to speak to this item but was told he was out of order. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None PW Commission 6 9/20/06 ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION by Commissioner Brittain to for an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Planning Sub -committee, Council Sub -committee, local architects, to meet regarding revitalization of Upper Pier Avenue, to provide oversight for design of project and do this as quickly as possible. After some discussion, motion was reworded as: MOTION by Commissioner Brittain to support staff recommendation to establish an Ad Hoc Committee. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. At this time the same gentleman, who identified himself as Dean Francois, attempted to speak to this motion and was again told he was out of order — was told could speak later at Item 11, Public Comment. AYES: Beste, Brittain, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: DiVirgilio ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Additional discussion included: • Want to move traffic in a safe manner • Should identify traffic safety in a separate motion to Council • Additional requirements could hold project up for years • Should formerly acknowledge many safety issues that need to be addressed • Don't have to push forward, could make statement to Council that want to further investigate, do broader discussion that supersedes downtown enhancement • Public safety is larger than this project • Safest design possible — can be added as item on future commission agenda • Every safety improvement possible will be included in project • Is realistic to put the infrastructure in place when do improvements for possible future signals — allowing for future options so don't have to tear up what's in place — could look at that • Citywide circulation study that looks at entire situations to significantly change anything — big challenge to made significant changes — all will impact side streets • Have options to do more later MOTION by Commissioner Winnek that members of Pier Avenue Subcommittee represent the Public Works Commission at the Ad Hoc Committee. Seconded by Commissioner Beste. AYES: Beste, Brittain, DiVirgilio, Marinelli, Winnek NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None At this time Mr. Francois again attempted to address the commission and was again told this was per time to address the commission. 7. Commissioners' Reports None at this time. 8. Public Works Department Reports a. Monthly Activity Report — July b. Project Status Report — July PW Commission 7 9/20/06 • 6. The above items are submitted for information purposes only. 9. Items Requested by Commissioners None 10. Other Matters Commissioner DiVirgilio congratulated Kiwanis, MOMs, all involved in "Show of Hands" for recent event — donations were for Centennial events. Commissioner Brittain thanked and commended Public Works team for their involvement in the event. 11. Public Comment Kathleen Midstokke, Hermosa Beach Has worked with the Brown Act since 1984 — believes Mr. Francois misstated the intent of the act giving the public the right to speak to every item on the agenda and commission generously gave the public almost two hours to do so; motions were relevant to the item and commended the chairman for holding to his position. Patty Egerer, Hermosa Beach Would like to have residents involved in process on these committees; have way of communicating to them when meetings are so they may attend. Mr. Morgan advised it is all part of the Brown Act as part of public notification. 12. Adjournment Commissioner Winnek adjourned the meeting at 10:18 pm to the meeting of Wednesday, October 18, 2006. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Public Works Commission of Hermosa Beach at the regularly scheduled meeting of September 20, 2006. Victor Winnek, Chairman Richard D. Morgan., P.E., Secretary Date F:\B95\PWFILES\PW Commission\minutes\minutes 9-20-06.doc PW Commission 6 9/20/06 • • 1 /- • L r • i 4,..i. }y.. l " o:* -,7• fi .,&,,,fil +�ys ( . [„;=�a 5 �4 „..,.-4g.70 . l if YYn .fig �s 6 < z'�Ay k :t [ t' y 2 a1 't [ 4 •4• '' ../e...:,... • il Niti4!r3 fj6�3 4 .3 Y i "cY— ) Honorable Mayor and Members of The Hermosa Beach City Council n� A October 3, 2006 */6/1)4, Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 NON-CIP PROJECT NO. 009-06 PIER CLOCK BENCH BARRIER PROJECT AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Authorize the award ofconstruction contract for Non-CIP Project No. 009-06 Pier Clock Bench Barrier Project to Dave Shaw Concrete and Block, Inc., in the amount of $48,000.00; 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the Contract subject to approval of the City Attorney; 3. Authorize an additional appropriation of $29,869.00 from the Downtown Enhancement Fund; 4. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue change orders as necessary up to $7,000.00. Background: On August 31, 2006, Public Works staff advertised for bids in accordance with public contract requirements. The City Clerk received four bids,by the closing date of September 14, 2006. The bids were publicly opened and read aloud. The results were as follows: Company Bid Amount 1. Dave Shaw Concrete and Block, Inc. 2. M3 Services 3. Freeway Electric 4. Zondiras Corp. The proposed work includes construction of a reinforced concrete bench/barrier. $ 48,000.00 $ 71,175.00 $ 97,680.00 $103,081.00 The project was previously sent out for bids in July, 2006. The low bid received at that time was $105,170.70, which was rejected by the City Council at the recommendation of Public Works Staff. Small design changes were made and the project was re -bid on August 31, 2006, which resulted in a low bid of $48,000.00. Staff reviewed the low bidder's documents and references and recommends award of this contract to Dave Shaw Concrete and Block, Inc. This project was initiated by the donation of the clock to the City from the Kiwanis. Council approved the installation of the clock last year and directed that it be located at the entrance to the Pier Plaza at Hermosa Avenue. The Kiwanis had requested that the clock be installed on a concrete pad that could serve as a bench. While designing this improvement the issue was raised by a resident regarding the inability of the existing bollards at this location to stop a run -away vehicle. Staff considered the issue and determined that the safety concerns were important and recommended that the bollards be replaced by a concrete barrier. This barrier could also provide the bench and pedestal for installation of the donated clock. This concept was designed and presented to the Public Works Commission and received unanimous support from the Commission. Staff presented the award of this contract to Council on September 26, 2006; Council directed staff to install a "mock- up" of the barrier/bench to assist Council in visualizing this improvement. The final mock-up was installed on October 4, 2006. 6c i • Options: 1. Approve installation as designed and authorize award of construction contract; or 2. Reject all bids and direct staff to redesign improvements, Fiscal Impact: The apparent low bid of $48,000 plus contingency of $7,000 brings the project total to $55,000.00. $25,131 has been reappropriated for FY 06-07. An additional appropriation of $29,869.00 (account 109-3301-4201) is needed to complete this project. Attachment: Photo Respectfully submitted, Kenneth Reamey Project Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Richard ' . Morgan Director of Public Works/City Engineer 2 F:\B95\PWFILES\CCITEMS\dock bench barrier 10-10-06.doc • ,��v Goe- or ios 6-d Supplemental to Municipal Matter October 10, 2006 (Handed to councilmembers at their council meeting.) Hermosa Beach City Council Re: Supplemental material re: COKE VENDING MACHINES ITEM From: Howard Longacre, resident Attached find; 2 pages - images of the 3 indoor and 2 outdoor vending machines in MB. 2 pages - vending machines in front of the Pavilions market at Anza Avenue and Torrance Blvd in Torrance. Note graffiti. 4 pages -'steel-caged' vending machines at the entrance of the 24-hour Super Kmart located at Torrance Blvd & Figueroa. Additional comments to my comments following the staff items in your packet. Manhattan Beach has 3 times the land area of Hermosa Beach and has an extensive park system. There are 2 outdoor vending machines located in M.B. They are located together at Manhattan Heights by an occupied game building just off Manhattan Beach Blvd. (See first and second image pages attached.) MB's other three vending machines are located indoors, one in Joslyn Center's foyer, and two inside the tennis 'pro' shop sign-up building at Live Oak park. (see first image attached) HB to equal MB per square mile would need only 2 vending machines total, not 9. MB to equal the initial count proposed for HB, would need 27 vending machines, or an increase of 22 machines. MB dispenses cokes at the 3 indoor vending locations at $1, and at the two outdoor machines at $1.25. MB's vending machines scream out in bright red, COCA COLA advertising. HB vending machines are proposed to charge 50% more than MB, and 250% more than the current city vending machine located i.e. in City Hall. A likely hazardous electrical condition currently exists at the two outdoor vending machines located outside MB's Manhattan Heights building. The sodas dispensed would all best not be dispensed by the city as they are, in my view, all without any significant nutritional value. The city should avoid offering such "food". Clean working drinking fountains are preferable. MB, per a Beach Reporter story, stated that they do not operate their 5 vending machines for the purpose of raising revenue. The proposed vending machines are not needed, they will degrade the parks, they will require time of city staff in various ways, electricity, be a probable policing problem. A net -negative! Better to have Coca Cola figure out how to contribute to the centennial, if they desire to, without their requiring an ongoing unneeded foot -in -the -door parks vending machine contract. Any such ongoing contract, in any case, should unquestionably be put out as a request for proposal (RFP) to any/all interested vending operators. Centennial or other contributions should not be used as a means to do business with the city so as to avoid a competitive RFP process. This is not a good way to do city business, notwithstanding what others might do. The contract, if it exists, was not posted on the Internet nor was a reference made to same. Kindly do not make any approval for this open-ended service agreement without the contract being available for public review first. Place HB people first. Reject this "contribution" contract. • • , 0.4nuchprt. p‘ra ted onis ; nyhr 'jISCkLIQCC rnete - • 6o- teii111115. WARNtHS. Oak Park ($1 & $2 Sodas) 2 Machines by Manhattan Heights Park Building . (only two which are outdoors, $1.25 cokes) V7 ° ABOVE ARE THE 5 VENDING MACHINES IN MANHATTAN BEACH. 3 ARE IN SECURED BUILDINGS, AND 2 ARE OUTDOORS. THE TWO OUTDOORS ARE PLACED SUCH THAT A SMALL CHILD COULD EASILY CRAWL BEHIND ONE AND BE ELECTROCUTED BY THE WIRES AND PLUGS WHICH LAY ON THE CONCRETE. (SEE NEXT PAGE) • ••, 4.,44 ' • • , • • • ' • , il„-00; • tali e ®a AntAbu die istwitif • • .10•4174;:!zii:1.-.7 October 3, 2006 • Honorable Mayor and Members The Hermosa Beach City Council • 60-/-74 Regular Meeting of / 03/44' October 10, 2006 Coca-Cola Bottling Company Sponsorship Agreement Recommendation The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission recommends that Commission approve agreement between the City and Coca-Cola Bottling Company to accept Centennial sponsorship of $25,000 and install vending machines at select City locations for the period of one year. Background City staff attended meetings with Geoff Slajer, Coke Drink Manager and Jarrod Harrison, Territory Account Manager to negotiate an agreement between the City and Coca- Cola Bottling Company. The result of negotiations is the following proposal: 1. $25,000 sponsorship to the Centennial account. 2. Installation of Dasani Water and Minute Maid Orange Juice vending machines at the Community Center, City Hall, South Park, and Valley Park, and Clark basketball courts. The machines will dispense a variety of nine Coca-Cola products including Coke, Dasani water, Minute Maid orange juice, Power Ade, Rock Star energy drink and green tea beverages. Precisely which beverages are disbursed at each location, to be determined by the City. 3. Revenue split of product sales between City and Coca-Cola is 30/70. Price point of beverages is $1.50. After tax and CRV deduction, the City receives .410 per product sold. Projected product sales figure is 50,000 per year; potential revenue is $20,500 per year. Revenue generation will fund Centennial activities. Coca-Cola will be responsible for the installation of machines, stocking and storing of product, maintenanceand servicing of equipment, money management and monthly payment to City for 30% of sales revenue. Attachments: A. Letter of Request B. Correspondence: Howard Longacre Respectfully submitted, Concur, Lisa Lynn Community Resources Director Noted for fiscal impact, Viki Copeland Finance Director (4, Step '..urrel City •. nager 6d •.. • g.t...earzcza24,6,,,,/06‘49.60.•, a COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES company August 30, 20.06 Chairperson and Members of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission RE: Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. Dear Chairperson and Commission Members: 19875 Pacific Gateway Dr Torrance, CA 90502 310965.2653 310.9652636 Fax Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. would like to request the opportunity to provide the City of Hermosa Beach with beverage -vending equipment. Below are the items/services that Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. intends to provide to the City and its residents: • Initial $25,000 sponsorship to be used by the City of Hermosa Beach Centennial Celebration account • Placement and service of bottle vending machines at approved city sites • The filling of all vending machines and storage of product • The management of all monies and revenue • Calculation of commissions from vending volume and submission of funds to the City to be used by the Centennial Celebration account Thank you for your consideration of this partnership. Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. looks forward to the possibilities that will result from this partnership. Jarrod Harrison Territory Account Manager Carson Sales Center (310)965-2692 Attachment A flecOoeKm...cd 10 WO Mtlatk .r-ooro, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK: I am submitting this correspondence in time such that it may be included with the packet materials for the council agenda item re: the "Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement", or whatever it is to be referred, and posted with same on the Internet for the council meeting it's to be agendized. Per your indication my understanding is that it will be Oct -10-2006. Should it not be possible to include this correspondence along with the staff reports in the packet for said item, then please place this correspondence under 'Written Communications from the Public' on the October 10, 2006 agenda. Please let me know as to which method of inclusion you will be using. Thank you. October 2, 2006 Hermosa Beach City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney City Of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California 90254 RECEIVED OCT .;22006 Per Re: My opposition to the "The Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement" involving the placement of multiple vending machines in the city's parks, and the lack of noticed and open advertising for proposals from other companies/vendors for such service contract with the city. Honorable Councilmembers, city officials, and others: I have previously submitted comments regarding the proposed "Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement". Below I am repeating some of those concerns and adding additional others for your consideration prior to any such contract approval. Also at the end of this communication I have attached some newspaper stories regarding vandalizing of vending machines in public parks. My primary concerns are the placement of vending machines in the city's parks, and the lack of public -noticing for solicitations from all companies/vendors interested in providing vending -machine service to the city. This is not a donation in the same sense as i.e. the one -day Kraft Foods largest -beach -blanket "donation" contract. This is a service contract which has the potential to go on and on, could be very lucrative to the service provider, and is coming to council for approval under the guise of being a "donation" to centennial activities. It's a service contract pure and simple with a particular vendor being given an inside track through what I view as a flawed and unfair city process to date. In no particular order then follow additional concerns, and some from my prior communication for your review. As you review these, consider marking those which are concerns/questions you may also have. 1. I believe very careful consideration needs to be given to the placement of vending machines in any location which is not well -secured at all hours, especially the city parks, or in any area which could be an enticement for break-in to a city building. 2. The donation mentioned is not a donation. It's an up -front payment which evidently will not be made if the service provider does not receive an agreement to place cash -taking vending machines into the city's parks via the council's approval. It therefore should be referred to as a city up -front fee rather than a donation. H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 1 of 7 • • 3. How does the city propose to audit the cash going into the vending machines and assure that there will not be disputes of revenues, as other cities have had, about the actual cash having been deposited into the vending machines? If there is a track record of expected sales it might be better to consider a fixed fee per month per machine and not get involved in the wheeling and dealing of the profit basis actual sales counts. Or, consider having the city itself operate the machines if they are so profitable. The city would best require monthly reports of sales, vandalism, and other notable conditions, even if a simple fixed fee is made per machine per month to the city. 4. If the Coca Cola Corporation or one of its franchise distributors desire to make a donation, that's fine, however again this is not a donation as such. A donation is freely given without strings. This "donation" is like so many others of recent years, one which is not given without a contract signed specifying something to be received by the giver of the "donation". It's a scheme to make money by the party(s) involved, at the city's own residents' and even its children's expense. This also appears to be justifying a method for companies/vendors to make deals with the city without a proper proposal competition being made. This appears to be a very flawed process. 5. This appears to be a back -room deal, a deal which did not come through the front door in a full and transparent manner. This kind of deal might be normal at the county, state, or federal level as that is where this kind of stuff goes on big time, but it is not appropriate in Hermosa Beach. There is no indication the council or staff directed that a public notice be made indicating that the city of Hermosa Beach is soliciting for a provider of vending machine services for its parks and would like to see proposals indicating the amount of money etc. a vendor is willing to provide to the city for such rights. As such this contract has not been solicited in a manner in the best interest of the people and their city. Saying that the city has sought donations for the centennial celebration does not qualify this as a proper process for this contract. This is a contract for services and other companies have not been solicited through appropriate public notice for such a service proposal. This is improper to say the least. 6. The city does not need its city parks degraded with vending machines dispensing over -priced junk-food/drinks to rip-off and possibly contribute to the ill -health of its children or their parents visiting the city's parks. If children are carrying cash, it is doubtful the parents have provided this cash to them to be spent in vending machines in the city's parks. 7. Has the question of vending machines being place in the city parks been reviewed with the PTA or the local schools, or the people up to this point? Has the question been reviewed with the police department? Where is the call out by the people for this? 8. It makes no difference what color or type of machines (as per staff reports) the vendor indicates will be installed in the parks as after a year or so they will likely morph into other machines, snacks, etc, because the distributors, knowing the city will prostitute itself, will likely offer more money year by year to get more of their offerings into the city's parks or city buildings, and besides, once a contract is let, detailed requirements are usually forgotten about or not enforced with time. 9. The city does not need to provide individuals or gangs an excuse to be in the parks to "get a can of soda". These vending machines will be a magnate for undesired consequences in the parks, consequences which, if they will entail policing or paramedic responses, could be costly in addition to any criminal activity they contribute to. One unfortunate incident could cost the city a million(s) of dollars in a law suit settlement for providing such an unnecessary attractive nuisance in this current age we live in. H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 2 of 7 • • 10. Vending machines are a target for graffiti and other vandalism. This will be an ongoing nuisance and condition leading to potential robbery of individuals, or other unsavory activity to be presented to children or others using the vending machines in the parks. 11. If this is a donation for a one time event why will a perpetual trashing of the city's parks be required? The council has already permitted trashy vending machines in front of the pier -head wall (perhaps placed there by the county without challenge by the city), a pier -wall again which itself is doing nothing but blocking out the view of the ocean and which needs to be modified. 12. The city's employees will not appreciate seeing soda prices escalate from 60 cents to $1.50 to $2.00 in the present city vending machines. Have they been considered or consulted? 13. It took residents years of arguing with a former city manager to rid the town of the advertising bus benches that littered and degraded the city in the late 1980s, as those were bringing a few thousands to the city annually, without any consideration that they made the city look degraded as like a downtown urban area. Thus any thought that these machines will be pulled out at the end of 12 months is just that, little more than a thought. A token city revenue -stream once initiated is seldom given up and the vendor is probably not interested in a short term deal. 14. This deal was metaphorically referred to as the "-The Coke Deal-" in a local newspaper's stories 9/21/06 and 9/28/06. The metaphor is a good one. The city will become addicted to the token revenue it receives without consideration of the creeping degradation and ripping -off of the city's own people through the sale of overpriced junk-food/drinks and the subtle advertising indoctrination of its children. 15. Again this is not the way to even slightly begin to recover revenue to cover the additional millions of dollars annually the city is expending for the extraordinary public safety necessary as directly resulting from the downtown area alcohol approvals made by Hermosa's city councils over the last 13 years. It would be better to focus on reducing those costs or having those businesses necessitating the costly public safety burden to pay those costs rather than degrading the city parks with anything as absurd as vending machines with all their negative propensities. 16. Service trucks will be in the city's parks servicing these unneeded vending machines. The city does not need that. This additional regular traffic into the parks could easily mask trucks in the parks for other activities. 17. Vending machines will unnecessarily compete with the city's local businesses trying to make a living. Businesses which work hard, pay high rents, license fees, etc., and which collect sales taxes the city shares in. 18. Nothing of this sort is needed in the parks other than working water fountains. People bring their own picnic items if they desire. 19. The city council is urged to not place vending machines in any of the parks. If this item was placed on the ballot you know the people would overwhelmingly defeat it. If vending machines are placed in any buildings a fixed fee would be best for the city to receive. And in any event if such contract is to be made, a request for service proposals should be publicly noticed giving the specifics for any and all vendors to make a proposal for these vending services. Again, this is not a donation but rather an excuse for a vendor to make a contract with the city which other companies/vendors have not been given a fair and equal chance to bid for. That is not in the interest of the people whom you represent and may in fact be quite improper. It is certainly not something someone will desire to run for re-election on. I.e. "That they championed for the H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 3 of 7 • • placement of vending machines in the city's parks and by a vendor which perhaps had an inside track". 20. For one to two dollars per year per resident of revenue to the city, there is no justification for damaging the city parks with vending machines given all the negatives. This is an incredibly bad idea which never should have been considered. Please don't cause the local newspapers to be printing stories that "The Hermosa City Council has authorized the placement of vending machines in its small city parks." 21. It is most unfortunate that the council's time, staffs time, the peoples' time, and even this vendor's time is being wasted on this item. The 'Parks and Recreation Commission' badly erred in approving vending machines to be in the parks. Hopefully the city council will not also err. Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter. Howard Longacre (Hermosa Beach Resident) att: A sample of newspaper stories re: vandalism of vending machines in parks follow. There are too many to attach them all. Vending machines in unsecured areas are a major target, and in secured areas are an incentive for break-ins. The News & Observer Subscribe 1 Subscriber Services 1 Subscriber Reward Friday, September 29, 2006 Raleigh • Durham Cary • Chapel Hill CARY - Police are looking for two young men they say broke into Green Hope High School late Monday night in a vain attempt to steal money from vending machines. Police say they think the young men also broke into vending machines at the nearby Cary Tennis Park on Louis Stephens Drive but again came up empty-handed. The suspects, thought to be between 16 and 21 years old, were videotaped walking through the school about 11 p.m. Monday. Authorities don't know how they got into the school. Even though they didn't get away with any money, the suspects could face up to 25 months in prison if convicted of breaking and entering, according to Cary police. Cary Crime Stoppers will pay up to $2,500 for information leading to the arrest of those involved with the break-in. Police ask anyone with information to call Crime Stoppers at 226-CRIM(E) or Capt. Dave Wulff at 469-4017. Burglars use torch to remove outer doors By Shannon Tangonan I-I.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 4 of 7 • • UNION -TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER OCEANSIDE — No soda machine is safe. Burglars using a cutting torch have broken into at least 40 soda machines in North County and south Riverside County over the past few months, police say. They take the cash from inside, which can be up to $700. Machines from Temecula to Oceanside have been hit. The burglars usually strike between midnight and 6 a.m. and target vending machines at schools, parks or apartment complexes where there are no surveillance cameras, said Oceanside police Detective Ernie Thibodeaux. "It's a good chunk of change — and I do mean change," Thibodeaux said. In Oceanside, the latest targets were side-by-side soda machines at Martin Luther King Park off Mesa Drive on Dec. 17. Oceanside police have investigated at least 10 soda machine burglaries. Escondido police have had more than a dozen similar thefts and there have been about 15 such burglaries in Temecula. It's unknown whether all the thefts are connected, but the method of operation is similar in most of the cases, police say. The burglars use a torch to cut the hinges to the machine's outer door, which falls off. They then cut into a second door. "They still have to pry the coin box out, but it's a lot easier when you don't have to pry through two doors," Thibodeaux said. In Escondido, detectives have been investigating soda machine break-ins for the past month and a half. In some cases, cutting torches were used, said Escondido police Sgt. Chuck Gaylor. The descriptions of the thieves have varied, which leads Gaylor to believe that more than one group is hitting the machines. "Probably what happens, and this is total speculation, is that lots of people in the criminal community work in groups ... they trade information," Gaylor said. Word might be out that "this is an easy way to get money," he said. Thibodeaux said detectives are narrowing a list of possible suspects and hope to make an arrest soon. Sep 13, 2006 - 10:39:33 CDT Two confess to breaking into soda machines Duo says they broke into approximately 10 machines a night By TERESA RESSEL\Daily Journal Staff Writer H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 5 of 7 • • Police believe they now know who was behind the thefts of money from numerous soda machines in Jefferson, St. Francois, Perry and Cape Girardeau counties. Park Hills Detective Mike Kurtz said two individuals have confessed to breaking into seven soda machines in Park Hills, as well as soda machines in Farmington, Desloge, Bonne Terre and rural areas of the county, Perryville, Jackson, Pevely and Festus. Kurtz said the duo, a 19 -year-old Ironton man and a 21 -year-old former St. Louis resident, stole from so many vending machines over a month-long period that the suspects can not say how many they broke into. He said they confessed to breaking into approximately 10 a night. He said one of the breaks in the case came when Jackson police officers obtained a surveillance video outside a business. The video showed two individuals exiting a red and white truck and breaking into a soda machine. The quality of the video was poor but Park Hills Lt. Doug Bowles was able to use their new VideoDetective to enhance the video footage and print out still images of two individuals and their vehicle. Kurtz said the second break in the case came when a person in Ironton saw two men breaking into soda machines and confronted them. This person was able to get the license plate on the truck and also overheard the men calling each other by their first names. The Ironton Police Department issued a stop and hold on the owner of the truck. Kurtz said the owner of the truck turned himself in at the St. Francois County Jail. The other man was picked up by a St. Francois County deputy. Kurtz conducted the initial interview. He said the two gave full confessions, implicating a third person who they say fled to another state. Kurtz said it was the fact that all of the agencies worked together that solved the case. He said there was good cooperation. Charges have not been filed at this time. Park Hills officers will be asking the prosecuting attorney to file felony charges of property damage and misdemeanor charges of theft. He said the other jurisdictions will also be seeking charges. Farmington Police Chief Rick Baker said Detective Tim Porter has been investigating the cases in Farmington. He will begin tying up the loose ends in the investigation to send a report to the prosecuting attorney. Kurtz estimates that each machine was valued at $2,000-3,000 and the machines will have to be replaced. ".According to their own statements, they got $40 or less from each machine," he said. "Oddly enough, they didn't steal any of the soda. They were quite proud of that." Fourth Man Arrested in Crime Spree at Irmo Park H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 6 of 7 By Joel Robert Williamson Updated: 9/10/2006 3:12:12 PM First Posted: 9/10/2006 3:01:41 PM (Irmo) - Lexington County Sheriffs Department deputies arrested the fourth and final man who had been wanted for committing a string of crimes, including breaking into a locked maintenance building and stealing two pickup trucks, at Saluda Shoals Park off Bush River Road near Irmo. Lexington County Sheriff James R. Metts says deputies arrested Joel Robert Williamson, 20, of Irmo, at about 12:48 p.m. on Saturday at the suspect's home. Metts says Williamson was arrested on charges of second-degree burglary and grand larceny. Authorities say he was being held Sunday at the Lexington County Detention Center on bail totaling $15,000. Sheriffs detectives previously had arrested Andrew William Davis, 19, of Columbia; Benjamin Bradley Hammett, 21, of Cayce; and David Lee Holton, 18, of North Augusta. Davis, Hammett and Holton each were charged with one count of second-degree burglary and one count of grand larceny. Deputies arrested Davis at about 5:35 p.m. on Thursday, Metts said. Davis was being held Sunday at the Lexington County Detention Center on bail totaling $25,000. Authorities say Myrtle Beach Police Department officers arrested Hammett and Holton on Wednesday, after officers found the men were riding in a Ford F-250 pickup that had been stolen from Saluda Shoals Park at 5605 Bush River Road over Labor Day weekend. Hammett and Holton were taken to the J. Rubin Long Detention Center in Conway. Metts says Davis, Hammett, Holton and Williamson committed a string of crimes at Saluda Shoals Park, starting in late August. The men vandalized buildings and coin-operated vending machines at the park. Investigators say that during Labor Day weekend, Davis, Hammett, Holton and Williamson broke into a locked maintenance building at Saluda Shoals Park and stole the Ford F-250 pickup, a Dodge Ram pickup, cellular phones and a John Deere all -terrain vehicle. The Dodge Ram pickup was later recovered in Marion. The Irmo -Chapin Recreation Commission operates the park. Metts says the case remains under investigation, and detectives might file additional charges against Davis, Hammett, Holton and Williamson. H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 7 of 7 Supplemental to Municipal Matter # 6 MId October 10, 2006 (Handed to councilmembers at their council meeting.) Hermosa Beach City Council Re: Supplemental material re: COKE VENDING MACHINES ITEM From: Howard Longacre, resident Attached find; 2 pages - images of the 3 indoor and 2 outdoor vending machines in MB. 2 pages - vending machines in front of the Pavilions market at Anza Avenue and Torrance Blvd in Torrance. Note graffiti. 