Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12/12/06
1 9 • ") Q.C1.Ce ge434414, Ma, a 6Ami e,. " — DI Ir c2t gAut gerceAa AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, December 12, 2006 - Council Chambers, City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Regular 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 1 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 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS 1 NIITID NIID le • • PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS CLOSED SESSION REPORT FOR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 28, 2006: MEETING CANCELLED. 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. 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 the following minutes: 1) Minutes of the Regular meeting held on November 14, 2006; and 2) Minutes of the Adjourned Regular meeting held on November 28, 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. 9 • • (d) Recommendation to accept donations of $1,000 from Sasine to be used for the Centennial Celebration, $1,000 from Jenkins & Hogin, LLP to be used for the Centennial Celebration, and $500 from the Woman's Club of Hermosa Beach to be used for repair and maintenance of the Veterans' Memorial. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated December 4, 2006. (e) Recommendation to approve proposal from Dooley Enterprises for the purchase of ammunition for the Police Department in the amount of $8,699.68. Memorandum from Police Chief Greg Savelli. (f) Recommendation to authorize the award of construction contract for CIP No. 06- 641 Clark Building Refurbishment to Everlast Painting Company of North Hills~ California, in the amount of $17,056.00; authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the contract subject to approval of the City Attorney; and, authorize the Director of Public Works to issue change orders as necessary within the approved budget. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated December 5, 2006. (g) (h) (1) Recommendation to receive and file status report for proposed Pacific Coast Highway relinquishment from Caltrans. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated December 4, 2006. Recommendation to receive and file list of regular and ongoing City Board and Commission appointive terms that will expire during the 2007 calendar year. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated December 4, 2006. Recommendation to receive and file report of Customer Service Surveys/Complaints. Memorandum from City Clerk Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated December 4, 2006. (j) Recommendation to approve change order for CIP Project Nos. 05-110 & 04-112 to add slurry sealing the entire reaches of Hermosa Avenue and Monterey Avenue; and, appropriate $233,987 of Prop 42 funds, received in the 115 State Gas Tax Fund, for this purpose. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated December 7, 2006. (k) Recommendation to receive and file the 2005-06 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), which includes the report from Caporicci and Larson, our independent auditors. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated November 22, 2006. (1) • • Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 2 for Project CIP 03-418 Sewer Improvements — Upgrade of Sewer Lift Stations for extra work encountered during the construction of the Sewer Lift Station at 35th Street and The Strand and the abandonment of the Sewer Lift at Ingleside Drive and 31st Street; authorize additional appropriation of $52,340 from the 160 Sewer Fund; and, authorize additional appropriation of $11,122 from the 301 Capital Improvement Fund. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated November 29, 2006. (m) Recommendation to approve City Council meeting schedule for 2007. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated December 5, 2006. (n) (0) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to execute the attached agreement with the County of Los Angeles to assume responsibility for maintenance of 34 Trash Excluders to be installed on catch basin openings along Hermosa Avenue. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated December 5, 2006. Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to execute an amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan in order to jointly fund a technical report required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated December 5, 2006. (p) Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 6, 2006. 3. CONSENT ORDINANCES a. ORDINANCE NO. 06-1276: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 17 — ZONING, PERTAINING TO RECONSTRUCTION OF NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS. For adoption. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated December 4, 2006. 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. S 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. (Continued from meeting of October 10, 2006). b. REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION OF. A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION ON OCTOBER 17, 2006, TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CAR WASH (AUTOMOBILE DETAILING) WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION PARKING STRUCTURE — AUTO SPA — AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated December 4, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: To sustain the. Planning Commission decision to approve the requests subject to conditions of approval as contained in the resolutions for approval of the restaurant and car detailing service. 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS a. INTRODUCTION ON FIRST READING OF ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT ORDINANCE. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated December 5, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Waive full reading and introduce ordinance. 7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a. DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated December 5, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report and direct City Manager to execute agreement. 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL NONE 5 • 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. a. Request from Councilmember Tucker to suspend street sweeping parking enforcement on December 26, 27 & 28, 2006. ANNOUNCEMENT IN OPEN SESSION OF ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. MINUTES: a. Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on November 14, 2006. b. Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on November 28, 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. a. Existing Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Name of Case: Johnny Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach Case Number: CV06-5078 b. Anticipated Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(b) Number of potential cases: 1 3. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54957 Title: CITY MANAGER ADJOURNMENT Jan 11.t ry,. Biography "A. likE5W rage l of , Cleaning the air that we breathe Air Quality Clean Air Plans Clean Air Technologies Governing Board News & Features Rules GQ Advanced Search Espai`at l i (} -ci:;: JAN PERRY Governing Board Member Cities of Los Angeles County, Western Region Representative Los Angeles Councilwoman Jan Perry, who represents the Ninth District communities of Los Angeles, was re-elected to serve a second term as a governing board member of the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board (SCAQMD) in January of 2006. In this role, Perry represents the 25 cities located in the western portion of Los Angeles County on the AQMD Board. She was selected by mayors and Council members of those cities. As the current chair of the Los Angeles City Energy and Environment Committee, Perry has consistently demonstrated her commitment to better air quality for her constituents and has vigorously pursued environmental justice for all residents. Additionally., Perry has initiated and participated in numerous activities and events to promote clean air throughout the region, personally meeting with elected officials, community members, and stakeholders from the 25 cities that she- represents. During the past two years, Councilwoman Perry has worked closely with AQMD staff and the western cities to see that the primary goals of AQMD are met. In 2004, she supported a move to commit over $25 million to replace and retrofit diesel school buses and $1.5 million for research into possible links between air pollution and cancer. She also was an advocate for the expansion of AQMD's environmental justice initiatives to enhance community involvement and access to the agency. And, in 2005, she worked with AQMD to reduce emissions from oil and gas production facilities through improved maintenance requirements and a prohibition on the venting of oil field gas. Councilwoman Perry currently serves on the Legislative and Mobile Source Board Committees; and subcommittees for refinery issues, paints and coatings, and the SCAG Ad Hoc Committee. She was also recently appointed by AQMD's Chairman, Dr. Bill Burke, to the Air Quality Institute Advisory Board. This Board is being formed for educational outreach purposes and consists of distinguished elected officials, business, community leaders, and representatives from organized labor. The Advisory Board will review course curriculum, list of participants and instructors, and provide policy guidance to staff and contractors, as needed. This page updated: April 21, 2006 URL: http:// wrwv.wmd.gov/bins/bmperrgjan.htmi http://www.aqmd.gov/bios/bm_perry an. html 12/12/2006 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, November 14, 2006, at the hour of 7:16 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Bobko, Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Nicky Tenpas CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION Mayor Edgerton presented Angelo Masino with a Certificate of Appreciation for his many hours of volunteer work to refurbish the Second Story Theatre at the Community Center, saving the City about $25,000. Angelo Masino, noting that he did not accomplish the task alone, thanked the City Council for the recognition, provided information about some of the theatre events, and introduced his young cast for an upcoming children's' production. Rick Koenig also presented to Angelo Masino an expression of appreciation for his volunteer work, noting that he had donated almost all his weekends to the project and that the work was beautiful. ANNOUNCEMENTS — Councilmember Bobko, noting the Council's recent adoption of a graffiti ordinance, discussed this week's arrest of an adult and a minor who placed graffiti on police cars and in other locations and suggested instituting a reward for those who assist in leading offenders to prosecution and conviction. Commenting on the Veteran's Day Ceremony, he said Howard Hermes .of American Legion Post 184 had given an inspiring address regarding his experiences with General McArthur in the Philippines, and then expressed gratitude to Steve Crecy and the Memorial Foundation for the moving ceremony and to the Woman's Club of Hermosa Beach for its $500 contribution. Councilmember Tucker thanked Councilmember Bobko for serving as master of ceremonies at the 13th Annual Veteran's Day ceremony. He then suggested that an inscribed Centennial brick, available for $100 at the Community Resources Department or on the City's website, would be a perfect holiday gift. Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan thanked all the poll workers who worked on Election Day and the voters for participating; he then congratulated all the winners, including Joanne Edgerton, who will provide four more years of leadership for the Beach Cities Health District. Councilmember Reviczky invited the community to a tree planting in front of the library at 3:30 p.m. on November 15, by the Friends of the Library in memory of Charlotte Malone, longtime member and past president of the organization. City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12041 2a(1). • • Mayor Edgerton noted that Charlotte Malone was also a former City Clerk, and a wonderful, involved person who will be missed. He then announced a Hazardous Household Waste Roundup in front of the Clark Building on Saturday, January 27, 2007, with paint and other hazardous materials being collected, as well as e -waste, such as computer components and televisions; and complimented City Attorney Mike Jenkins for his two-hour presentation of Ethics Training earlier in the evening prior to the Council meeting. CLOSED SESSION REPORT FOR MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 2006: Meeting canceled. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: 1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. Letter from Nicky Tenpas dated October 16, 2006 regarding the U S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement and the Sierra Club's "Cool Cities" Program. Coming forward to address the Council on this letter was: Nicky Tenpas — Hermosa Beach, member of the Sierra Club, said she had asked Mayor Edgerton to sign the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement regarding global warming and related issues (City Manager Burrell said that since Mayor Edgerton had agreed to sign this agreement, there would be a signing ceremony at the next Council meeting); Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Vicki Garcia and Sandy Orbach — Hermosa Beach, announced the 14th Annual Beach Cities Toy Drive; said unwrapped toys could be dropped off at the Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach Fire Departments and the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce; said the wrapping party would take place December 15 at the Joslyn Center in Manhattan Beach; asked everyone to remember the children who are 11 years and older, and to consider items such as CD players; Shirley Cassell — Hermosa Beach said it had been five weeks since the Council voted to return Pier Avenue to four lanes; said residents on Eighth Street and Monterey Boulevard were suffering from additional traffic diverted from Pier Avenue; Roger Bacon — Hermosa Beach businessman, detailed his estimate of the costs to re -stripe Pier Avenue; asked when the palm trees would be planted on Aviation and suggested that the palm trees be lit like the ones on Pier Plaza; Howard Lonqacre — Hermosa Beach, said he hoped Pier Avenue would be re -striped for the holidays; said he wondered if the people lingering after the bars closed were headed for after-hours restaurants which City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12042 • • might turn into after-hours clubs, and that, if that were the case, an entertaining ordinance would take care of the problem; said the appeal period after a Planning Commission decision should not begin until a resolution is adopted (City Attorney Jenkins agreed); Janice Brittain — said the presentations made by the Police and Fire Chiefs at the Neighborhood Watch/MOMS meeting on November 13 had been excellent and she wished more people had been there; urged the City Council to continue to support Neighborhood Watch/MOMS; was pleased that the graffiti offenders were in custody and thanked the Public Works Department for their prompt cleanup. Councilmember Reviczky noted that a plan for re -striping Pier Avenue was forthcoming from staff. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR: (a) Action: To approve the consent calendar recommendations (a) through (I) with the exception of the following items, which were removed for discussion in item 4, but are shown in order for clarity: 2(e) Tucker, (f) Reviczky, and (i) Tucker. Motion Reviczky, second Tucker. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 10, 2006, AND OCTOBER 24, 2006. Action: To approve, as presented, the minutes of the Regular Meetings of October 10, 2006, and October 24, 2006. (b) RECOMMENDATION TO RATIFY CHECK REGISTER NOS. 45768 THROUGH 45991 AND ELECTRONIC VOUCHERS, AND TO APPROVE THE CANCELLATION OF CHECK NO. 45834 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY TREASURER. Action: To ratify the check register as presented. (c) RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. Action: To receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items as presented. (d) RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE IMPROVEMENT OF 28th COURT TO EXTEND FROM ITS EXISTING TERMINUS APPROXIMATELY 60 FEET EASTERLY TO INCLUDE THE PROPERTY AT 424 28th STREET. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 31, 2006. City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12043 • • Action: To approve the improvement of 28th Court to extend from its existing terminus approximately 60 feet easterly to include the property at 424 28th Street, as recommended by staff. (e) RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO INSTALL A LIGHT IN NOBLE PARK AND APPROVE A TRANSFER OF FUNDS WITHIN THE PARKS BUDGET TO PAY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE LIGHT. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 30, 2006. Supplemental information from Director Morgan received November 14, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Councilmember Tucker for separate discussion later in the meeting. Public Works Director Morgan responded to Council questions. Corning forward to address the Council on this item was: Jim Gierlich — Hermosa Beach, said it was important to place lighting in Noble Park to protect residences and to Tight the park. (f) (g) Action: To refer the issue to the Public Works Commission with direction to incorporate lighting into the future refurbishment of Noble Park. Motion Tucker, second Keegan. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT DONATIONS OF $1,600 FROM PETER JOHNSON TO BE USED FOR A MEMORIAL BENCH FOR FRED FLOOD TO BE LOCATED ON THE PIER AND $250 FROM BLUE 32 TO BE USED FOR THE CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated November 6, 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 to the City: $ 1,600 from Peter Johnson to be used for a memorial bench for Fred Flood to be located on the Pier; $ 250 from Blue 32 to be used for the Centennial Celebration. Motion Reviczky, second Keegan. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE STATUS REPORT ON NUISANCE ABATEMENT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1928 ARDMORE AVENUE. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated November 7, 2006. Action: To receive and file the status report on nuisance abatement of property located at 1928 Ardmore Avenue, as recommended by staff. City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12044 1 t • • (h) RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE THE AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE CIP NOS. 05-110 AND 04-112 CRACK SEAL/SLURRY SEALING OF AVIATION BOULEVARD AND PROSPECT AVENUE TO PAVEMENT COATINGS COMPANY OF CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA IN THE AMOUNT OF $148,287.75; AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE CONTRACT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; AND, AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ISSUE CHANGE ORDERS AS NECESSARY WITHIN THE APPROVED BUDGET. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated November 8, 2006. (i) Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: (1) Authorize the award of construction contract for the CIP Nos. 05-110 and 04-112 Crack Seal/Slurry Sealing of Aviation Boulevard and Prospect Avenue to Pavement Coatings Company of Cypress, California in the amount of $148,287.75; (2) Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the contract subject to approval by the City Attorney; and (3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue change orders as necessary within the approved budget. RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO JOHN M. CRUIKSHANK CONSULTANTS, INC. (JMC2) TO PROVIDE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CIP NO. 05- 119 IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,400; AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE ATTACHED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; AND, AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO MAKE CHANGES AS NEEDED TO THE AGREEMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT BUDGET AMOUNT. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated November 6, 2006. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Councilmember Tucker for separate discussion later in the meeting. City Manager Burrell responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: (1) Award Professional Services Agreement to John M. Cruikshank Consultants, Inc. (JMC2) to provide design and engineering services for CIP No. 05-119 in the amount of $38,400; (2) Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the attached Professional Services Agreement subject to approval by the City Attorney; and (3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to make changes as needed to the agreement within the project budget amount; City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12045 • • with direction to staff to incorporate the repair of Longfellow Avenue between Manhattan Avenue and Hermosa Avenue as well. Motion Tucker, second Reviczky. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. (j) RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE ENERGY COALITION, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY AND THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN IT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated November 8, 2006. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6508, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ENERGY COALITION, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. GAS COMPANY, TO DELIVER AN ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM AMONG SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES KNOWN AS THE `COMMUNITY ENERGENCY PARTNERSHIP'." (k) RECOMMENDATION TO WAIVE THE $441 BANNER FEE FOR THE BEACH CITIES TOY DRIVE. Memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated November 8, 2006. Action: To waive the $441 banner fee for the Beach Cities Toy Drive, as recommended by staff. (I) RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP #61986 FOR A TWO -UNIT CONDO AT 509 AND 511 25th STREET. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated November 6, 2006. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 06- 6509, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 61986, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A TWO -UNIT CONDOMINIUM, LOCATED AT 509 AND 511 25th STREET IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH,CALIFORNIA." At 7:52 p.m., the order of the agenda went to public hearing item 5 (a). 3. CONSENT ORDINANCES - None 4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12046 • • Items 2(e), (f) and (i) 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 10:38 p.m., the order of the agenda went to item 8(a) 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. REVISION TO LOT MERGER ORDINANCE. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated November 7, 2006. Supplemental letter received from Howard Longacre on November 14, 2006. Community Director .Blumenfeld presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. City Manager Burrell also responded to Council questions. The public hearing opened at 8:06 p.m. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Howard Lonqacre — Hermosa Beach, supported the revision but suggested that the item be continued to the next meeting with better noticing for this public hearing, which was a continuation from a meeting nine weeks ago, which had no staff materials; said he attempted to contact people affected, who did not know the item was on the agenda; referred the Council to written materials he had submitted; Betty Ryan — Hermosa Beach, urged the Council to notify the people whose property might be affected; Sandy Cristor — Hermosa Beach, thought all residents of the City should be notified, not just the property owners who might be adversely affected; Greq Eberhardt — Hermosa Beach, said the 80% rule was confusing because it could be used to either support or not support a lot merger; said neighborhood compatibility should always be considered as well; said the Council agreed lack of notice in the past was a mistake; The public hearing closed at 8:14 p.m. Action: To refer the item back to the Planning Commission for further study, with direction to: (1) not feel that the 80% rule has to remain in the ordinance, (2) send individual letters to the 35 affected property owners and notices of all public hearings related to this ordinance to all property owners within a 300' radius of the 11 properties primarily in question; and (3) to return the item to the City Council for review and consideration no later than its meeting of February 27, 2007. Motion Keegan, second Reviczky. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. 6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12047 • a. KIWANIS CLOCK IN PIER PLAZA. Memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated November 7, 2006. Public Works Director Morgan presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Greg Wyatt — former president of Kiwanis Club, said he lives in Long Beach but works in Hermosa Beach and was speaking for Dallas Yost; said the Council could determine any location for the clock but the vision was for the "Dallas" clock to be seen while traveling down the hill on Pier Avenue; Rick Koenig — Hermosa Beach, former president of Kiwanis Club, said he hoped the clock would be placed as far east as possible on the Plaza; Pat Love — Hermosa Beach, current president of Kiwanis Club, said she was not speaking for the whole club, but for Dallas, and hoped the clock would be placed near Hermosa Avenue; said she checked with Plaza merchants and they agreed; and Howard Longacre — Hermosa Beach, said Option 2 (located near Hermosa Avenue) was best, and even though it might cost more for the installation, it was better to do it right. Proposed Action: To install the clock in the Loreto Plaza area, Option 1, but with benches. Motion Edgerton, second Keegan. The motion failed, noting the dissenting votes of Bobko, Reviczky, and Tucker. Action: To install the clock closer to the Hermosa Avenue sidewalk than Option 2, and without benches. Motion Tucker, second Bobko. The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Keegan and Mayor Edgerton. The meeting recessed at 9:02 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:29 p.m., with item 6(b). b. REVIEW OF ELIMINATING RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS IN THE C-1 ZONE. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated November 8, 2006. Community Director Blumenfeld presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: David Kissinger — Association of Realtors, said this issue has a significant impact on property values and property rights because if a property owner is unable to develop his land a certain way, the property might City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12048 Y • • not sell or might be used in an undesirable manner; said it was impossible to protect institutions; said concerns could be mitigated by CC&R's regarding noise, kitchen venting, lighting, delivery hours, trash pickup; said that mixed use is an option but not necessary; urged the Council to keep this option in place and even expand it to include restaurants; and Betty Ryan — Hermosa Beach, said when this was instituted in 2003, there was a great reaction from the people but nothing has happened to affect the City; Proposed Action: To continue consideration of the item to Council meeting of December 12, 2006. Motion Bobko, second Mayor Edgerton. The motion failed, noting the dissenting votes of Keegan, Reviczky, and Tucker. Action: To receive and file the report. Motion Keegan, second Tucker. The motion carried, noting the dissenting vote of Mayor Edgerton. c. COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Lisa Lynn dated November 7, 2006. Two supplemental letters received from Howard Longacre, one dated October 2 and one received on November 14, 2006. Community Resources Lynn presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Howard Longacre — Hermosa Beach, said he had no problems with the machines in buildings, but that there was crime potential from the outdoor ones; Steve Cannella — Hermosa Beach Parks, Recreation & Community Service Advisory Commission, said this item had been unanimously passed by Commission and that it was a great way to help fund the City's Centennial; and Jarrod Harrison — representing the local Coca Cola bottler in Carson, said he wanted to introduce himself, that he was excited about the project and was available for questions. Action: To approve staff recommendation to: (1) Approve the agreement between the City and Coca-Cola Bottling Company, with a written contract to come back for signature; (2) Accept Centennial sponsorship of $25,000; and, (3) Install six (6) vending machines at select City locations for a trial period of one year. Motion Tucker, second Edgerton. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12049 • At 10:27 p.m., the order of the agenda went to item 4, consent calendar items removed for separate discussion. 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 24, 2006. Additional memorandum from City Manager Stephen Burrell dated November 9, 2006. City Clerk Doerfling presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the list of City Council committee assignments with the following changes: (1) To not assign a second delegate to the Beach Cities Committee (2) To appoint Councilmember Bobko as the alternate delegate for the Independent Cities Association (3) To not appoint a delegate to the South Bay Youth Project but maintain Councilmember Reviczky as the alternate. (4) To replace Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan with Councilmember Bobko as delegate to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) (5) To replace Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan with Councilmember Bobko as alternate delegate to the West Basin Water Association (6) To appoint Mayor Edgerton as delegate to the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission (7) To eliminate the Library Temporary Council Sub -Committee (8) To appoint Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan as the second member of the Pacific Coast Highway Banner Temporary Council Sub -Committee (9) To eliminate the Beach Cities Transit Temporary Council Sub - Committee (10) To eliminate the Historical Preservation Temporary Council Sub - Committee (11) To appoint Councilmember Tucker and Councilmember Bobko as Council representatives to the Pier Avenue Committee (12) To replace Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan with Councilmember Tucker as the alternate delegate to the South Bay Cities Sanitation District (County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles) (13) To appoint Mayor Pro Tempore Keegan and Councilmember Reviczky as Council representatives to the Emergency Preparedness Committee. Motion Keegan, second Mayor Edgerton. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12050 • • 9. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL a. Request from Councilmember Reviczky to review the policy for issuance and use of construction parking passes. Councilmember Reviczky spoke to his request. Action: To agendize the policy for discussion, with direction to staff to bring back recommended changes. Motion Reviczky, second Keegan. There were no objections. b. Request from Councilmember Reviczky to ask CalTrans to re -stripe Pacific Coast Highway at Aviation to allow the northbound third lane to proceed through the intersection rather than to Aviation. Councilmember Reviczky spoke to his request. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Roger Bacon — Hermosa Beach businessman, said the criteria for CalTrans making changes is accidents; said his office faces this intersection and there have been very few accidents; said this change would potentially cause accidents by people moving back and forth between the lanes as they approach the intersection. Action: To direct staff to write a letter to CalTrans requesting the re -striping of Pacific Coast Highway at Aviation to allow the northbound third lane to proceed through the intersection rather than to Aviation. Motion Reviczky, second Keegan. There were no objections. 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 October 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 Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12051 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, November 14, 2006, at the hour of 10:59 p.m. to a closed session. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION — The Closed Session convened at the hour of 11:00 p.m. At the hour of 11:20 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 on Tuesday, November 14, 2006, at the hour of 11:21 p.m. to the Adjourned Regular Meeting of November 28, 2006, at 6:15 p.m. for Council interviews of Public Works Commission applicants prior to the Regular Meeting of the same date scheduled to begin at 7:10 p.m. ty City Clerk City Council Minutes 11-14-06 Page 12052 • MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, November 28, 2006, at the hour of 6:20 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton Absent: Bobko (arrived at 6:25 p.m.) The meeting was called to order in the Council Chambers — the location specified in the posted agenda. Action: To conduct the interview meeting in the conference room. Motion Tucker, second Reviczky. The motion carried, noting the absence of Bobko. INTERVIEWS OF PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION APPLICANTS Pursuant to past procedure, the applicants were interviewed separately, apart from the others, with each Councilmember asking one question of each of the applicants. Recognizing that this was a public meeting open to any member of the public wishing to observe the interviews, each of the applicants waited their turn and entered the room one at a time when called. (Councilmember Bobko arrived at 6:25 p.m., during the first interview.) Coming forward to proceed with the interview process and respond to the individual Council questions were the following applicants: Sean Krajewski Julian Katz Brian Koch Victor Winnek ADJOURNMENT - The Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach adjourned on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at the hour of 6:55 p.m. to the Regular Meeting scheduled to begin at the hour of 7:10 p.m. 2a(2) City Council Minutes 11-28-06 Page 12053 vchlist Check Register 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 1 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46122 11/22/2006 08955 AAE INC. 15177 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES/ OCT 06 001-3104-4201 180.00 146-8116-4201 6,174.00 Total : 6,354 11) 46123 11/22/2006 11437 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES C0-01 201175 TAXI VOUCHER PROGRAM/ OCT 06 145-3404-4201 Total : 4,407.90 4,407.90 46124 11/22/2006 14061 ADVANCED KAWASAKI 28311 Motorcycle Service 715-2101-4311 180.99 Total : 180.99 46125 11/22/2006 10610 AFSS - SOUTHERN DIVISION 20132 Registration/ S Diaz 001-2201-4317 46126 11/22/2006 06290 AIR SOURCE INDUSTRIES 453502 Oxygen Refill/ Oct 06 001-2201-4309 25.00 Total : 25.00 252.80 Total : 252.80 46127 11/22/2006 06827 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 8537 CROSSING GUARD SERVICE/10-15 TO 10-28-0 001-2102-4201 3,99E Total : 3,990. 46128 11/22/2006 00401 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSN 65927 Membership Dues/ Jan thru Dec 07 001-4202-4315 780.00 Total : 780.00 46129 11/22/2006 05179 AT&T 051 788 4923 001 Phone Charges/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 Total : 46130 11/22/2006 14127 BASICA, BLASE F 20131 Citation Refund/ # 1606023783 001-3302 Total : 23.54 N 23.54 5.00 5.00 Page: 1 vchlist Check Register 11122/2006 4:27:31 PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 2 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46131 11/22/2006 00261 CA PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIO 20140 Description/Account Amount Registration/ L Heard & D Loughin 001-2101-4312 001-2101-4317 Total : 66.00 66.00 132.00 46132 11/22/2006 00261 CA PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIO MEM56423 Membership Dues/ P Wolcott 001-2101-4315 70.00 Total : 70.1 46133 11/22/2006 10547 CBM CONSULTING, INC. 10192 ENGINEERING SERVICES/ OCT 06 301-8117-4201 2,210.00 10193 ENGINEERING SERVICES/ OCT 05 301-8120-4201 467.50 Total : , 2,677.50 46134 11/22/2006 12111 CHACO, JOHN 20085 Instructor Pymt/ # 11628, 632 001-4601-4221 168.00 Total : 168.00 46135 11/22/2006 12861 CHEMSEARCH 309970 ASPHALT CLEANER 001-3104-4309 949.56 Total : 949.56 46136 11/22/2006 13361 CINGULAR WIRELESS 556214765X11112006 Cell Phone Usage/ Oct 06 001-4202-4304 244.19 Total : 244.19 46137 11/22/2006 04715 COLEN AND LEE 2936 GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMIN/ SEP 06 • 705-1209-4201 1,000.00 Total : 1,000.00 46138 11/22/2006 09614 CONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 110906 300' Noticing - 703 Pier/Plan Comm Mtq 001-4101-4201 499.00 Total : 499.00 46139 11/22/2006 07809 CORPORATE EXPRESS 74528373 Office Supplies/ Nov 06 001-1208-4305 101.07 Page: 2 vchlist Check Register 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 3 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46139 11/22/2006 07809 CORPORATE EXPRESS (Continued) Description/Account Amount 74663359 Office Supplies Returned/ Nov 06 001-1208-4305 -6.84 Total : 94.23 46140 11/22/2006 00879 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AR327017 SEWER PUMP STATION MAINT/ SEP 06 • 160-3102-4201 1,542.38 AR327041 ARTESIA BLVD MEDIAN MAINT/ SEP 06 302-3104-4251 69.38 Total : 1,611.76 46141 11/22/2006 00850 CURTIS, L.N. 1112572-00 TURNOUT PANTS/C LOPEZ & A BAKER 001-2201-4350 1,266.53 1112572-01 TURNOUT PANTS/ S DURKIN 001-2201-4350 633.26 6001440-00 Turnout Repair/ Oct 06 001-2201-4350 112.58 Total : 2,012.37 46142 11/22/2006 08855 D & D SERVICES, INC. 1791 Dead Animal Disposal/ Oct 06 001-3302-4201 295.00 Total : 295.00 46143 11/22/2006 14122 DAVIDOV, AMY M 20122 Citation Refund/ # 1806013431 • 001-3302 10.00 Total : 10.00 46144 11/22/2006 12991 DELL MARKETING L.P. R66657190 Dell Optiplex Computer/Flat Panel 154-2107-5402 1,127.11 Total : 1,127.11 46145 11/22/2006 00364 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 596247 Employee Fingerprinting/ Oct 06 001-1203-4251 128.00 Total : 128.00 46146 11/22/2006 02055 DOERFLING, ELAINE C. 1007 Reimb/Registration Fee/Leap Cities 001-1121-4317 420.00 Page: 3 vchlist Check Register Page: 4 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46146 11/22/2006 02055 DOERFLING, ELAINE C. (Continued) Total : 420.00 46147 11/22/2006 00122 DUNCAN PARKING TECHNOLOGIE:28509 PARKING METER CASH KEYS 001-1204-4305 Total : 2,026.58 2,026.58 46148 11/22/2006 00181 EASY READER 1122006 Legal Ads/ Oct 06 001-1121-4323 1,314.8 Total : 1,314. 46149 11/22/2006 07853 EMPIRE PIPE CLEANING & EQUIP 7332 CLEAN AND VIDEO SEWER SYSTEM/ OCT 06 160-3102-4201 36,603.16 Total : 36,603.16 46150 11/22/2006 01962 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. 8-516-78584 Express Mail/ Oct 06 001-2101-4305 21.82 109-3301-4201 17.75 Total : 39.57 46151 11/22/2006 10825 FESS PARKER'S DOUBLETREE 19820 Lodging/ P Wolcott 001-2101-4312 433.79 Total : 433.79 46152 11/22/2006 09138 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE 6098766-R3 Subscription Renewal 001-2201-4317 30.00 Total : 30.00 46153 11/22/2006 12648 FIRST RESPONDER NEWSPAPER 748428 Subscription Renewal • 001-2201-4317 50.00 Total : 50.00 46154 11/22/2006 13481 GASSER OLDS COMPANY P5998 Jazz Stroll Plaques/ Final Payment 001-2165 1,447.38 Total : 1,447.38 46155 11/22/2006 06518 HAYER CONSULTANTS, INC. 2571 Plan Checks/ May 06 001-4201-4201 13,891.36 Page: 4 // vchlist Check Register Page: 5 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46155 11/22/2006 06518 HAYER CONSULTANTS, INC. (Continued) 2624 Plan Check/ Aug 06 001-4201-4201 1,919.58 2695 Fire Dept Plan Check/ Inspection 001-4201-4201 375 Total : 16,185. 46156 11/22/2006 00322 HERMOSA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 124 Emergency Vet Services/ Oct 06 001-3302-4201 35.00 Total : 35.00 46157 11/22/2006 00065 HERMOSA BEACH CAR WASH, ZIPf 11106 City Car Washes/ Oct 06 715-4201-4311 5.95 715-3302-4311 17.85 715-2101-4311 220.85 Total : 244.65 46158 11/22/2006 07547 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSO( 0012247 -IN SALES TAX SERVICES/ 2ND QTR 06/07 001-1202-4201 900.00 001-1202-4201 381.30 Total : 1,281.30 46159 11/22/2006 10820 JENKINS & HOGIN,LLP 13925 Legal, RE: General/ Oct 06 001-1131-4201 7,616.0 13926 Legal, RE: Land Use/ Oct 06 001-1131-4201 435.00 13927 Legal, RE: Pitchess Motions/ Oct 06 001-1131-4201 884.70 13928 Legal, RE: Code Enforcement/ Oct 06 001-1132-4201 1,742.50 13929 Legal, RE: Tattoo Parlor/ Oct 06 001-1131-4201 12,434.75 13930 Legal, RE: Stop Oil / Oct 06 001-1131-4201 142.20 13931 Legal, RE: Union Cattle/ Oct 06 001-1131-4201 410.00 Page: 5 r vchlist Check Register Page: 6 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46159 11/22/2006 10820 JENKINS & HOGIN,LLP (Continued) Total : 23,665.45 46160 11/22/2006 13840 JOHN M CRUIKSHANK 6418 DESIGN & ENGINEERING SERVICES/ OCT 06 301-8104-4201 3,522.50 Total : 3,522.50 46161 11/22/2006 13734 KOVAC-REEDY, KELLY 20107 Reimburse/Neighborhood Watch Supplies 001-2101-4201 1,221.32 Total : 1,221.30 46162 11/22/2006 00151 L.A. CO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT 91139MV Arrestee Processing Fee - Aug 06 001-2101-4251 145.84 Total : 145.84 46163 11/22/2006 00843 L.A. COUNTY METROPOLITAN 11060487 Bus Pass and Stamp Sales/ Nov 06 145-3403-4251 188.00 Total : 188.00 46164 11/22/2006 14129 LAW OFFICES OF JONES & MAYER 35251 Professional Services/ Oct 06 001-1203-4201 682.50 Total : 682.50 46165 11/22/2006 11452 LEHNER/MARTIN,INC 975907 Helium Tank Refill/ Oct 06 001-4601-4308 19.20 Total : 19.20 46166 11/22/2006 10045 MAIN STREET TOURS 33977 Transportation/ Getty Villa - Malibu 145-3409-4201 635. Total : 635.00 46167 11/22/2006 14041 MC GOWAN, P.E., KATHLEEN 3047 STORMWATER MGMT PROGRAM ADMIN/ SEP 160-3102-4201 3.458.38 Total : 3,458.38 46168 11/22/2006 13907 MODESTO TRANSFER & STORAGE 2527 MOVING COSTS/ POLICE CHIEF -GREG SAVEL 001-1203-4201 2,423.24 Total : 2,423.24 Page: 6 vchlist Check Register 11/22/2006 4:27:31PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 7 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46169 11/22/2006 10608 MTC ENGINEERING INC. 0512285 Engineering Consulting Services/ Sep 05 301-8643-4201 1,000.25 Total : 1,000.25 46170 11/22/2006 14126 MURRAY, ANDREW 20125 Building Permit Refund/ 33 16th St 001-3204 418. Total : 418.53 46171 11/22/2006 13846 