4 pages - 'steel -caged' vending machines at the entrance of the 24-hour Super Kmart located at Torrance Blvd & Figueroa. Additional comments to my comments following the staff items in your packet. Manhattan Beach has 3 times the land area of Hermosa Beach and has an extensive park system. There are 2 outdoor vending machines located in M.B. They are located together at Manhattan Heights by an occupied game building just off Manhattan Beach Blvd. (See first and second image pages attached.) MB's other three vending machines are located indoors, one in Joslyn Center's foyer, and two inside the tennis 'pro' shop sign-up building at Live Oak park. (see first image attached) HB to equal MB per square mile would need only 2 vending machines total, not 9. MB to equal the initial count proposed for HB, would need 27 vending machines, or an increase of 22 machines. MB dispenses cokes at the 3 indoor vending locations at $1, and at the two outdoor machines at $1.25. MB's vending machines scream out in bright red, COCA COLA advertising. HB vending machines are proposed to charge 50% more than MB, and 250% more than the current city vending machine located i.e. in City Hall. A likely hazardous electrical condition currently exists at the two outdoor vending machines located outside MB's Manhattan Heights building. The sodas dispensed would all best not be dispensed by the city as they are, in my view, all without any significant nutritional value. The city should avoid offering such "food". Clean working drinking fountains are preferable. MB, per a Beach Reporter story, stated that they do not operate their 5 vending machines for the purpose of raising revenue. The proposed vending machines are not needed, they will degrade the parks, they will require time of city staff in various ways, electricity, be a probable policing problem. A net -negative! Better to have Coca Cola figure out how to contribute to the centennial, if they desire to, without their requiring an ongoing unneeded foot -in -the -door parks vending machine contract. Any such ongoing contract, in any case, should unquestionably be put out as a request for proposal (RFP) to any/all interested vending operators. Centennial or other contributions should not be used as a means to do business with the city so as to avoid a competitive RFP process. This is not a good way to do city business, notwithstanding what others might do. The contract, if it exists, was not posted on the Internet nor was a reference made to same. Kindly do not make any approval for this open-ended service agreement without the contract being available for public review first. Place HB people first. Reject this "contribution" contract. • • October 10, 2006 • Hermosa Beach City Council Re: Supplemental material re: COKE VENDING MACHINES ITEM From: Howard Longacre, resident Attached find. 2 pages - images of the 3 indoor and 2 outdoor vending machines in MB. 2 pages - vending machines in front of the Pavilions market at Anza Avenue and Torrance Blvd in Torrance. Note graffiti. 4 pages -'steel-caged' vending machines at the entrance of the 24-hour Super Kmart located at Torrance Blvd & Figueroa. Additional comments to my comments following the staff items in your packet. Manhattan Beach has 3 times the land area of Hermosa Beach and has an extensive park system. There are 2 outdoor vending machines located in M.B. They are located together at Manhattan Heights by an occupied game building just off Manhattan Beach Blvd. (See first and second image pages attached.) MB's other three vending machines are located indoors, one in Joslyn Center's foyer, and two inside the tennis 'pro' shop sign-up building at Live Oak park. (see first image attached) HB to equal MB per square mile would need only 2 vending machines total, not 9. MB to equal the initial count proposed for HB, would need 27 vending machines, or an increase of 22 machines. MB dispenses cokes at the 3 indoor vending locations at $1, and afthe two outdoor machines at $1.25. MB's vending machines scream out in bright red, COCA COLA advertising. HB vending machines are proposed to charge 50% more than MB, and 250% more than the current city vending machine located i.e. in City Hall. A likely hazardous electrical condition currently exists at the two outdoor vending machines located outside MB's Manhattan Heights building. The sodas dispensed would all best not be dispensed by the city as they are, in my view, all without any significant nutritional value. The city should avoid offering such "food". Clean working drinking fountains are preferable. MB, per a Beach Reporter story, stated that they do not operate their 5 vending machines for the purpose of raising revenue. The proposed vending machines are not needed, they will degrade the parks, they will require time of city staff in various ways, electricity, be a probable policing problem. A net -negative! Better to have Coca Cola figure out how to contribute to the centennial, if they desire to, without their requiring an ongoing unneeded foot -in -the -door parks vending machine contract. Any such ongoing contract, in any case, should unquestionably be put out as a request for proposal (RFP) to any/all interested vending operators. Centennial or other contributions should not be used as a means to do business with the city so as to avoid a competitive RFP process. This is not a good way to do city business, notwithstanding what others might do. The contract, if it exists, was not posted on the Internet nor was a reference made to same. Kindly do not make any approval for this open-ended service agreement without the contract being available for public review first. Place HB people first. Reject this "contribution" contract. • • 0,-*(11,6r11-.4)erzitt4,•by. 'flir T)elrop <0040x0h1..5- or !Ay u(her •.t-Nia,r8IAGItINIS A T OI.JR 6,'N Oak Park ($1 & $2 Sodas) 2 Machines by Manhattan Heights Park Building . (oniy two which are outdoors, $1.25 cokes) 141 \6-4".• ,14 ay. 4ct fe.M. •-$061* 4 tr,b-VN , ee,r ;r:$ A • 4 ABOVE ARE THE 5 VENDING MACHINES IN MANHATTAN BEACH. 3 ARE IN SECURED BUILDINGS, AND 2 ARE OUTDOORS. THE TWO OUTDOORS ARE PLACED SUCH THAT A SMALL CHILD COULD EASILY CRAWL BEHIND ONE AND BE ELECTROCUTED BY THE WIRES AND PLUGS WHICH. LAY ON THE CONCRETE. (SEE NEXT PAGE) 1..J ECJ CO it '41 AZ ID V S GIA e' -77/J& b-i)v faia_ /0-(0-7) • CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK: I am submitting this correspondence in time such that it may be included with the packet materials for the council agenda item re: the "Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement", or whatever it is to be referred, and posted with same on the Internet for the council meeting it's to be agendized. Per your indication my understanding is that it will be Oct -10-2006. Should it not be possible to include this correspondence along with the staff reports in the packet for said item, then please place this correspondence under 'Written Communications from the Public' on the October 10, 2006 agenda. Please let me know as to which method of inclusion you will be using. Thank you. October 2, 2006 Hermosa Beach City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney City Of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Re: My opposition to the "The Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement" involving the placement of multiple vending machines in the city's parks, and the lack of noticed and open advertising for proposals from other companies/vendors for such service contract with the city. Honorable Councilmembers, city officials, and others: I have previously submitted comments regarding the proposed "Coca Cola Sponsorship Agreement". Below I am repeating some of those concerns and adding additional others for your consideration prior to any such contract approval. Also at the end of this communication I have attached some newspaper stories regarding vandalizing of vending machines in public parks. My primary concerns are the placement of vending machines in the city's parks, and the lack of public -noticing for solicitations from all companies/vendors interested in providing vending -machine service to the city. This is not a donation in the same sense as i.e. the one -day Kraft Foods largest -beach -blanket "donation" contract. This is a service contract which has the potential to go on and on, could be very lucrative to the service provider, and is coming to council for approval under the guise of being a "donation" to centennial activities. It's a service contract pure and simple with a particular vendor being given an inside track through what I view as a flawed and unfair city process to date. In no particular order then follow additional concerns, and some from my prior communication for your review. As you review these, consider marking those which are concerns/questions you may also have. 1. I believe very careful consideration needs to be given to the placement of vending machines in any location which is not well -secured at all hours, especially the city parks, or in any area which could be an enticement for break-in to a city building. 2. The donation mentioned is not a donation. It's an up -front payment which evidently will not be made if the service provider does not receive an agreement to place cash -taking vending machines into the city's parks via the council's approval. It therefore should be referred to as a city up -front fee rather than a donation. H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page I of7 • • 3. How does the city propose to audit the cash going into the vending machines and assure that there will not be disputes of revenues, as other cities have had, about the actual cash having been deposited into the vending machines? If there is a track record of expected sales it might be better to consider a fixed fee per month per machine and not get involved in the wheeling and dealing of the profit basis actual sales counts. Or, consider having the city itself operate the machines if they are so profitable. The city would best require monthly reports of sales, vandalism, and other notable conditions, even if a simple fixed fee is made per machine per month to the city. 4. If the Coca Cola Corporation or one of its franchise distributors desire to make a donation, that's fine, however again this is not a donation as such. A donation is freely given without strings. This "donation" is like so many others of recent years, one which is not given without a contract signed specifying something to be received by the giver of the "donation". It's a scheme to make money by the party(s) involved, at the city's own residents' and even its children's expense. This also appears to be justifying a method for companies/vendors to make deals with the city without a proper proposal competition being made. This appears to be a very flawed process. 5. This appears to be a back -room deal, a deal which did not come through the front door in a full and transparent manner. This kind of deal might be normal at the county, state, or federal level as that is where this kind of stuff goes on big time, but it is not appropriate in Hermosa Beach. There is no indication the council or staff directed that a public notice be made indicating that the city of Hermosa Beach is soliciting for a provider of vending machine services for its parks and would like to see proposals indicating the amount of money etc. a vendor is willing to provide to the city for such rights. As such this contract has not been solicited in a manner in the best interest of the people and their city. Saying that the city has sought donations for the centennial celebration does not qualify this as a proper process for this contract. This is a contract for services and other companies have not been solicited through appropriate public notice for such a service proposal. This is improper to say the least. 6. The city does not need its city parks degraded with vending machines dispensing over -priced junk-food/drinks to rip-off and possibly contribute to the ill -health of its children or their parents visiting the city's parks. If children are carrying cash, it is doubtful the parents have provided this cash to them to be spent in vending machines in the city's parks. 7. Has the question of vending machines being place in the city parks been reviewed with the PTA or the local schools, or the people up to this point? Has the question been reviewed with the police department? Where is the call out by the people for this? 8. It makes no difference what color or type of machines (as per staff reports) the vendor indicates will be installed in the parks as after a year or so they will likely morph into other machines, snacks, etc, because the distributors, knowing the city will prostitute itself, will likely offer more money year by year to get more of their offerings into the city's parks or city buildings, and besides, once a contract is let, detailed requirements are usually forgotten about or not enforced with time. 9. The city does not need to provide individuals or gangs an excuse to be in the parks to "get a can of soda". These vending machines will be a magnate for undesired consequences in the parks, consequences which, if they will entail policing or paramedic responses, could be costly in addition to any criminal activity they contribute to. One unfortunate incident could cost the city a million(s) of dollars in a law suit settlement for providing such an unnecessary attractive nuisance in this current age we live in. H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 2 of 7 • • 10. Vending machines are a target for graffiti and other vandalism. This will be an ongoing nuisance and condition leading to potential robbery of individuals, or other unsavory activity to be presented to children or others using the vending machines in the parks. 11. If this is a donation for a one time event why will a perpetual trashing of the city's parks be required? The council has already permitted trashy vending machines in front of the pier -head wall (perhaps placed there by the county without challenge by the city), a pier -wall again which itself is doing nothing but blocking out the view of the ocean and which needs to be modified. 12. The city's employees will not appreciate seeing soda prices escalate from 60 cents to $1.50 to $2.00 in the present city vending machines. Have they been considered or consulted? 13. It took residents years of arguing with a former city manager to rid the town of the advertising bus benches that littered and degraded the city in the late 1980s, as those were bringing a few thousands to the city annually, without any consideration that they made the city look degraded as like a downtown urban area. Thus any thought that these machines will be pulled out at the end of 12 months is just that, little more than a thought. A token city revenue -stream once initiated is seldom given up and the vendor is probably not interested in a short term deal. 14. This deal was metaphorically referred to as the "-The Coke Deal-" in a local newspaper's stories 9/21/06 and 9/28/06. The metaphor is a good one. The city will become addicted to the token revenue it receives without consideration of the creeping degradation and ripping -off of the city's own people through the sale of overpriced junk-food/drinks and the subtle advertising indoctrination of its children. 15. Again this is not the way to even slightly begin to recover revenue to cover the additional millions of dollars annually the city is expending for the extraordinary public safety necessary as directly resulting from the downtown area alcohol approvals made by Hermosa's city councils over the last 13 years. It would be better to focus on reducing those costs or having those businesses necessitating the costly public safety burden to pay those costs rather than degrading the city parks with anything as absurd as vending machines with all their negative propensities. 16. Service trucks will be in the city's parks servicing these unneeded vending machines. The city does not need that. This additional regular traffic into the parks could easily mask trucks in the parks for other activities. 17. Vending machines will unnecessarily compete with the city's local businesses trying to make a living. Businesses which work hard, pay high rents, license fees, etc., and which collect sales taxes the city shares in. 18. Nothing of this sort is needed in the parks other than working water fountains. People bring their own picnic items if they desire. 19. The city council is urged to not place vending machines in any of the parks. If this item was placed on the ballot you know the people would overwhelmingly defeat it. If vending machines are placed in any buildings a fixed fee would be best for the city to receive. And in any event if such contract is to be made, a request for service proposals should be publicly noticed giving the specifics for any and all vendors to make a proposal for these vending services. Again, this is not a donation but rather an excuse for a vendor to make a contract with the city which other companies/vendors have not been given a fair and equal chance to bid for. That is not in the interest of the people whom you represent and may in fact be quite improper. It is certainly not something someone will desire to run for re-election on. I.e. "That they championed for the I-I.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 3 of 7 • • placement of vending machines in the city's parks and by a vendor which perhaps had an inside track". 20. For one to two dollars per year per resident of revenue to the city, there is no justification for damaging the city parks with vending machines given all the negatives. This is an incredibly bad idea which never should have been considered. Please don't cause the local newspapers to be printing stories that "The Hermosa City Council has authorized the placement of vending machines in its small city parks." 21. It is most unfortunate that the council's time, staff's time, the peoples' time, and even this vendor's time is being wasted on this item. The 'Parks and Recreation Commission' badly erred in approving vending machines to be in the parks. Hopefully the city council will not also err. Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter. Howard Longacre (Hermosa Beach Resident) att: A sample of newspaper stories re: vandalism of vending machines in parks follow. There are too many to attach them all. Vending machines in unsecured areas are a major target, and in secured areas are an incentive for break-ins. The News & Observer Subscribe I Subscriber Services I Subscriber Reward Friday, September 29, 2006 Raleigh • Durham • Cary • Chapel Hill CARY - Police are looking for two young men they say broke into Green Hope High School late Monday night in a vain attempt to steal money from vending machines. Police say they think the young men also broke into vending machines at the nearby Cary Tennis Park on Louis Stephens Drive but again came up empty-handed. The suspects, thought to be between 16 and 21. years old, were videotaped walking through the school about 11 p.m. Monday. Authorities don't know how they got into the school. Even though they didn't get away with any money, the suspects could face up to 25 months in prison if convicted of breaking and entering, according to Cary police. Cary Crime Stoppers will pay up to $2,500 for information leading to the arrest of those involved. with the break-in. Police ask anyone with information to call Crime Stoppers at 226-CR1M(E) or Capt. Dave Wulff at 469-4017. Burglars use torch to remove outer doors By Shannon Tangonan -(.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 4 of 7 • • UNION -TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER OCEANSIDE — No soda machine is safe. Burglars using a cutting torch have broken into at least 40 soda machines in North County and south Riverside County over the past few months, police say. They take the cash from inside, which can be up to $700. Machines from Temecula to Oceanside have been hit. The burglars usually strike between midnight and 6 a.m. and target vending machines at schools, parks or apartment complexes where there are no surveillance cameras, said Oceanside police Detective Ernie Thi.bod.eaux. "it's a good chunk of change — and .I. do mean change," Thibodeaux said. In Oceanside, the latest targets were side-by-side soda machines at Martin Luther King Park off Mesa Drive on Dec. 17. Oceanside police have investigated at least 10 soda machine burglaries. Escondido police have had more than a dozen similar thefts and there have been about 15 such burglaries in Temecula. It's unknown whether all the thefts are connected., but the method of operation is similar in most of the cases, police say. The burglars use a torch to cut the hinges to the machine's outer door, which falls off. They then cut into a second door. "They still have to pry the coin box out, but it's a lot easier when you don't have to pry through two doors," Thibodeaux said. In Escondido, detectives have been investigating soda machine bi:'eak-ins for the past month and a half. In some cases, cutting torches were used, said. Escondido police Sgt. Chuck Gaylor. The descriptions of the thieves have varied, which leads Gaylor to believe that more than one group is hitting the machines. "Probably what happens, and this i.s total speculation, is that lots of people in the criminal community work in groups ... they trade information," Gaylor said. Word might be out that "this is an easy way to get money," he said. Thibodeaux said detectives are narrowing a list of possible suspects and hope to make an arrest soon. Sep 13, 2006 - 10:39:33 CDT Two confess to breaking into soda machines Duo says they broke into approximately 10 machines a night By TERESA RESSEL\Daily Journal Staff Writer -(.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 5 of 7 • • Police believe they now know who was behind the thefts of money from numerous soda machines in Jefferson, St. Francois, Perry and Cape Girardeau counties. Park Hills Detective Mike Kurtz said two individuals have confessed to breaking into seven soda machines in Park Hills, as well as soda machines in Farmington, Desloge, Bonne Terre and rural areas of the county, Perryville, Jackson, Pevely and Festus. Kurtz said the duo, a 19 -year-old Ironton man and a 21 -year-old former St. Louis resident, stole from so many vending machines over a month-long period that the suspects can not say how many they broke into. He said they confessed to breaking into approximately 10 a night. He said one of the breaks in the case came when Jackson police officers obtained a surveillance video outside a business. The video showed two individuals exiting a red and white truck and breaking into a soda machine. The quality of the video was poor but Park Hills Lt. Doug Bowles was able to use their new Vi.deo.Detecta.ve to enhance the video footage and print out still. images of two individuals and their vehicle. Kurtz said the second break in the case came when a person in Ironton saw two men breaking into soda machines and confronted them. This person was able to get the license plate on the truck and also overheard the men calling each other by their first names. The Ironton Police Department issued a stop and hold. on the owner of the truck. Kurtz said the owner of the truck turned himself in at the St. Francois County Jail. The other man was picked up by a St. Francois County deputy. Kurtz conducted the initial interview. :He said the two gave full confessions, implicating a third person who they say fled to another state. Kurtz said it was the fact that all of the agencies worked together that solved the case. He said there was good cooperation. Charges have not been filed at this time. Park Hills officers well be asking the prosecuting attorney to file felony charges of property damage and misdemeanor charges of theft. He said the other jurisdictions Wall also be seeking charges. Farmington Police Chief Rick Baker said Detective Tim Porter has been investigating the cases in Farmington. He Will began tying up the loose ends in the i.nvestigati.on to send a report to the prosecuting attorney. Kurtz estimates that each machine was valued at $2,000-3,000 and the machines will have to be replaced. "According to their own statements, they got $40 or less from each machine," he said. "Oddly enough, they didn't steal any of the soda. They were quite proud of that." Fourth Man Arrested in Crime Spree at Irmo Park H.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 6 of 7 • S By Joel Robert Williamson Updated: 9/10/2006 3:12:12 PM First Posted: 9/10/2006 3:01:41 PM (Irmo) - Lexington County Sheriffs Department deputies arrested the fourth and final man who had been wanted for committing a string of crimes, including breaking into a locked maintenance building and stealing two pickup trucks, at Saluda Shoals Park off Bush River Road near Irmo. Lexington County Sheriff James R. Metts says deputies arrested Joel. Robert Williamson, 20, of Irmo, at about 12:48 p.m. on Saturday at the suspect's home. Metts says Williamson was arrested on charges of second-degree burglary and grand larceny. Authorities say he was being held Sunday at the Lexington County Detention Center on bail. totaling $15,000. Sheriffs detectives previously had ar'r'ested Andrew Witham Davis, 19, of Columbia; Benjamin Bradley Hammett, 21, of Cayce; and Dav:i.d. Lee Holton, 1.3, of North Augusta. Davis, Hammett and Holton each were charged with one count of second-degree burglary and one count of grand larceny. Deputies arrested Davis at about 5:35 p.m. on Thursday, Metts said. Davis was being held Sunday at the Lexington County Detention Center on bail totaling $25,000. Authorities say Myrtle Beach Police Department officers arrested. Hammett and Holton on Wednesday, after officers found the men were riding in a Ford F-250 pickup that had been stolen from Saluda Shoals Park at 5605 Bush River Road. over Labor Day weekend. Hammett and Holton were taken to the J. Rubin Long Detention Center in Conway. Metts says Davis, Hammett, Holton and Williamson committed a string of crimes at Saluda Shoals Park, starting in late August. The menvandalized buildings andcoin-operated vending machines at the park. Investigators say that during Labor .Day weekend, Davis, .Hammett, Hol.ton and. Williamson broke into a locked maintenance building at Saluda Shoals Part: and stole the Ford F-250 pickup, a Dodge Ram pickup, cellular phones and. a John Deere all -terrain vehicle. The Dodge Ram pickup was later recovered. in Marion. The lr'mo-Chaplin Recreation Commission operates the park. Metts says the case remains under investigation, and detectives might fl.l.e additional charges against Davis, Hammett, Holton and Williamson. I -(.Longacre to City Council Re: Coca Cola Vending Contract Oct -2-2006 Page 7 or 7 • October 3, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of The Hermosa Beach City Council /// Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 Centennial Celebration January 14th, 2007 Birthday Party Proposal Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council appropriate $53,500 of Centennial Celebration sponsorship funds towards entertainment for the January 14th, 2007 birthday celebration. Proposal Sunday, January 14th, 2007, festivities on Pier Plaza to include live musical entertainment by Dean Torrance and the Stonebridge Band, a special rendition of the Happy Birthday song, birthday cake, centennial cookies, and a fireworks display orchestrated to music. 6:30pm-8:30pm Live Entertainment 8:30pm-8:45pm Fireworks Fiscal Impact $30,000 15 -minute fireworks display produced by industry leader, Pyro Spectaculars $23,500 Includes entertainment venue, lights, sound, stage, equipment, and production crew $53,500 was received entirely from Pier Plaza promotions previously and designated for 2007/2008 Centennial concert series. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Lynn Community Resources Director Noted for Fiscal Impact, Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur, S' -.hen Burrell City Manager • e6y4i? ////y/oL /0//o/o() September 28, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council October 10, 2006 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO ADD RESIDENTIAL (LIVE -WORK) AS A PERMITTED LAND USE IN THE M-1 (LIGHT MANUFACTURING) ZONE Recommendation: That the City Council direct staff as deemed appropriate. Background: This item was brought up by Councilman Sam Edgerton. Staff was directed by City Council to submit a report assessing the impacts of allowing residences as a permitted land use in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) district by allowing "live -work" housing. This report examines the potential impacts of allowing such residential use in the M-1 Zone. Analysis: Section 17.28.020 of the Zoning Code sets out the purposes of the M-1 district. The subsections relevant to the present issue include the following purposes: "C: Create and maintain suitable environments for various types of manufacturing and compatible uses, and protect them from the adverse effects of inharmonious uses. "D. Minimize the impact of development in the M-1 zone on adjacent residential districts. "E. Ensure that the appearance and effects of manufacturing and commercial buildings in the M-1 zone are harmonious with the character of the area which they are located..." The following highlights some of the impacts of adding residential as a permitted use in the M-1 zone as a mixed-use development (live -work) given the above purposes and the land use characteristics of the area: PROS: ■ The amendment will provide additional housing opportunities in the city. • The amendment will reduce housing expenses by enabling M-1 property owners to absorb housing costs as part of their business rent or mortgage expenses. ■ The amendment will create a virtual windfall for owners of property in the M-1 zone with land values increasing by as much as 7.5 times their current market value. (Average cost per foot for M-1 property is $28.14 and average cost per foot for residential property is $215.44).1 The increase in manufacturing property land value will create more property tax income for the City. ■ There is little reinvestment in the M-1 zone because the smaller lot size and road width associated with most M-1 properties in the city may not support larger, traditional 6f • • manufacturing development and the addition of live -work may provide incentive to redevelop the area for alternate uses. CONS: • The amendment will allow construction of residential use above or adjacent to existing industrial and heavy commercial uses such as manufacturing and auto repair that generate substantial noise, vibration and odors. This condition may create predestined code enforcement problems since it allows many incompatible abutting land uses. These impacts occur much less frequently among more compatible land use combinations, such as residential next to commercial or office uses. • Existing M-1 uses may be forced to close or restrict certain business operations due to complaints from new residential neighbors in the zone. The kinds of business permitted in the M-1 zone that may be affected by increased complaints include auto repair, surfboard manufacturing, cabinet shops and other similar businesses that generate fumes, excessive noise and vibration. These complaints will likely increase with residential uses in the M-1 zone and the City will be caught in an on-going cycle of complaints and code enforcement.2 (Please see attached land use survey). ■ Housing developer outbid virtually any other land use. Thus the proposed amendment will cause a reduction or the eventual elimination of manufacturing uses in the City as industrial land is replaced by more profitable residential development. This reduction will exacerbate the existing imbalance noted in a recent appraisal report that shows, while 55% of land in the City is allocated to residential use, only 0.8% is allocated to industrial. 3 • Traditional industrial uses that provide a source of jobs and are part of the City's tax base that will be lost. • Live work arrangements are difficult to enforce and the uses may transition to exclusively residential use. ■ Allowing residential land uses in the M-1 district may require more services (since residential uses consume more city services such as police and fire department service than industrial uses), eroding some of the tax benefit the proposed use brings to the City. Existing Residential Uses in the M-1 Zone. There are several properties originally zoned for manufacturing east of Ardmore Avenue that were designed residential in the General Plan. On a case-by-case basis these nonconforming properties have been rezoned to residential to conform with the General Plan designation and are distinguished from the remainder of the M-1 zone in that they are separated from the manufacturing zone by the greenbelt and abutting residential property to the east. (Please see attached map and land use survey.) 2 ■ • • Conclusion: Since residential land is many times more valuable than industrial land in Hermosa Beach, the allowance of new residential uses in the M-1 zone will open the door for the conversion of the remaining manufacturing land to residential use. This transition will likely further reduce the small amount of industrial property in the City. The present owners of the industrial land will benefit by the unusual windfall increase in land value, but at a cost to the future residents of the area and to the City because of the impacts described above. Staff believes that there is not a compelling reason then to add live -work to the manufacturing zone since the benefits to M-1 land owners and to the City from the inflated land values may not outweigh the disadvantages of eliminating industrial uses in the City. Sol Blumenfel Community Concur: Di ctor velopment Stephe City Manager Notes: rre 1. Nagasaki Associates Park In -Lieu Fee Study, 2006, Pg. 6. 2. For example, nuisance complaints from residences immediately outside the M-1 zone have been directed at surfboard manufacturers located on Cypress Avenue and Valley Drive due to resin fumes and airborne debris from foam sanding used in the surfboard manufacturing process. Even in the C-3 zone the conflict between residential with abutting manufacturing -like or commercial uses has been observed with the location of a new housing development on 7th Street adjacent to Learned lumber yard. Soon after moving in, the new residents of 7th Street repeatedly complained to the city regarding operating hours, noise, dust and fumes relating to the long established business. 