MY ESCUELITA 20086 Instructor Pymt/ # 11526 001-4601-4221 604.80 Total : 604.80 46172 11/22/2006 13114 OFFICE DEPOT 358320548-001 Office Supplies Returned/ Nov 06 001-1203-4305 -29.31 359855360-001 Office Supplies/ Nov 06 001-4601-4305 83.24 Total : 53.93 46173 11/22/2006 11539 PROSUM TECHNOLOGY SERVICE 19311 IT SUPPORT/ OCT 06 715-1206-4201 12,300.00 19314 VERIZON FIOS INSTALL/CONFIGURE/ FAILOVE 715-1206-4201 2,500.00 Total : 14,800.1 46174 11/22/2006 14123 REAMEY, KEN 20110 Reimburse/ Supply Expense 109-3301-4309 156.91 Total : 156.91 46175 11/22/2006 03726 RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING 152086 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE SERVICE/ OCT 0 001-4204-4201 400.00 Total : 400.00 46176 11/22/2006 03353 S.B.C.U. VISA 407628429901577010' Council Mtq/ Commissioner Interviews 001-1101-4305 29.94 407628429901733110, Council Mtq/ Commissioner Interviews 001-1101-4305 16.65 Total : 46.59 Page: 7 —7 vchlist 11/22/2006 4:27:31 PM Check Register Page: 8 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46177 11/22/2006 07858 SAFETY KLEEN 46178 11/22/2006 09951 46179 11/22/2006 09951 46180 11/22/2006 09951 46181 11/22/2006 09951 46182 11/22/2006 09951 46183 11/22/2006 09951 46184 11/22/2006 09951 SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE SANTA ANA COLLEGE 46185 11/22/2006 09656 SHRED IT CALIFORNIA M003757974 20051 20080 20081 20082 20083 20114 20078 20115 333479381 Description/Account Amount REMOVAL OF 635 GAL OF HAZARDOUS WAS! 001-3104-4201 Tuition/ J Crawford/ Prevention 2A Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ J Crawford/ Mgmt 2A Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ J Crawford/ Prevention 2B Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ J Crawford/ Mgmt 2B Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ J Crawford/ Prevention 2C Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ B Scott/ Prevention 2A Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ J Crawford/ ICS 400 Class 001-2201-4317 Tuition/ B Scott/ Prevention 1C Class 001-2201-4317 Shreddinq Services/ Oct 06 001-2101-4201 2,545.72 Total : 2,545.72 140.00 Total : 140.00 • 140.00 Total : 140.00 140.00 Total : 140.00 140.00 Total : 140.00 140.00 Total : 140.00 140.00 Total : 140.10 50.00 140.00 Total : 190.00 370.00 Total : 370.00 Page: 8 vchlist Check Register Page: 9 11/22/2006 4:27:31 PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46186 11/22/2006 14008 SO CAL RISK MANAGEMENT 1112006 Workers Comp Claim Admin/1st & 2nd Qtr 705-1217-4201 15,.1 Total : 15,368.136888 46187 11/22/2006 10960 SOUTH BAY AUTO UPHOLSTERY 110206 REPAIR AND REPLACE TORN SEAT/ HB9 715-2101-4311 156.5 Total : 156.19 46188 11/22/2006 00159 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON C 2-00-989-6911 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 259.90 2-00-989-7315 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 11,070.67 2-01-836-7458 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 26.30 2-02-274-0542 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 001-6101-4303 13.66 2-09-076-5850 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 32.94 2-10-947-9824 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 150.27 2-19-024-1604 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 001-6101-4303 408.82 2-20-128-4825 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 109-3304-4303 1,933.1 2-20-984-6179 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 18.14 2-21-400-7684 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 30.19 2-21-964-8003 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 21.16 2-22-267-0663 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 109-3304-4303 71.50 2-26-686-5930 Electrical Billing - Oct 06 105-2601-4303 2,292.69 Total : 16,329.34 Page: 9 vchlist Check Register Page: 10 11/22/2006 4:27:31 PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46189 11/22/2006 13969 SUNSET PRINTING 06-145241 46190 11/22/2006 06045 TAB PRODUCTS COMPANY 1625752 46191 11/22/2006 10529 TINGLEY, RUSSELL 1004 46192 11/22/2006 11209 UC REGENTS 19560 46193 11/22/2006 11209 UC REGENTS 19561 46194 11/22/2006 08207 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 1020060309 46195 11/22/2006 04768 UPTIME COMPUTER SERVICE 20094 46196 11/22/2006 09056 VERIZON ONLINE 57221306 46197 11/22/2006 13302 WHEELED COACH 172989 46198 11/22/2006 00129 WOLCOTT, PAUL 19819 Description/Account Amount Color Maps/ Neighborhood Watch 001-2101-4201 568.31 Total : 568.31 2 DIGIT YEAR LABELS 001-1121-4305 Per Diem/ Fire Chiefs Seminar 001-2201-4317 28.47 Total : 28.47 41110 50.0 Total : 50.00 Paramedic Prep Class/ A Baker -Wilhite 001-2201-4317 475.00 Total : 475.00 475.00 Total : 475.00 81.60 Total : 81.60 908.07 Total : 908. 111 Fiber Optic Line/ Nov 06 715-1206-4201 149.95 Total : 149.95 Replacement Wheelcover/ R11 715-2201-5403 276.13 Total : 276.13 Per Diem/ Background Investigator Class 001-2101-4312 84.00 Paramedic Prep Class/ S Durkin 001-2201-4317 Underground Service Alert/ Nov 06 160-3102-4201 Printer Maintenance/ Nov 06 715-1206-4201 Page: 10 vchlist Check Register Page: 11 11/22/2006 4:27:31 PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptionlAccount Amount 46198 46199 11/22/2006 00129 11/22/2006 00135 WOLCOTT, PAUL XEROX CORPORATION 46200 11/22/2006 01206 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES (Continued) 021039572 0090695 0090848 2021024 11/20/2006 00243 HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCO 11152006 2030820 11/22/2006 14008 SO CAL RISK MANAGEMENT 11222006 81 Vouchers for bank code : 81 Vouchers in this report boa Copier Maintenance / Oct 06 715-2101-4201 Street Sign Maint Material/ Oct 06 001-3104-4309 Street Sign Maint Material/ Oct 06 001-3104-4309 Payroll/11-1 to 11-15-06 001-1103 001-2030 105-1103 109-1103 117-1103 145-1103 156-1103 160-1103 301-1103 705-1103 715-1103 105-2030 156-2030 160-2030 715-2030 Workers Comp Claims - 11/17/06 705-1217-4324 Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 84.00 175.34 175.5 161.60 179.70 341.30 451,097.62 -1.02 3,356.74 1,553.99 1,421.19 56.49 3,029.16 8,020.86 5,865.74 3,786.# 5,068. -0. -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 483,255.19 16,477.77 16,477.77 679,739.14 679,739.14 Page: 11 /1 vchlist 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM Check Register CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 1 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46201 11/30/2006 10047 ALAMEDA CO DA'S OFFICE 20145 46202 11/30/2006 14132 AMERICAN HOMELAND SOLUTION: 1013 46203 11/30/2006 00321 AT&T 46204 46205 46206 11/30/2006 14133 11/30/2006 03676 11/30/2006 14025 BEST WESTERN INN BRIAN, JEAN BUDGET 331 254-6071 301 5 333 267-6155 686 9 333 267-6160 767 0 333 267-6161 416 3 333 267-6164 193 5 333 267-6165 717 0 Description/Account Amount Publications 001-2101-4305 Tuition/ L Heard / NIMS-SEMS Training 001-2101-4317 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-21014304 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 1013-A Lodging/ L Heard/ NIMS-SEMS Training 001-2101-4317 20194 2005 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 20146 Citation Refund/ # 1706014931 001-3302 20177 Citation Refund/ # 1606021886 001-3302 Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : 192.00 192.00 516.00 516.06 57.54 187.96 59.32 59.32 50.57 50.57 465.28 233.07 233.0. 24.61 24.61 30.00 70.00 100.00 Page: 1 vchlist Check Register Page: 2 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46207 11/30/2006 05621 BURRELL, STEPHEN R. 20193 Reimburse Travel Exp/Leap CA Cities 001-1201-4317 95.85 Total : 95.85 46208 11/30/2006 07109 BURT, ADAM 20159 Instructor Pymt/USTA Tennis Tourn 001-4601-4221 3,209. Total : 3,209.5 46209 11/30/2006 09632 CDWG CMC5784 Toners/ Nov 06 715-1206-4305 1,383.15 CMK4534 Printer Inks/ Nov06 715-1206-4305 23.27 CMS1972 Adobe Acrobat 7 Software 001-1202-4305 135.31 CNJ4478 DVD BURNER 001-1121-4305 115.83 Total : 1,657.56 46210 11/30/2006 00623 CMTA 1012 Registra/Lodging/J Workman/CMTA Conf 001-1141-4317 350.00 Total : 350.00 46211 11/30/2006 04715 COLEN AND LEE 2980 GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMIN/OCT 06 705-1209-4201 1,000.111 Total : 1,000. 46212 11/30/2006 09614 CONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 112406 300' Noticing - Dec 6, 06 Plan Comm Mtq 001-4101-4201 998.00 Total : 998.00 46213 11/30/2006 07809 CORPORATE EXPRESS 74764903 Office Supplies/ Nov 06 001-1208-4305 486.15 74764904 Office Supplies/ Nov 06 001-1203-4305 17.10 Total : 503.25 46214 11/30/2006 00850 CURTIS, L.N. 1114366-00 Uniform Boots/ A Bush Page: 2 vchlist 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Check Register Page: 3 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46214 11/30/2006 00850 CURTIS, L.N. (Continued) 001-2201-4314 116.50 Total : 116.50 46215 11/30/2006 12856 CYGANY, INC. 3599 DOG BAGS FOR PARKS/ GREENBELT 001-6101-4309 922.50 Total : 922.50 46216 11/30/2006 14143 DEBOLT, GREGORY DAVID 20192 Citation Refund/ #1106016524 001-3302 10.0 Total : 10.00 46217 11/30/2006 14144 DELANEY, TARA 20176 Citation Refund/ # 1606016551 001-3302 55.00 Total : 55.00 46218 11/30/2006 11449 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 3443672 PEST CONTROL SERVICES / OCT 06 001-4204-4201 55.00 3451066 PEST CONTROL SERVICES / OCT 06 160-3102-4201 500.00 Total : 555.00 46219 11/30/2006 14145 DILLON, LINDA M 20198 2006 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 24.61 Total : 24.61 46220 11/30/2006 02055 DOERFLING, ELAINE C. 1007-A PER DIEM/LEAG CA CITIES CITY CLERKS CON001-1121-4317 100. 410 Total : 100.00 46221 11/30/2006 12241 DUBBERKE, LOWELL R. 20189 2005 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 24.61 Total : 24.61 46222 11/30/2006 00122 DUNCAN PARKING TECHNOLOGIE: 28589 PARKING METER PARTS 001-3302-4309 141.78 Total : 141.78 Page: 3 vchlist Check Register Page: 4 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46223 11/30/2006 12985 EDMONDS ASSOCIATES CONSULT 2 PROFESSIONAL SERI ALOHA SHARKEEZ/ AUC 001-4201-4201 3 PROFESSIONAL SER/ALOHA SHARKEEZ/ NOV 001-4201-4201 46224 11/30/2006 10668 EXXON MOBIL FLEET/GECC 11916412 Gas Card Purchases/ Nov 06 715-2101-4310 715-2201-4310 715-4201-4310 715-4202-4310 715-3302-4310 715-6101-4310 715-3104-4310 715-4601-4310 715-2601-4310 001-1250 Total : Total : 46225 11/30/2006 11888 G & M PLASTERING 20156 Citation Refund/ # 1706017057 001-3302 Total : 46226 11/30/2006 01320 GALLS/LONG BEACH UNIFORM CO 777268 Uniform Jacket/ JR Smith 001-2101-4314 785065-01 Uniforms/ J Droz 001-2101-4314 790478-01 UNIFORMS FOR POLICE RECRUIT FAULK 001-2101-4314 46227 11/30/2006 00669 GASB 20195 Subscription Renewal/ V Copeland 001-1202-4317 Total : Total : 710.00 750.00 1,460.46 3,666.73 389.20 140.76 109.45 456.24 288.83 353.41 90.91 158.68 77.47 5,731.68 65.00 65.00 443.1 921.74 129.85 1,495.49 175.00 175.00 46228 11/30/2006 13481 GASSER OLDS COMPANY 5998 Jazz Stroll Plaques 001-2165 1,447.38 Page: 4 vchlist Check Register 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 5 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46228 11/30/2006 13481 GASSER OLDS COMPANY (Continued) Total : 1,447.38 46229 11/30/2006 05125 GHASSEMI PETTY CASH, MARIA 20197 Petty Cash Replenish/ 11-15 to 11-30-06 001-1201-4317 25.00 001-2101-4305 31.68 001-2101-4317 66.00 001-2201-4305 14.29 001-2201-4309 29.1 001-3104-4309 84. 001-4201-4305 21.0 001-4204-4309 71.19 001-4202-4305 70.95 001-4601-4305 27.35 001-4601-4308 348.38 715-2201-4311 10.81 Total : 800.29 46230 11/30/2006 06093 HEARD, LANCE 1013-B Per Diem/ NIMS-SEMS Training 001-2101-4317 84.00 Total : 84.00 46231 11/30/2006 14134 HENDREX, MICHAEL & JENNIFER 20161 Work Guarantee Refund/ # 6986 001-2110 3,000.00 Total : 3,000.00 46232 11/30/2006 14063 HILTON TORREY PINES 1007-B LODGING/E DOERFLING/LEAG CA CITIES CON 001-1121-4317 662. Total : 662. 46233 11/30/2006 13967 HRBOKA, ANDREA 20163 Instructor Pymt/ # 11680 001-4601-4221 472.50 Total : 472.50 46234 11/30/2006 09130 HRBOKA, DENNIS 20164 Instructor Pymt/ # 11359, 360 001-4601-4221 2,352.00 Total : 2,352.00 46235 11/30/2006 13330 HUGHES SUPPLY, INC. S126831759.001 Plumbing Supplies/ Nov 06 Page: 5 ,, vchlist Check Register 11/3012006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 6 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account. Amount 46235 11/30/2006 13330 HUGHES SUPPLY, INC. (Continued) 001-4204-4309 39.80 001-2021 0.56 001-2022 -0.56 S126862259.001 PLUMBING SUPPLIES/ NOV 06 001-4204-4309 455.• 001-2021 . 6.39 001-2022 -6.39 Total : 494.91 46236 11/30/2006 13916 HUNTER, DONNA 20173 Expense Reimbursement/ Event Canopies 001-4601-4308 644.03 20174 Expense Reimb/ Holiday Event Supplies 001-4601-4308 118.13 Total : 762.16 46237 11/30/2006 02458 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTF 210177-00 Electrical Supplies - Oct 06 105-2601-4309 243.13 001-2021 4.20 001-2022 -4.20 210595-00 Electrical Supplies - Nov 06 105-2601-4309 395.25 001-2021 7.4. 001-2022 -7. 210832-00 Electrical Supplies - Nov 06 105-2601-4309 414.38 001-2021 7.80 001-2022 -7.80 210918-00 Electrical Supplies - Nov 06 105-2601-4309 183.29 001-2021 3.45 001-2022 -3.45 210929-00 Electrical Supplies - Nov 06 105-2601-4309 421.75 001-2021 7.60 001-2022 -7.60 Page: 6 vchlist Check Register 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Page: 7 Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46237 11/30/2006 02458 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTR(Continued) 46238 11/30/2006 12151 JAHNG, CHRISTOPHER Y. 20166 46239 11/30/2006 13741 JAS PACIFIC, INC 819113 46240 11/30/2006 14139 JUICE PLUS 132066 46241 11/30/2006 10677 LAWRENCE ASSOCIATES 110306 Description/Account Amount Total : 1,657.80 Instructor Pymt/ # 11689 001-4601-4221 392.00 Total : 392.00 Interim Sr Bldg Inspector/ Oct 06 001-4201-4201 Rental Deposit Refund 001-2111 Total : Total : 4,290.00 4,290. 50.00 50.00 Staff Support Services/ Oct 06 140-4707-4201 1,054.00 140-8644-4201 221.00 117-5301-4201 1,445.00 Total : 2,720.00 46242 11/30/2006 07365 LEADER INDUSTRIES, INC. 0039316 -IN Emer i Repair/ Back-up Ambulance 715-2201-4311 47.32 Total : 47.32 46243 11/30/2006 00167 LEARNED LUMBER B48294 Rebar Purchased/ Nov 06 301-8535-4201 B48369 Rebar Purchased/ Nov 06 301-8535-4201 Total : 133.36 77.10 210.56 46244 11/30/2006 02175 LIEBERT, CASSIDY WHITMORE 71184 Legal, RE: HE050 00001 RK/ Oct 06 001-1203-4201 1,005.00 71185 Legal, RE: HE050 00029 RK/ Oct 06 001-1203-4201 879.95 71186 Legal, RE: HE050 00032 RK/ Oct 06 001-1203-4201 11,293.94 71187 Legal, RE: HE050 00034 RK/ Oct 06 001-1203-4201 12,460.38 Page: 7 in vchlist Check Register Page: 8 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 46244 11/30/2006 02175 LIEBERT, CASSIDY WHITMORE (Continued) 71188 46245 11/30/2006 14135 46246 11/30/2006 11601 46247 11/30/2006 00213 46248 11/30/2006 14141 46249 11/30/2006 06514 46250 11/30/2006 13023 46251 11/30/2006 00093 46252 11/30/2006 06909 LITANO, NICHOLAS LONG, YVONNE C LOS ANGELES TIMES MARTINEZ, ROBERT MAXIMUS, INC. MRW CONSTRUCTION, INC. OLYMPIC AUTO CENTER PRYOR, W.T. 71189 71190 20157 20184 1608939011 20187 1001105-02F192 19205 11947 20175 Description/Account Amount Legal, RE: HE050 00036 001-1203-4201 Legal, RE: HE050 00037 001-1203-4201 Legal, RE: HE050 00039 001-1203-4201 RK/ Oct 06 RK/ Oct 06 RGU/ Oct 06 Citation Refund/ # 1 70601 61 54 001-3302 2005 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 Newspaper Subscription/ Fire 001-2201-4317 2005 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 SB -90 Claims/ Elder Abuse Training 001-1202-4201 Work Guarantee Refund/ #5461 001-2110 Windshield Replacement/ Unit 21 715-2101-4311 2006 Assessment Tax Rebate 9,977.38 42.6 47.00 Total : 35,706.55 35.00 Total : 35.00 24.61 Total : 24.61 127.20 Total : 127.20 24.61 Total : 24.• 732.30 Total : 732.30 1,600.00 Total : 1,600.00 267.92 Total : 267.92 Page: 8 %Q vchlist Check Register Page: 9 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46252 11/30/2006 06909 PRYOR, W.T. (Continued) 105-3105 24.61 Total : 24.61 46253 11/30/2006 14131 ROBERTS, LESLEY 128949 Class Refund 001-2111 200.00 Total : 200.00 46254 11/30/2006 03726 RUSHER AIR CONDITIONING 116258 REPLACE THERMOSTAT/ 1ST FLOOR/ CITY H� • 001-4204-4201 325.00 116259 Emerq Ser Call/ AC unit in Basement 001-4204-4201 390.50 Total : 715.50 46255 11/30/2006 14136 RYAN, JOSEPH 20155 Citation Refund/ # 1105010873 001-3302 20.00 Total : 20.00 46256 11/30/2006 03353 S.B.C.U. VISA 262630668300031811 Airfare/ CALPELRA Conf/ M Earl 001-1203-4317 380.10 Total : 380.10 46257 11/30/2006 14124 SALDANA, MARC 20088 Instructor Pymt/ # 11602 001-4601-4221 224.00 Total : 224.00 46258 11/30/2006 07518 SELTZER & ASSOC., JULES 93014 PEDESTAL FILE BOX 001-4101-5401 374.3 Total : 374.33 46259 11/30/2006 09656 SHRED IT CALIFORNIA 333438925 Shredding Services/ Nov 06 001-2101-4201 222.00 Total : 222.00 46260 11/30/2006 09268 SIGNS 4 SUCCESS 17822 Holiday Banner Changes 001-4601-4308 50.00 Total : 50.00 Page: 9 vchlist Check Register Page: 10 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46261 11/30/2006 00018 SIMS WELDING SUPPLY CO. 00284317 Welding Supplies/ Nov 06 001-3104-4309 46262 11/30/2006 14130 SKILLPATH ON-SITE 29961 Seminar Tuition/ Oct 24, 06 001-1203-4317 001-2101-4317 46263 11/30/2006 14008 SO CAL RISK MANAGEMENT 11302006 Workers Comp Claims - 11/22/06 705-1217-4324 46264 11/30/2006 14104 SO CAL TRAINING OFFICERS 20013 Membership Dues/ Jan 1 thru Dec 31, 07 001-2201-4315 46265 11/30/2006 00118 SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 20148 Citation Surcharge/ Oct 06 001-3302 46266 11/30/2006 08812 SOUTH BAY REGIONAL PUBLIC CO 200607121 RADIOS FOR FIRE DEPT APPARATUS. 001-2201-5405 150-2204-5405 46267 11/30/2006 05195 STANDARD CONCRETE PRODUCT; 573599 Concrete/ Clark Field Project 301-8535-4201 573737 Concrete/ Clark Field Project 301-8535-4201 46268 11/30/2006 13201 STORMWATER SOLUTIONS LLC 00148 Double Matrix D-Raintanks 160-3102-4309 46269 11/30/2006 06045 TAB PRODUCTS COMPANY 1626388 2 DIGIT YEAR LABELS 001-1121-4305 270.98 Total : 270.98 1,000 2,200.07 Total : 3,200.00 17,813.75 Total : 17,813.75 40.00 Total : 40.00 16,234.20 Total : 16,234.20 3,039.82 57,756 Total : 60,796.111/ 840.03 662.17 Total : 1,502.20 953.58 Total : 953.58 13.79 Page: 10 vchlist Check Register Page: 11 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46269 11/30/2006 06045 TAB PRODUCTS COMPANY (Continued) Total : 13.79 46270 11/30/2006 14137 TEMPLIN-RANDALL, SHERI LYNN 20147 Citation Refund/ # 1106013391 001-3302 55.00 Total : 55.00 46271 11/30/2006 13845 TORRES CONSTRUCTION CORP Prog Pymt 6 COMM CENTER BLDG UPGRADES/ PROG PYIV 301-8626-4201 40,958.2 Total : 40,958. 46272 11/30/2006 00015 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 310 167-1756 990511 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 268.20 310 197-3683 INSTALL EMERG PHONE/ CITY HALL ELEVATC 001-4204-4201 145.00 715-1206-4304 212.17 001-3302-4304 66.49 001-2101-4304 1,348.91 001-2201-4304 243.77 001-4601-4304 149.65 001-4202-4304 128.73 001-4201-4304 89.54 109-3304-4304 36.05 001-1204-4304 29.90 001-4204-4321 -45.84 310 372-6373 040311 Personnel Fax Line/ Nov 06 001-1203-4304 33.7 310 PLO -0346 030623 Circuit Billing/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 42.3 Total : 2,748.69 46273 11/30/2006 03209 VERIZON WIRELESS -LA 2090397713 Cell Phone Usage/ Nov 06 001-2101-4304 38.55 Total : 38.55 46274 11/30/2006 02873 WESTERN GRAPHIX 26414 Employee ID Cards/ Nov 06 001-2201-4305 31.31 Total : 31.31 Page: 11 vchlist Check Register Page: 12 11/30/2006 4:29:16PM CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount 46275 11/30/2006 12899 WESTERN STATES INFORMATION 138 E -Newsletter Services/ Nov 06 001-1101-4319 500.00 Total : 500.00 46276 11/30/2006 10703 WILLDAN 061-21462 46277 11/30/2006 07085 WILMARTH, JUANITA 20183 46278 11/30/2006 14140 WINN, DIANA 132043 78 Vouchers for bank code : boa 78 Vouchers in this report Interim Sr Bldg Inspector/ Sep 06 001-4201-4201 7,750.0 Total : 7,750.0 2006 Assessment Tax Rebate 105-3105 24.61 Total : 24.61 Class Refund 001-2111 110.00 Total : 110.00 Bank total : 233,435.40 Total vouchers : 233,435.40 • Page: 12 vchlist Check Register Page: 13 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 11/3012006 4:29:16PM Bank code : boa Voucher Date Vendor Invoice "I hereby certify that the demands or claims covered by the checks listed on pages / to a3 inclusive, of the check register for -0, ..- ao /d are accurate funds are available for payment, and are in conformance to the budget." By Finance Director Date l atQb(e) Description/Account Amount Page: 13 • • December 4, 2006 Honorable Mayor and For the Meeting of Members of the City Council December 12, 2006 CANCELLATION OF CHECKS Please ratify the following request for cancellation of the check listed below: #44638 — 7/1 3/06 — MRW Construction — $1,600.00 The check was lost. A stop payment has been placed. #45646 — 10/05/06 — Santa Ana College — $140.00 The class was cancelled. The check was not mailed. #46263 — 11/30/06 — So. Cal Risk Management — $17,813.75 The wrong form of payment was used. The check was not mailed. Concur: Step City Manager T_cz-PAAA (Aieviu. (i'kYry) John M. Workman, City Treasurer Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director December 7, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 I TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS NO MEETING Code Red Fire Chief Parking In -Lieu Payment Schedule Fire Department Study Community Development Director Fire Chief Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of October 18, 2006. Public Works Director Activity Reports — November 2006 Noah's Wish Police Chief Parks Fee Report Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of. Community Resources Director Community Resources Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of. Community Development Director Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of. Public Works Director Activity Reports — December 2006 • Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Recommended Action: • December 4, 2006 For the City Council Meeting of December 12, 2006 ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS It is recommended that the City Council accept donations received by the City to be used as follows: Donor Sasine Jenkins & Hogin, LLP Women's Club of Hermosa Beach pectfully submitted: Valerie Mohler Accounting Supervisor Amount Purpose $1,000.00 To be used for the Centennial Celebration $1,000.00 To be used for the Centennial Celebration. $500.00 To be used for repair and maintenance of the Veterans' Memorial. (recorded in the Veterans' Memorial account.) Concur: 1 21,44 ..,/ Viki Copeland Finance Director phen Bur ell City Manager 2d • . /)-1/2/6-(:). Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular meeting of The Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 APPROVE BID FOR POLICE AMMUNITION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve proposal from Dooley Enterprises for the purchase of ammunition for the Police Department. BACKGROUND The request for proposal was issued 11/09/2006. It ran in local papers for two weeks and requested bids be filed with the City Clerk's office by November 30, 2006 at 2:00 PM. One bid was received from Dooley Enterprises, Inc., 1198 N. Grove St., #A, Anaheim, CA 92806 by the due date/time. The bid was for the listed ammunition and the total with shipping and tax came to $8,699.68. FISCAL IMPACT The Police range budget has allocated the money necessary to purchase this ammunition. Respectfully submitted, Concur: GREG 'AVELLI, CHIEF OF POLICE S " P I B LL CITY MANAGER Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, inance Director HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH — BID OPENING LOG SHEET Project Name: vD czyyvi-lcyt- Date: Bidder's Name ooLe1 E ► -t- .PA__ E5,��c. Paget of / Aniount of Bid S,cog 9. g 2) . 3) 4) 5) 6) Attest: C,1 ffica of the City CIerk - 1115 VaIT y Dr e - Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 From: dooley enterprises, inc. • Price Quote Customer Service 1198 N. Grove St. #A Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone: (714) 630-6436 FAX: (714) 630-3910 I�UOTE #: DE t 000374 QUOTE DATE: To: IHERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPT. 1ATTN: JRANGEMASTER 1540 PIER AVE. HERMOSA BEACH 1404 CA 190254 PHONE #: (310) 318-0317 FAX#: (310) 379-7725........................ Here are the prices you requested: QUANTITY SYMBOL 10.00 Q3131 4.00 RA45T 1.00 RA4OTA 0.50 RA9TA B (0039 111110/2006 DESCRIPTION PRICE EXTENSION NO BID IrNn1"r4wA;)nIDKA_ SFE fil 13F.) L-> 0.0d 45 Auto 230gr. Jacketed Hollow Poin 300.00 1200.00 40 S&W 165gr. Jacketed Hollow Point 9mm 127gr. Jacketed Hollow Point T- 10.00 3.00 USA45JHP Q4238 45 Auto 230gr. Jacketed Hollow Poin 40 S&W 180gr. Full Metal Jacket Q4172 1.00 1.00 RA1200 10.00 LC556 9mm 115gr. Full Metal Jacket 290.00 280.00 290.00 215.00 175.00 12ga. 9 Pellets 00 Buck, Low Recoil LAKECITY556caI 62gr.M855 Penetrator As -ALT 223 LC556 (WILL CALL ONLY) to3131 NOTES: SGT. THOMPSON, HERE IS THE QUOTE PER REQUEST. FREIGHT IS ONLY IF NEEDED BY 1-3 DAYS Please call me with any questions. Thank you, Barbara TAX I 8.25% 133.00 140.00 2150.00 525.00 390.00 295.00 133.00 390.00 2950.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL TAX AMOUNT I TOTAL $7,778.00 $641.69 SHIPPING I $280.00 a-Do.y3 oyr $8,699.68 FOR DROP SHIPMENTS, THESE PRICES INCLUDE FREIGHT 1 ` oO Dow S lD LP fir) n On p via --i I VD i} 11- FY OV`l c_ i u cti1 i rt 11- IF YOU ARE IN CALIFORNIA, WE INCLUDE SALES TAX ******MINIMUM ORDER 5 FULL CASES****** R\5 0 M0Si 1n Str2C-16- V2 Ypt• l),-) 1k Oa 1 l o 1 V 1q-+(114 1., \iv\ ll.J ii -,-E t u s� l41YA r> fir) torn 1L10u Nov 09 06 03:Olp H, Records 3107988926 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL The City of Hermosa Beach is soliciting sealed bids from qualified vendors to ammunition to the Hermosa Beach Police Department. � of the ammunition iongequested Include is a list of the ammunition. Vendors must be ableprovide shipping and applicable taxes. Ouantity/Rounds 10,000 4,000 1,000 500 10,000 3,000 1,000 1,000 Winchester S mbol Q3131 .223 S5grain FMJ RA45T Ranger 45 230 grain SXT RA9SX Range9mm&127 grain r 40 SW 165 r+P+SSXT XT RA9SXTP ... Ranger r USA 45J1E1P 45 ACP 230 grain RIP Q4238 40 S&W 180 grain FMJ Q4172 9mm 115 grain FMJ RA1200 12 gauge OOBk Low Recoil SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Descri tion ley Sealed proposals must be received r before 2:00 P.M , November 30, 2006.n the office of the City Clerk, 1315 �The Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254, onoity of Hermosa reserves the right to extend any time frame as necessary. No late proposals will be accepted. Late proposals received after the deadline will be returned to bidder unopened. Proposals are to be submitted in a sealed envelope with the words "Proposal of Police Ammunition" written or typed on the envelope. Questions about this proposal contact Sergeant Tom Thompson at (310) 318-0308 or Email at tthomnson@hermosaaolice.ora. P.c f • December 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of The Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 CIP NO. 06-641 CLARK BUILDING REFURBISHMENT, PHASEI AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Authorize the award of construction contract. for CIP No 06-641 Clark Building Refurbishment to Everlast Painting Company of North Hills, California, in the amount of $17,056.00; 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the contract subject to approval of the City Attorney; and 3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue change orders as necessary within the approved budget. Background: On October 26, 2006, Public Works staff advertised for bids in accordance with public contract requirements. The City Clerk received eight bids by the closing date of November 9, 2006. The bids were publicly opened and read aloud. The results were as follows: Company Bid Amount 1. Industry Coatings Co. 2. Everlast Painting Co. 3. Jimenez Painting Co. 4. Color Concepts 5. Southwest Coatings, Inc. 6. Stephen Radl Painting 7. Star Painting 8. Fix Painting Analysis: $ 13,960.00 $ 17,056.00 $ 17,665.60 $ 21,100.00 $ 21,215.00 $ 21,900.00 $ 24,000.00 $ 33, 000.00 The work will include painting the interior of the auditorium, refinishing the wood floor, and minor repairs to the wood floor. Staff reviewed the apparent low bidder's documents and noted discrepancies. After consulting with the City Attorney, staff rejected the apparent low bidder as unresponsive. Staff reviewed the second bidder's documents and found them to be in order. The Department of Public Works recommends award of this contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Everlast Painting Company, for $17,056.00. 2f • • Fiscal Impact: The Everlast Painting bid of $17,056 plus contingency of $1,705 brings the project total to $18,761. $40,000 is available in account 125-8641-4201 in FY 06-07 for refurbishment of the Clark Building. $15,000 has been allocated for architectural services, leaving $25,000 available. Respectfully submitted, Ken Reamey, P.E. Associate Engineer Noted For Fiscal Impact: Viki Copland Finance Director F:\B95\PWFILES\CCITEMS\06-641 AwardPaintingAtClark121206.doc Concur: Richard Morgan, P.E. Direct of Public Works/City Engineer Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council December 4, 2006 Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY RELINQUISHMENT Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file status report for proposed Pacific Coast Highway relinquishment from Caltrans. Summary: Staff will prepare a report to be presented to Council at the second meeting of January, 2007, which will estimate the costs incurred to own and maintain Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). The reason for considering relinquishment is to be able to maintain our commercial banner program which allows commercial advertisements on the banner location on PCH at 1st Street. Caltrans has been very patient with the City in completing this process and has allowed the continuation of these banners while we pursue relinquishment. Staff will be requesting authorization to hire a consultant to do a detailed cost analysis and assist the City in negotiating with Caltransfor a fair settlement amount. Respectfully submitted, Concur: Richard D. organ, P.E. Steph Director . Public Works/City Engineer City Meager Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copland Finance Director 2g F:1B951PWFILES\CCITEMS1pch relinquishment update 12-12-06.doc December 4, 2006 Regular Meeting December 12, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council RECEIVE AND FILE LIST OF REGULAR AND ONGOING CITY BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTIVE TERMS THAT WILL EXPIRE DURING THE 2007 CALENDAR YEAR Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the attached list, prepared for posting by the City Clerk pursuant to State law, of all regular and ongoing Hermosa Beach board, commission and committee appointive terms which will expire during the 2007 calendar year. Background: Government Code Section 54972 requires, on or before December 31 of each year, the preparation and posting of a Local Appointments List of all regular and ongoing boards, commissions and committees whose members are appointed by the City Council. The list must contain pertinent information on all appointive terms that will expire during the next calendar year, as well as information on the boards, commissions and committees whose members serve strictly at the pleasure of the City Council, without set terms (i.e., Board of Appeals). Pursuant to State law, I have prepared the attached list, which identifies two Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission terms ending June 30, 2007, two Planning Commission terms ending June 30, 2007, and two Civil Service Commission terms ending July 15, 2007. As required by State law, the list will be posted in the City Clerk's office and the public library for public viewing purposes. It will also be posted in the outdoor display case at City Hall where agendas and other notices are typically posted. Noted: Steph ,t I urrel , ity Manager Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk 2h • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST In accordance with Government Code Section 54972 (Maddy Act) dealing with open lists of local