3. Nagasaki Associates Park In -Lieu Fee Study, 2006, Pg. 6 Attachments: 1. Land Use Survey 2. Excerpt — Nagasaki Associates Fee Study orr III • M-1 Zoning • M-1 Zoned Parcels ----- i City Limits Department of Public Works GIS -• Chris Hardenbrook 1 September 2006 1111111111111 0 500 1,000 i re, 1sts�� •�'��• 2,000 3,000 Feet 4,000 LF • z SOUTH PARK ADDREES S M1 Zone Land Use Survey September 12, 2006 BUSISNESS TYPE AND NAME • 511 Cypress 513 Cypress 520 Cypress 524 Cypress 525 Cypress 530 Cypress 531 Cypress 545 Cypress 600 Cypress 601 Cypress 618 Cypress 620 Cypress 625 Cypress 635 Cypress 636 Cypress 637 Cypress 640 Cypress 643 Cypress 650 Cypress 725 Cypress 500 6th St Corner of 6th & Valley 530 d' St 665 Valley 669 Valley 671. Valley 675 Valley 677/679 Valley 717 Valley #A1 717 Valley #A2 717 Valley #B1 717 Valley #C1, C2 717 Valley #131, D2, D3 717 Valley #E1 Ocean Drive Auto Body & Paint Custom Cabinets — Cabinet Shop Coast Signs & Graphics — Sign contractor Sun Aired Bag Co. — Bag mfgrs Auto Parts Supply (No name on bldg) California Security Cans — can mfgr Mechanical Equipment Design mfgr Architect Office/Bug a boo Strollers Parking lot Dirt lot — proposed development Manhattan Oil — Racing oil Mfgr J & B Plumbing Custom Auto mfgr Storage A & B Air Conditioning Co. & Aesthetic Systems Acurak Steel truck rack mfgr Mangiagli surf board mfgr Surf Board mfgr & warehouse The Magic Touch Auto Body Repair Rubies Exclusive Coachworks —Auto body Vacant building City Yard Self Storage rentals Clothing and accessory mfgr Construction Co Office Music Focus — Music Recording Studio J D Manufacturing Co. — Jewelry mfgr Surf board shaping and storage Jot Design Inc — screen printing Blue Sky Tinting — window tinting Supreme Paint — contractor/supply Michael Johnson Woodworking Mike Collins Surfboard mfgr Precision Motor Sport — auto repair/mfgr • M-1 Zoned Property (Ardmore Avenue) No. Address Usage 1 322 Ardmore Miscellaneous Repair/ Auto Storage 2 623 3rd St. Residential* 3 436 Ardmore Cabinet Shop 4 422 Ardmore Residential* 5 611 4th St. Residential* 6 ' 615 4th St. Residential* 7 635 4th St. Residential* * General Plan designated Medium Density Residential PG 26 Key M-1 Zoned Properties NAGASAKI & •SOCIATES REAL ESTATE CONSULTANTS 120 transactions. We ultimately utilized sale transactions specifically within a five -mile radius of the city of Hermosa Beach which occurred from 2000 to the present. The sales ultimately utilized were segregated by land use of residential, commercial and industrial. The average price psf for residential, commercial and industrial sites were considered individually. We had a body of data consisting of around 220 sales transactions, which gave us a good sample to work with. Next we considered the land use allocation within the city of Hermosa Beach. The Hermosa Beach General Plan Land Use Element was amended in 1994, and includes the following land use allocation. The city's land use is divided between residential, commercial and office, open space, and other land uses. We utilized the allocation for residential, commercial, industrial, open space, public facilities and as five separate categories. Based upon this, the total acreage for the city of Hermosa Beach is broken down as follows: Land Use Acres % of Total Residential 457 54.88 % Commercial and office 86 10.29% Industrial 7 0.82% Open Space 225 27.08% Public 58 6.93 % Total 832 100.00% We then utilized the average and median price for land in each land use to determine the weighted average price for land in the city of Hermosa Beach. This considers the impact of the variety of land uses within the city under the three primary development types. We recognize that the land use most often considered for the In -Lieu fee would likely be residential land. However, this is not exclusive to the use of only residential land for the possible conversion to park land use. An alternative would be to dedicate land to the park land use, and could alternatively be some other land use type (often at a lesser price). Therefore we have used the weighted average approach, to consider the land available (any type) within the city for purposes of this ordinance. While the land values for the residential, commercial and industrial uses are obvious. We noted that open space and parkland values and public facilities considered to have a zero value in recognizing their non- economic use. The following tables show the allocation of land use, percentage of the total, average dollars and median dollars psf for land area by use and their resulting weighted dollars psf: WEIGHTED LAND SALES FIVE -MILE RADIUS 2000 TO CURRENT Average Weighted Median Weighted Land Use Acres % of Total $ Per Sf $ Per Sf $ Per Sf $ Per Sf Residential 457 54.88% $215.44 $118.24 $124.14 $68.13 Commercial and office 86 10.29% 88.32 9.09 59.89 6.16 Industrial 7 0.82% 28.14 0.23 21.46 0.18 Parks and Open Space 225 27.08% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public 58 6.93% 0.00 • 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 832 100.00% $127.56 $74.47 Average $101.01 Hermosa Beach - Park In -Lieu Fee Page 6 File No. 06-192 October 10, 2006 City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Request for addition as a Supplemental Agenda Item, 623 Third Street's M-1 Zoning Dear City Council, We would like to ask the City Council to please consider changing the zoning on our house from M-1 to residential, during its discussion of manufacturing zoning issues at tonight's Council meeting. • 623 Third Street is surrounded by residential zoning on all sides. • Our 3,600 square foot lot is too small for a viable manufacturing operation. • We are completely surrounded by residential housing, and although the current zoning designation reflects a time when the greenbelt was a working rail line, today's reality is dramatically different. • It is our understanding that the city's current "master plan" calls for our lot to be used as "R-2" housing. Any consideration you can give to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, ge/fri Kent and Eileen Brown 623 Third Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (310) 318-0901 SUPPLEMENTAL 6f INFORMATION DE 40 a RD ST. CONDOMINIUM riTRACT NO 52770 M. B. 1254 -97-98 FOR PREY. ASSMT. SEE:4j53 - 33 WALTER RANSO VENABLE PLS M.B.9-150 CONDOMINIUM TRACT NO._ 37: M. B. 951- 50.- 5 • September 28, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council October 10, 2006 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF ELIMINATING RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS IN THE C-1 ZONE Recommendation: That the City Council direct staff as deemed appropriate. Background: This item was brought up by Councilman Sam Edgerton. Council directed staff to submit a report assessing the impacts of eliminating residential condominiums in the C-1 (Limited Commercial Zone) in order to mitigate the potential loss of restaurants and "traditional" uses in the zone. This report assesses the potential impacts of the proposal. The C-1 zone allows certain stand-alone commercial uses and mixed-use development combining ground level commercial with residential uses above. The C-1 zone has allowed residential apartments above commercial for over 60 years and in August 2003 the City Council clarified that the C-1 permitted use list also included residential condominiums. In December 2003 the City adopted a mixed-use ordinance combining standards from the R-3 and C -I zones. Many cities in the area including Manhattan and Redondo Beach, have adopted similar ordinances to encouraged mixed-use development to spur revitalization of underdeveloped properties and to accommodate additional housing need. Developers have incentive to redevelop such properties because of the extra value added to commercial property with residential uses. An example of this revitalization effect in Hermosa Beach is 44 — 48 Hermosa Avenue where a new mixed-use project will replace the businesses that had sat vacant, becoming a code enforcement problem with vagrants and illegal dumping. A developer pursued redevelopment of the site but requested adding condominiums to the permitted use. list in order to develop the project. The City Council's approval of this change facilitated redevelopment. The project is currently in construction. The only other new mixed-use project in the city involves the property at 20 Hermosa Avenue which had been vacated by a restaurant more than two years prior to purchase by a local architect who planned to locate his office on the ground level and his residence above. The project is currently in plan check. There are no other applications to develop mixed-use projects at this time. Analysis: There are 39 C-1 zoned lots in the city, eight of which contain restaurants. The loss of existing restaurant or 'traditional" uses in the C-1 zone was raised as a potential problem created by the new mixed-use ordinance and it was suggested that removing condominiums from the C-1 permitted use list would present a way to mitigate this problem because there would be no compelling reason to redevelop C-1 zoned property. The current mixed-use development standards in the C-1 zone prohibit several commercial uses including restaurants that were deemed to be inharmonious with residential above. A new mixed-use project cannot include a restaurant. Stand-alone restaurant are still a permitted use in the zone and stand-alone condominiums are not permitted. The attached table and land use survey indicates that there are no existing restaurants located on C-1 zone lots that are susceptible to redevelopment without property assembly because these uses occupy lots that are too small to accommodate a mixed-use project with required parking. Thus the restaurant properties cannot be redeveloped as a mixed-use project unless they are assembled with other C-1 zoned properties and are not likely to be replaced. The proposal to remove residential condominiums from the C-1 zone 6 g will potentially affect 13 properties that are similarly zoned and located adjacent to three or more lots that can be assembled and developed with at least a two -unit project. Less than two units is generally not a profitable development because of the cost of land, and less than three lots generally provide inadequate land area to accommodate ground level commercial and required project parking unless the.lotsare exceptionally large. Further, if a lot is small and not directly accessed by two or more streets, it is generally not possible to redevelop it with even one residential unit above ground level retail because parking is a major controlling factor in developing a mixed use project. If a project cannot be parked it cannot be built. The attached table illustrates how parking affects mixed-use development feasibility in the C-1 zone. Most single, small lots that include uses like Martha's, El Gringos or the Bottle Inn restaurants are not threatened with redevelopment and similarly "traditional" uses such as the Green Store, Boccatos and Mikey's Deli are also not developable due to the inability to provide adequate parking.' Any additional concerns about losing existing restaurants and "traditional" uses in the C-1 zone can be addressed in two ways: 1. Amend the permitted use list to remove condominiums as part of the residential uses allowed in the C-1 zone, similar to the way it was written originally which reduces the incentive to redevelop C-1 property; or 2. Eliminate the restriction on restaurants from the Mixed Use Ordinance. (ie. amend "Limitation on allowed Commercial Uses". The types of uses that are currently prohibited in the mixed- use ordinance include restaurants, bars, laundries and stand alone parking lots or structures. Sol Blumenfel Community D Di ector velopment Attachments: 1. Development Feasibility Spreadsheet 2. Property Ownership List 3. Example of Mixed Use Development 4. Permitted Use List and Mixed -Use Ordinance Notes: 1. The C-1 Development Spreadsheet shows existing land uses, required parking for mixed use commercial and residential projects and project feasibility for each property based upon parking. Alternate calculations were prepared for reorienting the commercial on the site (noted with "A" following the Parcel Number column), since the commercial area of the project (and related parking) changes based on lot orientation. Lots that may be assembled are shown shaded/colored on the spreadsheet. The tabulated data indicates the following: • One Lot Mixed Use Development with Street Frontage on One or Two Sides - Single lots are generally too small to redevelop with two units unless they are accessed by streets or alleys on two or more property boundaries which allows more efficient lot utilization with back-up onto alleys, etc. (See Attachment 3). Tandem parking is not permitted. ■ Two Lot Mixed Use Development - If two standard lots are assembled the additional commercial frontage requires additional parking and generally cannot be parked. ■ Three Lot Mixed Use Development - Three lots typically provide enough land to park the commercial and residential portions of a project. A B C D E F G H 1 J K 1 Mixed Use Development on C-1 Zoned Property 2 Parcel # Address Exist. Use Lot Comm. Comm. Parking Res. Park Total Park Total Park MXD 3 Size Area Parking Feasible 2 Units Req'd. Prov'd. Feasible 4 4181018001 3216 Man. Amigos Tacos 4918 2475 10 8 5 15 8 No 5 4181018001A 3216 Man. 4918 1800 7 10 5 12 10 No 6 4181018002 3232 Man. Dan's Liquor 4905 2475 10 8 5 15 8 No 7 4181019003 200 Long. La Penita II 2100 900 4 4 5 9 4 No 8 4181023002 2700 Man. La Stosta 4796 2400 10 8 5 15 8 No 9 4181023002A 2700 Man. " 4796 1800 7 10 5 12 10 No 10 4181025005 2641 Man. Manhattan Mart 4134 3150 13 3 5 18 3 No 11 4181025009 2604 Herm. Comm. Store 2990 921 4 7 5 9 7 No 12 4181025010 2608 Herm. El Gringo 2087 1998 8 0 5 13 0 No 13 4181025020 2629 Man. Laundry 3088 1127 5 7 5 10 7 No 14 4181025900 Remnant 22 22 0 0 5 5 0 No 15 4181030015 3125 Man. Boccatos 3859 2100 8 6 5 13 6 No 16 4181030015A 3125 Man. " 3859 1654 7 7 5 12 7 No 17 4181031012 139 Long. Apts. 2474 900 4 5 5 9 5 No 18 4181031012A 139 Long. Apts. 4950 2475 10 8 5 15 8 No 19 4181031014 3201 Man. Offices 2474 900 4 5 5 9 5 No 20 4181031014A 3201 Man. " 4950 2475 10 8 5 15 8 No 21 4181031015 3217 Man. Hair Salon 2474 2474 10 0 5 15 0 No 22 4181031015A 3217 Man. Hair Salon 2474 900 4 5 5 9 5 No 23 4182003014 19 22nd Martha's 2627 2627 11 0 5 16 0 No. Comm.Entire Lot 24 4182003014A 19 22nd 2627 900 4 6 5 9 6 No 25 4182004008 20 22nd Nielson Creativ 3601 825 3 9 5 8 9 No. But 2 Units w/ 26 4182004011 26 22nd Bottle Inn 3607 1224 5 8 5 10 8 Adj. Lot Assembly 27 4182004012 2147 Herm. Green Store 3607 1224 5 8 5 10 8 Possible 28 4182004012A 2147 Herrn. 3607 2400 10 4 5 15 4 " 29 4187004026A 1020 Strand Sea Sprite 2537 904.5 3 5 5 8 5 No. But 2 Units w/ 30 4187004004A 1028 Strand Sea Sprite 2537 904.5 3 5 5 8 5 Adj. Lot Assembly 31 4187004005A 1042 Strand Sea Sprite 6313 1809 5 15 5 10 15 Yes. 32 4187004026A 1016 Strand Sea Sprite 7366 2713 8 16 5 13 16 Yes. 33 4188003031 • 20 2nd + Lot 2nd St. Cafe- V 4000 1800 7 7 5 12 7 Yes. 34 4.18800.3033 135-139 Herm. Vacant 2250 900 4 5 5 9 5 No. 35 4188003034 133 Herm. Vacant 5 2223 900 4 4. 9 4 No. 36 4188003035 113 Herm. Pacific Rim Cat 3925 1800 7 7 5 12 7 No. But 2 Units w/ 37 4188003036 101 Herm. Mickey's Deli 3038 1578 6 5 5 11 5I Adj. Lot Assembly • • A B C D E F G H I J K 38 Parcel # Address Exist. Use Lot Comm. Comm. Parking Res. Park Total Park Total Park MXD 39 Size Area Parking Feasible 2 Units Req'd. Prov'd. Feasible 40 4188012048 19 2nd SFR 3864 800 3 10 5 8 10 Yes, Due to Access 41 4188007013 25 2nd SFR 2866 900 4 7 5 9 7 No 42 4188007014 201 Herm. Blue Pacific Re 2866 900 4 7 5 9 7 No 43 4188012048 170 Herm. Le Petite Cafe 2897 900 4 7 5 9 7 No 44 4188012049 190 Herm. Le Petite Cafe 2897 870 3 7 5 8 7 No 45 4188012048A 170-190 Herm " 5794 1800 7 13 5 12 13 Yes 46 4188012048A2 170- 190 Herm " 5794 3000 12 9 5 17 9 No 47 4188014035 30-44 Herm. Mixed Use 7200 2700 11 15 5 16 15 Yes, Due to Access 48 4188014036 " 0 ' & Adj. Lot Assembly 49 4188014037" 0 50 4188014038 48 Herm. Apts. 2400 900 4 5 5 9 5 No. But 2 Units w/ 51 4188014039 54 Herm. Lookout Enterp 2400 900 4 5 5 9 5 Adj. Lot Assembly 52 4188014040 60 Herm. Vacant 2400 900 4 5 5 9 5 Possible 53 4188014041 66 Herm. HBYC 2400 900 4 5 5 9 5 " 54 4188015037 2 Herm. Dawn -Dusk Liq 5236 1950 8 11 5 13 11 No. But 2 Units w/ 55 4188015038 16 Herm. Apts. 2400 900. 4 5 5 9 5 Adj. Lot Assem 56 4188015039 22 Herm. Apts. 2400 900 4 5 5 9 5 Possible 57 22 Herm. Apts. 10028 3750 15 21 5 20 21 Yes • • HdL Coren & Cone for 017 2006/07 Flagged Parcels - in Parcel Order pat cel:>::..:,:.:• .. :::.:::::::.Situsi Address ................................... .... ,. Owner :::. l .:............... caner V 4181-018-001 3216 Manhattan Ave Carty Richard And Pat 4181-018-002 3232 Manhattan Ave D A J Inc 4181-019-003 200 Longfellow Ave Krech Douglas K 4181-023-002 2700 Manhattan Ave Sohail Llc 4181-025-005 2641 Manhattan Ave Singh Rajesh And Arun L 4181-025-009 2604 Hermosa Ave Firestone Steven 4181-025-010 2608 Hermosa Ave Gordon David And Elsie Trs Et Al Gor CATALANO C CO TR CATALANO TRUST 4181-025-020 2629 Manhattan Ave Jalali Mostafa Tr Mostafa Jalali Tru NASRI SEDIGHEH 4181-025-900 Hermosa Beach City S By S 4181-030-015 3125 Manhattan Ave Boccato Franco Et Al BOCCATO JOHN V . • 4181-031-012 139 Longfellow Ave Icaza Ricardo F And Adele Trs Icaza 4181-031-014 3201 Manhattan Ave Icaza Ricardo F And Adele Trs Icaza 4181-031-015 3217 Manhattan Ave Bredesen Chris And Virginia Trs C G 4182-003-014 19 22nd Ct Volk Robert D Tr Robert Davies Volk 4182-004-008 20 22nd St Hicks Robert A Tr R A And F M Hicks 4182-004-011 26 22nd St Oswell Investments Llc 4182-004-012 2147 Hermosa Ave Green Store Partners 4187-004-003 1020 The Strand Sprite Enterprises Associated 4187-004-004 1028 The Strand Sprite Enterprises Associated 4187-004-005 1042 The Strand Donaldson E D And H E Trs Et Al Dona BOWMAN HENRY H 4187-004-026 1016 The Strand Sprite Enterprises Assoc 4188-003-031 20 2nd St Jersey Hills Llc And KILLEN PATRICK J 4188-003-033 133 Hermosa Ave Herrera Daniel B And Casey T 4188-003-034 Herrera Daniel And Casey T 4188-003-035 113 Hermosa Ave Kwak Chong K And Ok Ja 4188-003-036 101 Hermosa Ave Mance Rosalee Tr Mance Trust 4188-007-012 19 2nd St Wells Gary And Cindi 4188-007-013 25 2nd St McMillen Darwin W And Ann M Trs Mcmi 4188-007-014 201 Hermosa Ave Triantis Steve And Christina Trs Tri 4188-012-048 170 Hermosa Ave Holliday John 4188-012-049 190 Hermosa Ave Holliday John 4188-014-038 48 Hermosa Ave Nelson Gary E 4188-014-039 54 Hermosa Ave Baron Eric L And BERNARD YVONNE M 4188-014-040 60 Hermosa Ave Dimitrius Ralli Tr Ralli Dimitrius T 4188-014-041 66 Hermosa Ave Kissel Leonard F Tr Leonard F Kissel 4188-014-090 30 Hermosa Ave 30 Hermosa Llc 4188-015-037 2 Hermosa Ave Wilk Sanford And Marlene Trs L R Sim 4188-015-038 16 Hermosa Ave Conroy Brian F Tr Conroy Family Trus 4188-015-039 22 Hermosa Ave Libiano Lance E 39 Parcels :• unr. rnrPn R, r,,.,P nrnnPrty Tav Page 1 • /613112:1-HeTT� • •>17,6G t2 N C� • -15) p�K 2L • EXAMPLE OF MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT — MINIMUM 30' COMMERCIAL DEPTH Single Lot Required Parking: 4Gommercial @ 4: 1000 5 residential @ 2 Per Unit & 1 Guest 9 Total Required 6 Provided Parking Short by 3 Spaces Not Permitted Street Alley Street Residential Commercial Double Lot Required Parking: 7 Commercial @ 4: 1000 10 Residential @ 2 per Lip & 2 Guest 17 Total Required 12 Provided Parking Short by 5 Spaces Not Permitted • SUPPLEMENTAL 5a Attachment C-1, C-2 and C-3 ZONES, LAND USE REGULATIONS P = Permitted - = Not Permitted U = C.U.P. Required (See Chapter 17.40) USE . ;C -i i.C-2 C-3 ]See Section Adult businesses - :i - U 1 iJ.46.15o :Adult paraphernalia, X -Rated uses and materials, limited to no more :. :. U :: 17.40.060 :than 20% of stock -in -trade .: .: . Alcohol.beverage establishments, on -sale:. - • :i - :: U :: U :: 17.40.080 1 ...... . ....... • ..... ..... ...... ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,, , ,,,,, , , , ,• ,,,,,,,, , • •.,•.v•" ",• , • ,,,,, Alcohol beverage establishment, off -sale -- (closing at 11:00 p.m. or . P , • arlier) • • :Alcohol beverage establishment, off -sale -- (open between 11:01 p.m. :i U 1 U 1 U :i 17.40.090 and 2:00 a.m.) Animalhospitals,,,,,, .......... ,.... ,....... ........ ....... 7 ....... 1 ....... - ....... ..... .P.......i; ..................................... ......i ..... ...... . Aquariums, sales and supplies of marine life P P P .: 3 ., Art/antiques/curios gallery or shop • Audio/video equipment and supplies, sales and repair ii P ! P 0 :! . :• Bake 1 P P P .•• • • !Banks and financial institutions . ,,,- :i .4.-4 P :i , P :i .. .. Barber/beauty shop • ii P ii P i: P . • . iBilliard or pool halls :: - P :] P 1Books/news/magazines, sales :i P :i P P :Bowling alley - - :; P . $ :.• : : .., :1Brick and stone (ornamental) ii - - ii P :: 3 . . . IEius station, not including terminal facilities - - P :Business schools - - P :Catering business P ;Clinic, dental and/or medical .. .• P P P :i s. . :., Clothing and wearing apparel sales and service :i P :i P :: P i ,.. ........................... .... ...... ...... ....... ........... .............. ... ....... .......... ....... ..... ....... .... .................... ................ ..... .... ..... ,..... .......... ,...........,......::.......... ..... .i:..... ............... .. . , ... , ................ I :Clubs, private .:: - p :. p , , Computer and Internet Access Center„.„. . - :: - 1 U 17.40.020 :.,,,,,,,,, .... ...„...,...............,,,,„: ....................................... .. .. , .. „„,,,,„„ .. , .... „„„, ..... . ....... „:„„ ...... „„„: ....... „:..„,......:.„:„, ..... „:„......„,„„„„...„:::„. ...... .....„.:: ..... ,,,,,, ...... .....,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.; convention hall • - :: - l: U i: 17.40.020 .: Copying and printing services and supplies ' P i P ':. P . . . ii. Dancing, customer -P P . .:. Day nursery,preschool„ :1 U i. U „ ii. U 17.40.110 -•: . . ., .„., ...„.,.„,.„ .„........ . ,,.....—, . ..• ...... ., . Department stores • i:. - - P 1. 4 .f . Detective agency - P : : Drugstore :: P ::P :: P ::,• ...................................................... .,,,,.....,....1,..,,,,,,,,,, , .."...,.,..,-....,-.......,,....'...44.,,...,,,........,,,,,..., : • :. Entertainment, live - U 1 U 17.40.020 !Equipment (household tools and lawn/garden equipment including - - p -:.-small engines) rental, and repair, other than street vehicles :: 3 • Florist or plant shop P :i P P :i 4 food and beverage market (maximum 4,000 square feet floor area) • :: P ii P ii P ii 1 Fortune tellers, psychics and astrologers : - :1 - . . . . i'. Funeral homes, including mortuaries : - P :i P :IFurnituretfurnishi .... .... sales and •. P P . .. . • ... , .. ... . ... .. .. ... ... . ...... . . . .... .. , .. , .. .... . .... ....... .... , ....... ............... .. .. ... ...... .... ..... 3 Game arcade, if five (5) or more machines - - U 17.40.020 ........................................ ......... .......... ........................... ..................................................... ......... ........... ...... ..... ........... Garden equipment, small, hand -operated, sales and rentals - P P :::.Gun shop - - P ....• .: .• . . .. ...... ... ... . ....... . . , .... . ;iGymnasium/health and fitness center :: - :: P :: P :: ......... . :Hardware/home improvement store ii - p p ) :illobby and craft supplies a,nd service l-lospitals, general, psychiatric out-patient only ;: - ;:. - U ii 17.40.020 .. .... . , ... . , '. : :. .• :. :. motels ls, :itlote- p • ................................... ..... ..... ........ :Household appliances/office equipment, sales and repair •: P :: P :i 3 :Instruments (professional and/or scientific), sales :: P :: P :: P . . . ,. ilInterior decorating studio, store or shop ;: P Laboratories - P P , iLaundry business and dry-cleaningincluding self-service ;:. P :: P :: P . . .. - ..... ...,,,,...„:„.........:—........:-....„......:: ........... :„. ... .. _._ .• Locksmith business .................. .. .... ii P P :: P 1 . ..... 5 5 ............ ............... .... Lumberyard, retail :: :: - P 3 ;:M.therapy business - U• U 17.40.160 Messenger service P :1 P i; P ....... niature golf course - - p :iMonuments ,. :Motor vehicles and equipment, sales and service (including •1 motorcycles, boats, non -tractor trucks, RV's) •• . :: .. •. .. . 1 • . ............. . ....-,::::::::::- .. - ... :::::::-.:•••••••••-::::::: .............. ...-:- . -:•;.:::::• ..... ••••:;•••••••••:-::::••••••• ..... ••••:;••••••::::•••••• .................. •:-:•••••••: Sales/rental, new or used - - U 17.40.020 3' •3,........,,,,,........... : : -• : -.: - - , .......... r.' General repair, service, installation of parts and accessories - - U . 17.40.020 l :i.....Body repair and painting • - - U :: 17.40.020 .....Service station - - U 17.40.030 .... ,.....Parts and accessories, retail sales - :i.....Car washes or (self-service car wash) - :. - U :: 17.40.030 :f . „ , "Vehicle storage . :: - :: - U ii 17.40.020 :Movie theaters - U :: U :: 17.40.020 l. I ,Museums :: :: P :: P i . . . . 1Music academy U ;.: U 17.40.020 : : :• :• Musical instruments,. retail and repair :: - !: P :: p :1Nurseries U 17.40.020 ;10ffices, general e P ii P : P Parcel delivery terminal :: - P .., s...,":......•••,.....:•,,,,-- .....„:„.....„....-„,...,„,,,,,, ... ..,44,.....,,,, ....... , ,:. , .....4.1, 7,-,44.744.,....,. ..... W... : , , ..... , : ' , , , !, , '• , ,.....,...,,,,,.....,,,,,,,,,,,,,,4 'Al, ......................, 7 .. .., : , • • , 1 , , • ...i:7....,,, : ,,... , : :: ,..... , ..,..; —.4, .... , ....... 1 .. ....' Parking lots and /or structures p i: P p ii 5 ,••• ..... •..•••• :Pet grooming, no overnight kennels: ;: .. . .. Yet stores, including sale of pets :: _ - p :: s .. • :Photo engraving business i: _ - p :: •: fi Photography...equipment sales and service, film processing, studio):: P i P P , .... .•."•....."••.• ..................... ...••• :Printing and or publishing business, commercial- ; P :: P • : 3 3. ...: Radio and television stations - - U ;: 17.40.020 Recycling, large or small collection facility ..•.: •17.40.130, •, • . .-.. _ U : • . . : •... Residence: Residential uses above ground floor commercial• . • • •. :: U : - - 17.40.020 :. •, Alse(s), including condominium devlopments. • .. . : .. . .. • ... • : .••• . .: - .-. Restaurant, with drive-in, or drive-thru window, or with outdoor walk- :: - ; U :: U 17.40.020 .. up window on ...c right of way .. .. . • • •: • ;Itestaurant/cafe:: P ; •P 1: P ii • .: •••••• • . • • - ;IRestaurant/cafe with beer and wine or (on -sale alcohol beverage ii U : U :i U :: 17.40,080 ,establishment) . , Reverse vending machine(s) U : U :i U ;! 17.40.120 ;Secondhand merchandise, retail sales - :Skating rink, ice or roller i: - - ...... .. • .. • • . • • ... • . • .. • .. .. • . P P • - P :Snack bar/snack shop p P i; P !i iiSound score production facility • - - U :i 17.40.020 ......• ........... ....... ................. •••••••• .......... • ..... ........... .... ..... ........................................ ..... •••••••••••"• ...... ..... :Sporting/recreational equipment sales, service. and rental ;i . . ',Supermarkets Surfboard manufacturing - P 17.40.020 `Ticket broker/sales ........:.................. 'iTo acco store ! P P P :Toy store ;.... ;,<� ;.,. `;Upholstering shop - P P P Wedding cha el commercial ;;Wireless communication facility U U U NYouth Hostel U U 17.40.150 Entertainment special performances - . U* U* :;Outdoor merchandise display, temporary outside dining, in conjunction U* U* U*ii 17.26.050(D) • ;with special event Parade, circus or carnival 17.40.180 Mixed -Use Development (C-1 Zone) For uses allowed in the C-1 Zone as part of a mixed-use development, the following conditions and standards of development, in addition to any other deemed necessary or appropriate to ensure compatibility with existing or permitted uses in the vicinity, shall be required: A. Residential Development Standards. The residential portion of a mixed-use development shall be subject to the development standards of the R-3 zone as set forth in Chapter 17.16 with the exception of the following: 1. If the residential portion of a mixed-use development is a condominium development, then the development shall be subject to the condominium development standards as set forth in Chapter 17.22. 2. Residential use. is limited to 25% of the first floor area for the purposes of providing entry -exit areas or lobbies, stairs and corridors, and shall not include primary living areas or sleeping rooms. 3. Front setbacks shall be a minimum of five feet. 4. The front setback area may be used for required open space if the area is a deck above the commercial level and otherwise complies with the open space requirements of the R-3 zone. 5. No lot coverage maximum shall be applied. 6. No 36" box tree per dwelling unit shall be placed as a street tree to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. B. Commercial Development Standards. In addition to the requirements of the commercial zone, the following standards shall apply .to the mixed-use development. 1. The ground floor shall be primarily commercial with a minimum average depth of 30 - feet, and living and sleeping areas of residential units shall be located above the ground floor. 2. Building frontage shall be used for commercial purposes with the exception of entry - exit corridors and stairs for accessing the residential units and/or for driveways to access parking. C. General Development Standards for noise, security, lighting. 1. Noise: Residential uses shall be separate from commercial uses by soundproofed floors and walls with minimum sound transmission rating as required for condominiums as set forth in Chapter 17.22. Commercial uses hours of operations shall be limited where appropriate so that residents are not exposed to offensive noise or activity. 2.. Security: Separate and secured entrances for residences directly accessible to sidewalk and parking areas. 3. Lighting: Outdoor lighting and lighting for signs associated with commercial uses designed so as not to adversely impact residences. No flashing, blinking or high intensity lighting. Adequate lighting to illuminate parking areas and corridors to access // parking and public sidewalk. Lighting for signs may only be illuminated during business hours. D. Signs. Signs shall be limited to the commercial building frontage pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 17.50. E. Limitation on allowed Commercial Uses. Permitted commercial uses within a mixed use development shall be as permitted in the underlying commercial zone with the following exceptions which shall not be permitted: 1. Restaurants and bars 2. Laundry and dry-cleaning businesses 3. Parking lots and/or structures. F. Limitations on hours of operation. The hours of operation for any commercial use shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. Owner shall disclose separately and in writing upon sale or rental of the subject property that it is mixed use and permits commercial and residential uses within the building. ORDINANCE ADJUSTING CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION I • 111 /6)//0/a7 September 26, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of October 10, 2006 Recommendation: Waive full reading and introduce ordinance adjusting Council compensation for City Councilmembers and amending the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code. Background: At the September 12, 2006 City Council meeting, Council directed staff to return with an ordinance that addresses Councilmember compensation. Government Code Section 36516 allows a general law City to pay Councilmembers a monthly compensation in relation to the population size of their City. Government Code Section 36516 further states that a general law City may increase Council stipends 5% per year since the time of the last increase. The City of Hermosa Beach's City Council has not had an adjustment to its monthly compensation since compensation was established in 1986. In view of the increases in the cost of living since 1986, Council may want to consider an increase to the Council's compensation. The Government Code further states that, upon Council approval, a compensation increase may not go into effect until after the Council election and at least one member has begun a new term of office. Therefore, any increase in Councilmember compensation would not go into effect until November, 2007. The Government Code does not specify whether the 5% is to be calculated using compound or simple interest, however, the Attorney General has recently ruled that the increase must be calculated on a simple interest basis. Using the simple interest calculation, the maximum amount that Council compensation can be increased is to $600 per month — using the simple interest calculation, $300 x 5% _ $15 x 20 years = $300 + $300 (existing compensation) = $600. Alternatives: 1. Increase monthly compensation for a lesser amount than $300 per month. Fiscal Impact: If approved, any increased compensation will be budgeted as part of the FY 07-08 Budget. Respectfully submitted, S .hen R. Burrell City Manager 6h • • ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ADJUSTING COMPENSATION FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings. a. Municipal Code Section 2.72.040 establishes compensation for City Councilmembers in the amount allowed by California Government Code Section 36516. b. Council compensation was last adjusted in 1986. c. In accordance with subparagraph (c) of Section 36516, the Council may adjust compensation in the amount of five percent (5%) for each calendar year since the operative date of the last adjustment. d.• The increase in compensation provided for in this Ordinance, to take effect in November, 2007 following the City's next general municipal election pursuant to California Government Code Section 36516.5, represents an adjustment of five percent (5%) from April 1986 through November 2007. Section 2. Section 2.72.040 of Title 2, Chapter 2.72 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 2.72.040 Compensation of city council. In accordance with Section 36516 (c) of the Government Code of the State of California, the amount of compensation for each member of the City Council shall be $600. Section 3. The increased compensation provided for by Section 2 of this Ordinance shall first be paid for the pay period first following the date that councilmembers elected in the • November, 2007 election are sworn into office. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2006. MAYOR Attest: City Clerk Hermosa Beach El Segundo Gardena Hawthorne Lawndale Manhattan Redondo Beach Beach City Council $300.00 $900.00 $650.00 Stipend $350.00 $200.00 $792.67 Mayor Auto Allowance Expenses Conference Budget Bonus/Other . • $950.00 $10,000 per year $400.00 $350.00 $420.00 $0.00 $375.00 $60.00 $75.00 \.. 12% deferred comp cellphone $30/month redevelopment agency compensation Z ZO_ uJ Q Jry 0- LI - a. O D (i) Z 10/3/2006 Torrance Inglewood Lomita Rolling Hills Rolling Hills Rancho Palos Estates Verdes Carson Palos Verdes Estates 10/3/2006 $5,157.00 $390.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 $1,148.25 $0.00 $9,275.00 $0.00 $0.00 $350.00 $700.00 $0.00 $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $160.00 $0.00 $250.00 per diem $0.00 Travel paid $0.00 $125.00 $50 communications allowance $0.00 up to $4500/yr Conferences paid $0.00 ta 10/3/2006 Hermosa Beach El Segundo Gardena Hawthorne Lawndale Manhattan Redondo Beach Beach City Council $300.00 $900.00 $650.00 Stipend $350.00 $200.00 $792.67 Mayor Auto Allowance Expenses Conference Budget Bonus/Other . IIIIagency $950.00 $10,000 per year $400.00 $350.00 $420.00 $0.00 $375.00 $60.00 - $75.00 \.. 12% deferred comp cellphone $30/month redevelopment compensation Z z0 LU Q �2�/ 0_0 U- Z 10/3/2006 Torrance Inglewood Lomita Rolling Hills Rolling Hills Rancho Palos Estates Verdes Carson Palos Verdes Estates 10/3/2006 $5,157.00 $390.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 $1,148.25 $0.00 $9,275.00 $0.00 $0.00 $350.00 $700.00 $0.00 $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 • $0.00 $160.00 $0.00 $250.00 per diem $0.00 Travel paid $0.00 $125.00 $50 communications allowance $0.00 up to $4500/yr Conferences paid $0.00 0 10/3/2006 • • /00/6-(,, October 3, 2006 City Council Meeting October 10, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS - SEPTEMBER 2006 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council appoint delegates and alternates to the various committees, consistent with the policy of maintaining permanent representation whenever possible, and delete any obsolete temporary subcommittees as appropriate. Background: At its meeting of September 26, the Council continued this item to the October 10 meeting. The appointments made at the September 12 meeting (L.A. County City Selection Committee and South Bay Cities Sanitation District) are reflected in the attached committee assignment list. Council members are requested to contact Mayor Edgerton prior to this meeting concerning any preferences they may have with regard to the remainder of the committee assignments. Please note that the following committees require resolutions for delegate/alternate appointments and if assignment changes are made this evening to any of these committees, new resolutions will be placed on the consent calendar of the October 24 agenda for Council adoption: 1. Councilmember Tucker is the current delegate for the Independent Cities Lease Finance Authority, with both Finance Director Viki Copeland and City Treasurer John Workman serving as the designated alternate representatives. 2. Mayor Edgerton is the current delegate for the Independent Cities Risk Management Association, with Personnel/Risk Management Director Michael Earl as the designated alternate, and Finance Director Viki Copeland as the substitute alternate representative to serve in the absence of the delegate and alternate. 3. Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan is the current delegate and Mayor Edgerton the current alternate for the South Bay Cities Council of Governments. (The delegate and alternate of this committee are also appointed to the LAX Committee, since those meetings occur back-to-back on the same day and at the same location.) After the assignments of delegates and alternates, letters will be sent to the appropriate boards and committees, and the revised list will be forwarded to the City Council. NOTED: .fir n� Stephen R. Burry ity a ger Elaine Doerfling, City Cler R • • REORGANIZATION OF CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE APPOINTMENTS Beach Cities Committee Delegate Reviczky (as called) Delegate Coordinating Council Delegate Tucker (Kiwanis Club Building, as called) Independent Cities Association Delegate Alternate Keegan (Quarterly - dinner meeting) Independent Cities Lease Finance Authority Delegate Alternate Tucker (Annual - in June, as called) Copeland/Workman RESOLUTION NO. 04-6347 Independent Cities Risk Management Association Delegate Alternate Edgerton (2nd Wed. - 10:30 a.m., Huntington Park) Earl (Copeland - substitute) RESOLUTION NO. 97-5886 LAX Committee (same as South Bay Cities Council of Governments) Delegate Edgerton Alternate Keegan (4th Thursday — 5:45 p.m., Lomita City Hall League of California Cities - Board of Directors Delegate Tucker (1st Thurs. - 7 p.m., Stevens Steak/Seafood House, 5332 Steven's Place, Commerce Alternate Keegan [dark in July) Page 1. Appointments 12-13-05 (as amended 09-12-06) • • Los Angeles County/City Selection Committee (must appoint alternate separately each time when unable to attend meeting) Mayor Edgerton (as called) Metropolitan Transportation Authority City Selection Committee Delegate Reviczky (as called) Alternate Keegan Sister City Association, Inc. Delegate Reviczky (1st Wed., Community Center, Room 4 Alternate Keegan South Bay Cities Council of Governments (same as LAX Committee) Delegate Alternate Keegan RESOLUTION NO. 04-6349 Edgerton (4th Thursday, 7 p.m., Lomita City Hall) South Bay Cities Sanitation District (County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles) Delegate Edgerton Alternate Keegan 3rd Wed. - 1:30 p.m., Torrance City Hall) South Bay Youth Project Delegate Alternate (Quarterly, as called - 6 p.m., Reviczky 320 Knob Hill, Room 4, Redondo Beach Southern California Association of Governments Delegate Keegan (Annual, as called) West Basin Water Association Delegate (Quarterly - dinner meeting - 4th Thurs. - Reviczky 6 p.m., Charlie Brown's, Redondo Beach) Alternate Keegan Page 2 Appointments 12-13-05 (as amended 09-12-06) a i • • Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission Delegate Alternate Tucker TEMPORARY COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEES Beach Cities Health District Councilmember Reviczky Councilmember Tucker Airport [Formed 6/24/97] Councilmember Reviczky Councilmember Edgerton City -School District Partnership [Formed 5/28/98] Councilmember Edgerton Councilmember Tucker Library [Formed 8/8/00] Councilmember Reviczky Councilmember Edgerton Downtown Noise [Formed 1/22/02] Councilmember Reviczky Councilmember Edgerton Aviation/PCH Improvements & Parking [Formed 2002, Subcommittees combined 1/27/04] • Councilmember Keegan Councilmember Tucker Page 3 Appointments 12-13-05 (as amended 09-12-06) • Pacific Coast Highway Banner [Formed 11/12/03] Councilmember Edgerton Councilmember Beach Cities Transit [Formed 7/13/04] Councilmember Yoon Councilmember Reviczky Police/Fire/Government Buildings [Formed 7/27/04] Councilmember Tucker Councilmember Keegan Historical Preservation [Formed 10/16/04] Councilmember Tucker Councilmember Edgerton St. Patrick's Day 2006 Celebration [Formed 11/09/04] Councilmember Reviczky Councilmember Tucker Page 4 Appointments 12-13-05 (as amended 09-12-06) • .151 Tr) ///ozg 10G • October 5, 2006 /a//7j/O-67 City Council Meeting October 10, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council VACANCIES - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - EXPIRATION OF TERMS - PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council schedule a meeting prior to the regular meeting of Tuesday, October 24, 2006, for the purpose of interviewing applicants, with appointments to be made that evening at the regular meeting. Background: Two terms on the Public Works Commission will expire October 31, 2006. At its meeting of September 12, 2006, the City Council directed that the City Clerk advertise for applicants for the two seats. Notice was posted at City Hall and published in the Easy Reader September 21 and 28, with an October 4 deadline for submitting applications. Both appointments will be for full four-year terms ending October 31, 2010. Four applications are on file at this time for the two seats (see attached). The applicants are: Julian Katz Brian Koch Sean Krajewski Victor Winnek Noted: -GAG-.L2� Elaine Doerfling, City Cler • PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION APPLICANTS MICU f\CUL 31U-372-5141 • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BOARD/COMMISSION APPLICATION p.1 ,v 0 Cry 40 o 446,6, NAME OF COMMISSION O L /c rr _ Name UC/ A-,4 441 E Home Phone: 57q*- 71ci Address: Occupation/Profession: �=7��.� &—A1671KJ Name of Employer Address of Employer REFERENCES: Local: ZA o1,4 re-fY+7d Alp 3/D Bus. Phone: Professional: /247 uG Other: a,' a- ABG -- c?5'�sr rTr r,I 2 5 --09S Z� COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND SERVICE (past and present): !/icc .0 67.47 j E-(• 13 . Z5 Gu Al a wL i,e'G U D Pecs r .e 8 !14 Ia. E0ace977 1V j`=ou dQ�-fit/ Why do you wish to become a Commission member? —L L -o 7 -1S"' C f y 41.i° *AI , oe- /V ,Q P 7o /A-vNA //7/414/61(cob, er-/6;71fri r/8 i �rlC► 5,<<?G G.s W,4 _Z 1rCZ�G Cala Gly #.17A0) evi 7o T14 £d�.S6di/4 r-raE0b ,...4s/ a/4/ / !L-rs 7' Co M 4.4 1 S / o #J What do you feel are the duties and responsibilities of a Commission member? ‚€‚' 0,77-M-Pz. 'Ye-deecceS ,42 4s. 1 7 -- Pc) r:5 Goo /1 S 7, 7- 17! »d c Co v »!c / [ lca SUeer //(4 r— / 41,e 4311/ es9t1G Co WS/3 12,1 /SIC-�s� O /�•��0 e' 77&S �-S Page 1 of 2 D %! / 77/6-- Cc)"7v :31U -',1/2-b141 p.2 • • Do you have any current obligations or responsibilities, which could be construed as a conflict of interest with your being a board/commission member? Yes _ )S No (If yes, please explain) Please give a resume of your education, employment, memberships, past activities and other experience that you feel would qualify you as a Board/Commission ember. • 6'� _44-_ �i1i� c _ e'-/ ' irl/c 44,14' cunt tortipc cos r U • y.a4 20 14---E.` 5-7-v ••J 'Ye ' nl g' , f/ art ' ?2x•, T44. MI MI, Q • r!z ix C2,e,-Gb G.09-7,6,1/4/ . /4raC�,I4- "..i o e7•'/ cf ' 2 , Qcnl c G eZs-t722, c - "7-19_76-:e7-4-40 C' -Tea) 6 dL ,.1i -'44c- Sk '1' - e- - - t 2l fer /At A.�t-" cam- //-t"�G'4 • td r,' X4-42 411 CeP,s 9 G�-rctp�d<t/Lnaess; �cyri-rr 4Jia, L yds This Board/Commission meets onol�• at 7 p.m. Do you foresee any scheduling problems that might make you miss meetings? Yes _-No How long have you lived in Hermosa Beach? /7 )4.10e2..S Comments: Z Zad'oe A7e-w in 76 :4 /* Signed: Date: Page 2 of 2 (4/23/01) sib/ 2/2006 15:32 NO.036 D01 • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BOARD/COMMISSION APPLICATION NAME OF COMMISSION Ptth)ie Works Commission Name: Brian C. Koch Home Phone: 310-410-0902 Address: 2450 Ozone Court, Hernioa Beach 90254 Occupation/Profession: Civil / Structural Engineer Employer: City of Los Angeles/Dept. of Water 8c Power ILAAW') Bus. Phone: 213-367-0054 Address of .Employer_ 111 North I -lope Street, Room 945, Los Angeles, CA 90012 REFERENCES: Local: Roh tt Carleen 13este, work phone f310) 781-6900 Professional: John Dennis, LADWP, work phone (213) 367-0881 Other: COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND SERVICE (past and present); or 2-1 2 rs fr t 2000 til e It. 200 rev ou 1 served on the Public Works Conurtiasion. For the fist year 1 was the Chair of the Commission I believe our inaugural several years of the PWC was successful and provided valuable input to the City Council. personally had excellent attendance at Commission meetings, missing very few meetings. Why do you wish to become a Commission member? I first moved to Hermosa Beach almost 15 Years ago and have enjoyed the city spirit and culture servinon a Commission ain wouldthe the o o ni to hel itn rove the comm As : licen d ineer. 31 tee Zn c:l . .rofe ional ex.ertise fits well within this i v hay ► ovi wit : ) cn trib io s ijto e decision makin rocess for Public Works construction and procedures in the past, and would do so in the future. What do you feel are the duties and responsibilities of a Commission. member? As the ar►nouncernent stales: the duties of this Commission are to review and mak recommendations to the City Council on all capital improvement projects assist.in the development and updating of design guideli.ne.S fo.r pttbJ improvements and other matters referred to the Conimissiort by the City Council. [ feel that the duties are to listen to public and staff input evaluate proiec s/proarams and act in a responsible manner to make decisions I carr .specifically provide input of a technical nature. regi ,ji,g bol}tlspeeif c project details, design options, and code requirements, as well as input into the contracting process. Engineering 06/20'2006 15:32 • • NO.036 P02 expertise is valuable to review alternateproposals and make informed recommendations to the city Council. Publicproiects need to balance community needs, technical opportunities, and economic considerations. Do you have any current obligations or responsibilities, which could be construed as a conflict of interest with your being a board/commission member? Yes X No (If yes, please explain) — — Please give a resume of your education, employment, memberships, past activities and other experience that you feel would qualify you as aBoard/Commission member. Attached is a Resume. As an engineer eer in a local _municipal department,' have extensive experience in Public Works cons Con ro'ects incl din buil in ro'ects si e irnprovements/roadways and utility work Ideal with both in-house designers and contractor design firms, works on permitting, specifications, design documents/drawings, and contract administration. 1 also had a previous opportunity to serve on another public board, as an elected member of the i�ADWP Retirement Board hick rovi ed ex e ' ce in the workin sofapubliclynoticed oversight group. This Board/Cornmission meets on the third Wednesday of the month at 7 p.m. Do you foresee *any scheduling problems that might make you miss meetings? Yes X No How long have you lived in Hermosa Beach? Over 10 years Comments: Mtechnical and rofessional experience and Ion ter volvement in Hermosa Beach provides a solid base to serve on the Public Works Commission I enjoyed my past gars on the PWC, and serving again would be a great way to give back to our community. This commission al ows me to use my engineering expertise and working knowledge of public works projects to provide support to our elected officials, Signed: Date: Co 6 Please return completed application to the City Clerk's Office 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 40254 (310) 318-0204 or FAX to (310) 372-6186 06/20/2006 15:32 NO.036 P03 • BRIAN C, KOCH. JRB Room 945 work phone (213) 367-0054 Profile: Over 23 years of diversified, in-depth experience in management, administration & engineering, including technical, business, resource & strategic planning;; technical & administrative supervision; budgeting and asset management; project design and management; and contract administration, with education and experience in business/finance skills, planning, camputer applications, leadership, recruitment, and administrative issues. A results -oriented team player with excellent problem solving, analytical, and communication skills. Professional Experience: City of Los Angeles, Department of Water and Power 2004 to present-- Manager of Power System Planning, PSP&P 2001 to 2004 - Power Engineering Manager - PT&D System Planning, Budget & Asset Management 1998 to 2001 - WSO Projects Design Manager (Civil/Structural & Electrical/Mechanical Groups) 1997 to 1998 - FEMA Project Management Engineer 1995 to 1997 - Executive Office Staff Engineer - Power System 1991 to 1995 - Structural Engineer (Structural Design Supervisor) 1988 to 1991 - Senior Structural Engineering Associate 1982 to 1988 - Structural Engineering Associate / Civil Engineering Assistant Current responsibilities: Power System Planning, including Distribution, Transmission and Integrated Resource / Generation Planning, and Capital Project Prioritization, Budget & Schedule Tracking. Includes directing preparation of the Integrated Resource Plan and 10 -year Transmission Assessment, encompassing demand & production forecasts, resource planning, & capital program development. Past PT&D responsibility: Manager for PTDBU 'budget (Capital $225M, O&M $173M), Distribution System Planning, General Facility/Architectural and Claims Groups. Preparation of PTDBU Business Plan, Coordination of Reliability & Benchmarking Studies, Performance Tracking Reports, & PEMA Project Documentation. Past WSO responsibility: Projects Design Group Manager for Water Engineering & Technical Services, leading the Civil/Structural & Electrical/Mechanical Groups. The. almost 50 employee group designs reservoirs; tanks; pump stations; buildings; groundwai:er, chlorination, & fluoridation treatment facilities; and control systems. Previous Power System responsibilities: strategic planning related to Energy Services reorganization, developing budget & staffing targets, managing industry restructuring implementation teams, crafting organizational structure, ensuring employee communication/goal development, and evaluating budget/schedule performance. Education: 1988 -1993 Master of Business Administration (MBA) University of Southern California Magna Cum Laude 1982 -1984. Master of Science, Civil Engineering (MSCE) University of Southern California Magna Cum Laude. 1977 -1982 Bachelor of Science, Engineering (13SE) University of California, Los Angeles Cum Laude. Registration and Professional Affiliations: Structural Engineer - State of California #537.94 Civil Engineer - State of California #C39670 Past Member of ASCE , ICBO, and Structural Engineers Association of Southern California Other Activities: DWP Retirement Board Member, 1999-2000 Public Works Commissioner, City of Hermosa Beach, 2000 - 2003 • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BOARD/COMMISSION APPLICATION NAME OF COMMISSION Name %C, Address: 116 " . Occupation/Profession: 6 (6 Name of Employer 611,,, 3L Address of Employer a37—, \-4-e-rc‘- o I 4 Home PhoneC�, ')5c B — //-155M� r 'tr,e�S w (-)�— Bus. Phone(3ro) 37L - 09-(11 REFS NCES: (fin l / i,� L ,c oc- (c S n -i' ss 1 Local: G� I r 1 � ��- Professioj� Other: U . G-`- I,- cwt.- r L,(, -‘,.....\\o/ �ubii� LA)0,4,S m 0_11(0- (3)o ) C3Ac ?;,(f? ----14-1 - s COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND SERVICE (past and present): t cam„ �;4 CAMAy. 1 (n L. lSo �d v, \ nvv1ve c w M Lee -A2 -1"-V\ oSc_ AZ_ \41'.M 05 -r 61LiYY1S W.1 - / IsSe&-reA Why do you wish to become a Commission member? �� , �`w J p .. i bei(`S 1 �M S'o v -e_ �_ \ Cl�i`m tY�� 1 � cx-VuW S t�it7t t What (do you feel are the duties and responsibilities of a Commission member? ��```'" (Asuv, c \ O..vA v j z I Cts ( YS; arL +IY� ewt �ex-� w C v� 0" 'i 1 ee.1rS Page 1 of 2 Do you have any current obligations or responsibilities, which could b construed as a conflict of interest with your being a board/commission member? Yes No (If yes, please explain) Please give a resume of your education, employment, memberships, past activities and other experience that you feel would qualify you as a Board/Commission member. ycee-A.12-e.44.A- 141Z-. --\--e-.tryt S MON" 1();4-1;w)441-Archc LOAC_Si\./ D4c'4.---1 • N ceNSv cat-. Gau.te.: vL Co4mck w ALL, e.r - b.. t.e, -4v This Board/Commission meets on • 3 `-a l�i�O at any scheduling problems that might make you miss meetings? o you foresee How long have you lived in Hermosa Beach? I C ,-e••04-5 Comments: i W °jk A--4-:‘" r-c-&e---cre- • C'c.) C.e.„9,51 U-` Le_., .-e---C' Y , c -e. 4 a. 1% c. Sere, cue, invJ�v ►n at love. Signed: Date: / /01-e Page 2 of 2 (4/23/01) • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BOARD/COMMISSION APPLICATION VI Name c -c, v C. c Ai/kJ EK Home Phone: (31') 3 7 6- r( Address: a 00 / AvA Ave Occupation/Profession: Name of Employer A+1, -v Nr4•-"4) ) L -et cu WLA/LI Bus. Phone: ( I 1-0 SC G -4) / ? 9 Address of Employer ° Yv. G" (j`'`` C1 vc (t- Di/ . 5� � +-ti�. Ake -kJ CA / G S REFERENCES: Local: MY. Lw.vey (3N) Professional: /-1a1n • f)g.vx ) Ski ti (af,F5.) Other: 1 Y• RGIAW�S+ 1� CS.1) 3`-)170. COMMLUNITY PARTICIPATION(AND SERVICE (past and present): PUJ I\i. ljovk5 Cv fro5S &Li V��., �,a /�✓<�w� 1 1 w � coAkt Foo+La.1/ 412l'Jj ASS4c.4< Why do you wish to become a CommisOon member? -T. 0.1^'` C ti►'✓ 14A c oC-� �� /« �n✓IS CC/13.1.1 SD° 01A-lY f VeMA+,Ki� 0 r.vl �lpa1'VI" 4' Com i lsr'�" QK) wvvrf `,�c �� Cc/-14ikµc �eVrliu.� ii l J ctoy .4 What do you feel are the duties and responsibilities of a Commission member? Se+' e e. ) 4PC-`fht 641 Cot/AO F 4 ci �,�1K) / jv.�, �t•, C.yn�.&1 Cokf �►'f/St.� f ss - I,t i`1 C,V, o C Pagelof2 Do you have any current obligations or responsibilities, which could be construed as a conflict of Yes X (If yes, please interest with your being a board/commission member? explain) Please give a resume of your education, employment, memberships, past activities and other experience that you feel would qualify you as a Boar Commission member. t Le aLi i / y�ew�c. inn D��7I ell:, 6 it( (,J/ j �Gl✓I IS3[L{/lQy PA? ��L�,c� f �i �c �v�jv-(t� �� ,3 Culp. i 15c ovi.ti� e i (A),_ Li Su 1,0 cr v, Se, vv (e mCuiW`�/ (�YIw Aj �IG7�v�, j�G3� )Lhse.) -J (j t This Board/Commission meets on -We v at F-'' U p.m. Do you foresee any scheduling problems that might make you miss meetings? Yes KA) How long have you lived in Hermosa Beach? L V r c -, i°1"1( Comments: Signed: Date: x/33/ 44. i Page 2 of 2 (4/23/01) `� r r'• . 'fS 0 0101- r ' 74-0111° • • ••••?-'. I `-- a^ iA1� City of 2lermosaT eacl v Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach L.► ; L.RiSalifornia 90254-3884 • : 1/2 Bill Meistrell Memorial This very special event invites all Surfers, Divers and Boaters to enter the water with gear to swim out in traditional waterman formation to the Body Glove Boat in remembrance of Bill Meistrell. Date: Sunday October 1st 9:00am Paddle/Dive/Boat Out Avenue C in Redondo Beach (Esplanade and Avenue C) Followed by Reception at 11:00 am Seaside Lagoon, 200 Portofino Way, Redondo Beach, CA (310) 318-0681 Donations may be Made to the following charities that reflected Bills passion and life. If inspired, please make a contribution to cny of the following in Bills name: For the ocean: The Redondo SEA Lab: The SEA Lab is a program of the nonprofit LA Conservation Corps in Redondo Beach. Please address gifts to: "ACC PO Box 15868 Los Angeles, CA 90015 Attn: SEA Lab (Bill Meistrell) Or you can Donate Online wwwlacorps.org For the children: Make A Wish Foundation: Please make a Memorial Gift in Bill Meistrell's name. ww.wish.com For health: Parkinson's Disease Foundation: Please follow instructions under the Giving to PDF" tab and make a memorial gift in Bill Meistrell's name. www.pd£org/giving Everyone is welcome to join the Meistrell family and share any memories you might have about Bill Meistrell. The Body Glove Family is currently gathering all moments and stories to create a compilation for the Bill & Bob Book for future projects. Please email Billy Meistrell at Martha@bodyglove.com, Attn. Billy. Or by mail to: 201 Herondo St., Redondo Beach CA,90277, Attn: Billy. :�- is Waterman Down by Kevin Cody Edited by,I-1. Kane with Mr. Cody's permission] Bob Meistrell recognized that his identical twin brother Bill was sinking when Bill failed to recognize him on a recent visit. "Who are you again," Billy asked me. "I said, `I'm Bob, your brother.' "He said, `I don't believe you. Are you sure you're Bob?' "I started to get angry with him. I said, `Don't you know your own brother?" "He asked me, `Where'd we meet?' "Now I was really angry. Then he started laughing. He was a jokester `til the end," Bob said Tuesday afternoon. Bob's older brother (Bill was born be- fore midnight, Bob after midnight), busi- ness partner, fellow lifeguard, Pioneer . Surfing Hall of Famer, Diving Hall of Famer, Wreck Divers Hall of Fame, Surf Industry Manufacturers Association Lifetime Achievement Award recipient, Advisory Board Member to the Historical Diving Society and best friend died July 25th following a long fight with Parkinson's disease. Though Bill Meistrell's failing health was well known among South Bay Waterman and waterwomen, his passing nevertheless stirred feeling suggestive of a major piece of the continent slipping beneath the sea. The response reflected recognition of the debt that just about everyone who seriously enjoys the ocean owes the Meistrell twins. Surfing, diving, windsurfing, Boogie boarding, and body surfing would not have achieved widespread popular- ity when they did had the Meistrell brothers not solved the hypothermia problem with their development of the modern wet suit. In 1953, the twins acquired a half interest in a one -year-old dive and surf shop: , aptly called "Dive N' Surf." The shop, on the Redondo waterfront next to -the Fox movie theater, was founded by two of the twins' watermen buddies, Bev Morgan and Hap Jacobs. Like other post World War II divers and surfers, the Meistrells experimented`with various materials and methods to delay the onset of hypothermia, ranging from wool sweaters and battery heated, flight pilot "bunny suits," to fires on the beach. Finally, one day in 1953, Morgan and the Meistrell solved the problem with the introduction of a wetsuit they called the "Dive N' Surf Thermocine." What set the Dive N' Surf wetsuit apart from the latex covered canvas favored . al by hardhat divers and the latex frogman suit popular with SCUBA divers was its use of closed -cell neoprene rubber. Neoprene possessed two qualities that other rubbers didn't. Its thousands of tiny air cells retained body heat and, perhaps more importantly, kept its wearers afloat. Boonville boys Bill and Bob Meistrell were born in 1928 in Booneville, Mo., population 13,000. Bill would have been 78 ori July 30th, and Bob 78 on July 31st. The twins, older brothers John and Joe and sisters Fran, Mary Ann and Judy were raised alone by their mom Mary from the time the twins were four -years -old. That year their dad was shot and killed in his office vault by a former business partner over a dispute about the partner's delinquent mortgages. In spite of Boonville being as far from any ocean as a person can get while still living in the continental U.S., the teenage twins developed a fascination with deep sea diving. t, The family home was on a hill overlooking the municipal pool, which enabled the twins' mother to keep an eye on them while from the kitchen window. "We joined the Boy Scouts so we could compete in the.annual swim meet," Bob said during a 2003 interview when Dive N' Surf celebrated its 50th Anniversary. "After the meet we'd quit." Pool passes were $10 and meant to last a summer. But the twins used up their punch cards after only a few days and their mother couldn't afford to keep buying more. The pool supervisor allowed them to swim for free in exchange for draining and scrubbing the pool three times each week. The time was 1941. The twins were 13. The National Guard was training in town with wooden rifles. "We read about Navy hard hat divers, who became heroes when the Germans started sinking ships," Bill recalled. "They wore latex -covered canvas suits and a metal helmet bolted to a breastplate with an air hose attached to a pump on the ship." "So we got a five gallon vegetable oil can from mom's mercantile store and cut holes in the front and bottom," added Bob. "Then we pulled up tar from the street in front of our house and chewed it to soften it and seal the glass faceplate. We soldered a hose fitting to the top and fit it with a spring and a marble that worked like a check valve so the air wouldn't go back out when we stopped pumping. I don't know how we -knew we needed a valve. It just seemed like the thing to do." They took their dive helmet, a garden hose, a bike pump andsome lead weights from their mother's store to the municipal swimming pool. "One of us would sit on the bottom of the pool and read library books while the other worked the bicycle pump 'til it got so hot we had to put it in the pool to cool it down,' Bill recalled. "We also marched around the bottoms of different lakes in the area. Our morn built us a lake on our property. I don't know why we didn't get air embolisms." California, here we come At the start of World War II, their older brother Joe, who was 4F because of deafness in one ear, moved to Manhattan Beach to work in the aircraft industry In 1944, the twins followed with their sisters and mom, bringing their dive helmet and dreams of sunken treasure and owning a submarine with them.They finally got a yellow, one-man submarine, capable of diving to 750 feet in 1975. The sunken treasure dream would come true in 1996 when they participated in the recovery of $10 million in gold coins from the Civil War -era, side-wheeler "Brother Jonathan" off the coast of Crescent City. But the homemade dive helmet, and with it a piece of diving history, went into the trash after the now 15 -year-old boys found a blue, barely used dive helmet with a double piston pump, 50 feet of hose and shoe weights, all for $25. "Mom asked why it was so cheap," Bob said. "It was because the guy who owned it drowned." "We marched all around the Redondo breakwall with that thing, but could only do one dive a day because we'd come up with our eyes bloodshot and ears bleeding," added Bill. "We could never get below 10 or 15 feet." There was no one to tell them that the atmospheric pressure on a diver's eardrums increases three pounds every sit feet. The Boonville twins had no trouble adjusting to life in Manhattan Beach, where they lived with their mother and grandmother. Both took up surfing and played football at El Segundo High, despite being only 5 -foot 7 and weighing 128 pounds. "I got the fastest letter in football history," Bob said. "I made a tackle on the first play of the season and crushed a vertebra. I walked off the field and the coach was about to send me back in when I fainted and fell into in the sawdust pit." After high school, the two passed the lifeguard run -swim -run test, becoming the smallest lifeguards in the department's history. When the Korean War broke out and Bill was drafted. Bob assumed his broken back would earn him a deferment. Bill had made plans to go to Hawaii with surfboard builder Dale Velzy Velzy was counting on a deferment for "house- maid knees." Before Velzy's Army physical, he crawled around on his knees until they bled. "I went to see Dale, who was living with his mother in an apartment over the Her- mosa mortuary on Pier Ave.," Bill said. "He had a quart of milk in one hand and a paper in the other hand. He said we weren't going to Hawaii. The paper was his draft notice." • Bob's draft notice followed. He was sent to Fort Ord in northern California. Bob lived on Pleasure Point in Santa Cruz and spent his evenings and weekends surfing the area's icy, but well -shaped waves. "People thought we were crazy sons of a gun," Bob said. "And we were. I can still feel the chill in my bones when I think about surfing at night by car light at Pleasure Point. All we had were those wool, Army sweaters to'keep us warm. I'd take it off and wring it out every time I fell off my board. We'd last for three or four waves, then run to our cars and turn the heater on, and then give it another go. People thought we were nuts. They practically moved to the other side of the street when we walked by with our boards." Significantly, he added, though he thought he knew every surfer in the area, he never ran into jack O'Neil, the founder of O'Neil Wetsuits. O'Neil claims to have invented the neoprene wetsuit in 1952, one year before the Dive N'Surf wet suit was introduced. Bill, meanwhile, in the hopes of avoiding assignment to a rifle company, volun- teered for what he thought was "heavy motors." He spent the next 10 months with a heavy mortar company on the front lines, where he earned a Bronze Star. Bill and his Commanding Officer, Captain Barron were at an outpost communicating with soldiers that were deploying mortar rounds at the North Koreans. There was no such thing as "wireless. communication" at the time, and the hard -wired line to the mortars suddenly stopped working. Immediately, Bill told Captain Barron that he would restore the line. Bill grabbed a spool of wire then ran, and crawled on his belly through enemy fire to find and repair the break - which he did, but he did not return. Captain Barron and the company were concerned that he would not make it back because they were taking on considerable enemy mortar fire. Several hours later Bill walked into camp without a scratch! Captain Barron thought it was a very brave thing to do Eno one volunteered to go along with 11 and recommended Bill for the Bronze Star.But even in Korea, Bill found an opportunity to get in the water. "I was in Pusan on R and R and was walking down the beach when I saw a guy in a high chair," Bill recalled. "I thought, 'This can't be true.' I asked the guy if they needed more lifeguards, and said, `If you're looking, I'm your man.' The guy had been a lifeguard on Coney Island. He told me to swim out to some black thing out in the water. So I beat the water to a froth and when I got back, he said you're a ' good swimmer. Then he asked me what the black thing was. It was a rock. He said they'd been watching it for three days and thought it was a shark." "I sent Bill a letter telling him I was getting my orders changed so I could come over and join him," Bob said. "He sent me a letter back saying don't do it, the surf's not that good." Coming home After the war the brothers returned home to lifeguarding, surfing and diving. Lifeguarding paid $75 a month. To supplement his income, Bob cleaned floors every evening at Pancho's restaurant, Joe's Candy Cottage, Bentley's men's shop, his brother Johnny's Manhattan Five and Dime and his sister Fran's dress shop, Lee's Fashions. Bill made plans with Velzy to open a dive shop in Topanga. "We had a 14 -foot Chris Craft and we'd dive for lobster or spear halibut every morning," Bill said. "I was surfing an old Joe Quigg board, and Bob had his Sim- mons `slot' board." The Simmons was a crudely hewn, twin fin, sandwich board with slots carved in the side so the board would plane like a modern short board. The brothers disagreed over whether it is the only one left in existence. Bob says it is. Bill said he knows someone who has another one. In either case, it is the precursor of the modern surfboard and is a priceless piece of surfing history. During this period, the brothers purchased their first dive tank and regulator for $125 from fellow lifeguard Frank Rodecker, who sold them out of his car trunk to supplement his income. "On our first dive we went with [future Hermosa city councilman] Jack Wise to salvage a landing barge that had sunk in the harbor," Bob said. "But we couldn't dive deep enough to reach it." The only instruction Rodecker had given them about the new dive gear was not to hold their breath on the way up. The brothers still didn't know about equalizing the pressure on their ears on the way down. Other pioneer divers were even less fortunate. The hand brand Still, it wasn't until almost 10 years had passed, and the "Gidget" movies made surfers the envy of youth around the world, that surfing reached critical mass and wetsuits became as essential an accessory as a pair of corduroy shorts with a Hang Ten emblem. Thermocline wetsuits were selling well, but weren't keeping pace with the competition, notably O'Neil wetsuits from Santa Cruz. One day in 1965, Bill was talking to Hang Ten founder Duke Boyd, when Boyd said to him, "Your suits will never sell with a name like Thermocline. Who the hell knows what a thermocline is?" Divers knew, but even they probably didn't. much care. And the dive market paled in size compared to the burgeoning surf market. "What do you suggest?" Bill asked. "What's so great about your wetsuit?" Boyd asked. "They fit like a glove," Bill answered, the proud tailor. "Let's call it the Body Glove," Boyd answered immediately. A few days later, Boyd sent the Meistrells a black and yellow design with a hand in the middle that looked like an X-ray, encircled by the words "Body Glove." It was accompanied by an invoice for $200 -- $35 for the designer and $175 for Boyd's two words of copy. "Every morning I wake up, I thank Duke Boyd," Bob said. Today the Body Glove hand is one of the most recognizable logos in the marketing world. The name fuels sales approaching $200 million annually, not only of wetsuits for every conceivable water sport, but also clothing, shoes, sports braces, wallets and even cellular phone protectors. Identical and different Bob credited his more introverted brother with being the one "who always wanted to find a way to make things go faster. I was the front of the shop, the retail guy. He was the back of the shop -guy making sure things worked." Despite their contrasting personalities, Bob said, he and his brothers never fought — at least not for long. "He'd get so mad he'd make me stop the car so he could get out and walk. When we'd meet back at the shop we'd go to lunch," Bob said. "I'm going to miss calling him Saturday to rag on him being a year older tharn me. I used to do that every year," Bob said Tuesday afternoon. In addition to his brother Bob, Bill is survived by his wife Lori, former wife Jackie, children Bill Jr. and Julie, daughter-in-law Karen, and grandchildren Jenna, Daily, Jake and Jared, nephews Robbie, Ronnie and Randy, his sisters Fran, Maryanne and Judy, and his worldwide family of watermen and watewomen. • .k,••. . pq', •.,. _107-r- iii.dw voo Every year on July 30th I bugged my brother about being a year older . than me — the next day, July 31 st...I caught up to him. We were inseparable growing up in Missouri [we were the youngest of all the' siblings] and our bond grew even tighter after we moved to California. We did virtually everything together. It is very rare in life to spend that much time with one person. Even with a spouse, you still don't spend the first 20 years of your life in each other's constant company. The only time we were separated was in the army. We thought and acted alike. There are countless incidents through- out the years when Bill would show up at the dock at the precise time I needed him; or that I would stop by the shop at 3:00 am and he would say "I was hoping you would be here." I think it's true that twins have a special 6th sense about each other. As adults, we worked together, played together - which felt like the same thing because we loved our work so much. The only big dif- ference is that I married a brunette and Bill married a blonde!! The longest we were able to stay mad at each other after an argument was about an hour. My fondest memory is of diving off our boat in Catalina and taking off with the scooters — we had so much fun and were gone so long that everyone was sure we had drowned or had been washed out to sea. Just before a search party was sent out, we showed up happy as clams with stories about the things we had seen. Bill and I loved to lobster dive. We were great at it because we worked in sync as a team. Until Bill became very ill, an average year had us spending 360 days a year together. Bill was my best friend and a fantastic brother... I will miss him terribly. Bob (Bill's Twin) i w _._ -_ �� '�I On Sunday evenings, my Dad never said "I have to go to work tomorrow" My Dad always looked forward to going to the "shop." He welcomed everything that came his way with enthusiasm. Because I worked with my Dad I got to spend a lot more time with him than many of my friends did with their fathers. I was so lucky to have that time. . My Dad taught me by example that if you love what you do, you will be happier and you will enjoy your life much more. I will miss him greatly — he is always in my heart. Love, Billy (Son) I remember another funny story about my Dad that happened when I was really little and every summer Catalina was our second home. I remember having a two-piece wetsuit, a Beavertail, jacket and pants. As all kids do, I was constantly going in and out of the water all day long. Back then wetsuits were really hard to get on as they were rubber on both sides and every time that I wanted to put it on, my dad had to literally shake me into the pants and then inch my arms into the jacket one by one. Getting the suit off was no problem as we would just unzip the jacket and dive off the boat into the water and it would just slip right off. Anyway, my Dad used to get tired of putting my wetsuit on several times a day. My Dad made me a one - of -a -kind wetsuit especially for me. I remember it had orange and yellow flowered tape all over it and it had full zippers up both legs and arms so I could put it on myself. I never saw another wetsuit like it and I never had trouble getting my wetsuit on again. At the time I thought my Dad made the suit just for me but looking back, I think he made the suit more for him, so he could have a little time to enjoy Catalina himself. Love, Julie (Daughter) When I was 13 years old I wanted a Honda 90 motorcycle. My Uncle Bill paid 50% of the cost so I could afford it. We were partners in that motorcycle, which I don't believe he ever rode once. In the mid 1980's he took me out to the cliffs and showed me how to fly RC Gliders. We had so many laughs flying those gliders. I remember going back over to his house and working every night in his garage fixing the gliders we had crashed earlier that day. I have many memo- ries diving with him, but what I remember most about him was the incredible relationship he had with my dad. I think I was about 10 years old when I could finally tell my dad and my uncle apart. One time I was showing my dad and mom how to unload my 45 caliber gun, and it discharged, and I shot a hole in Bill's desk at work. When I showed him the hole in his desk he laughed, and shrugged his head. He used the hole as a pencil holder after that. . Robbie Meistrell (Nephew) �� I will never forget the motorcycle trips to Mike's Sky Ranch and to Nine Mile with Uncle Bill, Billy Dick and Dave Garret. We had the most fun anyone could have. The laughs that we had on those trip I will cherish the•rest of my life. I do love him and I will miss him. Rest in Peace Uncle Bill. Randy (Nephew) :iIFW11 Va1:..... Ever since I was a baby my Papa taught me to love the hand like he did. From then on he taught me respect for the ocean as well. When I would visit him we would hike down to the beach with trash bags to pick-up the litter, keeping the ocean blue and the beaches clean. Love, Jenna (Grandaughter) This is my Grandpa when I was a kid getting ready to go out on the Body Glove Boat. These memories on the boat were some of the best times of my life. His passion and love for the sea that he passed on to me will be etched in my heart forever. I will miss my Grandpa and I love him dearly. Love, Daley (Grandson) We had so many good times it is hard to pick just one. We worked together and we played together. I guess if I have to choose just one, the best memory that I have would be getting up in the morning and going lobster diving. These were the best and most enjoyable times that I have ever had going diving in my life - and I will never forget them. I miss you, and I love you Bill. Ronnie (Nephew) Dear Meistrells: I am spiritual in my own way, but I disappoint my little brother, as I don't go to church. I am like a man going to a funeral, who does not really feel too deeply about the deceased. Bill's case is different, because I feel heart broken about his passing. Bill and I go back a long, long way, to when we were knee high to a grasshopper. I spent every Saturday night with the Meistrells in Manhattan Beach and we would watch Milton Berle on the Texaco Star Theater. As we grew up, we both competed against each other in high school and then we were on the same swim squad competing for Compton College. Bill, Bob and I entered the L.A. County Life Guards in the late 40's. I was always involved with Dive N' Surf and so was my family. My dad built the company the first twin hulled racing craft that Dive N' Surf raced to Catalina with. I painted the sign on their building on The Redondo waterfront where they were in business with Jacobs & Morgan and then did art work for their new establishment on Broadway. I designed the first wet suit brochure, when they started manufacturing their famous products. Bill, little Bill, Randy, Dave and I made dozens of adventure trips to Mikes Sky Ranch in Baja together riding our off road bikes from Cape Colonet. Who will ever forget our annual camping trips to Kennedy Meadows? Every year found all of us competing in the Cal Poly Hi -Mtn: Enduro, where, one year I almost froze to death in the pouring down rain in 1984. I will never forget our last ride together. Bill and I decided to make one last venture in Mexico and we drove my Yukon, trailering our bikes to Restaurant La Paloma in Santa Tomas, Baja in 2004. From there we took a picturesque ride along the wind swept sea to Erendira. From this little village, we crossed the mountains on our way to Valle de Trinidad and Mikes Sky Rancho, stopping for a soda at Pero es Nado. (It is better than nothing). Immediately upon leaving, Bill took a nasty spill into a barbwire fence and I patched up his arm with my boot sock. I will weep for years when I think of the times we had together, riding our bikes, starting back in the early 80's. Dave, Bill, little Bill, Randy and I have been exhausted, uncomfortable, wet, cold, cactus -scarred and mosquito bitten, but never sitting on a Honda XR and any of us being unhappy. Dave and I are going again to Mikes on my birthday this year 2006 and I will always turn around to see if Bill is behind me. His memory will continue to bring my joy and I shed tears of lovely remembrance. Bill buried my father, my mother and my darling wife, Marie and I want to be aboard the Body Glove vessel to bury my one friend. Keep in touch and I love you all. Dick Garrett (Life Long Friend) I first met Bill Meistrell in 1962 when I was in college. We became friends, my brother, cousin and I became certified scuba divers (Bob was our instructor) and we spent a lot of time together in Catalina and other places. Bill and Bob told me that when I graduated and became a CPA they would give me their account. They did in 1966 and I was their CPA for 25 years until they hired me as president of their company. I think I can honestly say that other than my father, Bill had more influence in my life than any other man. I learned the principles of hard work, treating customers and people with respect, and generally trying to do your best always. I know my life has been better because of my long friendship and working relationship with Bill. It has been said that if the world is a better place because of you living in it, then you have had a successful life. In the case of Bill, along with his• brother Bob, I don't think you could count the lives that have been positively affected by them. This does not only include the countless individuals with whom they have had per- sonal contact, but their contribution to changing the entire culture of surfing and diving in California and around the world in a positive way. Bill Meistrell's life was a life well lived. Russ Lesser (President of Body Glove) "Love what you do... do what you love." Bill Meistrell P 1 73 72 TYP MAIN DINING #2 [1021 MAIN DINING #1 L 1 12 TYP TYP var ENTRY 11001 L_ COOKLINE 1 11101 10 dli 1201/ PREP AREA 2 MAIN SERVICE STN. SCULLERY • a PRIVATE DINING #2 10 0 ilioseremssessesoossemesegrAlwarmilpre k. WINE RETAIL aga 11141 777 PREP KITCHEN C 1- PRIVATE I- PRIVATE WASH STATION 2b 12a777=7ZT/7.27[[u/olllll L-, COOLER PRIVATE RESTROO Ii18r tt TIP 2t EXISTING COURTYARD 11051 7 F/u SIM SERVICE STATION PRIVATE DINING #1 11071 EMI 13 14 12 N.I.C. WINE RETAIL I1oaI 2 Vir Alk Nifir EXISTING LOBBY EMPL RESTRM',, Floor Plan Notes N.I.C. CD EXISTING SHELL BUILDING WALLS TO REMAIN Q NEW 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP BD FURRING OVER EXISTING CONCRETE &/OR CONCRETE BLOCK WALLS O EXISTING BUILDING DOOR TO BE SECURED IN CLOSED POSITION Q NEW MAJESTIC GAS FIREPLACE: MODEL SHR48; UL MH6018 VOL 36, SEC 1; IC BO #ER -5677 – WITH STONE VENEER NEW BAR DIE WALL 0 +40 1/2" A.F.F. O NEW COOKLINE COUNTER DIE WALL 0 +46 1/2" A.F.F. O NEW LOW MILLWORK PARTITION; WITH DECORATIVE IRON SCREEN WHERE OCCURS REMOVE EXISTING NON–BEARING PARTITION 9O G.C. TO PROVIDE FULL HEIGHT BLACK FILM OVER EXISTING GLASS 0 NEW FURRING to G.C. TO PROVIDE BLACK FILM OVER EXISTING GLASS UP TO TOP OF BOOTH BACK 0 +48" A.F.F. 4" BURGUNDY COLOR VINYL WITH STILLWATER LOGO ABOVE BLACK FILM VERIFY WITH OWNER 17 EXISTING STOREFRONT TO REMAIN, G.C. TO PROVIDE NEW MAHOGANY CLADDING OVER EXISTING ALUMINUM MULLIONS – TYP DECORATIVE MILLWORK ENDCAP POSTS EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB – TYP REMOVE EXISTING TEMPORARY INFILL PARTITION TO ALLOW FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION PER PLAN CUSTOM MILLWORK BAR/CABINET/COUNTER, SEE MILLWORK DWGS 12 13 14 15 76 NEW DECORATIVE FALSE TREE TRUNKS BY OWNER 17 INFILL PORTION OF EXISTING STOREFRONT W/ 3–%" METAL STUD FRAMING AND %" TYPE 'X' GYP BD. STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES 1a G.C. TO PROVIDE FLOOR TO CEILING CERAMIC TILE WALL, EPDXY COVE TILE BASE AT ALL EMPLOYEE RESTROOM WALLS PROVIDE is LOCATION OF OCCUPANCY SIGN PER CBC 1007.2.6 20 INTERNATIONAL ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL TO BE AFFIXED ON ALL ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCES PER CBC 11176.5.2, 11178.5.3. 11178.5.5, 11176.5.6, 1117B.5.7 – SEE ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOLS A8.1 GD PROVIDE TACTILE EXIT SIGNAGE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CBC 11178.5.1–B PER CBC 1003.2.8.6 –MOUNT C +60" A.F.F. 22 DECORATIVE ART GLASS W/ WATER TREATMENT Legend EXISTING BUILDING WALL NEW FULL HEIGHT NON–BEARING PARTITION WALL NEW FULL HEIGHT ONE–HOUR RATED NON–BEARING WALL NEW DIE WALL, SEE KEYNOTES THIS SHEET FOR HEIGHTS OWALL TYPE DESIGNATION, SEE SHEET A7.1 Inte.loff antl e,chlteet Baal aimP5).52 CT22�9023090 P 111615519449 IMO Naimam u.d, Cala.9216{) 1949,I721-I96e £1919) MA961 .E2111Canrcoclamt&me5m Agony man F1110.707.1609 F616.T01.tai6 411111 p 111. Jlg Si.,vlwu: .56 Mut q, u• 1,169511 uS6 Nreai P. Sia:.4n [A M6 GLUMAC onjinome for e•Llinole tuba., PROJECT NEC E VED ISSUE DATES I — /,e/66 PLAN CHOCK RESUEAARTAL -ner on %1CCNFt415 Mil. oRA5n4: SHEET TITLE 055116 Ls/Ac FLOOR PLAN site, rve� A1.0 0 M BAR/ LOUNGE 11041 7'-0" W W EXISTING COURTYARD 11051 4'-O"O 4 — 1 7'-0" j R30'-10" ISI I BAR II •I `\` \e-6" 1 V 7'-0" 7'-0" MAIN I -t.„11, DIN�No�1#2 c M M 18" MAIN DINING #1 2.L9.. - -4" SERVICE STATION 9'-6" x 11 I 7'-0" 24'-0" Mr I.047401695956,427 1 -¢I ITP � I 6'-5" 1 J l I 1 7,.0" 7'-0" 111 T 0 1012" IYP 10'_4" PANTRY 11091 8'-0" 10'-2" 4 N 1 4'-0" 33'-8" CD SII' %II-F.1v11/ I -C e, I,;.4J -erl or, ore arcn11ac1 uie 4.!•C NE',PCIH 'tlE 6M1 Bu"Iphwt Cm."cn.C.36aaaw 3252 x13101.3.5153 elm'CC zn s�uu 3 ypael3 ,dauo 253 Li 2?i LLERY- �I PRIVATE DINING #2 5'-0" -9" 6'-9.. L PRIVATE 'WASH STATION 1 7'-8" / '/,(7.77,///7/; 27/7//TTT///T1/277T////,� 16.-7" L PREP AREA COOKLINE 01; MI 4'-O" CLR L I 14'-11"_ � 5.-0" 1 11 NI r/ MAIN SERVICE STN. 11121 411 • — AUGN z 0 a 9.-8" 7J/ ENTRY 11001 WINE RETAIL 11231 1 �G" TY> o 16" 7'-5•' 3'-07" 1, 3'-8" MIN CLR 7'-2" 01 ELECT RM 11241 12'-6" .4 "c4 1 8" tit 1 H 1FLZ71. I PRIVATE DINING #1 Dimension Plan Notes 1 107 1 12'-5" N .3 18" 1 (, ITYP Col I 23'-10" 13'-7" 2' -ll" !- - WINE RETAIL T 11081 EXISTING LOBBY 1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE NEAREST 1/2" 2. ALL 3. ALL 4. ALL 5. ALL FULL HEIGHT WALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FINISH U.N.O. LOW WALL / PATIO WALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH U.N.O. WINDOW DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER OF MULLION UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. DOOR OPENINGS ARE TO CENTER OF DOOR. 6. ALL RAILING DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER OF RAIL. 7. ALL "CLEAR" DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH WALL / LOW WALL 8. G.C. TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING JOB SITE DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. 9. G.C. TO SNAP OUT WALLSLAB AND REPORT DIMENSION DISCREPANCIESOED TOSBIITTON DESIGNUT GROUP ANDON. OWNER IMMEDIATELY. ANY Legend EXISTING BUILDING WALL NEW FULL HEIGHT NON-BEARING PARTITION WALL - NEW FULL HEIGHT ONE-HOUR RATED NON-BEARING WALL NEW DIE WALL. SEE KEYNOTES THIS SHEET FOR HEIGHTS I ' J N N.I.C. PREP KITCHEN 02 m 177=2.7lJSrlZLrCnITTIT/L071 Lal, /LZ= /Z r h� C 008195 1 r01 15'-9" +- 7'-0"�01 8'-4" ro ' EMPL I RESTRM I -...........1:17.........4' 1211 0 • or I, `� I 1 CORRIDOR 11 j, 11221 L____ - 5'-10" i % C EMPL RESTRM 11201 dk Il ENLARGED RESTROOM I� 1! =J11 ro 112) • II r FREEZER �T— II cmccc"„nca .,.lace ,m Noun HU,G01301 Pole KO .5936 cala701.1e3a Pc',11TH 1I - ". T N. r. ,evlre CC 3, Intece 5r3.11r. 9325 313,1131.33. aeeWalla 0. 3c ley fF SVE Is"r. 55 33111 6.3950113 GLUMAC .m Im.ro rn wwn!nal* EUWn- PROJECT >- Z 7- C ISSUE DATES E9/19/0pW! CHECK RES"BNIrt1L MIEET TITLE- DIMENSI01` PLAN AI.I 23'-0" 77 LJ " 7'—°"_ - II 1' 7'-0" Ifll 1 7,-0" T-0" LII MAIN N,� DINING 0 M EXISTING COURTYARD 11051 w � k 18" TYP 9" II 1'-8 411 _ MAIN DINING #1 7'-O" 24'—O" 8'—O" 18'-0" 10'-4" PANTRY 11091 J T-0" F 7'-0" II Lst i J f — r ITI -- `a ENTRY y. n, \+Os _ 9'-8" \\ o I � 1a 9'-6" SERVICE STATION 1losI PRIVATE DINING #1 11071 12'-5" 11 �� N.I.C. 1. 7 23'-10" WINE RETAIL 11081 of 2'_-11" 1 — 0i I 22'-11" ,R\y 14'-O" ii//riiiirJi ri r%i I Y � 10'-2" COOKLIN 101 1 _I . %/zj7i/T/7,—.•. /7 7/7Tl/ //Tl// it// �� 1 16'-7" --P --li h-1 — — PI01 1 110 i AREREPA in ® 1 , __ ___ — —1 33'-8" 4'-0" CLR 14'-11" %,l 5,-0" LI M N 13'-7" EXISTING LOBBY Dimension Plan Notes 1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE NEAREST 1/2" 2. ALL FULL HEIGHT WALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FINISH U.N.O. 3. ALL LOW WALL / PATIO WALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH U.N.O. 4. ALL WINDOW DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER OF MULLION UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 5. ALL DOOR OPENINGS ARE TO CENTER OF DOOR. 6. ALL RAILING DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER OF RAIL. 7. ALL "CLEAR" DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH WALL / LOW WALL 8. G.C. TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING JOB SITE DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. 9. G.C. TO SNAP OUT WALLSLAB AND REPORT G DIMENSION DISCREPANCESOED TOSBIITTON DESIGNUT GR UP ALLON OWNER MMEDIA ELY.ANY Legend EXISTING BUILDING WALL NEW FULL HEIGHT NON—BEARING PARTITION WALL NEW FULL HEIGHT ONE—HOUR RATED NON—BEARING WALL NEW DIE WALL. SEE KEYNOTES THIS SHEET FOR HEIGHTS 9 44k1/4 II MAIN SERVICE STN. 00 X1 CD a 03 ' WINE RETAIL z 1 � CtILLERY 0,0 I 001 03 EQ 1 1 EQ \— ALIGN 16" 7a-5" 3,-0.1 17" —TT L� IIII 11 iillll Li L 1 III IIII I �JJ4I lI lig PRIVATE DINING #2 11141 51_Da. y" —I —4 I F PREP KITCHEN 1(' 4" PRIVATE (WASH STATION 11151 7'-8" 1 Lr7'ZLLLZJ=' COOLER 11181 7'-2" I.I 15'-9" n 7'-O" 1 I • ON 1 ;'EMPL`� / RESTRM[ L I CORRIDOR I o I'10 it 1 krormorommoscosiorownromoral 1 _.1. 111 1 5'-10" , RESTRM 1 • � \ 11201 / l 1' N.I.C. N.I.C. ELECT RM 11241 1.11 II. I li III NIP ENLARGED RESIROOM 8'-4" `� —I FREEZER i PRIVATE RESTROO CD e �,1�Q91-yr1 a^:a.n7l: n ii'e ci'� 0.1 ANGLLLS NUN,. 3EFi 1. Cky ,C•116=8•90230 6910141)90 F 910141.91196 `x.14,11 ..9dU 690903B53045I 2.9 [amt. Me. Bub 10 poursH4, G01311 P618101..100B F018.707.1996 ywrk yr I rasa sw n.i" co" �• 1106 "r:l 60v Mt Mkt- Ota Gala Not et 9'6A enIN .0 et 911!6 !tee 1 -ie.•: "ki.' .:1r 5:04:101 tet 8.1,12tfrOt GLUMAC PROJECT [ISSUE OATES _1 F 1— I09/16/06 PIAN . GH,,ECH 6ESUBMrrtAL_ I>�.� I�<sc •MRSNIF A49 Uee Of 0O.41 e• 05260 ~� 052606 oRUE01 0 Sett �1/d'=I SHEET TITLE __I DIMENSIOr PLAN AI.I 0 OL OK J.6 -.._./ '-7. ' / 1- /... ./ .,..._ /. -.. /.....--/ Y I/ / / / / i / / / :..' / / / /1 //// .' ... / / ' / // .. / / / / / / J _ : / :! / t PANTRY Ii I 1 +/ '1 I I: / I a`/ f; 1 /_,/ 7: \ I 1 ' 1 /DAfv/ �:. ii / /:'//4, \ ( /INING#1 /// /X011:. ' / / / / / /MT / • :.• • / !/ ./ /. /_ /_./-/✓:'• // --�_.._.___/.. 7 / filli 11091 MAIN DINING #2 j / / / / / ti,/ 3.-8" 811 / �� e TABLE ! AISLE�r INMr. r- 7/777,%/-2//7//, 72-77/77777/7"77--7/-7/// / 3/8 / AISLE/ i / / 7 7_ , /, / //� / //� ,// ' i // /a // / LINE 01 / i / / •/ / / / /I / / / 7 / SCULLERY 01":11. Loam) ' FIFIh X11 ,_///ice//./�/i///,/, / MAIN SERVICE STN. 11121 / / PRIVATE DINING #2 tin WNW Iv FREPLACE d 3:.SANNr.N4C PRIVATE WASH STATION r KITCHEN I® I'1w IIS al ILII ),faa'aa, a ,„1.:',,,,_,1 DISPLAY ANTIQUE CABINK-k - DECORATIVE HI I FALSE TREES n CHECKOUT COUNTER TO BE 28" TO 34" A.F.F. PER CBC 1122B.3 WINE RETAIL (E) Stair #6 ELECT RM CORRIDOR L COOLER SERVICE STATION HEES SALES FREEZE PRIVATE DINING #1 EXISTING COURTYARD EXISTING LOBBY 3'-0" WINE RETAIL Seat'ng Count DINING AREA TABLES SEATS INTERIOR SEATING: MAIN DINING STOOL _ _ - 15 DEUCES _ - 6 12 THREES _ _ 2 6 FOURS - _ 20 80 SIXES 1 6 SUB TOTAL _ 29 119 INTERIOR SEATING: PRIVATE DINING #1 EIGHTS 1 8 INTERIOR SEATING: PRIVATE DINING #2 FOURS 3 12 SUB TOTAL - 33 139 WAITING AREA TABLES SEATS EXTERIOR SEATING DEUCES _ _ 2 4 TOTAL SEATING 35 143 PRIVATE 1 \RESTROOM • IIS S WS A\GI1CS - xE»Y01.1 SCA 06 6099 Bat ppm] u.vaz 9v 0]001"k=Asm9 SAB ISO !km W"Elark C/ibmi 92YD V p99p24-1561 L % 9 .915 Cbt ma *15tatt Iro Ag.relaa. CAPlart P616M t9® 1636 /\ . 5;1'1- & Cf Kt, +.." exs woo, 0310 ..• s. uea Ls MN 11151565E mo -,s euva sv 99 SAME to. 0951wl C LU MAC tynkc papa. .Mp11K.lot . 1.111111. 111•1111.14111.e. • PROJECT SSLJE OATES 11 AIM jaovfm. PIAN CHECK RSUBMIRAL 9 C91< C.. 00 OVICRSHIR .A I1 ESE CL O000ulxl ;1.IC: 01,651: �IIWECi NO. 052606 Is/AC 20,20 1/4,0 -0 ISHEET TITLE SEATING PLAN SHEET Ho: A2.I O 10 _ __ 7 / 7 ...T 1-7-- H 11111:111111111I® - I O / PANTRY SCULLERY PRIVATE DINING #2 7 / --7...... } / '1 / 'AIN i ! / zR / 1--NING #2 — — DI'M11021 L I _ / _2-- 7 7- 7 7 / Z__ I / :r .....:7 / / / _ 4:10- / / / / / ./ ....-------- ---I -----./,______ 7 /-..... / ./—____/__Z_ 7/ ..1.....------------ / / T 777'777'711 17i//77i/;7%////72///1////: PREP AREA 11111 v ,/7/7(//„. 77/7<77/,7/7//7/7/,,,,////7,77/////77///7/// PRIVATE WASH STATION Ills] PREP KITCHEN / / - ! - / /. .......-----'LOUNGE . ...._/ 104 BAR 11031 _/ / 7. / fl 7r /I 7 ---7- y 7 I /- / 7 Z. ! / 7/ TI I 1 +STE piiiiiiffillia IN , --� / y- .., g I.-, ---,-),_ 1_... MAIN /..... .....__ , 2 z ..lbw b �f`___. , AdiaNti A 1', DINING #1 _ - WF T ! 1 .... _7. / Is / / /-11001-- ▪ / ENTRY —r- 7100 -mum \ ‘, MISMIN / - -z __ ...../ / _ r 1__1 17 1 / - IV G- 7 T 7-- i/ • 7 MAIN SERVICE STN. 112 f��l v s 7 J tot 7 1` 7_ T_7 / z COOLER / / L_....._.._...._:.. /- 7 1 .....__._.....L .............. ..... / / / CORRIDOR / EMPL RESTRM ELECT RM 7 7 — 7- 11241 SERVICE- STATION 11061 11 r LLI� v FREEZER EMPL RESTRM 11201 II/u _..._.. _. EXISTING COURTYARD 11051 PRIVATE DINING #1 11071 EXISTING LOBBY N N.I.C. n Finish Floor Plan Notes O EXISTING FLOOR FINISH TO REMAIN O MOSAIC TILE LOGO IN FLOOR O 6"x12" MARBLE BORDER G.C. TO REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING MARBLE FLOOR AT LOBBY AND PREP TO RECEIVE NEW FINISHES WOOD FLOOR OVER PLYWOOD SUBFLOOR AND WATERPROOF MEMBRANE O CONCRETE CURB PER KITCHEN DRAWINGS ED EPDXY FLOOR OVER WATERPROOF MEMBRANE O GRANITE THRESHOLD O STONE HEARTH PER SPECIFICATIONS 10 12"x12" SLATE BORDER W/ CLEAR MATTE SEALER 1i CONC CURB. SEE FS DRAWINGS I2 FLOOR TROUGH DEPRESSION, SEE FS DRAWINGS CD GALVANIZED CURB, SEE FS DRAWINGS H, F\,1J/LR-a.LO Z� \PieciuiF GELES NL'bP�;NI 11 h�i UlmBakal Many .,,oumwsOW 113101151 =2 FPIW!5]-9M9 Inn. Mom Star MI 1' k'•➢aremah(JWxia1 vdfeo T19p.17ri% P 1919)72419111%I 2.19 4a.aad Most Bib 106 P9oa".Hu,Q 1 1 1.11121.701..1. rEli6707.19.5 '•RW. SMITH& C1 rad arty Oes,p taallmla 11F5 Pe .1a 4n .A9 . Sm O'. taa t6 'u m o.!MDlaic c 'lYab�J a: a52.,AN:1 GLUMAC .num.. for ..a.la;11,NW"- PROJECT 7 L� < LQ0< v�� Ll. CJ 0 (11 t CC o LO 0 rr.;.wcc• N.;. scrLc SHEET TITLE FLOOR FINISH PLAN aNEEt Y0: A3.I J 9' L.8 0 Q eco DINING #2 - 1 1 1 / 1 / 1/ X / \ / 1 / 1 GYP BD 1 C3 CD LSI I 111��t� r�3 j EXISTING COURTYARD 11051 PRIVATE DINING #1 11071 NOTE: INTERIOR WALL AND CEIUNG FINISHES FOR ASSEMBLY AREAS SHALL NOT EXCEED AN END POINT FLAME SPREAD RATING OF 76-200 CLASS C. ANY DECORATIONS USED SHALL BE NON-COMBUSTIBLE OR FLAME PROOFED IN AN APPROVED MANNER. Ceiling Plan Notes GYP. BD. CEIUNG/ SOFFIT PAINT AS NOTED 2 SEE FS— DRAWINGS. MECHANICAL DRAWINGS AND DETAILS. 2X4 T—BAR CEILING USG # 3270 STRIPPLE WHITE SMOOTH WASHABLE SURFACE. SEE— d HOOD BY KEC. G.C. TO PROVIDE FIRE RATED SHAFT PER CODE COOLER/ FREEZER & BEER CEILING & LIGHTING BY KEC. O DECORATIVE BOXED BEAMS O DECORATIVE ARCHES W/ BRICK VENEER O BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER GOTHIC ARCH CEILING O GROINVAULT CEILING WITH BRICK VENEER FINISH O 1 X 6 T&G CEDAR PLANK CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP.BD. PROVIDE CLEAR MATTE FIN. SEALER. 10 COPPER MESH CEILING W/WOOD CORNER MOULDING. it WOOD SLAT CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP,BD. 12 BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER DUROCK FINISH SOFFIT. 13 DECORATIVE COPPER FASCIA W/INDIRECT COVE LIGHTING. CID 2X2 T—BAR CEILING 15 GYP BD SOFFIT. PLASTER FINISH 16 EXISTING A/C UNIT ABOVE 0 10'-3"± A.F.F. 17 WOOD CORNER MOULDING Decorative Lighting Legend PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C. .L2 41.3 HLI F -E1) -L5 L7 + L9 - - OFFSET NEON LIGHT BY G.C. MAIN DINING WALL SCONCE - 50W SUSPENDED PENDANT LIGHT OVER CENTER OF BOOTH TABLES TO BE +5'-6" A.F.F. TO BOTTOM OF FIXTURE — 75W DECORATIVE BOOTH DECK LIGHT BY OWNER INSTALLED BY MILLWORK CONTR. SEE AD2.1 SEATING PLAN FOR LOCATION. 25W EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE - 12W RETAIL WALL SCONCE - 50W SERVICE STATION ARM PENDANT LIGHT- 25W NOT USED MAIN DINING DECORATIVE CHANDELIER - 100W EACH SECTION. Y'L13 LOUNGE/ MAIN DINING AND PRIVATE DINING CHANDEUER: 80W RETAIL CHANDELIER: 200W WINE CHANDELIER: 80W RESTROOM WALL SCONCE - 26W 2X4 MOUNTED/ RECESSED FLUORESCENT UGHT LITHONIA 2GT 240 Al2.40 WATTS BULBS WITH HINGED/ FRAMED ACRYLIC DIFFURSER. 117'7IL.9 BAR RECESSED DOWNLIGHT - 20W DIRECTIONAL SPOT LIGHT General Lighting Legend PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. PRIVATE RESTROOM 01 fjIA 018 01C 01D .2 Q3 LOW VOLTAGE DOWNUGHT; MR16- 20WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. SAME AS DOWNUGHT #1. INSTALL, ABOVE CENTERED TREATMENT AT BAR LOUNGE AREA 25W COMPACT FLORECENT- 26WATT - UGHTOLIER 3500 KELVIN - COLOR: BLACK FINISH - 4" DIA. LOW VOLTAGE DOWNUGHT; MR16- 50WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. 86 CRI - INDEX MED. FL000 ???; MR16- 18WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. RECESSED DOWNLIGHT JUNO TC912-24B - 3000 KELVIN PAR -30 5OWATT WITH LENSES AND SHATTER PROOF BULB -6" DIA WALL WASH: INTENSE IVA497 W/ RECESSED ADJ. TRIM W/ MR16 20W MFL — BLACK FINISH LIGHTING BY KEC. IN COOLER.- SEE K DRAWINGS ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGN WITH BATTERY BACK-UP. EXTERIOR EXIT SIGNS SHALL BE WET LABEL. RECESSED GROUND LIGHT . SEE- SEATING PLAN A2.1 FOR LOCATION SiyLLI. ).�-a. ALAI SRr„CIA- R intirlonn and cichltsctuin AVAI.c • "iavrR1 acuM ' Hm'q l"' MP 34,1252 F F pia! 55.1-941-0 TFzc9 Alp FI9491124,99: 2@29 Lanm9 Steal Bop, I05 Apeaa it CAalaal P614,01,1k8 F815.207.1830 11i. sea l l -I & CO ,. .w a.l. rmk. amJlo•e4 !16 Pi, Nina CS. 4 .1 p'". 4.,1 Yr, u. Ca..;.g4 :5 nli9 P4410 sY!919IeT: i•}eY1_:ii P" 4:19044 GLUM AC arp4ma for ".Wtln±Y Hare • PROJECT 0 L_ ISSUE OATES 09/ 16/05. PLAN CHEC6 RENNS/MTAL .. a.n �pescrioli9n PRNffl 55 LS/AC SCLL SHEET TITLE CEILING PLAN 54,1,C A4.I PRIVATE WASH STATION 0 115 / 0-4 PRIVATE EIESTROO 0 12" -r MAX 121 122 SAA A ci'1'41t 1fll. e" .1 M.P.. C�y.OEk23O paq333.3252 WO) 5519169 000 . T19191714.5 .220.orool go...103 Apo..e..91301 POIVO7.1B09 818.797.1035 gly ''• Omy vido tino OTIt. ,Oso C., TAO NNW 3,530 Ntt F6,312r, 14 ENLARGED PRIVATE RESTROOM/WASH STATICI N FLOOR PLAN 1 / 2 " 1 ' " 6 ENLARGED EMPLOYEE RESTROOMS FLOOR PLAN z " = " 1,4 2x4 FRAMING AVONITE SOUD SURFACE • • TYP NOTE: PIPES UNDER VANITY TO BE BOXED OR WRAPPED BACKSPLASH 3/16" x .14-x STL ANGLE - LLV W/ DIA M.B. EA END 15 VAN ITY 1" = o TOILET PAPER 12"HOLDER I 1 t r . , -- I 1. FLUSH CONTROLS SHALL BE OPERABLE WIlli ONE HAND, AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TTGHT GRASPING, PINCHI148. OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND SHALL BE NO MORE THAN +44" A.F.F. THE FORCE REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE CONTROLS SHALL BE 140 GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS PER FOOT. 2. FLUSH CONTROLS SHALL BE OPERABLE WITH ONE HAND, AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND SHALL BE MOUNTED ON ME WIDE SIDE OF THE TOILET AREAS, AND NO MORE MAN +44- A.F.F. THE FORCE REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE CONTROLS SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS PER FOOT. 3. FAUCET CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE OPERABLE VIETH ONE HAND. AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TIGHT GRASPING,PINCHING, TWISTING OF THE WRIST. THE FORCE REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE CONTROLS SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS PER FOOT. LEVER OPERATED. PUSH -TYPE, AND ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED MECHANISMS ARE EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTABLE DESIGNS. SELF-CLOSING VALVES AREA ALLOWED IF THE FAUCET REMAINS OPEN FOR AT LEAST 10 SECONDS. (TYP.) 4. TOILET FACILITIES SHALL PROVIDE A 44114. OF 4 AIR -CHANGES PER HOUR, 15 CFM PER OCCUPANT TO OUTSIDE AREA WHEN A MECHANICALLY OPERATING VENTILATION SYSTEM 15 PROVIDED IN UEU OF NATURAL VENTILATION. SUCH MECHANICALLY OPERATED EXHAUST SYSTEM SHALL OE CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO THE OUTSIDE, AND THE POINT OF DISCHARGE SHALL BE AT LEAST 3 FEET FROM ANY OPENING THAT ALLOWS AIR ENTRY INTO OCCUPIED PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING. (1202.2.1) 5. NO PVC PLUMBING FOR DRAIN, WASTE OR VENT ALLOWED IN THE STRUCTURE, EXCEPT CAST-IRON OR WROUGHT -IRON PLUMBING. 6. TOILET PARTITIONS FOR THE ACCESSIBLE TOILET SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A LATCH THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE GRASP OF TWISTING. AND A U -SHAPE OR LOOP IMMEDIATELY BELOW THE LATCH ON THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF ME PARTITION DOOR. NOTE: NEW WATER CLOSET AND ASSOCIATED FLUSHOMETER VALVES, IF ANY, SHALL USE NO MORE THAN 1.6 GALLONS PER FLUSH AND SHALL MEET PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD INSTITUTE STANDARDS A112.19.2, AND URINALS AND ASSOCIATED FLUSHOMETER VALVES, IF ANY, SHALL USE NO MORE THAN ONE GALLON PER FLUSH AND SHALL IAEET PERFORMANCE STANDARD ESTABLISHED BY THE AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE STANDARDS A112.19.2 H & S CODE, SECTION 17921.3(5). ND. 0 0 0 0 0 DESCRIPTION GRAB 13AR (36" LONG) 1-1/4"DIA. STAINLESS STEEL BOBRICK # 0-6806 GRAB BAR (42" LONG) I -1/4"DIA. STAINLESS STEEL BOBRICK # 8-6006 MIRROR- WITH STAINLESS STEEL ANGLE FRAME BOBRICK # 13-290 1836 RECESSED PAPER TOWEL/ WASTE RECEPTACLE BOBRICK #5-3944 SATIN FINISH STAINLESS STEEL SURFACE- MOUNTED SOAP DISPENSER BOBRICK # 0-4112 CONTURA SERIES STAINLESS STEEL CIRCULAR WASTE CHUTE MOUNTING IN COUNTERTOPS BOBRICK# 8-529 - - - - - IAVATORY- MOUNTED SOAP DISPENSER BOBRICK- 13-82216 RECESSED TOILET -SEAT -COVER DISPENSER, SANITARY NAPKIN DISPOSAL, AND TOILET DISPENSER BOBRICK- 43574 (WALL PARTITION) SELF -RIMMING LAVATORY KOHLER K-2196 FAUCET - TRITON NO. 5-16010-4 LAVATORY- KOHLER- PEDESTAL LAVATORY WATER CLOSET KOHLER- HIGHCUFF BOWL K-4367 - POWER ASSISTED REMARKS 36" LONG 0 + 33' A.F.F. PROVIDE BLOCKING 42" LONG 0 + 33' A.F.F. PROVIDE BLOCKING G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALLATION G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALLATION G.C. TO PROVIDE. INSTALL & LOCATE IN FIELD G.C. TO PROVIDE. INSTALL & LCICATE IN FIELD C.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL G.C. TO PROVIDE AND INSTALL C,LUMAC 141AVeaVamorhoa.e... T./MR:Wm • unlecof. Nroomors fro a @Loin:. !tare PROJECT _ 16 TYPICAL ADA COMPLIANT STALL_ 1/2" = 12 TYPICAL RESTROOM NOTES ACCESSORIES LEGEND ISSUE OATES N.. :1111NC.Nc OF1/.7 ./NC NCL? [SHEET TITLE ENLARGED RESTROOMS SIN I NI, A6.0 OPEN TO SERVICE STATION i !!1.0 , REVOLVIfIIG DOOR 1ENTRY #100 JScale: 1/4" = 1"-0" 1, MAIN ENTRANCE 4 TYP TYP CD zs Q 110<UIIWBIUI� e,�� LLL�� 1 4v . OPEN TO DINING I t%}A�fj r� vF.3j=161',,w- II,': ^ I�Iuleldr 161',, `'`� /� jf�., "' . / . •g @ag gpg ... to too G' a`' I, I 'I r: �� Y it l �;r ;1s. `•c f I 1l (� - n,1T6 I f v -- /;/ 1K1=1:1•ILl1Wl 'i _ 1 171 u _ if I 1 r' is I _ All IllA a"8 :. lav, Mii,.e5?64m'+.V.47 ,5 ua. 11 �d `" .��J a OPEN TO DINING — I 1 h i ii IG., -RE 1 'IG DRY STOW.. RIG, I,i REF IG.,1 1.... IIII11,_� I I' Al�( I d .51 �tl LL BAR AREA �\ I 1 P-IMAIN DINING #2/ BAR/ DINING #1 ]Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" SERVICE STATION 2 SERVICE STATION 9 EXIT SMAIN DINING #1/ SERVICE STATION 32 16 C4 33 TYP . ;BAR/ LOUNGE Scale: 1/4° = 1'-0" - -- - - I !o o'. OPEN TO BAR/ LOUNG OPEN TO BAR/LOUNGE. TYP r TYP 5 MAIN DINING #2/ PANTRY/ COOKLINE _jScale: 1/4" = 1'-0" TYP 7ICOOKLINE •Scale: 1/4" 1,=0r--- - - -- - --- __ REVOLVHIG DOORI- 40 Tf e !MAIN ENTRY TO WINE RETAIL #1 23 I ,Scolex 1/4" = V-0" 36 6 MAIN DINING # 2 _ Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0 1 CID 9 1WINE RETAIL #123 JScale: 1 /4" = V-0" --- - -- ---- - nterior Elevation Notes EXISTING STOREFRONT TO REMAIN C.C. TO PROVIDE FAUX TEXTURE OVER EXISTING ALUMINUM MULLION– TYP. O CUSTOM WOOD/GLASS ENTRY DOORS PER DOOR SCHEDULE O MAHOGANY TRIM O 6" WOOD BASE O GYP BD WALL, PAINTED O DECORATIVE WINE DISPLAY 81' MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. O REVOLVING DOOR 10 WOOD PANELED WALL– 0 O 10 EPDXY BASE COVED WOOD PILASTER AROUND DOOR FRAME. (0 DECORATIVE POST/BEAM. SEE– (0 SERVICE STATION. SEE - 13 LOW WALL BY MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. SEE - 15 t4 ISOKERN GAS FIREPLACE DECORATIVE GLASS PANEL 16 ONYX SLAB PANEL OVER GYP. BD. (3 SIDES). 17 DRAPERY BY OWNER. CD 1X4 WOOD TRIM 19 DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER. G.C. TO INSTALL 20 DECORATIVE WOOD TRIM 21 BACK LIT ONYX PANEL. 22 GYP. BD. CEILING 23 GYP. BD. SOFFIT PEWTER OPEN TUBE WATER TREATMENT 26 25 WOOD PANELED PILASTER / BACKBAR DECORATIVE SOFFIT MOUNTED BRACKET LIGHTS CD WOOD END BOOTH WALL 27 ALUMINUM/GLASS WINDOW W/ WINE DISPLAY 0 MOSAIC TILE ON WALL CD BOOTH/SETTEE BY BOTH CONTRACTOR CD 6" TILE BASE 32 31 EXISTING STOREFRONT DOOR/TRANSOM DECORATIVE BOLTS – PEWTER FINISH DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER, G.C. TO INSTALL 34 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT BY NEC 35 SS HOOD BY KEC 36 GAS BURNING FIREPLACE 37 PEWTER FINISH HEARTH 38 COOKLINE COUNTER DIE WALL 39 BRICK VENEER ON WALL O 6" TILE BASE 42 41 VENETIAN PIASTER WALL FINISH STONE VENEER FIREPLACE ANTIQUE WOOD MANTLE O WINE DISPLAY CABINET O CHEESE SHOP CABINETRY 46 MOSAIC TILE SPLASH 47 MOSAIC TILE SORROUND SLATE HEARTH 49 SLATE HEARTH 50 BRICK VENEER FIREPLACE 51 MOSAIC TILE INLAY 52 BRICK VENEER ARCH CEILING OVER GYP. BD. 53 RETRACTABLE DRAPERY BY OWNER. CD BRICK VENEER PILASTERS. 56 DECORATIVE CHANDELIER 8Y OWNER. G.C. TO PROVIDE POWER & INSTALLATION. 57 WINE DISPLAY TABLE BY OWNER. XV FINISH SIII I"IILFI,IML R4 ALC;AZC ASSOCIA?LS nl .clod and aiahifaafuls 5 4NwL 1, - N. OPOR' 11.C" 10I1.1aa P.6a,r Pl%ssvvu 11 018153.9449 NALaaol.ch,CLam1.92000 1919172,4990 1111917/4198: AO' n�m Caee4sol Soda LOS all A19J07.1000 F8f6rar.1W9 P..'la. �I'lill H & (T\ 9'.54 WA= Ak 'n 1.4 PEW So No. LA KM MIM,c 511011041 .,'•�..,� Paau4Lm1 C LU MAC .mucroroe a sustain. 'Owe. PROJECT LSA DATES 11t1.1/OPUN CH6 ECK R€suBNIRaL � � n 0A LIS:" Ox40ENi5Ow 1'4 052505 LS/AC PPOIECI W; SC41• 1/.1.1'-0 (SHEET TITLE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS :L1 A6.I 0 c1 ro N --- 1 OPEN • C47 WW1, I Lila! CHEESE DISPLAY (�� 4Jl O WINE RETAIL #123 0 4 L11 Scale: 1/4" = 1,-0" •�. `rLrF r_r -r-- 1 P-1 1 111,' r,' 4''7C7a1g60piEj:S- y2 -teal. �"?; i� --r,-r- .4n V.Si1. i�S'i`, °'90`4:$,:_:1.:__,� 111, W^ A milIF'�rf�'f�fzl I.f`Ixlf`,�,f�I 1 t'L^i IN l 16;1^1 i': L IL IL j �IIAI�dIdmR��llle jeAE� I ldnrl i x I'm J r��L�,�fl[ r�T 1 rr4Cr, 1� iii �Y f PI fill (Yrs i. (Lith Yrs c� rYi c� ) ,;r �ti'i9'df'ii111 TYP WINE RETAIL #1 23 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 0 39 44 41 44 39 42 41 39 CD'o O 39 41 ED 46 FIREPLACE 2 I I4 43 WINE RETAIL #1 23 Scale: 1 /4" = 1'-0" MEMMIENNOMMIEN 1 =MI" W fi I e di a fl til MiWinEWThEi TYP 5 1WI N E RETAIL #123 scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 7 irLr�J�. FIREPLACE I !I I 711 I -I mac_ I'ra LH,4 ;4411 I 30 CD CDO 30 PRIVATE DINING #2 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 11H/INE RETAIL #1013 _: 1/4" = 30 I8 PRIVATE DINING #2 L � Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" -- - - - MERIN 11511115111114 orin 4 a, MINIM MOM 12' WI N E RETAIL #108 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-O" 1 I CHEESE - DISPLAY I JI .r_. I r117_,i 1 II IiT r, 4:r SII �I I ti r MMIlt�l��p��7�p1��I��yy�r�m�I -teal. r --r,-r- ry�b-I MIEN i RE i': j �IIAI�dIdmR��llle jeAE� firo PATI W b j�� 1®®®®Ae1REECs� Y 100L1E01 1� PI w ill 1ti agi NgJ!I1 I_I �ti'i9'df'ii111 I 11H/INE RETAIL #1013 _: 1/4" = 30 I8 PRIVATE DINING #2 L � Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" -- - - - MERIN 11511115111114 orin 4 a, MINIM MOM 12' WI N E RETAIL #108 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-O" 1 I CHEESE - DISPLAY I JI .r_. I r117_,i 1 II IiT r, 4:r SII �I I ti r MMIlt�l��p��7�p1��I��yy�r�m�I I r --r,-r- ry�b-I MIEN i RE i': j �IIAI�dIdmR��llle jeAE� PATI W b j�� 1®®®®Ae1REECs� Y 100L1E01 i w ill VAMP ••••0 n 0 Ma X18" ® 3 WINE RETAIL #123 _.__JScale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 CST 18" a a CHEESE DISPLAY 39 VIM 4,41 ,15: n1UI 1` al d i 6 CHEESE / WINE RETAIL #123 Scale:1/4" = 1'-0" SIS 53 C 53 SIS PRIVATE DINING #2 9 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" (P 41 3 WI N E RETAIL #108 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 40 TYP 110 PRIVATE DINING #2 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" cr) cp I NM IA MN Win L1 Immmmmm® 151111 mmmmmmmmm AT meeemmmel mis EN ME ME mpg EMAIS MEM ILlmmmmm8N mammmmmmm mmmmmmmm 'b'Ib'b 14 WINE RETAIL #108 __IScale: 1/4" = 1'-0" Interior Elevation Notes O EXISTING STOREFRONT TO REMAIN G.C. TO PROVIDE FAUX FINISH TEXTURE OVER EXISTING ALUMINUM MULUON- TYP. CUSTOM WOOD/GLASS ENTRY DOORS PER DOOR SCHEDULE MAHOGANY TRIM • 6" WOOD BASE • GYP BD WALL, PAINTED DECORATIVE WINE DISPLAY BY MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. REVOLVING DOOR WOOD PANELED WALL^ EPDXY BASE COVED 10 WOOD PILASTER AROUND DOOR FRAME. 11 DECORATIVE POST/BEAM. SEE 12 SERVICE STATION. SEE - LOW WALL BY MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. SEE- ISOKERN 14 GAS FIREPLACE 15 DECORATIVE GLASS PANEL 16 ONYX SLAB PANEL OVER GYP. BD. (3 SIDES). 17 DRAPERY BY OWNER. 18 1X4 WOOD TRIM 19 DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER. G.C. TO INSTALL 20 DECORATIVE WOOD TRIM 2f BACK LIT ONYX PANEL 22 GYP. BD. CEILING CDGYP. BD. SOFFIT CD3'4" PEWTER OPEN TUBE WATER TREATMENT 25 WOOD PANELED PILASTER / BACKBAR 26 DECORATIVE SOFFIT MOUNTED BRACKET LIGHTS 26 WOOD END BOOTH WALL 27 ALUMINUM/GLASS WINDOW W/ WINE DISPLAY 28 MOSAIC TILE ON WALL CDBOOTH/SETTEE BY BOTH CONTRACTOR 30 6" TILE BASE (D EXISTING STOREFRONT DOOR/TRANSOM 32 DECORATIVE BOLTS - PEWTER FINISH 33 DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER, G.C. TO INSTALL 34 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT BY KEC 35 SS HOOD BY KEC 36 GAS BURNING FIREPLACE 37 PEWTER FINISH HEARTH CD COOKLINE COUNTER DIE 3g BRICK VENEER /ON WALL O 6" TILE BASE ( 1 I 1 41 VENETIAN PLASTER WALL FINISH CDSTONE VENEER FIREPLACE • ANTIQUE WOOD MANTLE 44 WINE DISPLAY CABINET CHEESE SHOP CABINETRY MOSAIC TILE SPLASH 47 MOSAIC TILE SORROUND O SLATE HEARTH q9 SLATE HEARTH 50 BRICK VENEER FIREPLACE 51 MOSAIC TILE INLAY 52 BRICK VENEER ARCH CEILING OVER GYP. BD. 53 RETRACTABLE DRAPERY BY OWNER. 55 BRICK VENEER PILASTERS. 56 DECORATIVE CHANDELIER BY OWNER. G.C. TO PROVIDE POWER & INSTALLATION. 57 WINE DISPLAY TABLE BY OWNER. AM v v SAA °FILL:,Il.cR>ALCAT-" : ;i;CCIATS I�n16,Ior1 and 0,11,1 leeluie :ae A:eru c - NEroC,I .1 Bowl P., Ory r p,esa-nasn m:,vom *wmo,8.12s2 rmai.39Na e Aram 5oQ 1 0 AFFHs Ac59EktduUfi(vci,9 40 F10401n4 : AMWO 09219Ccxecod B9ee1 Bv1Y 103 Aum m Mt CA 91301 PRI9.'M.1409 F1118.2nh.,938 lip %. Sl'-: 0.al"1 Ave., a' '0k [ma Yro Gale .7,•g• T.IiO Nre 105101. Pm, .x5l010: IU �.StPS^13 U,OCiP CLUMAC 9rMUrra lot • LoinfhN !vivre • PROJECT ISSUE DATES • A ♦ 09/18/06 PW1 CHECK RESUBMIrri1 IDewrP•oo UW !fin" ]140 USE Or Cala, DKr 052606 DP ' r [ LS/AC PR:or r .CIF SHEET TITLE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS l A6.2 PACK RIBS WITH MINERAL BATT INSULATION OR EQUAL S FIRE RATED PARTITIONS 0M W WALL PARALLEL TO DECK CONCRETE OVER METAL PAN /- - PACK RIBS W/ MINERAL BATT INSL_ATION OR EQUAL 0 FIRE RATED PARTITIONS _ CONT. SHEET METAL- %x" MIN. TO Ti'A"—OR BLOCKED WITH 6" MAX. CLEAR I I ME: FAL STUD FLAT rG 30" O.C. ACROSS MIN. 543" TYPE "X" v'' 2- DECK LEGS. GYP. BD. TYP. / STUDS. TYP. DEEP LEG SLIP ----� TRACK, TYP. NON -RATED - - FIRE SEALANT WALL PERPENDICULAR TO DECK 44 TYPE "X" GYP. BD. TYP. BOTH SIDES 17 SLIP JOINT @ DECK ATTACHMENT @ DECK SCALE:, aerw,L d. RIP m", a OUP 18 14 PLANNG PER �{ lo , -� WALLEXPANSION 0 24" D.0 ANCHOR TO THROUGH HAT CHANNEL I I} 3/4" 20 GA. STL. - HAT CHANNELS ® 16" O.C., a I. C.B.O. U.N.O. W c FLOOR SLAB 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD - WALL FINISH PER SCHEDULE EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL - BASE & FLOOR FINISH PER SCHEDULE - NOTE: REFER TO 8/A7.I FOR BOTTOM CONNECTION FURRING WALL SCALE: 1 1/ 2"= 1'-C" TYP U.N.O. 2ND LAYER 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP RD CA SIDE -- WHERE OCCURS 10 L BOTTOM 07 R00' STRUCTURE MN. I.5 x STUD DEPTH -C RST WEB PUNCH OUT - CEILING HEIGHT PER PLAN BLACK IRON ROD BRACING 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP BD EA SIDE TO FL _L HEIGHT OF STUDS 600CC 18 0 16" 0.C. U.N.O. - SEE TABLE BELOW ▪ ) II SOUND BATTING WHERE OCCURS MIN. 1.5 x STUD DEPTH TO FIRST WEB PUNCH OUT 1 -HOUR FIRE -RATED WALL USE (2) LAYERS 5/8" GYP BD EA SIDE USE 5 1/2"" MTL STUDS WALL TYPES TYP U.N.O. �"-- METAL STUD DIAGONAL BRACING 0 4'-0" O.Q. STAGGER WHEN POSSIBLE H SPAN SEE TABLE BELOW -� 3-5/8" MTL STUDS 16" O.C. U.N.O. - SEE TABLE BELOW. 18 GA. CONT. METAL TRACK - CEILING HEIGHT PER PLAN 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP BD TO 6" ABOVE CEILING EA SIDE SOUND BATTING WHERE OCCURS a TYP U.N.O. 1 -HOUR RATED - NON -LOAD BEARING INTERIOR PARTITION WALL (* AT KITCHEN/RESTROOM WALLS) a 0 USE (2) LAYERS 5/8" GYP BD EA SIDE USE 6" NTL STUDS 2 ROWS 3-5/8" MTL STUDS WALL SPACE INSTALLED WITH SOUND INSULATION HEIG-IT 7 INT. METAL STUD SIZE • BTN.SUPPORT AND SPACING (5 PSF) UP TO 20'-0" 1 3/8"x 3 5/8"x 20 GA. 0 16' D.C.. UP TO 26'-0"} 1 3/8"x 4x 16 GA. 0 16" O.C. UP TO 30-0"' 1 3/8"x 6x 20 GA. 0 16" O.C. BRACING LENGTH SIZE 6' OR UNDER - EXISTING EXTERIOR CM:: WALL NEW MTL STUD FURRING SIEO.C.INTERIOR NICE.. U.N.O. - SEE LAN FOR FURRING SIZE (WHERE OCCURS) - R19 BATT INSULATION. IN WALL SPACE NEW 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP BD NOTE: F;NISH PER SCHEDULE EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL 3/0 FURRING USE (2) LAYERS 5/8" GYP BD W/ 7/8" FURRING CHANNELS W/ 6" FURRNG CHANNELS 3 5/8" x 25 GA. 6'-'" TO 12' 4" x 20 GA. 12'-1" TO 16' 6" x 20 GA. SCREWS 3-#10 EA. END 3-#10 EA. END] 3-#I0 EA. END NOTE: F.NISH PER SCHEDULE EXISTING INTERIOR WALL GENERAL PARTITION NOTES, 1. METAL STUDS '0 BE 2C -GAUGE SPACED 16" O.C. U.N.O. 2. METAL STUDS TO BE BRACED DIAGONALLY TO STRUCTURE ABOVE 3. USE WATER RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD AND 12" OF CEMENT BACKER BOARD AT WET LOCATIONS 4. WALL TYPES CONTAIN CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION ONLY. SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIOI & SCHEDULE OF FINISHES (THIS SHEET) 'OR WALL FINISHES 5. ALL GYPSUM BOARD TO BE HELD 1/2" ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR 6. SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR WALL FINISHES 7. ALL INTERIOR PARTITIONS TO BE 1 HOUR RATED 8. METAL STUDS ARE TO BE S5MA ICBG #4943 SCALE; 1/2" = 1'- 19 1/16"2" EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE v 6"X18"X TOGA. PL. ® <'-0" O.C. WITH #'0 METAL SCREWS (3 FLUTES) --CUP ANGLE TOGA. AS BRACE USE 3-#8 SCREWS OR WELD (Ti6"-3") METAL STUD BRACE 751 DIAGONAL STUD BRACE TO METAL DECK SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" r(E) ROOF DECK F Ark 3 5/8" 20 GA. MTL S -LID BRAC YG (N 8'-0" 0.C. r EXISTING STEEI. TRUSS ',-"(E) STRUCTURAL MEMBER J1 1 1 5\- 1, 111 ,, `—'3 5/8" 20 GA. MTL. STUD BRACING S 8'-0" 0.C. 1 1 BRACING ATTACHMENT DETAIL SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" 2-#10 SCREWS 0 24" O.C. SLOT TRACK SLOT TRACK #6 GAUGE SCREWS 30" O.C. STUD TO STUD (TYPICAL) TYPICAL TRACK TYPICAL STUD -. REFER TO WALL '`!PES -- #6 GAUGE SCREWS 30" 0.C. STUD TO STUD (TYPICAL) TYPICAL STUD - REFER TO WALL TYPES TYPICAL TRACK 'TYPICAL STUD - REFER TO WALL TYPES TYPICAL WALL CORNER FRAMING SCALE: 3" = V-0" 20 J z 0 W U EXIT CORRIDOR SEE PLAN MEC'- DUCT W/ FIRE DAMPERS, SEE MEC -I CWGS EIRE/SMOKE TYPE DAMPERS SURFACE NCUN-EC LIGHTS I -HOUR CEILING: 7" 18 GA METAL STUDS C 24" O.C. MAX W/ 1 LAYER 5/8" GYP RD FIRECODE C CORE EA SIDE 1 -HOUR WALLS: (UL # U4)9) 3-5/8" 20 GA METAL SUDS 24" O.C. MAX W/ I LAVER 5/8" GYP BD FIRECODE C CORE EA SIDE 16 ONE HOUR CORRIDOR vally --- (E) ROOF DECK METAL STUDS - PER PLANS 1 2 WALL PERPENDICULAR TO STEEL JOIST SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" H SPAN SEE TABLE ON DETAIL UNDERSIDE OF 11 EXISTING ROO= DECK 18 GA. UNPUNCHED DEEP LEG METAL TRACK TYP. OR SLOT TRACK SEE 18GA. CONT. METAL TRACK ME -AL STUD ® 16" O.C. U.N.O. - SEE TABLE ON DETAIL 10 CONT. 20 GA. / UNPUNCIIED TRACK r l (I ,s" FLANGE TYP. T & B) E3 STUD DETAIL EUISTNG CONCRETE SLAB SHANK D',A. RAMSET ® ' 6" D.C. 1 -TN" PENERATION. SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" TYPICAL TRACK TYPICAL STUD - REFER TO WALL TYPES TYPICAL TRACK #6 GAUGE SCREWS 30" O.C. STUD TO STUD (TYPICAL) TYPICAL TRACK #6 GAUGE SCREWS 30" O.C. STUD TO STUD (TYPICAL) TYPICAL •STLID - REFER TO WALL TYPES TRACK OR STLC 2" WIDER THAN WALL FRAMING 4 TYPICAL WALL INTERSECTION FRAMING SCALE: 3" - 1'-0" SAA SHLE6,1LRA AL RALLY AS C C IA IES LOS ANGELES - NCAPORI BEACH 011, Bd,ml PA6sAJ U,v0R, ar mioxso PW MIS= A'P1N SWAMI 301144c4 Avon..... au®mdao BPIP• 1"IMne1 / =Mg boomed OPeelsec, los Aqu 01 • 07.1 00406 6 FBIAIB.197.1BOd 111,..,. I:•III YW Anaf ho" 0004 10N, GdANLGIOLI Sal 114514, CAWM PMx r:454 1) Hw 6b.Stl1 5 XI.SUAL Eat MUM CLUMAC PIPPOPPIPP .002.001. .ml„m.4tor e�".:1414 ULUrOA PROJECT >- Q T c.0 L/) U CL 0 Lv ISSUE CIATES /1e/66' PLAN CHEM BESUBNTAC Cole .axw o. DAT NC 1;E 01', DOCUMMIS AC AS NOTES S'A'E SHEET TITLE I WALL SECTIONS AND DETAILS AI • I SAA SIILEI,IMERO ALGAZ.IF ASSOCIATES InleriQ,I a rC.hil6G16•G LOS. ANGELES YErn'OB, BE._- C66P•�'°6nd.Emm 92191 69969]49 MAIO 99666.1s A.m. 6.196 r1169a996e6/ 11916) 709966 -77 »wE-31.1 1', er: o u p.1 29129 C, -o,.45 fd Noun 9c4. CA 91601 !70/1666 F616901.1696 •, 1 S IV N. 59669 ow;%96,6416s. Mb Aro, Aru 119,1611169 029,66 1196, 111 ?166661fox 660611 265 41,1911:966 Sm 01,60 91116 Rs6 9290910 GLUMAC VAmMSDROMODO 661:6«61r 6 we•In6euemem IR 41 PROJECT >- a 67 77 Q0< O ` m .ri « U¢ W L7 ¢ L.I ly CL ~ LJ 5 T. o In Cf? WALL SECTIONS DETAILS 91,EE- No-. A7.2 �- APPLIED TYPO "X" GYP. BD. / HORIZONTALLY w1TH DOUBLE _APER 1-1/2" LONG N0. 6 CUD SIDE i� DRY -WALL SCREWS TO EAC -I STUD SCREWS ARE TO DE s" I 0.C. AT VERTICAL EDGE AND I HR. SHAFT ENLCOSL'RE 4" X 25 GA, USG STL. "CH" STUDS y@ 24" O.C. (3 SIDES) SEE DETAIL 12 GAUGE WR= AT --.. DIAGONAL CORNER (SLACK - VO 066306) TO RUCTURC - \� . �' /�--------------- _�� ----2 �` 51 GAUGE WIRE AT DIACONAL CORNER (SLACK -NO TENSION)TO 12 GAUGE VERTICAL SUSPENSION WIRE @ 12'-D" o.C.E.w. .��'`` CEILING GRID MAIN RUNNER \� RECESSED LIGHT F.XTURE HOUSING �-'CEILING GRID MAIN RUNNER • LAY -IN PANELS SHOULD BE SECURED IN PLACE BY CLIPS WHEN ASSEMBLY REQUIRES A FIRE RESISTANCE RATING, ALSO AGAINST UPLIFT DUE TO PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL. •HANGERS SECURED TO FRAMING MEMBERS, STRUCTURAL DECK, OR i0 SECONDARY FRAMING SYSTEM. •FIXTURES GENERALLY HAVE TO BE BOXED -IN FOR FIRE RESISTANCE. RATING; FIRE DAMPERS MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL OPENINGS, SUCH AS DIFFUSERS. j 3/4' L.M.T. VERTICAL STRUT AT 12'-0" O.C. SCREWED TO STRUCTURE 1, & T -BAR STRUTS UP TO 8'-G•' FT , A MIN. 25 GA, METAL STUD WITH t 1-5/8" FLANGES AND 1/2" _IPS P_ACE STRUTS WITHIN 2 INCHES OF THE FOUR SPLAYED WIRES. 11 ,r 3-5/8" IRON STUDS r "R" @ i6" O.C, 16 GA GALV. WELDED DUCT RUN MIN \ �'-' , e (12" -s6 / MAX) / MIN. / \ i' L• 5/8" TYPE GYP. BD. 11 5/S CLOSURE ! PANEL BY K.E.C.STRUCTURE \ CONTRACTOR \ -'`�`� 1 12" O.C. Gm :VTERMEJIATE STUDS STAGGER HORIZ. JOINTS on OPPOSITE SIDES TO EXI-AJST BLOWER ON RcoF B ,. __ ,I T S I! 111— J ? CONT. ONE HR. SHAFT. ''' 1/2" DUROCK � I' e'':::/// 7 'z ! • I -I ♦� _- REFER TO MECH. DWGS- FOR EXHAJST DX? SIZES: �'C-IF' SHAPED STUDS, 1 1/2.":2. -•'j?" 74 MSG -\ 451 \ % ••a "v 2 ' ' '/i %/ r \ -aw." \ \ - \\\��` SUSPENDED CEILING, LATERAL FORCE. DRAC VG WHERE INING DESIGN GALS ARE NOT PROVIDED, HORIZONTAL RESTRAIN'( SHALL BE EFFECTED BY SOUR #12 GA. WIRES SECURED TO THE AWN RUNNER WITHIN 2" OF THE CROSS RUNNER INTERSECTION AND SPLAYED 90 FROM EACH OTHER AT AN ANGLE NOT EXCEEDING 45 FROM THE PLANE OF THE CEILING. THESE HORIZONTALRESTRAINT POINTS SHALL BE PLACID 12' ON CENTER IN BOTH DIRECTIONS WITH THE '.4.51' POINT WITHIN 6' FROM EACH WALL. ATTACHMENT OF THE RESTRAINT WIRES TO HE STRUCTURE ABOVE SHALL BE AOEQUA-E FOR THE LOAD IMPOSED. PER CHAPTER `6, CHAPTER 251(E) TABLE #25-2 OF UBC cALV STEEL 4D 24" 0.0. 1 REFER TO' DETAILS } 18" MIN. - .a'-6- 11 �� .\: / s 5/8" Gs'P. BD. •V CLASS EXHAUST FILTERS MAKE 111 1-,: - - HOOD W/ GREASE UP AIR BY CONTRACTOR �- 6" MIN. TQ 12" MAX SPACING . ... r 3" MIN. CLR AIR S'ACE 4L_ S DES CF HOOD 1 5/8" TYPE 20 GA. MTL. "X" GY.. BD- ON 3 -5/8" STUDS 0 16" O.C. A_TERNA"E : JSE (2) LAYERS 0= 35 DUCT -WRAP 'F APPROVED F31 3. -DG AND FIRE: DEPT. BASE) ON UL - U46.. ALTERNATE USE (2) '_43055 OF 3M DUCT IF A°ORC`!ED BY BLDG AND FIRE DEP-. -WRAP BAS_D ON UL - U469� 1 3 2 HOUR SHAFT SCALE:3/4" = I' -O"9 °"""'`'»'-"° Z HR. SHAFT SECTION 9CALE:1" = 1'--0" D°'""''"=""'°° SUSPENDED FIXTURE SCALE: NONE n..,.1.•, — 2'x4' OR 2'x2' 7 -BAR CE _INC N0. #DX \--_ EXPOSED TEE SYSTEM. BY DOWN CORP. O 1 V _ _ _ �& -�- + OR APPROVED 40. NATJRAL HSSURED WITH EDGE TRIM RR# 23541 1.3.6.0. #2244 / -,--1-, 3-48" x 20 GA. DIAGONAL 4RACING Al 48" 0.C. - _•- METAL / ' $ SCREWS -0 •� 8_ - '+- + +SHEET; '' NOTES: 1. TIE TWO ADJACENT WALLS TO CEILINGS CROSS &/OR MAIN RUNNERS. 4'-0" I- ;12'-O" . 2. SUSPENDED CEIL'IGS SHALL COMPLY MAX. X O.C. �I PLAN WITH UBC TABLES 25-; & 16-0 3. 3/8" MIN. CLR. BETWEEN TILE AND CROSS RUNNER OR MAIN RUNNER � i / (3) #6 SHEET I I NTL. SCREWS � I 1f 16" 8 x 20 GA. FRAMING AT + : - METAL REFER FRAM•VG i0 CEILING1\ ♦ FRAMING / PLAN Gir 'i �o / % i � �- \• /- \. ; 8- PERIMETER VERTICAL WIRES / 8" CU- FROM THE WALL VERIF" W/ F.S.E.C. - - SETBACK WALL 2'-0" FOR STORAGE REFER TO .,FILING PLAY in a �l - - #12 "GAUGE WIRE MIN, ES z 10 Y 42 _ ACOJST:CAL CEILING TILES 2'x2' OR 2'x4' (4 P,S. F.) MAX.) #12 GAUGE WIRE MIN. L< is E F w z S: z _ - I / / \\ �5 \ 1' ., -- GYPSUM ,;, FINISH SCHEDULE / -I BOARD AND - REFER 1'0 j GYP. ED. AND FINISH - REFER -C SCHEDULE 2" CTAP -__ --STAINLESS STEEL CLOSURE B" F.5 E.C. -- PREFABRICATED WALK-IN COOLER- REFER TO FOOD SERVICE DRAWINGS. NOTE: PROVIDE #12 GA. WIRES AT ALL FOUR CORNERS OF LIGHT FIXTURE &CEILING DIFFUSERS TYP. - SEE DET. THIS SHEET . LATERAL FORCE BRACING MEMBERS SHALL BE A MIN. OF 6 I6C4ES FROM ALL HORIZONTAL PIPING OR DUCT WORK NOT PROVIDED WITH BRACING RESTRAINTS FOR HORIZONTAL FORCES. BRACING WIRES SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THE GRID AND STRUCTURE ANO SHALL SUPPORT A DESIGN LOAD THE GREATER OF 200 LBS. OF THE ACTUAL LOAD, WITH A SAFETY FACTOR OF 2. 1 4 10 SOFFIT AT WALK-IN BOX SCALE:/ 1/2"= I' -D" o6..1L.: WALL TO CEILING SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 06,,1..e a 2 SUSPENDED CEILING SCALE: N --.S. =TAO,: 400000 N0TE: SEE 16 FOR ATTACHMENT TO EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE - SIM /� ROOF OR STRUCTURE FLOOR �. P RECAST CONCRETE I \\ __- rl�\\ \ �� v f~� -��-, '._.u'rL^,L_(! 'ice L-9 �,r �; EXISTINGCONCREOVER- MLWVER/f7"0 T. 5/a6" / l / /.1 / / / f / / . / / ' / / ____ - ( ~ r // � / ///4 � ,� � •I YYY _ � ,... • +13T.,.4-----l_iy-----,,,„=.._,_J==----L___.,,-.----, ,-- --, 1„ _I -13" \ r TO BOTTOM t!" -r--.,.) OF METAL DECK 'r----,,---,---) 4 . „,. ---- - ; . • .......„,-,_ I 4l Ti4 ----ri 1L G.C. 10 PROVIDE BLACK FILM OVER EXISTING WINDOW • MAXIML.1 GROIN VAULT -IEIGHT /21 T riLL(Iu A OP'ri r .4.,1 H.4 Liu 11 \I / • / CFANDELIER 3Y OWNER G.C. TO PROV CE POWER & INSTALLATION ,111," SUBSTRATE OVER METAL STUDS WITH BRICK VENEER FIN 54. CURVED METAL TRACK -0 CON 'ORM TO GROIN VALET SHAPE 17 EXISTING EXTERIOR ---.-- GI ASS AND METAL STOREFRONT (WHERE OCCURS) II I BRICK VENEER OVER I)" DUROCK (F) CONCRE1E. OVER METAL DECK 3-s" 20. GA. D AGONAL BRACE 048" 0.C. OVER EXISTING CONCRETE DECK SEE. c-1.711 3-V METAL SLOE 0 16" O.C. TO METAL DECK. SEE 7-11-•-, =OR ATTACHMENT. EXISTING CONCRETE VV OVER METAL DECK -LS , /11 Hk,/- -------,/ „„, ., --- %-MET. STUD VERT. N • \ @ - 6" D.C. TO ETAL \ DECK. SEE Ark FOR .` / • A-1ACHMENT 3 TX" 20 GA. CIAG. — BRACE 01 48" 0.C. ALTERNATING OVER (K) CONCRETE MET. DECK. SEE FOR ATTACHMENT Irk TAY N • _L ▪ 6 1 1/2" , 71(," TYPE "X" OVER f 6" 3-38" MET. STED 1 20 MAHOGANY MATERIAL INSTALLED ON END. 6 1 1/2" 03 2x MAHOGANY STAIN - `4•3" CY.131). SOFFIT PAINT - PARTIAL ELEVATION 0+T-4" -7' OF OVER BAR TOP , A r BAR 01+42" A.F.F. '16" TYPE TX" OVER 3-58" PET. S'UD DECORATIVE WOOD SUSPENDED STRUCTURE RECESSED LIGHT FIXTURE INSTALL BY G.C. WIT -I DIE WALL SEE FLOOR PLAN DUROCK ON OVER 3-%" MET 5T3D5 16" O.C. SEE - MASONRY VENEER-- --- SEE IIREPIACIT V 1 El GROIN VAULT CEILING ELEVATION 6 SOFFIT g EAR SCALE:1 1/2"-=Y-0" WAILS: 4TO BOTTOM OF METAL DECK A.F.P. *42" 3 78" VERTICAL STUDS 0 16" O.C. T 'E) METAL DECK, SET FOR ATTACFIMEN .1(1 L • 3 ;ii" 20 GA. DIAGONAL BRACE © 48" O.C. ALTERNATING OVER (E) CONCRETE METAL DECK SEE FOR ATTACHMENT (E) CCNCRETE OVER META_ DECK - MINIMUM FRAMING 10 ALLOW MAXIMJN HIGHT +12.-1" 10 BOTTOM OF BEAM A = = '43" TYPE TX" GYP. BD OVER 3-38" METAL ST-J[7S / DECCRAT VE LIGHT FIXTJRE G.C. TO PROVIDE POWER A INSTALLATION %" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. OVER 343" METAL STUDS ET 38" -"PE "X" GYP. BD. OVER 3-78" METAL STUDS MAHOGANY TRIM/ DECORATIVE BEAM STAIN IXA WCOD TRIM PAINT SEMI -G000 DECORATIVE <ACED POST DECORATIVE ACRYLIC PANEL, TYPICAL DECORATIVE PENDANT LICHT BY OWNER O +5'-6" A.F.'. - CHROME 3RACKET SUPPORTS • (0) LOCAT ONS DECORATIVE WOOD LOW WALL IS1 +42" A.F.F. BOOTH 8' OWNER '-6" WOOD EASE EXISTING CONCRETE OVER METAL DECK 0 --"-F--• l. i \'--IT 1 1 , I . —1,--71 I+___11. II ! I 1 / // P ' ' I in I 1 „ . -..--T---3-3N"MET. STUD VERT. I 0 16" 0.C. TC METAL DECK. SEE ATTACHMENT FOR CONTINUOUS METAL SINGLE SUPPORTS \\' 3 5.4" SO GA DIAD. BRACE 0 48 O.C. ALTERNATING OVER (E) CONCRETE MET. DECK, SEC FOR ATTACHMENT MAHOGANY CORNER MOULDING. STAN CONCRETE SIMULATED TREE TRUNCKS BY OWNER RECESSED GROUND LIGHTS IN CONCRETE BY D.C. 38" TYPE "X" OVER 3 38" MET. STUD DECORATIVE COPPER METAL MESH CEILING Ark L_ 20 WALL SECTION @ BOOTH AT MAIN DINING 8 SOFFIT- TREE TRUNKS @ LOUNGE AREA 9 CALE:1 I /2"..1.- 0" 06TAIL,01 Svai-017 S RT.7;14g ..;-A I, re" 1,11,1,01n coIl INTANINTIorty TMOT ROOM CI,TO ,S34019 /NO IT* Av.. Sui.130 TANN /NOM e ANN. MI 2C.773dS1011LO ,G00. /NW CA 01731 P010.70,11.3 F ONANTAISOMI ' • ' • 3186 Alno/ hew ONIA Sea 74 92725 Ph= 144392.1010 fec .6 WNW Mm Sr: Ng CA 4INS 77.73 731430104 Fm E... GLUMAC enolneora oilltin:01•11,141.• PROJECT > - et 5 u < — (,3 et r - „CEO LT e„ if I El COO (.1) liT 5 1 CD CO ISSUE DATES 0/100/011P AND USC OA NOUN DETS titilk2 CITE 064604 00577< LN/00 FIT.T.0 NO SEAL 1/4 =1-0 SHEET TITLE DETAILS SNEET A7.3 2'-3" SIFITilvoiAArO1101cIiili...C1..:I..1,i.,..Tr,.,i..5...,, VARIES FLOOR PLAN _ V _ _ -, (E} CONCRETE OVER GRANITE TOP OVER 3/�' PLYWOOD SU BTO' „�'• _-,. _ ,t `L� , ' -_ --.1r _+ _ I _- , METAL DECK ® 3/e !JJy�� y413' B" "Ilgg A.F.E. % j Y C _. - ,\" Lr•�••:C.:� --__ .. _- _ ... - r T -J u.wvra.i�--3/4" ®It 6.i4PW yWM SOLID CEASAR S -CNE OP v 'l-� ,.: .., TO BOT7OM% CF MEAL DECK / I (E) STEEL BEAM WITH I - ��.�,:.s .:' .� �...,....,.,.,,,....,.,�. _...�....,...•.......,..��..... ,T amo moms P PIS...locenc M_... - d WHITE UNDERNEA?H FRP GREEN I`I PLASTIC- LAMINATE =WITH FINISH OVER eWOOD BOARD , n !• !` '+'• I I I \ �� OYNALI-E WI -H SLACK FINISH (CONFIRM LENGTHS ANO F.LECTRICA_ TYPE) H4 -20W 9-B BLOCKING Yz"X Yz" ALUM. REVEAL �/f'X Yz" SOLID CHERRY FIREPROOFING 1 - _I NwPa.AZD.t91p.e. // / -� —BROOKSIDE VENEER OVER // 1+13'-4" MA XIMIUM '�,MDFm (POINT-�--r--��C i 1 ~�® I I { 1 L AO TYPICAL TOP DETAIL ��;FEED P __-� I--=.'.II'1�1.. �1 .�TI. .: _ I. l yam I �� h. �� - -5 ?p 20. CA. D AGONAL. 4 T- 1 f- gE�111114 .B.,,ly�, peu�nler,usaol 51, {,'jII ALUM. REVEAL : BRACE ®48" O.C. OV_R V a, E%1511NG WALL 55,a VERTICAL -' 5 METAL STJD OVER I 1 I Pcle,9ma6m Pe1e.]01.189e '1! 151 MOSAIC TILE OVER Ir \, 4'' TO (E) META(.. DECK _� I `�'` ) SEE -% 17 I a I 1" DUROCK ® 147X Y" fi" WOOD BASE- STAIN CONTINUOUS BASE SHOES -WOOD FLOOR ®lk FaE wh, mWnau 18 . - 1X4 MARBLE BASE M V ' . 1116/19999wm 0555 111917111* 0.09969996 Saw%4,9➢A ems. msamornsulmo 196.9 Fa nlII .1 Fa, eW5L 1I / \ IP- 1 - --0.C. TO PROV OE '`', 1 1'1` 1 1 - / /1" GLU MAC 6" QUARRY COVE SASE I / L1 !� IL 1111111l'1ElNI. 0 BLACK FILM OVER EXISTING WINDOW 1 -0 / / BO TYPICAL SASE DETAIL @ WD. FLOOR - "-^ - 1 11 , 1 N_ 1 _ `- ryl . 9 ,,.w.Fa a.rr .w1FtlroW.F .. I 1 r 1 1 7 LOW WALL DETAIL 3,. = 1' D" 1 3 COOKLINE DIE WALL DETAIL 1/2" = 1'-0" I L_=1 PROJECT / C \ �—-'-IO'--9" A.F.F. CROSS BEAMS PLACES SEE CEILING PLAN I ` a �w N ll / I -r L._�y1 \ L r }F1. J "' ii1444 Ii` � I ( i TOP' G.C. TO ` I� IS..- II I I;� 1 _-I+ MI I I'L'---- I ;� AND TO COORDINATE CONSTRUCTION - - - -------- _ L I I DECORATIVE DIE BY F.C. PRIOR �` 2X WOOD NAILER — — — —I ` I— BAR EQUIPMENT BY K.E.C. 1'�- 20 GA. MTL. S -UDS X 6 0 16 O.C. I S 8" GREEN BOARD ON BAR SIDE % �` & 5/87 GYP BC ON CUSTOMER SIDE FRP OVER GREEN BOARD SEE FIXTURE DWG FOR FINISH T( - — 12" 111G1 CEMENT SOCKET BOAR -1 INSTALWATERPROOF MENBRANE VARIES �` (2) 94.1 . 6•' METAL STUDS WITH INSULATION S 16 O.C. TO META. DECK. SEE FOR ATTACHEMENT. �17� -- C 1 14 P "= ,I 011 A ` - 4 II/ SEE PLANS FOR FINISH WALL BATT INSULATION, WHERE OCCURS. - SEE PLANS --5/8" TYPE "X'• GYP. BOARD OVER 3 5/67 20 GA. METAL STUDS 0 16" O.C. "CF.MCO" I.C.B.O. 3403P IIILTI SHOT PIN - COVED .QUARRY TILE BASE (3/8" R) W/ CONT. QUALAN? TOP OF TILE BASE AND QUARRY TILE r -_GOR, SEE FINISH SCHEDULE v CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR 11111 vk `, 2 3/ _' _ 1 -2' -{ •� BRICK. VENEER OVER kX" DUROCK -_ , Y- Y" SLBSTRA'E OVER METAL STUDS z WITH BRICK VENEER FINISH. v1 •�lq,' A7.� J'fv - - CURVED METAL TRACK - ji //X / L + v + - _ I 1,v' � S i4' e. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY ITES 165, 170 & 175 ERM0SA BEACII, CA Y. ,. , a -• , c '• -- 6" COVED QUARRY TILE RASE. BY G.C, 1 8 WALL/BASE DETAIL 3" = I•_0' 1 4 BAR DIE WALL 1" = 1'-0" 1 p SOFFIT © PRIVATE ROOM A. --- VARIES, SEE FLOOR PLAN -DECORATIVE ACRYLIC SCREEN (WHERE ( 17A `, - \ OCCURS) _ EL FRAME F.XISP EG CONCRETE OVER METAL DECK. F , _ -PP RECESSED hBLACK. CON`. CHANM1 W/ CLEAR SILICONE BEAD WHERE OCCURS ---LINE � „ J _L O V -3/" CEASAR 5 -ONE TOP m OF SOFFIT BEYOND: ` - ., o " Q L �_'!� 0 —1/2" X 1/2" ALUM REVEAL -- 5/B" GYP BE EA SIDE ON 2X6 WOOD STUDS 16" O.C. 4Y G.C. FINISH BY N._LWORK -`.—, L,— a -1--t o - _-- yyI r �� I-- I l _._ ,\ �� f' r�--" I r �. +� 11 _ % - -__CONTINUOUS 284 L. _ 1� ,I ,i11 -V ii ' ;1-� L+� -/ --� BLOCKING ,. � J 5/e" (i� �� % '� ri I�. ---- 39" SOLID MAHOGANY �\ '- ' \ N STAINED- \ V ` +13' )S"A.F. TO BOTTOM 0' E MTL ( j DECK i .. :' - E STEEL BEAM WITH ( ) FIREPROOFING I 3 20 CA. MAG. - BRACE @ 48" C C. ALTERNATING OVER - ( ) CONCRETE MET. DECK. 5E`: I ,� Y /r1 1'-6" BACKLIT ONYX SLAB PANEL _ J'J,.Ii \ '\ 5 /' TYPE "X" GYP BD. 1 CVER 3 5/g" MF:I'AL FOR ATTACHMENT® . a'11 b 11 — I . __ • l( MILLWORK CONTRACTOR -- BROOKSIDE VENEER WAINSCOT __—NOTE: NO FINISH ® BOOTH BACK CONDITION 5 _/ I 1 6"41 ; / _ (Nj STUDS -- \ _ _.. .. .. .- ._\ ... 10 1/2" 1 i_. ..,L. i�—. �F / \ +I 1.-I„A.F.F TO BOTTOM T 999 9... ._ _ _ .. 9999. ._.., .. ....�1 - - .........._ \� / ,�.9ye, \ STEEL(1-- 7, h;. i-eumiw, !+, .flr ,,., !w !ua� ..- L l� .. wm .. ,,m. uv.w "., r,J :,, ,�, ,^�e'�1a+�, ! 7E \ ` BOF EAME) BEAM rramw. ,,,.,. ,I ,I II �� I t 1 • r,o1 PEWTER FINISH HEARTH r 6" W000 BASE STA V / 0 WOOD FLOOR & OR % 6" TERRAllO EASE Oro CONCRETE FLOOR (WHERE OCCURS) v gIq a- /'� \ I' S. I / 1 1-1I 1 META(_ STUD FRAMING q�z•1 \ �fy` J. / ` ` ' !' ��-''fid I---177-77H ' `4 �'I II I q 4, \, 01 �7� I \\,...- „„./ F a :@I-� IEii� 11 �I ---CONT. SHOES BADE 0 WOOD FLOOR 11 ��,• y) �1�''• 1 11 ,�p5 1r5 �• I fl 6. , �•{ 1('}5 r /` I'.. < --.-- 1'LJ. --- RAMSET 0.141'01" LONG DRIVE - PIN 0 16" 0.C.#4 -- 00 --- -- -+9'-4" A.F.F. MAXIMUN '1 1 g HEARTH DETAIL " = 1'-0' 1 5 TYPICAL LOW WALL DECK %z" _ ::•" , ARCH T 1 DEC❑RATIVE FALSE BEAM SCALE:1 1/z" 1'-D" Sr P oRti �.6, .a 1 CHANDELIER HT OWNER. G.C. ROIPOWER & 'VSTALLATION _ ;� TOP G.C. TC _f- II — AND DECORATIVEDIE BY P.C. TO TRTIOCOORDINATE PRIOR CONSTRUCTION ION I F l 1- I I 1X6 CEDAR PLAN4 T& G OVER GYP. BD. CELL'. VG TYPICAL t I WITH CLEAR MATTE FINISH - r / / a I'+-` L �p�l.'JT SEALER o 1 WALL SCONCES BY OWNER -- ISSUE DATES L f j �I 161--- I I II fff ". ` 23 WOOD NAILER. EAR EOJIPMENT BY K.E.C. ---- -LINE OF DECCRAT.VK LOW WALL BEHIND 4 IJ I AN_ VENEER OVER Yz" DJ 4CC'K / • ¢ 1'1--- - BRICK -_ I_ 1 I + :T 0 0➢ IB/ab PVN CHECK RCSII[VII01N. 1 EXISTING STA. RWE_L WALL / loC. 0.\ �W `v' I I �1— ,! `` 1--1.---- 20 GA. MTL STUDS X 6 " 16 O.C. I 5/8" GREEN BOARD ON BAR S.OE •3�„ & 5/8" GYP BD ON CUSTOMER S ]_ g `f 1_� �— FRP OVER GREEN BOARD ��— SEE FIXTURE DWG =CR FINISH 11L 4 --1-1-------- 12" HIGF CEMENT DOCKER BOARD - NS -AL WATERPROOF MENBRANE0 `_ ,- UW21099,10Job W:JNENiS OM --CONTINUOUS 2X4 uwDeacrUs /� BLOCKING '^' �' p T 52606 _ 15” SOLID MAHOGANY .. __ % UR LS/AC STAINED- _ NO' -L- �� ':� I` yuEE191909EC1 1 3/, 1 Iv,'"// (SHEET TITLE / DETAILS 1/2" 54(5, 510: A7 -- - 6" COVED QUARRY TILE BASE BY C.C. 1 6 BAR DIE WALL I" = r a" 1 2 DECORATIVE POST SCALE:1 1/2" = r--0" o.„.,,S, .o,, 8 ARCH CEILING ELEVATIONS 0 WINE RETAIL 1 1/2" = 1'-0" DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR TYPES DOOR NO ROOM NO. DOOR PROPERTIES 2 100 3 TYPE 108 4 5 6 7 108 A A 108 107 B 9 101 SIZE THA. MAIL, GLASS FINISH RATING DOOR FRAME MATO. F:NISH • x 8'-0" C WO TEMP 20 MIN HM HARDWARE / REMARKS ®©®0®®00 CUSTOM MAHOGANY WOOD / TEMPERED GLASS ENTRY DOOR 5-0" x 8'-0" C H 113 10 11 12 13 114 117 3'-0" x 7-0" • x 7-0" B F 5-0" x 7-0" 3'-6" x 7'-0" H 123 123 117 14 15 16 F 3'-0" X 7-0" C 5_0" x 7,-0" 3'-0" x 7-0" C 116 123 17 121 F D 5-0" x 7-0" 3'-O" x 7'-0" 3'-0" x 7-0" 1 3/4" 1 3/4" WD TEMP 20 MIN 0000©©®0 CUSTOM MAHOGANY WOOD / TEMPERED GLASS ENTRY DOOR DOOR NO. 2 HM 1 3/4" HM TEMP TEMP 00 © © 3 4 1 3/4" 1 3/4" HM TEMP 000C),00 HM TEMP 20 MIN ©0©0©000 5 6 1 3/4" 1 3/4" HM 0Q® HM 7 8 1 3/4" NM ©CD 1 3/4" 1 3/4" G 120 116 E E 4'-0" x 8'-0" E 31-0" x 7.-0- 3'-0" x 7-0" 3'-0" x 7-0" HM TEMP 00® 9 10 HM TEMP ®© o 1 3/4" 1 3/4" HN ©C) HM PER MANUFACTURERS REQUIREMENTS 1 3/4" WD TEMP 20 MIN o©o©©o®o CUSTOM WOOD / TEMPERED GLASS ENTRY DOOR 11 12 13 14 1 3/4" 1 3/4" 1 3/4" NM 0©® O ©00 NM 15 16 HM 17 \ — CLEAR TEMP. GLASS - CLEAR TEMP. GLASS VARIES SEE SCHEDULE P✓ \,I B C H CLEAR TEMP. GLASS VARIES SEE „SCHEDULE, C MAHOGANY WOOD DOOR -+--I— - REVOLVING DOOR CANOPY �11 N --- GLASS ENCLOSURE GLASS WINGS i /I E RESTROOM SIGNAGE WHERE OCCURS - SEE DETAIL BELOW F NIH. 10"x20" CLEAR TEMP. GLASS VIEW PANEL WHERE NOTED. KICK PLATE, TYP. WINDOW SCHEDULE WINDOW TYPES WINDOW NO. A H C D (E. LOCATION •C8 100 '23 I0`., '23 WINDOW SIZE 9'-6" X 7'-D" 2' 10 X f' 0" 1'-2" x 8-0: -4"X8 0" FRAME SILL HT GLASS THICK MAT„ FINISH REMARKS WINDOW NO. TEMP /CLR MEAL TEMP/ CI T METAL UTTAL ACTOR FACTORY A'CTORY A. B TEMP/CLR ME TAL VF11AL FACTORY FACTORY WINDOW NOTES: 1. FIELD MEASURE ALL WINDOW OPENING FOR EXACT GLAZING DIMENSIONS 2. ALL GLAZING SHALL CONFORM TO UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEE PLAN -A. 0 0 A ,SEE PLAN. DOOR WHERE OCCURS B F I L C OUTLINE OF REVOLVING DOOR 0 1� fh V D SEE PLAN i 0 E SAA SNLFAMERDALGA2G ASSO::IA"ES '.e,erlorl ,r0 :eiledl Yr" LOS Pm:ELLS ,'DOOR' BEACH 604.1.1.11.4, dfl ,,-.—rr"wan [310] BMW =OraAm Soho L10 Nods... MAIO Flew rl08e5! l.0191 r/1-1981 • Cacaommeermm,De • lsk DUO, Pele."R.,9011 Fel&i0i.tem :ir.,r11. S,;IIIHr & C11C N" q"Y 1.a,e V. YYdml Rive Oda Nem, OA UM Sm U,q:. C49A16 ;:.•. la. : I,, 0&1331.1¢0, leo 11e5N.T.l 11,51::21 HARDWARE SCHEDULE FOR EACH DOOR LEAF 0 1 1/2 PR. 4 1/2" X 4 1/2" BUTTS • 2 PR. 4 1/2" X 4 1/2" BUTTS © 1 DOOR CLOSER ©D PANIC HARDWARE LEVER PASSAGE SET Q LEVER PRIVACY SET LEVER LOCKSET OH LEVER DUMMY SET 01 DEAD BOLT Oj FLUSH BOLT O COORDINATORS © KICK PLATE - 10" O SIGN MEN HANDICAP 0 SIGN WOMEN HANDICAP e DOOR SCHEDULE NOTES ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOLS DOOR STOP - WALL / FLOOR THRESHOLD WEATHER STRIP CUSTOM PUSH/PULL PUSH PULL - 3"X12" SIGN OVER DOORS "THESE DOORS TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHENEVER BUILDING IS OCCUPIED" PEEPHOLE VIEW PANEL DOORBELL OVERHEAD SLIDING TRACK RECESSED FINGER PULLS RECESSED PULL HARDWARE 1. EXIT DOORS SHALL BE OPENABLE FROM THE INSIDE WITHOUT USE OF A KEY OR ANY SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR EFFORT. (TITLE 24, 1004.3). 2. WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF REQUIRED EXIT DOORWAYS TO COMPLY WITH TITLE 24, 1004.6. 3. PROVIDE APPROVED PANIC HARDWARE ON REQUIRED EXIT DOORS. TITLE 24, SECTIONS 1016 4 & 1004.4 4. ALL NEW DOORS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH LEVER TYPE HANDLE. 5. IF LATCHING OR LOCKING HARDWARE IS USED ON EXIT DOOR, INSTALL ABOVE DOOR A SIGN SAYING "THIS DOOR IS TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHENEVER BUILDING IS OCCUPIED" 6. ALL DOOR HARDWARE TO BE MOUNTED BETWEEN 30" TO 44" A.F.F. 7. BOTH INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR DOOR CLOSERS TO HAVE A MAXIMUN OPENING EFFORT OF 5—POUNDS. CBC 11336.2.5. 8. DEAD BOLTS AND/OR THUMBLOCKS ARE NOT ALLOWED ON ANY EXIT DOORS. NOTE: SIGN SHALL BE LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE LATCH SIDE OF THE SINGLE DOOR AND THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DOUBLE DOORS +60" AFF PER CBC 11178.5.7 NOTE: WHERE THERE IS NO WALL SPACE ON THE LATCH SIDE, INCLUDING AT THE DOUBLE LEAF DOORS, SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE NEAREST ADJACENT WALL, PREFERABLY ON THE RIGHT. 12" DIA CIRCLES, TYP — IN—BRAILLE —1 MEN 'WOMEN MOUNT ON DOORS AT +60" TO CENTER OF CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL SYMBOLS 1/4" ENGRAVED PLASTIC — BLUE BACKGROUND WITH WHITE LETTERS 06. 1W BRAILLE _ 0 GLUMAC erylroer0,a "xNulrad. (Owe I PROJECT I 5/8" GYP. BD. 3/4" x 3 1/2" OAK TRIM OAK DOOR & DOOR FRAME PLYWOOD SHEATHING WHERE OCCURS VERIFY EXT. PLASTER n SII • 2" SSEEEINTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR WALL FINISHES 16 GA. WELDED H.M. FRAME PAINT COLOR TO MATCH ADJACENT WALL SURFACE. TYPICAL U.N.O. - DOUBLE 20 GA. STUDS AT JAMB TYP. \\\� GYPSUM BOARD WALL FINISH - SEE PLAN T LINE OF DOOR FRAME BEYOND ---- DOOR & FRAME - REFER TO DOOR SCHEDULE - 1" DOOR UNDERCUT r-- FLOOR FINISH - REFER TO SCHEDULE MATERIAL TRANSITION (WHERE OCCURS) CENTERLINE OF DOOR EXTERIOR -sv SLOPE — LINE OF DOOR FRAME BEYOND DOOR & FRAME - REFER TO DOOR SCHEDULE THRESHOLD - REFER TO 1 HARDWARE SCHEDULE / Ir— FLOOR FINISH - REFER TO SCHEDULE MAXIMUM /2" OFFSET AT ALL THRESHOLDS AND AT ANY CHANGE OF FLOORING MATERIAL OFFSETS GREATER THAN 1/4" REQUIRE A MAX. BEVELED SLOPE OF 1 UNIT VERTICAL TO 2 UNITS HORIZONTAL LEVEL CHANGES NOT EXCEEDING 1/4" MAY BE VERTICAL 1 7 TYP EXT HEAD/JAMB DET SCALE: 12" = 1'— =man.dY:ws10"-eel 1 3 TYP. HEAD/JAMB DETAIL SCALE: 3" = OCrolo...:OBI"o-"o1 9 TYP. DOOR THRESHOLD SCALE:3" = 1'-O" PErA,x d: 0,4 10r 5 TYP EXT THRESHOLD SCALE:3" = 1-0" CD L T 'ISSUE BATES 00/10/00 PIAN CHECK RESUE,1 1. No. Oale Caulinl:en OWNERSHIP MVO USE or LOC MOM, NO.:— SHEET TITLE SCHEDULES AND DETAILS I I NO: 48.1 SQA?. NOTES: 1. FOR EXACT LOCATIONS/CONFIGURATIONS OP WALL FINISHES, SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS— A6 SERIES SHEETS. 2. FOR CEIUNG AND SOFFIT HEIGHTS/CONFIGURATIONS, SEE REFLECTED CEILING PLAN A4.1 3. FOR FLOOR FINISHES, REFER TO FINISH FLOOR PLAN A3.1 MATERIAL LEGEND FLOORS v AEA v v IIT AMIL v WALLS / CEILING (� MOSAIC TILE: \ / PAINT: CONCRETE FLOOR: STAINED AND SEALED WOOD FLOOR: FINISH: EPDXY FLOORING: MFG: FINISH: SLATE TILE FLOOR: MFG: FINISH: / NATURAL SLATE FLOOR: / MFG: FINISH: BASE v v TILE BASE: WOOD BASE: (EPB \ EPDXY BASE: 1 / MFG: 4" WIDE x 3f" SOLID, RANDOM LENGTHS PROVIDE WATERPROOF MEMBRANE (COLD TAR/HOT MOP) OVER EXISTING CONCRETE FLOOR; WI" CDX PLYWOOD. G.C. TO PROVIDE 4 COATS OF EXTRA HEAVY DUTY POLYEURETHANE FINISH, SAND BETWEEN COATS, SUBMIT SAMPLE TO BITTON DESIGN GROUP FOR APPROVAL 12" x 12" W/ CLEAR MATTE SEALER W/ CLEAR MATTE SEALER 6x12 SLATE TILE BASE 6" HIGH W/ r COVE BASE E) STAIN: v AEI v GYPSUM BOARD: 3%" GYP BD, PREP FOR SMOOTH PAINT FINISH GYPSUM BOARD: 36" WATER RESISTANT GYP BD / DR \ DUROCK: V" DUROCK WD WOOD VENEER WALL: CEDAR PLANK CEILING: 1x6 TAG — CLEAR MATTE FINISH E-.) ONYX SLAB PANEL: AIX v Ltilk v v VENETIAN PLASTER FINISH: ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE: 24" x 48" x 5/8" ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE WASHABLE FACED, NON—PERFORATED PANELS, IN ALL ALUMINUM SUSPENSION SYSTEM WITH 12 GA. STAINLESS STEEL WIRES AS REQUIRED. PANEL MFG: ARMSTRONG CLEANROOM VINYL VL (NON—PERFORATED OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVED EQUAL). WHITE (LIGHT REFLECTANCE RATING IS 0.83) CHICAGO METALLIC (NO. 830) (800) 323-7164 SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. PANEL COLOR: GRID MFG: ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE: PANEL MFG: PANEL COLOR: GRID MFG: BRICK VENEER: 24" x 24" x 5/8" ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE WASHABLE FACED, NON—PERFORATED PANELS, IN ALL ALUMINUM SUSPENSION SYSTEM WITH 12 GA. STAINLESS STEEL WIRES AS REQUIRED. ARMSTRONG CLEANROOM VINYL VL (NON—PERFORATED OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVED EQUAL). WHITE (LIGHT REFLECTANCE RATING IS 0.83) CHICAGO METALLIC (NO. 830) (800) 323-7164 SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. SHLLIdHdLi" A.0 CaO. 4$Ao:: A -LY 1a 19 rtols c6d cnciecluro 'OK"'",-:," SII mm66$+� r P19 ss1.ww ]'Alf"b:: SHarIp .HRHHHHHILCillfmnia C19'C! 84-1%1 2224C...Qaee®eS,w199 p..,s"„CA91301 143111,07.1. F01410).10]0 es% cu" HMI1.;CTHA WNI, C4121. H SCHS33 Rnv X565:,11H6 IHs,ewai fa: HE.HOnn.. GLUMAC ",xl,m.,1."WMWMW l",,.. 1. PROJECT ISSUE DATES 00/14/D61 PUN CHECK RCSLeCO"EFL . ICo. ICe,criElio, RS"IP AND U5: I13:.1NEM nn1r. Va4_4, no SCALE NOW SHEET TITLE FINISH SCHEDULE AND LEGEND A8.2 MATERIAL / FINISH SCHEDULE 402 WALL ORIENTATION (U.N.O.) R• ❑ M WALL 4 CEIUNG REMARKS ROOM ROOMNO. NO. ROOM NAME FLOOR BASE WALL 1 WALL 2 WALL 3 MAIL FINISH MAIL FINISH MAIL. FINISH MAIL. FINISH MAIL FINISH MAIL FINISH MAIL. FINISH HEIGHT 100 ENTRY WF -1 — WB -1 — — — — WO -1 — — — ACT -2 GB -1 p 10'-6" 11'-9" 100 101 MAIN DINING #1 WF -1 — WB -1 — — — — — WD -1 — — — ACT -2 GB -1 P 10'-6" 11'-9" 101 102 MAIN DINING #2 WV -1 — WB -1 — WD -1 — — — — — — — ACT -2 GB -1 p 10'-6" 11'-9" 102 103 BAR EP -1 — EPB -1 — — — — — — — — — GB -1 SW/P +9'-6" 103 104 BAR/LOUNGE WF -1 — WB -1 — — — — — — — M-1 — GB -1 P +10'-6" 104 105 EXISTING COURTYARD — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — EXISTING 105 106 SERVICE STATION SL -1 — TB -1 — — — WD -1 — WD -1 — — — GB -1 SW/P +10'-6" 106 107 PRIVATE DINING #1 CF -1 — TB -1 — VP -1 P— VP -1 P-1 VP -1 P-1 VP -1 P-1 BV -1 — +12'-8" BV -1 WALL FINISH ON PILASTERS, SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 107 108 WINE RETAIL SL—i SL -2 TB -1 — TBD — TBD — TAD — TBD — WD -2 — VARIES 108 109 PANTRY EP -1 — EPB -1 — — — — — — — — — GB -1 P +8'-0" 109 110 COOKUNE EP -1 — EPB -1 — — — — — — — — — GB -1 P +8'-0" 110 111 PREP AREA EP -1 — EPB -1 — — — — — — — — — GB -1 P +8'-0" 111 112 MAIN SERVICE STN MT -1 — TB -1 — CT -1 — FRP — FRP — FRP — GB -1 SW/P +8'-0" 112 EP -1 — EPB -1 — FRP — FRP — FRP — FRP — ACT -1 SW/P +9'-0" 113 113 SCULLERY 114 PRIVATE DINING 12 TBD — TBD — TBD — TBD — TBD — TBD — BV -1 — VARIES 114 115 WASH STATION TBD — TBD — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -1 SW/P +9'-0" * TOILET ROOMS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH TILE OVER MOISTURE RESISTANT DRYWALL TO A MIN HEIGHT OF 4' W/ 5" MIN COVED BASE PER CBC 807.1.2 115 116 PRIVATE RESTROOM TBD — TBD — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -2 — GB -1 SW/P +9'—O" : TOILET ROOMS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH TILE OVER MOISTURE RESISTANT DRYWALL TO A MIN HEIGHT OF 4' W/ 5" MIN COVER BASE PER CBC 807.1.2 116 117 PREP KITCHEN EP -1 — EPB -1 — FRP — FRP — FRP — FRP — ACT -1 SW/P +9'-0" 117 118 COOLER EP -1 — EPB -1 — — — — — — — — — — — +9'-0" SMOOTH EMBOSSED ALUMINUM AT ALL COOLER / FREEZER CEILINGS AND WADS — BY KEC 118 119 FREEZER — — — — — — — — — — — — — — +9'-0" SMOOTH EMBOSSED ALUMINUM AT ALL COOLER / FREEZER CEILINGS AND WALLS — BY EEC 119 120 EMPL. RESTROOM EP -1 — EPB -1 — GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -1 SW/P +9'-0" ° TOILET ROOMS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH FRP OVER MOISTURE RESISTANT DRYWALL TO A MIN HEIGHT OF 4' W/ 5" MIN COVED BASE PER CBC 807.1.2 120 121 EMPL. RESTROOM EP -1 — EPB -1 — GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -2 FRP GB -1 SW/P +9'-0" ° TOILET ROOMS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH FRP OVER MOISTURE RESISTANT DRYWALL TO A MIN HEIGHT OF 4' W/ 5" MIN COVED BASE PER CRC 807.1.2 121 122 CORRIDOR EP -1 — EPB -1 — GB -1 P-1 GB -1 P-1 GB -1 P-1 GB -1 P-1 GB -1 P-1 +8'-0" 122 123 WINE RETAIL SL -2 — TB -1 — VP -1— 8V-1 VP -1 BV -1 — VP -1 BV -1 — VP -1 BV -1 — WO -2 BV -1 — VARIES 123 NOTES: 1. FOR EXACT LOCATIONS/CONFIGURATIONS OP WALL FINISHES, SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS— A6 SERIES SHEETS. 2. FOR CEIUNG AND SOFFIT HEIGHTS/CONFIGURATIONS, SEE REFLECTED CEILING PLAN A4.1 3. FOR FLOOR FINISHES, REFER TO FINISH FLOOR PLAN A3.1 MATERIAL LEGEND FLOORS v AEA v v IIT AMIL v WALLS / CEILING (� MOSAIC TILE: \ / PAINT: CONCRETE FLOOR: STAINED AND SEALED WOOD FLOOR: FINISH: EPDXY FLOORING: MFG: FINISH: SLATE TILE FLOOR: MFG: FINISH: / NATURAL SLATE FLOOR: / MFG: FINISH: BASE v v TILE BASE: WOOD BASE: (EPB \ EPDXY BASE: 1 / MFG: 4" WIDE x 3f" SOLID, RANDOM LENGTHS PROVIDE WATERPROOF MEMBRANE (COLD TAR/HOT MOP) OVER EXISTING CONCRETE FLOOR; WI" CDX PLYWOOD. G.C. TO PROVIDE 4 COATS OF EXTRA HEAVY DUTY POLYEURETHANE FINISH, SAND BETWEEN COATS, SUBMIT SAMPLE TO BITTON DESIGN GROUP FOR APPROVAL 12" x 12" W/ CLEAR MATTE SEALER W/ CLEAR MATTE SEALER 6x12 SLATE TILE BASE 6" HIGH W/ r COVE BASE E) STAIN: v AEI v GYPSUM BOARD: 3%" GYP BD, PREP FOR SMOOTH PAINT FINISH GYPSUM BOARD: 36" WATER RESISTANT GYP BD / DR \ DUROCK: V" DUROCK WD WOOD VENEER WALL: CEDAR PLANK CEILING: 1x6 TAG — CLEAR MATTE FINISH E-.) ONYX SLAB PANEL: AIX v Ltilk v v VENETIAN PLASTER FINISH: ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE: 24" x 48" x 5/8" ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE WASHABLE FACED, NON—PERFORATED PANELS, IN ALL ALUMINUM SUSPENSION SYSTEM WITH 12 GA. STAINLESS STEEL WIRES AS REQUIRED. PANEL MFG: ARMSTRONG CLEANROOM VINYL VL (NON—PERFORATED OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVED EQUAL). WHITE (LIGHT REFLECTANCE RATING IS 0.83) CHICAGO METALLIC (NO. 830) (800) 323-7164 SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. PANEL COLOR: GRID MFG: ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE: PANEL MFG: PANEL COLOR: GRID MFG: BRICK VENEER: 24" x 24" x 5/8" ACOUSTICAL CEIUNG TILE WASHABLE FACED, NON—PERFORATED PANELS, IN ALL ALUMINUM SUSPENSION SYSTEM WITH 12 GA. STAINLESS STEEL WIRES AS REQUIRED. ARMSTRONG CLEANROOM VINYL VL (NON—PERFORATED OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVED EQUAL). WHITE (LIGHT REFLECTANCE RATING IS 0.83) CHICAGO METALLIC (NO. 830) (800) 323-7164 SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. SHLLIdHdLi" A.0 CaO. 4$Ao:: A -LY 1a 19 rtols c6d cnciecluro 'OK"'",-:," SII mm66$+� r P19 ss1.ww ]'Alf"b:: SHarIp .HRHHHHHILCillfmnia C19'C! 84-1%1 2224C...Qaee®eS,w199 p..,s"„CA91301 143111,07.1. F01410).10]0 es% cu" HMI1.;CTHA WNI, C4121. H SCHS33 Rnv X565:,11H6 IHs,ewai fa: HE.HOnn.. GLUMAC ",xl,m.,1."WMWMW l",,.. 1. PROJECT ISSUE DATES 00/14/D61 PUN CHECK RCSLeCO"EFL . ICo. ICe,criElio, RS"IP AND U5: I13:.1NEM nn1r. Va4_4, no SCALE NOW SHEET TITLE FINISH SCHEDULE AND LEGEND A8.2 Los cuu_._S - t='Pao* MLAO+ awl awslwe..e cm,.cr.o,ecas mw elm353.9 srmlrOreArm: Norm Bock t eraw: TO,01.4958 p9172.4.w1 9aem MVO xrw ow,ou SUMS.. AaweNaAGnwenal P..707.1909 re1e90r.nee .7••• 'fon ann. Orr, OronS IN Aro, Jos fmm rre o nA0 Punt In519E91 Inc M5aw25 .5777417n wn a,e. Ol.76 Nor 8E5301871 Im: ROMP, CLUMAC SAA SH�EMMER+ALGAZ9 ASSOCIATES Inlerlor9 aria deft IeclJre K. SANITARY FACILITIES (GENERAL) 1. Sanitary facilities that serve buildings, facilities or portions of buildings or facilities that ore required to be accessible to persons with disabilities ore required to be accessible. Sec 11158.1 [3105A(b)Ii 2. Where separate facilities are prodded for non -disabled persons of each sex, separate facilities shall be provided for persons with disabilities of each sex also. Where unisex facilities ore prodded for non-handicapped/non-disabled persons, such unisex facilities can be prodded for persons with disabilities. Sec 111513.2 [3105A(b)IA1 3. Where facilities are to be used solely by small children, the specific heights may be adjusted to meet their accessibility needs. See 11158.3 [3105A(b)1B1 4. Doorways leading to men's sanitary facilities shall be identified by an equilateral triangle I/4" thick with edges 12" long and a vertex pointing upward. Women's sanitary facilities shall be identified by a circle 1/4" thick and 12" In diameter. See 11158.5 [3105A(b)101 5. Unisex sanitary facilities shall be Identified by a circle 1/4' thick, 12" in diameter. with a 1/4" thick triangle superimposed on the circle and within the 12' diameter. Sec 11150.5 [310580:010 6. Geometric (circle & triangle) symbols on sanitary facility doors shall be centered on the door at a height of 60" and their color and contrast shall be distinctly different from the color and contrast of the door. Sec 11158.5 [3105A(b)I[1]. NOTE: See also Section 111713.5.9 for additional signage requirements applicable to sanitary facilities. L SINGLE ACCOMMODATION SANITARY FACILITIES 1. There shall be suffclent space in the toilet roam for a wheelchair measuring 30' wide by 46" long to enter the room and permit the door to close. Sec 11158:7.2 [31058(4)38]. 2. There shdl be In the room a clear floor space of at least 60 -in diameter, or a T-shaped space complying with Figures 118-12(a) or (b). No door shall encroach Into this space. Sec 11158.7.2 [3105A(b)36]. Fig IIB -IA, 3. fie water closet shall be located in a space which provides a minimum 28" wide clear space from a fixture or a minimum 32" wide clear space from a wall at one side. The other side shall provide 18" from the centerline of the water closet to the wall. A minimum 48" clear space shall be prodded in front of the water closet. Sec 11158.7.2 [3105A(b)38]. Flg 11B-1 A. 4. All doors, fixtures and controls shall be on an accessible route with a minimum clear width of 36" except et doors. If a person In a wheelchair must make a tum around an obstruction, the minimum clear width of the accessible route shall be as shown In Figure 118-5E. Sec 11158.7.2 [3105A(b)313]. M. MULTIPLE ACCOMMODATION SANITARY FACILITIES 1. A clear space measured from the Door to a height of 27' above the floor, within the sanitary facility roam, of sufficient size to inscribe a circle with a diameter not less than 60", or a clear apace 56" by 63" In size. shall be prodded for wheelchair maneuvering. Doors other than the door to the occeseible toilet comportment in any position may encroach Into this space by not more than 12'. Sec 11158.7.1.1 [31058(6)38(1)1 Fig 11B -1B. 2. A water closet fixture located In a compartment shall provide a minimum 28' wide clear space from a fixture or a minimum 32" wide clear space from a wall at one side of the water close!. The other elde of the water closet shag provide 18" from the centerline of the water closet to the wall. Grab bars shall not project more than 3" Into these clear spaces. Sec 11158.7.1.2 [3105A(b)3A(I0I. FIg 118-16. 3. A minimum 48" long clear space shall be prodded in front of the water closet if the compartment has an end opening door (facing the water closet) and a minimum 60" long clear space shall be provided In front al the water closet if the comportment has a door located at the side. Grab bars shall not project more that 3" Into these clear spaces. Sec 11158.7.1.2 [31058(b)38(1l)1 Fig 11B-1A&B. 4. Water closet compartments shall be equipped with a door thot has an automatic -closing device, and shall have a clear, unobstructed opening width of 32" when located at the end and 34" when located at the side with the door positioned at an angle of 90 degrees from its closed position. Sec 11158.7.1.3 [31058(b)3A(t1Q]. Fig 11B -1A & B. 5. When standard compartment doors are used, with a minimum 9" clearance for footrests underneath and a self-closing device, clearance at the strike edge as specified in Section 1004.9.2.2 is not required. Sec 11158.7.1.3 131058(6)3801Q1 6. The inside and outside of the compartment door shall be equipped with a loop or U-shaped handle Immediately below the latch. The latch shall be flip -over style, sliding, or other hardware not requiring the user to grasp or twist, Sec 11158.7.1.3 [3105A(b)3A(III)]• 7. Except for door opening widths and door swings. a clear, unobstructed access not less than 44" shall he prodded to water closet compartments designed for use by persons with disabilities and the space immediately In front of a water closet comportment shall be not less than 48" as measured at a right angle to compartment door In Its closed position. Sec 11156.7.1.3 [3105A(b)3A(lIl)J Fig 118-1B. 8. Where elx or more stalls are provided within a multiple accommodation toilet room, in addition to the standard accessible stall required above, at least one additional stall shall be provided with a width of 36" with an outward swinging self-closing door and parallel grab bars complying with Sections 11158.8.2 through 11156.8.4. Sec 11158.7.1.4 [3105A(b)3A(Iv)J N. SANITARY FACILITY FIXTURES & ACCESSORIES 1. The height of accessible water closets shall be a minimum of 17" and a maximum of 19" measured to the top of a maximum 2' high toilet seat, except that 3' seats shall be permitted only In alterations where the existing fixture is less than 15" high. Sec 1502 [1502]. 2. A clear floor space 30" by 48" shell be provided In front of a lavatory to allow a forward approach. Such clear floor space shall adjoin or overtop an accessible route and shall extend into knee and toe space underneath the lavatory, Sec 11158.9.1.1 [31058(6)48(1)1 Fig 118-18. 3. Lavatories adjacent to a wall shall be mounted with a minimum distance of 18' to the center line of the fixture. See 1504.1 [1504(a)]. Fig 1113-1A. 4. Lavatories shall be mounted with the rim or counter surface no higher than 34" above the finished floor and with a clearance of at least 29' from the floor to the bottom of the apron with knee clearance under the front Ilp extending a minimum of 30" in width and 8' minimum depth at the top. Toe clearance shall be the same width and shall be a minimum of 9" high from the floor and a minimum of 17" deep from the front of the lavatory. Sec 1504.1 [1504(x)] 5. Hot water and drain pipes accessible under lavatories shall be Insulated or otherwise covered. There shall be no sharp or abrasive surfaces under lavatories. Sec 1504.2 [1504(b)]. 6. Where urinals are prodded, at least one shall have a clear floor space 30' by 48' In front of the urinal to allow forward approach. Sec 11158.9.4 [3105A(b)461 7. Where one or more urinals are provided, at least one with a rim projecting a minimum of 14" from the wall and at a maximum of 17" above the floor shall be provided. Sec 1503.1 [1503(a)]. 8. Controls for water closet flush valves shall be mounted on the wide side of toilet areas. Sec 1502 [1502]. 9. Water closet and urinal flush valve controls, and faucet and operating mechanism controls, shall be operable with one hand, shall not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist, and shall be mounted no more than 44" above the floor. Sec 1502, 1503.2. & 1504.3 [1502, 1503(6), & 1504(n)]. 10. The force required to activate water closet and urinal flush valve controls, and faucet and operating mechanism controls. shall be no greater than 5 Ibf, Sec 1502, 1503.2, & 1504.3 [1502. 1503(6), & 1504(c)]. 11. Self-closing faucet control valves are allowed If the faucet remains open for at least 10 seconds. Sec 1504.3 [1504(c)]. 12. Mirrors shall be mounted with the bottom edge no higher than 40" from the floor. Sec 11158.9.1.2 [3105A(b)4A(II)1 13. Where towel. sanitary napkins, waste receptacles, and other similar dispensing and disposal fixtures ore provided, at least one of each type shall be located with all operable parts, Including cola slots, within 40" from the finished floor. Sec 11158.9.2 [3105A(b)48]. 14. Toilet tissue dispensers shall be located on the wall within 12" of the front edge of the toilet seat and no lower than 19" from the floor. Dispensers that control delivery or that do not permit continuous paper flow shall not be used. See 11158.9.3 [3105A(b)4C1 Fig 116-1A. 15. Toilet room floors shall have a smooth, hard, non-absorbent surface such as Portland cement, concrete, ceramic tile or other approved material which extends upward onto the walls at least 5". Walls within water closet compartments and wails within 24" of the front and sides of urinals shall be similarly finished to a height of 48' and, except for structural elements, the materials used in such walls shall be a type which is not adversely affected by moisture. Sec 11158.9.5 [3105A(b)5]. 0. GRAB BARS 1. Grab bars shall be located on each side. or on one side and the back of the accessible toilet stall or compartment. Sec 11158.8.1 [3105A(b)3C(I)1 Fig 116-1A, B. & C. 2. Grab bars at the side shall be at least 42' long with the front end positioned 24" in front of the water closet stool and with the back end positioned no more than 12" from the rear wall. Grab bare at the back shall be not less than 36" long. Sec 11158.8.1 [3105A(b)3C(1)]. Flg 118-1A, 8, & C. 3. Grab bars shall be securely attached 33" above end parallel to the floor, except that where a tank -type toilet is used which obstructs placement at 33", the grab bar may be as high as 36". Sec 11158.8.1 [3105A(b)3C(I)]. Flg 1113-1A. 4. The diameter or width of the gripping surfaces of a grab bar shall be 1-1/4" to 1-1/2" or the shape shall provide an equivalent gripping surface. If grab bars are mounted adjacent to a wall, the apace between the wail and the grab bars shall be 1-1/2". Sec 11156.8.2 [3105A(b)30(I0]. Fig 11B -1C. 5. A grab bar and any wall or other surface adjacent to It shall be free of any sharp or abrasive elements. Edges shill have a minimum radius of 1/8'. Sec 11156.8.4 [3105A(b)3C(Iv)1 P. DRINKING FOUNTAINS 1. In now construction, where more than one drinking fountain or water cooler is provided on a floor, 50% of those provided shall comply with Plumbing Code Section 1507 and shall be an an accessible route. Sec 11178.1.1. 2. Drinking fountains shall be located completely within alcoves or otherwise positioned so as not to encroach into pedestrian ways. The alcove in which the water fountain Is located shall be not lees than 32" in width and 18" in depth. Sec 11178.1.2 [3105A(d)IB]. Fig 119-3. 3. Drinking fountains shall be a minimum of 18" in depth and there shall be a clear and unobstructed knee space under the drinking fountain not lees than 27" in height and 8" In depth,the depth measurement being taken from the front edge ofthe fountain. Sec 1507.1 [1507(0)1 Be 118-3. 4. There shall be toe clearance. of 9" in height above the floor, and 17" In depth from the front edge of the fountain. Sec 1507.1 [1507(o)]. 5. A side approach drinking fountain is not acceptable. Sec 1507,1 [1507(a)]. 6. The drinking fountain bubbler shall be activated by o control which Is easty operated by a handicapped person, such as a hand -operated level type control located within 6' of the front of the fountain, a push bar control along the front of the drinking fountain, etc. Sec 1507.2 [1507(b)]. Fig 11B-3. 7. The bubbler outlet orifice shall be located within 6' of the front of the drinking fountain and shall be within 36" of the floor, The water stream from the bubbler shall be substantially parallel to the front edge of the drinking fountain. Sec 1507.2 [1507(6)]. Flg 116-3. Q. PUBLIC TELEPHONES 1. If public telephones are prodded, they shall be made accessible. Sec 11178.2.1 [3105A(d)2A1 2. A clear floor or ground space at least 30" by 48' that allows either a forward or parallel approach by a person using a wheelchair shall be provided et telephones. Sec 11179.2.2 [3105A(d)281 Fig 118-4. 3 Bases, enclosures and fixed seats shall not Impede approaches to telephones by people who use wheelchairs. Sec 11176.2.5 [3105A(d)2E1 4. The highest operable part of the telephone shall be within 48' of the floor if forward approached and 54" If side approached. Sec 11178.2.6 [3105A(d)2F1 Fig 118-4. 5. Telephones mounted diagonally In a corner that require wheelchair users to reach diagonally shall hove the highest operable part no higher than 54" above the floor. Sec 11178.2.6 [3105A(d)2F]. Fig 116-4. 6. The cord from the telephone to the handset shall be at least 29" long. Sec 11178.2,11 [3105A(d)2k]. 7. Telephones shall have push-button controls where service for such equipment is available. Sec 1178.2.10 [3105A(d)24 8. If telephone enclosures are prodded, they shall comply with the following: Sec 11178.2.7 [3105A(d)2G]. a; For side approach telephones, the enclosure overhang shall be no greater than 19" and the height of the lowest overhanging part shall be equal to or greater than 27". Sec 11178.2.7.1 [3105A(d)2G(I)J FIg 11B -4(a). b. For forward approach telephones, If the enclosure overhang la greater than 12", the clear width of the enclosure shall be 30" minimum; if the deer width of the enclosure is less than 30", the height of the lowest overhanging part shall be equal to or greater than 27". Sec 11178.2.7.3 [3105A(d)2G(tl1)1 Fig 11B -4(c). e. Entrances to full -height enclosures shall be 30" minimum. Sec 11178.2.7.2 [3105A(d)2G(i1)]. Fig 119-4(b). d. Where telephone enclosures protrude Into walls, halls, corridors or aisles, they shall comply with Section 1121 B. Sec 11178.2.7.4 [3105A(d)2G(Iv)1 9. Telephones shall be equipped with a receiver that generates a magnetic field In the area of the receiver cap. If bunks of public telephones are provided, at least one in each bank and a total of at least 25% of the total number of public telephones, including closed circuit telephones in a building or facility, shell be equipped with a volume control. Such telephones shall be capable of a minimum of 12 dbA and a maximum of 18 dbA above normal. If en automatic reset is provided, 18 dbA may be exceeded. Public telephones with volume control shall be hearing old compatible and shall be identified by a wigs containing a depiction of a telephone handset with radiating sound waves. Sec 111713.2.8 [3105A(d)2H1 10. If a total of four or more public pay telephones are provided at the Interior and exterior of a site, and if atleast one of the total Is In an interior location, then at least one interior public text telephone shall be provided. Sec 11176.2.9.1 [3105A(d)21(I)1 11. Text telephones shall comply with the fallowing: Sec 11178.2.9.2 [31058(01(101 a, Text telephones used with a pay telephone shall be permanently affixed within or adjacent to the telephone enclosure. If an acoustic coupler Is used, the telephone cord shall be sufficiently lohg to allow connection of the text telephone and telephone receiver. Sec 11178.2.9.2.1 (3105A(d)21(II)a]. b. Pay telephones designed to accommodate a portable text telephone shall be equipped with a shelf and an electrical outJet within or adjacent to the telephone enclosure. The telephone handset shall be capable of accommodating a text telephone and shall ham 6" minimum vertical clearance in the area where the text telephone Is to be placed. Sac 11178.2.9.2.2 [3105A(d)21(II)b1 c. Equivalent facilitation may be substituted for the above requirements as described in Section 11176.2.9.2.3. Sec 11178.2.9.2.3 [31058(021(11)c1 d. Text telephones shall be identified by the International TDD symbol (see Figure 116-14). if a facility has a public text telephone, directional signage Indicating the location of the nearest such telephone shall be placed adjacent to all banks of telephones that de not contain a text telephone. Such directional signage shall Include the international TDD symbol. If a facility has no banks of telephones, the directional signage shall be provided at the entrance or in e building directory. Sec 11178.2.9.3 [3105A(d)21(III)]. 12. If telephone books are provided, they shall be located within 48" of the floor if forward approached and within 54" if side approached. Sec 11176.2.12 [3105A(d)213 0 r� N *HEIGHT TO HIGHEST OPERABLE PART WHICH S ESSENTIAL TO BASIC OPERATION OF THE TELEPHONE. R. CONTROLS & OPERATING MECHANISMS 1. Controls and operating mechanisms required to be accessible by Section 101.17.1-10 shall comply with the requirements of Section 11176.6. Sec 11176.6.1 [3105A(01]. 2. Clear floor space complying with Section 11186.4 that allows a forward or parallel approach by a person using a wheelchair shall be prodded at controls, dispensers. receptacles, and other operable equipment. Sec 11178.6.2 [3105A(f)2]. 3, The highest operable part of all controls, dispensers. receptacles, and other operable equipment shall be placed within 48" of the floor but not lower than 15" if forward approached and within S4' but not lower than 9" If side approached. Sec 11178.6.3 [3105A(f)31 4. Controls and operating mechanisms shall be operable with one hand and shall not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist. The force required to activate controls shall be no greater than 5 pounds of force. Sec 11176.6.4 & 1507.2a [31058(1)41 5. Faucet controls and operating mechanisms for kitchen sinks' shall be operable with one hand and shall not requIre grasping. pinching, or twisting of the wrist. The force required to active faucet controls and operating mechanisms for kitchen sinks shall be no greater than 5 plf. Lever -operated, push -type, and electronically controlled mechanietne are examples of aceeptabie designs, Self-closing valves are allowed if the faucet remains open for at least 10 seconds. Sec 1508 [1508] 6. Vending machines shall be installed in compliance with Section 11178.6 through 11178.6.4. Sec 11268 [31058(p)]. 00 uta C❑NTR❑LS SWITCHES & OUTLETS S. HAZARDS & PROTRUDING OBJECTS 1. Abrupt changes In level, except between a walk or sidewalk and an adjacent street or driveway, exceeding 4" In a vertical dimension, such as al planters or fountains located in or adjacent to walks, sidewalks, or other pedestrian ways, shall be Identified by warning curbs projecting at least 6" in height above the walk or sidewalk surface to warn the blind of a potential drop oft Sec 1024.1 [3325(x)] 2. When a guardrail or handrail is provided, no warning curb Is required when a gulderall Is provided centered 3" & 1' above the surface of the walk or sldewdk, the walk 1e 5 percent or less gradient. or no adjacent hazard exists. Sec 1024.1 [3325(o)] Fig 118-27(b). 3. Objects projecting from walls with their leading edges between 27" and 80" above the finished floor shall protrude no more than 4" into walks, halls, corridors. passageways, or aisles. Sec 1121 8.1 [3105A(k) I]. FIg 11B -7A. 4. Objects mounted with their leading edges at or below 27" above the finished floor may protrude any amount into walks, halls, corridors, passageways or aisles. Sec 11218.1 [3105A(k)1]. Fig 116-7A. 5. Free-standing objects mounted on posts or pylons may overhang 12' maximum from 27' to 80" above the ground or finished floor. Sec 11216.1 [31058(011 6. Protruding objects shall not reduce the clear width of an accessible route or maneuvering space. Sec 11218.1 [3105A(k)1]. 7. Walks, halls, corridors, passageways, aides or other circulation spaces shall have 80" minimum clear head room. Sec 1121 13.1 [3105A(k)21 FIg 116-7A. 8. Any obstruction that overhangs a pedestrian way shill be a minimum of 80' above the walking surface es measured from the bottom of the obstruction. Sec 1024.2 [3325(b)]. Fig 11B-28. 9. Where a guy support is used parallel to a path of travel Including, but not limited to. sidewalks, a guy brace, sidewalk guy or similar device shall be used to prevent an overhanging obstruction as defined. Sec 1024.2 [3325(b)]. 10. if a walk crosses or adjoins a vehicular way, and the walking surfaces are not separated by curbs, railings, or other elements between the pedestrian areas and vehicular areas, the boundary between the areas shall be defined by a continuous detectable warning which is 36' wide, complying with Section 1024.3 . Sec 1024.5 [3325(e)]. T. SPACE ALLOWANCE & REACH RANGES I. The minimum clear floor or ground apace required to accommodate a single, stationary wheelchair and occupant is 30" by 48'. (The minimum floor or ground space shall be increased to 42" by 48" when such space is perpendicular to an adjacent seating space). The minimum clear floor or ground space for wheelchairs may be positioned for forward or parallel approach to an object. Clear floor or ground space for wheelchairs may be part of the knee space required under some objects. Sec 11178.2.3 & 11186.4.1 [3105A(d)2C & 3105A(h)4A]. 2. One full unobstructed side of the clear floor or ground apace for a wheelchair shall adjoin or overlap an accessible route or adjoin another wheelchair clear floor space. If a clear floor or ground space for a wheelchair la located In an alcove or otherwise confined on all or part of three sides, additional maneuvering clearances shall be provided. Sec 11178.2.4 & 11188.4.2 [3105A(d)20 & 3105A(h)413].Fig 3. The space required for a wheelchair to make a 180 degree turn is a clear space of 60" diameter or a T-shaped apace. Sec 111883 (3105A(h)3]. FIg 11B -12(a) es (b). 4. The minimum clear width required for a wheelchair to turn around an obstruction shall be 36" where the obstruction is 48° or more In length and 42" and 48" where the obstruction is less than 48" In length. Fig 118-5E. 5. The minimum clear width for single wheelchair passage shall be 32" at a point (24' maximum length) and 36" continuously. Sec 11188.1 [3105A(h)1]. Fig 118-10. 6. The minimum width far lea wheelchairs to pass Is 80'. Sec 11188.2 [3105A(h)2]. Fig 11B-11. 7. If the clear floor space only allows forward approach to en object, the maximum high forward reach allowed shall be 48". See Figure 11B-5C(a). The minimum low forward reach In 15 ". If the high forward reach Is over an obstruction, reach and clearances shall be as shown In Figure 118-5C(b). Sec 11188.5 [3105A(h)4C]. 6, If the clear floor space allows parallel approach by a person In a wheelchair, the maximum high side reach allowed shall be 54' and the low side reach shall be no less than 9" above the floor us shown in Figures 118-5D(a) & (h). If the side reach Is over and obstruction, the reach and cleorances shall be as shown In Figure 11B-5D(c). Sec 11188.8 [3105A(h)40]. U. EMPLOYEE WORK AREAS & WORK STATIONS 1. Specific work stations, with theexception of work stations In sales facilities, checkstands, ticket booths, and other work stations with specific requirements contained in other portions of the regulations, need only comply with aide width and floors and levels, and entry -ways shall be 32 " In clear width. Sec 11236.2 [3105A(m)2]. 2. Em[Sloyee work areas shall be accessible by means of a 36 minimum aisle and a 32" minimum clear opening door width. Sec 11058.3.2.3, 11058.3.3.2.& 11088.5 [3103A(c)28(llI), 3103A(c)2D(Il), & 31038(0)41 3. Employee areas shall conform to all requirements of the Division of the State Architect/Access Compliance Section In the California Building Code, Plumbing Code, and Electrical Code. Sec 11238.1 [3105A(m)I]. V. FIXED OR BUILT-IN SEATING, TABLES, & COUNTERS 1. Where fixed or built -In seating, tables, or counters are provided for the public, and In general employee areas. 5%, but never less than 1 must be accessible, as required In Section 11228. Sec 11228.1 [3105A(I)1]. 2. The tops of tables and counters shall be 28' to 34" from the floor or ground. Sec 112213.4 [31058(1)41 3. If seating for people In wheelchairs la provided at fixed tables or counters, knee spaces at least 27" high, 30" wide, and 19' deep shall be prodded. Sec 11228.3 [310580)31 Fig 118-13. 4. If seating spaces for people In wheelchairs are provided at fixed tables or counters, clear floor space complying with Section 11188.4 shall be prodded. Such clear floor space shall not overlap knee space by more than 19". Sec 11226.2 [31058(1)21 Fig 118-13. 5. Where a single counter contains mare than one transaction station, such as (but not limited to) a bank. counter with multiple taller windows or a retail sales counter with multiple cash register stations, at least 5%, but never less than 1, of each type of station shall be located at a election of counter that ie at least 36" long and no more than 28' to 34' high. Sec 11226.4 [31058(1)4]. W. SIGNS & IDENTIFICATION 1. The Intematlonal Symbol of Accessibility shall consist of a white figure on a blue background. The blue shall be equal to Color Na. 15090 In Federal Standard 599b. Sec 11178.5.1.2 [3105A(e)2] 2. Letters and numbers on signs shall have a width -to -height ratio of between 3:5 and 1:1 and a stroke width -to -height ratio between 1:5 and 1:1 0. Sec 111178.5.3 [31058(e)4]. 3. Characters and numbers on signs shat be shed according to the viewing distance from which they ore to be read. The minimum height Is measured using an upper case X. Lower case characters are permitted. For signs suspended or projected above the finish floor in compliance with Section 11218, the minimum character height shall be 3'. Sec 11178.5.4 [3105A(e)5]. 4. Characters and symbols shell contrast with their background, either light characters on a dark background or dark characters on a light background. Sec 11178.5.5 [3105A(e)6]. 5. When raised characters or symbols are used, they shall conform to the following: Sec 11178.5.6 [3105A(e)7]. a. Letters and numbers on signs shall be raised 1/32" minimum and shall be sons -serif uppercase characters accompanied by Grade 2 Braille. Sec 11178.5.6.1 [31058(6)74]. b. Raised characters or symbols shall be a minimum of 5/8' high. Sec 11178.5.6.2 [31058(5)781 c. Pictorial symbol signs (pictograms) shall be accompanied by the equivalent verbal description placed directly below the pictogram. The border dimension of the pictogram shall be a minimum of 6' In height. Sec 11178.5.6:3 [3105A(e)7C1 6. Contracted Grade 2 Braille shall be used wherever Braille symbols are specifically required in other portion's of these regulations. Dots shall be 1/10" an centers In each cell with 2/10" apace between cells. Dots shall be raised a minimum of 1/40" above the background. Sec 11178.5.2 [3105A(e)3]. 7. All building entrances that are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities and at every major junction along or leading to an accessible route of travel shall be identified with a sign displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility and with additional directional signs, as required, to be visible to persons along approaching pedestrian ways. Sec 11176.5.7& 11278.3 [3105A(e)8&3106A(c)]. 1111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 E•� ��d1111 voa IIWZOM ENTRY & DIRECTIONAL SIGNS 6. When permanent identification Is provided for rooms and spaces, raised letters shall be prodded and shall be accompanied by Wallis in conformance with Sections 11178.5.6 through 11178.5.6.3. Signs shall be installed on the wail adjacent to the latch side of the door. Where there is no wall space on the latch elde. Including at double leaf doors, signs shall be placed on the nearest adjacent wall, preferably an the right. Mounting height shall be 60" above the finished floor to the centerline of the sign. Mounting location shall be determined so that a person may approach within 3" of signage without encountering protruding objects or standing within the swing of a door. Sec 11178.5.9 [3105A(e)10]. 9. Pole supported pedestrian traffic control buttons shall be Identified with color coding consisting of a textured horizontal yellow band 2" in width encircling the pole, and a 1" wide dark border band above and below this yellow band. Color coding should be placed Immediately above the control button. Control buttons shall be located no higher than 48" above the surface adjacent to the pole. Sec 11178.5.10 [31058(0)11], SS. ELECTRICAL 1. The center of electrical and communication system receptacle outlets shall be Installed not less than 15' above the Floor or working platform. Sec 11176.6.3 [3105A(f)3J & 210-7(g). 2. The center of the grip of the operating handle of controls or switches Intended to be used by the occupant of the room or area to control lighting and receptacle outlets, appliances, or cooling, heating, and ventilating equipment shall not be more than 48' above the floor or working platform. Sec 380-8(c). 3. The center of fire alarm initiating devices (boxes) shall be located 48" above the level of the floor, working platform, ground surface, or sidewalk. Sec 760-9. ervawa for•Lelrew•rvw,e ' CD.JECT ISS -.E DAT'' emvsumu NC '„SC Or MCC rs MOE., SCALE. AS NOTES ADA ACCESSIBILITY A9.1 A. SITE DEVELOPMENT & ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL I. When more than one building or facility Is located on a site, accessible routes of travel shall be provided between buildings and accessible site facilities. Sec 11279.1 [3106A(a)], 2. The acceaslble route of travel shall be the most practical direct route between accessible building entrances, accessible site facilities, and the accessible entrance to the site. Sec 11278.1 [3106A(a)]. 3. At !goat one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall b. provided from public transportation steps, accessible parking and accessible passenger loading cones, and public streets or sidewalks, to the accessible building entrance they serve. The accessible route shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for the general public. Sec 11148.1.2 [31038(02]. 4. When a building or portion of a building Is required to be accessible or adaptable, an accessible route of travel shall be provided to all portions of the building, to accesslble building entrances, and between the building and the publlo way. Sec 11148.1.2 [3103A(02]. 5. At least one accessible route shall connect accessible building or facility entrances with oil accessible spaces and elements that are on the earns site and with all accessible dwelling units within the building or facility. Sec 11141.1.2 [31038(02]. 6. When more than one route of travel Is provided, all routes shall be accessible. Sec 11149.1.2 [3103A(1)2]. B. WALKS & SIDEWALKS 1. Walks and sidewalks shall have a continuous common surface, not Interrupted by steps or by abrupt changes in level exceeding 34", and shall be a minimum of 48" In width. Sec 1023.1 [3324(a)]. Flg 111-27(a). 2. When abrupt changes in level not exceeding 34" occur, they shall be beveled with a elope no greater than 1:2, except that level changes not exceeding 1/4" may be vertical. Sec 1023.4 [3324(0)]. Fig 116-5E (c) & (d). 3. Abrupt changes in level along any accessible route exceeding 34" shall comply with the requirements for curb ramps. Sec 1023.4 [3324(4)]. 4. When the elope in the direction of travel of any walk exceeds 1 vertical to 20 horizontal H shall comply with the provisions of Section 1007 as a pedestrian ramp. Sec 1023.3 [3324(x)]. 5. Walk and sidewalk surface cross slopes shall not exceed 1/4" per foot. Sec 1023.1.3 [3324(e)3]. 6. Walks shall be provided with a level area not less than 60" by 60" at a door or gate that swings toward the walk, and not less than 48" wade by 44" deep at a door or gate that swings away from the walk. See 1023.5 [3324(e)]. 7. Walks shall extend a minimum of 24" to the side of the strike edge of a door or gate that swings toward the walk. Sec 1023.5 [3324(e)]. 8. All walks with continuous gradients shall hove level areae at least 5' In length at Intervals of at least every 400'. See 1023.6[3324(f)]. 9. Walk and sidewalk surfaces shall be slip -resistant as follows: Sec 1023.1 [3324(a)]. e. Surfaces with a elope of less than 6% gradient shall be at least as slip-realetant as that described as a medium salted finish. b. Surfaces with a slope of 6% gradient shall be slip -resistant. 10. Walks. sidewalks. and pedestrian ways ahell be free of gratings whenever possible. For gratings !seated In the B urfaoe of any of the. areas. grid openings in gratings shall be no greater than 34" wide in one direction. If gratings have elongated openings, they shell be placed e n that the long dimension Is perpendicular to the dominant direction of travel. Sec 11248.4 & 1023.2 [3105A(n)4 & 3324(b)]. Flg 11B -71(a). CONC. WALK 1/4" GROOVING 1 11/2" O.C. RAMP DOWN 1 20 SLOPE TOP OF HAND RAIL 60"x60" M:N [ 60" MIN. SLOPE 1.20 72" MIN. CLEAR n\ in HAND RA LS AND 2" GUIDE SECTION 1 336.5.5. AS REQUIRED CURB BOTH SIDES PER UBC, 12" _TTP- +pro C. RAMPS GUIDE RAIL CENTERED - AT3"t 1" 72" MIN. CLEAR 1. The maximum dope of a ramp that serve. any exttwey, provides cc.ss for persons with disabilities, or Is In It,. path of travel shall be 1' rtes In 12' of horizontal run. Sex 1007.3 [3307(0.1)1]. 2. The cross slope of romp surfaces shall be no greater than 1:50. Sec 1007.3.1 [33070.1)2]. 3. The width of ramps shall be as required for stairways and exits. Sec 1007.2a [3307(6.1)1]. Fig 1 11-38 & 39. 4. Pedestrian ramps serving primary entrances to buildings having an occupant load of 300 or more shall have a minimum clear width of 60". 5e0 1007.2.2 [3307(6.1)2]. 5. All other pedestrian ramps serving primary entrance. shall have a minimum width of 48". Seo 1007.2.2 [3307(b.1)2]. 6. Landings shall be provided at the top and bottom of each ramp. Sen 1007.4. 10 [3307(d.1)1]. Flg 118-38 & 39. 7. Intermediate landings shall be provided at Intervals not exceeding 30" of vertical rise and at each change of direction. Sec 1007.4.ta [3307(0.1)1). Flg 116-38 & 39. 8. Top landings shall be not less than 60" wide and shall have a length of not less than 60" in the direction of ramp run. Sec 1007.4.2 [3307(4.1)2]. Flg 111-38 & 39. 9. Doors In any position shall not reduce the minimum dimension of the ramp landing to less than 42" and shall not reduce the required width by more than 3" when fully open. Sec 1007.4.3 [3307(0.1)3]. Flg 11B-38 & 39. 10. The width of the landing shall extend 24" past the strike edge of any door or gate for exterior ramps and 18" post the strike edge for interior ramps. Sec 1007.4.4 [3307(0.1)4]. Fig 118-39. 11. At bottom and Intermediate landings, the width shall be at least the same as required for the ramp. Sac 1007.4.5 [3307(0.1)5]. Fig 1113-38 & 39. 12. Intermediate landing at a change of direction in excess of 30 degrees and bottom landings shall have a dimension to the direction of ramp run of not less than 72" to accommodate the handrail extension. Seo 1007.4.6 [3307(4.1)6]. Fig 118-38 & 39. 13. Other Intermediate landings shall have a dimension in the direction of ramp run of not leas than 60". Sec 1007.4.7 [3307(d.1)7]. Fig 111-38. 14. Ramp landings are not considered in determining the maximum horizontal distance of each ramp. See 1007.4.1a[3307(d.t)1]. 15. Handrails are required on ramps that provide access if the ramp slope exceeds I' rise in 20' of horizontal run. See 1007.5a [3307(e.1)]. 16. Handrails shall be placed on each side of each ramp, shall be continuous the full length of the ramp, shall be 34" to 38" above the ramp surface, shall extend a minimum of I' beyond the top and bottom of the ramp. and the ends shall be resumed. Sec 1007.5a [3307(..1)]. Fig 118-27 (b) & (c). 17. The grip portion of handrails shall be not less than 1-1/4" nor mon than 1-1/2", or the shape shall provide an equivalent gripping surface, and all surfaces shall be smooth with no sharp comer. Handrails shall not rotate within their fittings. Sec 1007.5a [3307(e.1)]. Flg 118-36. 18. Handrails projecting from a wall shall have a space of 1-1/2" between the wall and the handrail. Sec 1007.5a [3307(e.1)]. Flg 118-36. 19. Handrails may be located In a recess If the recess is a maximum of 3" deep and extends at least 18" above the top of the rail. See 1007.5o [3307(e.1)]. Fig 118-36. 20. Any wall or other surface adjacent to handrails shall be free of sharp or abradve elem•n's. Edges shall have a minimum radius of 1/8". Sec 1007.5a [3307(e.1)]. Flg 118-36. 21. Where the ramp surface la not bounded by a wall or fence And the ramp exceed. 10' in length, the ramp shall comply with one of the following requirements: See 1007.10 [3307(h.1)). Flg 112-27(b) & (e). a. A gelds curb a minimum of 2" In height shall be provided at each side of the ramp: or b. A wheel guide rail shall be provided, centered 3" di 1" above the surface of the romp. 22. Outdoor ramps and their approaches shall be designed and constructed so that water will not accumulate on walking surfaces. Sec. 1007.3.2. 60" MIN. LANDING CONC. WALK 1/4" GROOVING II 1 1(2" O.C. RAMP DOWN 1 : 20 SLOPE 72" MIN. CLEAR, • of 2 in - HAND RA LS AND 2" GUIDE SECTION 1 330.5 5. AS REQUIRED CURB BOTH SIDES PER UBC, 6. 11 diagonal (comer type) curb ramps have returned curbs or other well-defined edges, ouch edges shall be parallel to the direction of pedestrian flow. The bottom of diagonal curb ramps shall have 48" minimum clear space. If diagonal curb romps are provided at marked crossings, the 48" clear space shall be within the markings. If diagonal curb ramps hove flared sides. they shall also have at least a 24" long segment of straight curb located on each sIde of the curb ramp and within the marked crossing. Sec 11278.5.10 [3106A(e)10]. 7. The surface of each curb ramp and lie flared sides shall be stable, firm, and slip -resistant and shall be of contrasting finlah from that of the adjacent sidewalk. Sao 11276.5.6 [3106A(e)8]. 8. All curb ramps shall have a grooved border 12" wide at the level surface of the sidewalk along the top and each rade approximately 3/4" on center. All curb ramps constructed between the face of the curb and the street shall have a grooved border at the level surface of the sidewalk. Sec 11279.5.7 [3106A(e)7]. 9. A curb ramp shall have a detectable warning that extends the full width and depth of the curb romp Inside the grooved border when the ramp slope is less than 1 vertical to 15 horizontal. Detectable warnings shall consist of raised truncated domes with a diameter of nominal 0.9" of the base tapering fa 0.45" at the top, a height of nominal 0,2", and a center -to -center spacing of nominal 2.35", in compliance with Figure 111-23. "Nominal", as used here, shall be In accordance with Section 12-31-102, State Referenced Standards Code. The detectable warning shall contrast visually with adjoining surfaces, either light -on -dark or dark on -light. The material used to provide contrast shall be an integral part o1 the walking surface. The domes may be constructed in a variety of methods. Including cast -In-place or stamped, or may be part of a prefabricated surface treatment. Sec 11276.5.8 [3106A(e)8]. 10. Curb ramps ehan be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked can. Sec 11278.5.9 [3106A(e)9], FRONT EDGE OF, WALKWAY. 1 tTl )SIDESL E. PARKING 4'-0" MIN. RAMP SURFACE I MIN. i r I I SECTION A rl PLANTING (TYP.) APPROX. 3/4" O.C. - (1 1/2" ON SLOPING I PORTION OF RAMP.) 1/4",c, • _4'-- -a.- SECT ON B 1. Where single accessible parking spaces are provided, they shall be 14' wide and outlined to provide a 9' parking area and a 5' loading and unloading access aisle on the passenger side of the vehicle. Sea 11291.4.1 [3107A(b)l]. Flg 11B-188. 2. When more than one acceaslble parking space is provided, In lieu of providing a 14' wide space for each parking apace, two spaces can be provided within a 23' wide area lined to provide a 9' parking area on each side of o 5' loading and unloadingss aisle in the center. S. 11298.4.1 [3107A(b)I]e Flg 118-18A & C. 3. The minimum length of an accessible parking space shall be 18'. Sec 11298.4.1 [3107A(b)1]. Flg 116-18A, B. & C. 4. When less than 5 parking spaces are provided al * buildings and facilities 'object to these regulations, one shall be 14' wide and lined to provide a 9' parking area and a 5' loading and unloading area However, there Is no requirement that the space be reserved exclusively or identified for use by persons with disabilities only. Seo 11296.2 [3107A(a)2]. TOP OF HAND RAIL -- ,_y o 60" x 60" SLOPE 11_20 n3 72" MIN CLEAR 60" MIN. GUIDE RAIL CENTERED AT 3" s 1" D. CURB RAMPS 1. Curb romps shall be a minimum of 4' In width and shall lie, generally, In a single sloped plane, with a minimum of surface warping and cress slope. Sec 11278.5.2 [3106A(e)2]. 2. The slope of cum ramps shall not exceed 1 vertical to 12 horizontal. Sec 11279.5.3 [3106A(e)3]. 3. Maximum slopes of adjoining gutters, road surface Immediately adjacent to the curb ramp. or accessible route, shall not exceed 1:20 wtthln 4' of the tap and bottom of the curb ramp. The slope of the fanned or flared sides of cum ramps shall not exceed 1 vertical to 8 horizontal. Sec 11278.5.3 [3106A(e)3]. 4. A level landing 4' deep shall be provided at the upper end of each curb ramp over Hs full width to permit safe egress from the ramp surface, or the slope of the fanned or flared side, of the curb ramp shall not exceed 1 vertical to 12 horizontal. Sec 11278.5.4 [3106A(e)4]. 5. Transitions from ramps to walks, gutters, or streets shall be flush and free of abrupt changes, except that the lower end of each curb ramp shall have a 1/2" lip beveled at 45 degrees. Sec 11278.5.3 811271.5.5 [3108A(e)3 & 5]. 5. One in every eight accessible spaces, but not less than one. shall be served by an aocess aisle 96" wide minimum end shall be designated van acceaslble. All such spas may be grouped on one level of a parking structure. Sec 11298.4.2 [31078(b)2]. 6. Surface slopes of accessible parking spaces shall be the minimum possible and shall not exceed 1/4" per foot In any diroctlon. Seo 11298.4.4 [3107A(b)4]. 7. All entrances to and vertical cleamncee within parking structures shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 8'-2" where required for accessibility to accessible parking spaces. Sec 11308 [31078(4)]. 8. In each parking area a bumper or cum shall be provided and located to prevent encroachment of can over the required width of walkways. Sec 11298.4.3 [3107A(b)3]. Flg 111 18A, 8, & C. 9. Pedestrian ways which are accessible to people with disabilities shall be provided from each such parking space 10 related facilities, including curb cuts or ramps as needed. Sec 11298.4.3 [31078(b)3]. FTg 118-188, B, & C. 10. Ramps shall not encroach into any parking space, with the exception of a transition ramp from a loading/unloadlny area to an adjacent sidewalk. The transition ramp shall be a minimum of 48" In width, a maximum of 60" In length, with a maximum slope of 1:12. See 11291.4.3 [3107A(b)3]. Fig 1113-18A, B, & C. 11. Accessible parking spaces shall be so located that persons with dtsabillHes are not compelled to wheel or walk behind parked cars other than their own. Sec 11298.4.3 [3107A(b)3]. •µ 51 PARKING SIGNAGE 12. Each parking space reserved for persona with dtsabillHes shall be Identified by a reflector/zed elgn permanently posted Immediately adjacent to and visible from each stall or space, consfstlng of a profile view of a whesaehalr with occupant In white on dark blue background. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square Inches in area and, when In a path of travel, shall be posted at a minimum height of 80" from the bottom of the sign to the parking apace finished grade. Sea 11298.5 [3107A(c)]. Flg 118-18A, B. & C. 13. Signs to Identify accessible parking spaces may be centered on the wall at the Interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 36" from the parking space finished grade, ground or sidewalk. See 112913.5 [31078(.)]. 14. Van accessible parking spaces shall have an additional sign elating "Van -Accessible" mounted below the symbol of accessibility. Sec 11291.5 [3107A(c)]. 15. An additional sign shall also be posted, In a conspicuous place, at each entrance to off-street parking facilities, or immediately adjacent to and vlsible from each stall or space. The elan shall be not leas than 17" by 22" in sloe with lettering not leas than 1" in height. which clearly and conspicuously states the following: Sec 11298.5 [3107A(c)]. "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates Issued for persons with disabllBles may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephoning Not&. Blank spaces are to be filled in with appropriate Information as a permanent part of the etgn. 16. The surface of each accessible parking space or stall shall have a surface Identification duplicating either of the following schemes: Sec 11291.5 [31078(c)]. Flg 118-18A, B, & C. a. By outlining or painting the stall or space in blue and ouHlning on the ground in the stall or space in white or auHabie contrasting color a profile view depicting a wheelchair with occupants or b. By outlining a profile view of a wheelchair with occupant In white on blue background. The profile clew shall be located so that It Is visible to a traffic enforcement officer when a vehicle is properly parked In the vac. and shall be 36" high by 36" wide. 3'-0" MIN. SQUARE P `LIKING c'l r.2F AcL MEL ■••11111u ■Uta 1■■■•■■ EMIL -I■■U■ MUM IEEE.. Mr '111111111111 ■1 iMMENI �•• ■ IN■•■ L Iii. ■L VEEP' AIL Al GRID SHOWN FOR LAYOUT PURPOSE ONLY. ONE SQUARE EQUALS 3" x 3" ANNUM. F. PEDESTRIAN GRADE SEPARATIONS HANDICAPPED PARKING ONLY VAN ACCESSIBLE II K'NC1 cl _ sF_ os`ncue+inc r ISSUEI LOP I PI CA_L I nNrn:amro Prsras MAY BE raw.o A,v.,r 11,11E0 vLF'_ CLCI.inv :3F .-: C, AMP, AT: ENTRANCE 1. Pedestrian ramps on pedestrian grade ueparations shall comply with the requirements of Section 1007 for ramps. Sea 11286 [3106A(1)]. 2. Where pedestrian grade separations cross streets or other vehicular traffic ways, and where a street level croeeing can reasonably and irately be used by persons with dlsabllBles• there shall be provided conforming curb ramps and a usable pathway. Sec 11289 (31068(f)]. 3. Cross slopes of walking surfaces shall be the minimum possible and shall not exceed 1/4" per foot. The slope of any appreciably warped walking surface shall not exceed 1 vertical in 12 horizontal In any direotton. Seo 11289 [3106A(f)]. G. ENTRANCES & EXITS 1. All entrances and all exterior ground floor exit doors to buildings and facilities shall be made accessible to persons with disabilities. Sec 11141.1.3 & 1001.9.1 [3301(h)1]. 2. During periods of partial or restricted use of a building or Mollify, the entrances used for primary access shall be accent/Hale to and usable by persons wtth dlsabllitiea. Sea 1001.9.2 [3361(h)2]. 3. Exit doors shall be apenable from the Inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. Sec 1004.3 [3304(c)]. 4. Manually operated edge or aurface-mounted flush bolts and surface bons are prohibited. When exit doors are used In pairs and approved automatic flush bolts are used, the door leaf having the automatic flush bolts shall have no doorknob or surface -mounted hardware. The unlatching of any leaf shall not require more Man one operation. Sec 1004.3 [3304(c)]. 5. Latching and looking doors that are hand activated and which are In a path of travel shall be operable with a single effort by lever type hardware, panic bars, push-pull activating bars, or other hardware designed to provide passage without requiring the ability to grasp the opening hardware. Locked exit doom ,hall operate as above In egress direction. Sec 1004.3.1 [3304(c.1)]. 6. Hand -activated door opening hardware shall be centered between 30" and 44" above the floor. Sec 1004.3.1 [3304(0.1)]. 7. Every doorway whish Is located within an aecessIble path of travel shall be of a sloe as to permit the installation of a door not less than 3' in width and not less than 6'-8" In height. When Installed, exit doors shall be capable of opening eo that the clear width of the exit is not less than 32", measured between the lace of the door and the opposite slop. Sec 11151.4.1, 1004.8 & 1004.8.5 [3304 (a)1 & (f)1]. Flg 118-58 & 118-33. 8. Where a pair of doors le utilized, at least one of the doors shall provide a clear, unobstructed opening width of 32" with the leaf positioned at en angle of 90 degrees from Its closed position. Sec 1004.6.2 [3304(03]. 9. When an automatic door operator Is utilized to operate a pair of doors, at least one of the doors shall provide a clear, unobstructed opening width of 32" with the door positioned at an angle of 90 degrees from Its closed position. Sec 1004.6.3 [3304(04]. 10. For hinged doors, the opening width shall be measured with the door positioned at an angle of 90 degrees from Its closed position. Sea 1004.6.1 [3304(02]. Flg 118-33(a). 11. There shall be a level and clear floor or landing on each side of a door. The level area shall have a length In the direction of door swing of a1 least 60" and the length opposite the direction of door swing of 48" as measured at right angles to the plan. of the door In the closed position. Sec 11158.4.2 & 1004.9.2.2 [3304(1.1)28]. Flg 1111-26. 12. The width of the level area on the side to which the door swings shall extend a minimum of 24" past the elrike edge of the door for exterior doors and a minimum of 18" past the strike edge for Interior doors. Sec 11158.4.2 & 1004.9.2.3 [3304(I.t)2C]. Flg 118-26. 13. The floor or landing shall be not more than 1/2" lower than the threshold of the doorway. Sec 1004.9.1a [3304(1.1)1]. Fig 1113-32. 14. The space between two consecutive door openings In a vestibule, serving other than a required exit stairway, shall provide a minimum of 48" of clear space from any door opening Into such vestibule when the door Is positioned at en angle of 90 degrees from its closed position. Doors In a series shall swing either In the same direction or away from the apace between the doors. See Figures 118-30831 for design alternatives. Sec 1004.9.2.4 [3304(1.1)20]. 15. The bottom 10" of all doors except automatic and sliding shall have a smooth, uninterrupted surface to allow the door to be opened by a wheelchair footrest without creating a trap or hazardous condition. Where narrow frame doors are used, a 10" high smooth panel shall be Installed on the push side of the door, which will allow the door to be opened by a wheelchair footrest without creating a trap or hazardous condition. Sec 1004,8.1 [3304(1.3)]. Flg 118-29. 16. Recessed doormats shall be adequately anchored to prevent Interference with wheelchair traffic. Seo 1001.9.3 [3301(h)3]. Fig 118-25. 17. MexImum effort to operate doom shall not exceed 8-1/2 pounds for exterior doors and 5 pounds for Inferior doors, suah pull or push effort being applied at right angles to hinged doors and at the center plane of sliding or folding doors. Compensating device. or automatic door operator. may be utilized to meet the above standards. When }Ire doors are required, the maximum effort to operate the door may be increased to the maximum allowable by the appropriate adminletrative authority, not to exceed 15 pounds. Sec 1004.5.1 [3304(1.2)1]. 3 H. STAIRWAYS E EXTERIOR CE RL DOORS MI1J. CLEAR AT " INTERIOR DOORS 12 MIN PROVIDE THIS ADDITIONAL SPACE IF DOOR IS EQUIPED WITH BOTH A LATCH AND A CLOSER. 1. Stairways shall have handrails an each side, and every stairway required to be mere than 88"fn width shall be provided with not Tess than one intermediate handrail for each 88" of required length. Intermediate handrail, shall be spaced approximately equally across the entire width of the stairway. Sec 1006.9.1 [3306(1.1)1]. 2. Handrails shall be 34' to 31" above the nosing of the treads. Sec 1006.9.2.1 [3306(1.1)2A]. Flg 110-35. Handrail and mounting device shall he designed for 250 pounds p/ linear feet load 3. Handrails shall extend a minimum of 12" beyond the top nosing and 12" plus the tread width beyond the bottom nosing. Sec 1008.9.2.2 [3306(1.1)28]. Fig 111-35 & 37. 4. Where the extension of the handrail In the direction of the stair run would create a hazard, the termination of the extension shall be made either rounded or returned smoothly Ix the floor, wall. or post. Where the stain are continuous from landing to landing. the inner rail shall be continuous and need not extend out Into the landing. Sec 1006.9.2.4 [3306(1.1)2D]. Fig 11B-37. 5. Ends shall be returned or terminate In newel posts or safety terminals. Handrail shall not rotate within the Maas Sec 1006.9.2.3 [3306(1.1)2C]. Fig 118-35 & 37. 6. The handgrip portion of handrails shall be not less than 1-1/4" nor more than 1-1/2" in orose sectional dimension or the shape shall provide an equivalent gripping surface. The handgrip portion of handrails shall have a smooth surface with no sharp comer. Any wall or other surface adjacent to the handrail shall be free of sharp or abrasive elements. Edges shall hove a minimum radius of 1/8". Sec 1006.9.2.6 [3306(1.1)2F]. Fig 118-36. 7. Handrails projecting from a wall shall have a space of 1-t/2" between the well and the handrail. Handrails may be located In a recess If the recess is a maximum of 3" deep and extends at least 18" above the top of the rail. Sec 1006.9.2.5 [3306(1.1)26]. Fig 118-36. 8. The upper approach and the lower tread of each stair shall lie marked by a strip of clearly contrasting color at least 2" and no more than 4" wade placed parallel to and not more than 1" from the nose of the atop or landing to alert the visually Impaired. The strip shall be of material that Is at least as slip resistant as the other treads of the stair. See 1008.16.1 [3308(q)]. Flg 1113-35. 9. Where stairways occur outside a building, the upper approach and all treads shall be marked by a strip of clearly contrasting color at least 2" and no more than 4" wide and placed parallel to and not more than 1" from the nose of the step or landing to alert the visually impaired. The ship shall be of a material that Is at least as slip -resistant as the other treads of the stair. A painted drip shall be acceptable. Sec 1006.16.1 [3308(q)]. Flg 11B-35. 10.. All tread surfaces shall be slip -resistant. Treads shall have smooth. rounded. or chamfered exposed edges, and no abrupt edges at the nosing (lower front edge). Sea 1008.16.2.1 & 1006.16.2.1.1 [3306(r)1]. Flg 11B-35. 11. The nosing shall not project more than 1-1/2" past the face of the riser below. Sec 1006. 16.2.2 [3306(r)2]. Fig 118-35. 12. Open riser. are not permitted. Sec 1008.16.3 [3306(r)3]. Fig 118-35. 13. Approved stairway Identification signs shall be located at each floor level In all enclosed stairways in buildings four or more stories in height. two or more stories In height for OSA/AC requirements. The algn shall Identify the stairway, Indicate whether there Is roof access, the floor level, and the upper and lower terminus of the stairway. The sign shall be located approximately 5' above the floor landing In a position which is readily visible when the door la In the open or closed position or as required by DSA/AC the sign shall be located approximately 5' above the floor landing immediately adjacent to the door on the strike side. Signs shall comply with the requirements of UBC Std. No. 10-2. Sec 1006.16 [3306(p)]. SMOOTH SUI(RFAC-E- SMOOTH SURFAC-E Mlry�'.. V9 '1 1/4"1/21. 1 1/2" til MIN.MA)t' -- v` I. CORRIDORS & AISLES • 3 1. Every corridor serving an occupant load of 10 or more shall not be loss than 44" In width. Sec 1005.2.1 [3305(6)1.1]. 2. Corridors serving en occupant load of leve than 10 shell not be less than 36" In width. Sec 1005.2.1 [3305(6)1.1]. 3. Condors which are located on an accessible route and exceed 200' in length shall have a minimum clear width of 60"; have. at a central location. a 60" by 60" minimum wheelchair turning apace or passing alcove, have, at a central location, an Intervening cross or tee condor, a minimum of 48" In width: or, hove, at a central location, an op noble door. Sec 1005.2.2 [3305(b)2]. Flg 11B-34. 4. Circulation aisles and pedestrian ways shall be sized according to functional requirement* and in no case shall be less than 36" In clear width. Sec 110513.3.6.1 & 11109.2.1 (3103A(c)2G(I)]. J. FLOORS & LEVELS 1. In buildings and faogitiee, floors of a given story shall be a common level throughout, or shall be connected by pedestrian ramps, passenger elevators, or special access lifts. Sec 11201.1 [3105A(j)1]. 2. Ground and floor surfaces along accessible routes and In accessible room* and spaces, Including floors, walks, ramps. stain, and curb ramps, shall be stable, firm. and slip -resistant. Sec 11248.1 [3105A(n)1]. 3. Changes in level up to 1/4" may be vertical and without edge treotmest. Sec 112413.2 [3105A(n)2]. fig 11B-5E(c). 4. Changes In level between 1/4' and 1/2" shall be accomplished by means of a romp no steeper than t vertical to 2 horizontal. Sec 11248.2 [3105A(n)2]. Fig 11B-5E(d). 5. If carpetor carpet tile Is used on a ground or floor pa surface, 11 shall be securely attached: have a firm cushion, pad or backing or no cushion or pad; and have a level loop, textured loop, level cut pile, or level cut/uncut pile texture. The maximum pile height shall be 1/2". Exposed edges of carpet shall be fastened to floor surfaces and have him along the entire length of the exposed edge. Carpet edge trim shall comply with Section 11248.2. Sac 11246.3 [3105A(n)3]. Fig 118-78. 01Liv`.E`2'.c,_1_Ail; ..SSJCIAILS nrero,r sed e,r•Itartu•r LOS F0^.S':_'. - N-narp,, CJ:nCN ae, ectlCMxr cun.cq,cwrwmsen0 rpm ssana vplq Sa 910 30 v..pnae.gr .Lie c r l9.el7e0.893a rp,e'a,.,o: 211.51 rmar im 1,31310,1e0e re13.71:3.163e gib P 741.H Snk<OHTweekly� :+.-.Yes,.U:".i1: `M Ora:1.06 Pre 1:1j.,9e:t ,ay GLUMAC "rylreee rur • arelneowrwuree • F'FT _J1 -CT 544 . .15 00115 ICC- T TL ADA ACCESSIBILITY A9.2 COVERE� VALL 3UIL:I\G STREET LEVEL 6 AREA ANALYSIS RESTAURANT RETAIL RESTAURANT DINING RESTAURANT BAR RESTAURANT BACK—OF—HOUSE RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL 1,535 SF (991 SF+ 544 SF) 2,823 SF 643 SF (539 SF + 114 SF) 2,371 SF IOTA -L 7 X372. SF ,crtiG $ t sTRo 1,544 SF (650 SF+ 894 S 2,455 5,995 (1511 SF+ 4484 SF) TOTAL SF 17,366 SF MECH ROOM MECHANICAL ROOM STAIR #1 STAIR #2 STAIR #3 STAIR #18 STAIR #7 RETAIL 2,455 SF STAIR #13 TENANT SPACE (24—HOUR EIT\ESS) RETAIL RETAIL r RETAIL STAIR #8 DNIT 5,995 SF (1511 SF+4484 SF) STAIR #10 F- ARI- N LiS VH A\A SCALD 3/3P" = 1' US SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMVIAT!<0r1 6 s AA SHLEMMER+ALGAZE+ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOS ANGELES - NEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City , California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 F [310] 553-9449 3300 Irvine Avenue Suite 130 Newport Beach, California 92660 T [949] 724-8958 F [949] 724-1981 PROJECT O Q CO r In - LU (n w ck) C/ O O ■ J 0 Q I— co w r s CC waw I- _^^ V! w JUN 1 9 2666 !Jiv,. DEP I. ISSUE DATES A No. D ate Descri Dtion OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All Draw ngs, Specifications and copies thereof furnished by SAA Interiors are and shall remain it's property. They are to to be used only with respect to this project. Federal law prohibits the reproduct'on, display, sale, or other disposition of this document without the expres written consent of Shlemmer+Ngaze+Associates Interiors 8 Architecture. DATE: 06/15/06 DRAWN: GJB PROJECT NO.: SCALE: 20.06.5004 AS NOTED SHEET TITLE STREET LEVEL 6 AREA ANALYSIS SHEET NO: A-0.1 ©© MIMEVATE IING #2 ©O w U a J W 0 ii O d PREP AREA 117 S El mon _ ,-lip1 • tIII'..I'.,;g1\Ork �.1\,_ I �{\III \�►I\ IIIIII�IIII�I �■►I\\\t+IVOrss- — I a EP J MAIN SERVICE lis! red re. I -a ►4' II Cepa i9t9171 \I \I nn g!Ael lPiO i0■ N COOKLINE R 10 9 110 O .I --- — igliagESSIM 5 ■ MAIN DINING #2 OW QJ Wm mH 112 m m m t 0 COOLER 118 lol WINE R ETAI L FREEZE MEN'S 119 St WOMEN'S _CORRIDOR 112 MEN'S �zu L zELEV U Z F - ENTRY 100 0 WAITING AREA/ I OUNGF 104 MAIN I DINING #1 101 TREES o )O WINE RETAIL 108 I RETAIL 180 R ETAI L 190 R ETAI L 185 SERVICE STATION 106 WINE BAR R ETAI L 140 RETAIL 145 PRIVATE DINING #1 Csocn 000* 105 7 _ RETAIL 160 RETAIL EXIST BETA L 150 K STALE L�WATER 16BISTRO SAA SHLEMMER+ALGAZE+ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOS ANGELES - NEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City , California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 F [310] 553-9449 3300 Irvine Avenue Suite 130 Newport Beach, California 92660 T [949] 724-8958 F [949] 724-1981 C) LU CO -J w CC 0 < crop 0 0 0 rE _ LO L U r Q CD- 0m rU Q co O Waw co w r ISSUE DATES A A A No. Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All Drawings, Specifics ions and copies thereof furnished by SAA Interiors are and shall remain it's property. They are to to be used onlywith respect to this project. Federal law prohibits the reproduction, dsplay, sale, or other disposition of this document without the express written consent of Shlemmer+Algaze+Associates Interiors & Architecture. DATE: 06/15/06 DRAWN: GJB PROJECT NO.: 20.06.5004 SCALE: SHEET AS NOTED TITLE RESTAURANT FLOOR PLAN SHEET NO: A-1.0 ONE PARCEL 3,462 SF VESTING PARCEL MA 62913 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 3 IN BLOCK S, OF TRACT NO. 2002, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 22, PAGE 154 AND 155 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES SUBDIVIDER STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE THAT I AM THE SUBDIVIDER OF THE LANDS INCLUDED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN ON THIS MAP WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINES, AND I CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF SAID MAP AND SUBDIVISION. ROBB STROYKE SUBDIVIDER • *ll Exp 12.'3' /07 RECORD OWNER: BARD PARTNERS LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY THIS SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED AS A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT FOR 2 UNITS WHEREBY THE OWNERS *OF THE UNITS OF AIR SPACE WILL HOLD AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREAS WHICH WILL, IN TURN, PROVIDE THE NECESSARY ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR THE UNITS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ON '` ‘2) ,,. %r BEFORE ME,ECA, i'� 4 ( c61-,UE'� T PERSONALLY APPEARED ROBB STROYKE 200 PERSONALLY KNOWN TO ME OR PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS AUTHORIZED CAPACITY AND THAT BY HIS SIGNATURE ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. NOTARY UB IC IN AND FOR S Alt STATE NAME:` C. �. L�- �, ,, (' � 9c -t. r" MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 7 ' MY COMMISSION NO IS: SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS RECEIVED OCT 4 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND WAS COMPILED FROM RECORD DATA IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF ROBB STROYKE ON NOVEMBER 3, 2005. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS PARCEL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE APPROVED. OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP, IF ANY. C)°4-14/1-- LEWIS SOLOFF PLS 5344, EXPIRES 12-31-07 RECORD DATA WAS TAKEN FROM TRACT NO. 2002, M.B. 22-154-155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, TO WHICH THE LAND INCLUDED IN THE WITHIN SUBDIVISION OR ANY PART THEREOF IS SUBJECT, AND WHICH MAY BE PAID IN FULL, HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL. CITY TREASURER OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND THAT IT CONFORMS SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE TENTATIVE MAP AND ALL APPROVED ALTERATIONS THEREOF, THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND THAT I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT WITH RESPECT TO CITY RECORDS. DONALD L. WOLFE CITY ENGINEER DEPUTY DATE R.C.E. EXPIRES COUNTY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP, THAT IT COMPLIES WITH ALL PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP; AND THAT I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT IN ALL RESPECTS NOT CERTIFIED TO BY THE CITY ENGINEER. DATE BY DEPUTY R.C.E. EXPIRATION DATE CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BY MOTION ADOPTED AT ITS SESSION ON THE DAY OF , 2006 APPROVED THE ANNEXED MAP. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE CITY PLANNER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED MAP CONFORMS SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE TENTATIVE MAP APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE DAY OF , 2005. SECRETARY OF PLANNING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH . DATE WARREN GILLELEN IS AN EASEMENT HOLDER FOR WATER PIPE PURPOSES PER BOOK 1617, PAGE 47 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY. SAID EASEMENT IS BLANKET IN NATURE. SCALE: 1 " =20' Lv W • CEL VEST ING IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR CONDOM IN IUM PURPOSES VALLEY DRIVE FD. SPIKE AND WASHER UNREADABLE, FITS TIES PER CEFB 185 EASTERLY LINE LOT 3 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 SOUTHERLY LINE LOT 2 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 S 12'44'00" E 30.00' S 12°44'00" E I AREA 3,462 SQ. FT. • N 12°10'00" W 30.00' Ai i SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS LEGEND: INDICATES THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND BEING SUBDIVIDED BY THIS MAP FD. SPK. AND WASHER L. A. Co. F.C.D. NO REF., ACCEPTED AS CENTER LINE INTERSECTION NORTHERLY LINE LOT 4 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 w o BARD STREET "0 N 12'10'00" W w w O O N CN N 77'52'00" E ONE PARCEL SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS .3, 471 SF VESTING A'CEL MAP 62912 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE. OF CALIFORNIA BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 4 OF BLOCK S, TRACT NO. 2002, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 22, PAGE 154 AND 155 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES SUBDIVIDER STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE THAT I AM THE SUBDIVIDER OF THE LANDS INCLUDED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN ON THIS MAP WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINES, AND I CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF SAID MAP AND SUBDIVISION. ROBE STROYKE- SUBDIVIDER RECORD OWNER: BARD PARTNERS LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY THIS SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED AS A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT FOR 2 UNITS WHEREBY THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS OF AIR SPACE WILL HOLD AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREAS WHICH WILL, IN TURN, PROVIDE THE NECESSARY ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR THE UNITS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ON SS. ,2006 • BEFORE ME, L ZGi_) �� .C;C`'AA CIji� PERSONALLY APPEARED ROBB STROYKE PERSONALLY KNOWN TO ME OR PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS AUTHORIZED CAPACITY AND THAT BY HIS SIGNATURE ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. 4d)4/ NAME:� r L s\ MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS NOTARY PUBLIC IN FOR SAID STATE FOR SAID STATE D IS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MY COMMISSION NO. SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT RECEIVED OCT 4 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND WAS COMPILED FROM RECORD DATA IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF ROBB STROYKE ON JULY 1, 2005. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS PARCEL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE APPROVED OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP, IF ANY. LEWIS SOLOFF PLS 5344, EXPIRES 12-31-07 RECORD DATA WAS TAKEN FROM TRACT 2002, M.B. 22-154-155 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, TO WHICH THE LAND INCLUDED IN THE WITHIN SUBDIVISION OR ANY PART THEREOF IS SUBJECT, AND WHICH MAY BE PAID IN FULL, HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL. CITY TREASURER OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND THAT IT CONFORMS SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE TENTATIVE MAP AND ALL APPROVED ALTERATIONS THEREOF, THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND THAT I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT WITH RESPECT TO CITY RECORDS. DONALD L. WOLFE CITY ENGINEER DEPUTY DATE R.C.E. EXPIRES COUNTY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP, THAT IT COMPLIES WITH ALL PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP; AND THAT I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT IN ALL RESPECTS NOT CERTIFIED TO BY THE CITY ENGINEER. DATE BY DEPUTY R.C.E. EXPIRATION DATE CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BY MOTION ADOPTED AT ITS SESSION ON THE DAY OF , 2006 APPROVED THE ANNEXED MAP. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE CITY PLANNER'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED MAP CONFORMS SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE TENTATIVE MAP APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE DAY OF . 2005. SECRETARY OF PLANNING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATE CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY, A SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO WARREN GILLELEN, IS AN EASEMENT HOLDER FOR WATER PIPE PURPOSES PER BOOK 1617, PAGE 47 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, SAID EASEMENT IS BLANKET IN NATURE. SCALE: 1 "=20' SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS VESTING 11TH STREET ARCEL A \ 62 12 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES LEGEND: INDICATES THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND BEING SUBDIVIDED BY THIS MAP FD. SPK. AND WASHER • L.A.Co.F.C.D. NO REF., ACCEPTED AS CENTER LINE INTERSECTION VALLEY DRIVE FD. SPIKE AND WASHER UNREADABLE, FITS TIES PER CEFB 185 EASTERLY LINE LOTS 1 THROUGH 9 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 SOUTHERLY LINE LOT 3 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 S 12°44'00" E �. 30.00' S 12°44'00" Lri 0 • ,0 N Ln Z CO 0 0 LC) a a AREA 3, 471 SQ. FT. a N 12'10'00" W 30.00' e NORTHERLY LINE LOT 5 BLOCK S, TRACT 2002 M.B. 22-154-155 f w w cNi BARD STREET w N 12°1000 W d' w w o o N N 1 N 77'52'00" E H- W W CC F -- F- 00 FD, PK NAIL — FITS TIES PER CEFB 162 0 0 N N r - Z