appointive positions, the following is: 1. A list of all appointive terms which will expire during the 2007 calendar year, with the names of the incumbent appointees, their dates of appointment, the date each term expires, and the necessary qualifications for each position; and 2. A list of all boards, commissions and committees whose members serve at the pleasure of the legislative body, and the necessary qualifications for each position. INCUMBENT APPT. TERM COMMISSION APPOINTEES DATE EXPIRES QUALIFICATIONS PARKS, REC. & Robert Bell 07-08-03 06-30-07 Bona fide residents of COMMUNITY Stephen Francis 07-08-03 06-30-07 the City RESOURCES (see HBMC 2.28) COMMISSION 4 -year terms, no term limit PLANNING Peter Hoffman 06-10-03 06-30-07 Qualified Elector of COMMISSION Sam Perrotti 06-10-03 06-30-07 the City (see HBMC 2.32) 4 -year terms, no terns limit CIVIL SERVICE Susan Blaco 07-08-03 07-15-07 Qualified Elector of COMMISSION Barry Warner 07-08-03 07-15-07 the City (see HBMC 2.76) 4 -year terms, no term limit BOARD OF APPEALS (Serve at the pleasure of Council — must be qualified to act on building construction matters - U.B.C. - See HBMC 15.04.020) Bruce Cook, David Garrett, Robert Lininger, Mike Ludwig, Larry Peha ELAINE DOERFLING City Clerk Dated: 12-13-07 M Mayor and Members of the City Council • December 4, 2006 .:Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 REPORT OF CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEYS/COMPLAINTS Recommendation: To receive and file the report. Complaint/Survey Summary This summary report includes all complaints and surveys received by the City Clerk's office from the 1st of October to the 30th of November, 2006. The following summarizes the three anonymous complaints received. Dept(s) Date Rec'd Complaint Investigation Completed/Resolved Several staff & two 10-23-06 Various police 10-24-06 councilmembers department issues A councilmember 10-23-06 Unprofessional comments Received and filed A councilmember 10-23-06 Unprofessional behavior Received and filed Dept(s) The following summarizes the two surveys received: Date Rec'd Service Additional comments Public Works 10-9-06 Excellent Commended staff for helpful and excellent service. Public Works 10-28-06 Excellent Noted: Stephe, Ci ' : nager Elaine Doerfling, City Cie 2i S Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Recommendation: SLURRY SEAL PROJECT (CIP NOS. 05-110 & 04-112) It is recommended that the City Council: December 7, 2006 Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 1. Approve a Change Order for CIP Project Nos. 05-110 & 04-112 to add slurry sealing the entire reaches of Hermosa Avenue and Monterey Avenue; and 2. Appropriate $233,987 of Prop 42 funds, received in the 115 State Gas Tax Fund, for this purpose. Summary: The City received $233,987 of Prop 42 funding which have not yet been earmarked for a specific project. The State is now doing a survey of all cities to determine who will receive disbursements of the recently approved Prop 1 a funding for street improvements, of which the City is eligible for approximately $400,000. This will be a competitive distribution with the desire that these funds go to cities that will spend the money in a timely manner. The survey, which is due by December 14t , is asking about how the cities have spent previous Prop 42 monies. Staff believes that it will be important to show that we have committed to spending these funds this fiscal year. Staff recommends that Hermosa Avenue and Monterey Avenue are excellent candidates for slurry sealing, along with crack sealing and localized replacement as needed. We have a very competitive bid amount for the recently awarded CIP project for slurry sealing Prospect Avenue and Aviation Boulevard with Pavement Coatings Company and therefore recommend that this work be added to this contract by change order. The total pavement area to be included is 934,500 square feet which, at $.25 per sq. ft., is estimated to cost $233,625, just within the Prop 42 amount. Fiscal Impact: Appropriation of $233,987 from Gas Tax Fund to CIP Nos. 05-110 & 04-112. Respectfully submitted, Richar. Morgan, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Stephen City Ma 41 /ger 2j i vem er 22, 2006 1 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 2005-06 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) (Including Report from Independent Auditor) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: Receive and file the 2005-06 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), which includes the report from Caporicci and Larson, our independent auditors. BACKGROUND Annually the City has a financial audit performed by an independent, certified public accounting firm. The auditor's report is located behind the second divider that is labeled "Financial Section". When the City Council extended the audit agreement in January 2005, we indicated that our goal was to complete the audit and produce the CAFR earlier than we had in the past. Last year we completed the audit and produced the CAFR by the first meeting in January, which was one meeting earlier. This year we succeeded in producing the CAFR in time for the December meeting, which is a whole month earlier than two years ago and is probably as early as is possible. The earlier time frame requires a tremendous effort from both staff and the auditors and we are very pleased we were able to meet it. 01-/3 GASB, or the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, is the standard-setting body for state and local government financial reporting. GASB 34 is the statement that established new financial reporting standards, which, for our City, were implemented for the 2002-03 fiscal year reporting. Implementation of the new standards involved a complete overhaul of report formatting and development of conversion entries for the required reports. Even though the new reporting format was implemented four years ago, staff still struggles with the requirements and conversions necessary to comply since we only deal with it once a year. This year, we are also complying with a new reporting requirement, GASB Statement 44, Economics Condition Reporting: The Statistical Section. As such, the statistical section in the back of the CAFR has been completely revamped to comply. For 2005-06, the City again received an unqualified opinion, which indicates that the auditor believes the financial statements present a fair picture of the financial position of the City, as opposed to a qualified opinion, in which the auditor "qualifies" or limits his opinion for specific reasons, such as lack of capital asset accounting, significant internal control deficiencies or non-compliance with other GASB requirements such as GASB 34. The report will again be submitted to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) to qualify for the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the sixteenth time. The award program requires a high level of compliance with governmental standards, inclusion of information well beyond the general-purpose financial statements and an unqualified audit opinion. F:1895\FINANCE1\CAFR\cafr0506city council item revised.doc 2k 1 ANALYSIS • • As a reminder, the new reporting model: • presents financial information in new formats, namely, the Government Wide Financial Statements, beginning on page 17. These are designed to show net assets and equity of the City as a whole, provide information on the cost of services and show how programs are financed. • requires a new section, Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD &A) to present financial highlights and assess performance for the year. • requires reporting on "major" funds rather than aggregate fund types. • requires accrual accounting for all governmental funds, meaning that long term assets and liabilities (such as capital assets, including infrastructure) are included in addition to short term assets and liabilities. All revenues and all costs of providing services are also reported, not just those received or paid in or soon after year-end. Additional information and analysis can be found in the Transmittal Letter starting on page v and in the Management Discussion and Analysis (MD & A) starting on page 3. General Fund information is found on page 11. Some of the comments are repeated herein for the purpose of having this staff report stand alone. Since comparative information for the General Fund for 2004-05 and 2005-06 is not included in the CAFR, it is presented below. Amounts for 2004-05 have been adjusted to include the Parking Fund for comparative purposes since the Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. General Fund Revenue General Fund revenue increased 9% over 2004-05 and was 6% over budget estimates. REVENUE SOURCE Reven.06ue. `' Amount , Increase <,"/oOf:::: (Decrease) ;::;Increase.:::, Over FY 04-05 `(D.e:c:rease).' Of Total Property Taxes ;$,8,361,888. $2,140,352 Sales Tax 2,511:;.004 (73,010) Utility User Tax 2,726,085 50,889 Transient Occupancy Tax.:1`,628,394. 150,782 Other Taxes 1:,:832,1;62: 133,751 •Licenses & Permits `:8.68,08.5: 166,617 Fines & Forfeitures 1:,5$8;81:5.:. (277,223) Use of Money and Property31:2;248. (34,534) Intergovernmental Revenuei.•'::559:,933.: (699,534) Charges for Services 3;765,895..:.. 229,132 Miscellaneous <71,3.1.8 (151,944) Interest 117,730. ` 24,800 Total 34.35 10.31 11.20 6.69 7.53 3.57 6.53 1.28 2.30 15.47 0.29 0.48 ,:$24343;557 $1,660,078 `8;54% 100.00% F:\B95`,FiNANCE1\CAFR\cafr0506city council item revised.doc 2 Taxes Revenue from taxes ge tes 70% of General Fund revenue. Ograph below tracks the four largest revenue sources over the past ten years. $7,000,000 58,000.000 General Fund — Largest Revenue Sources 55,000,000 54,000,000 53,000,000 52,000,000 51,000,000 $0 . Secured/Unsecured • Property Tax 1996-07 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003.04 2004.05 2005-08 --0— SeUUns Properly Tax ..4111."111,1T -*—Sales Tax —el—TOT. UUT Sales Tax TOT Total property tax revenue increased 34% due to inclusion of property tax received in lieu of vehicle license fees, which are now distributed with and are to be considered property tax. The graph above shows secured and unsecured tax only, which increased 13% and 3%, respectively. Sales Tax revenue is 3% down from 2004-05. Fortunately, BMW stayed longer than they originally planned or the decrease would be greater. There has been interest from a number of parties in the remainder of that site; hopefully a sales tax- generating business will eventually reside there again. Sales Tax By Class* Top Ten Categories RANK/BUSINESS CLASS Sales Tax. Increase! 2005-06 (Decrease) %':of::' Change % Prev :Yr. of Total 1. Eating/Drinking Places ;;$699,265 $39,369 2. Auto Dealers and Supplies '..340,825 (283,597) 3. Other Retail "281,023 22,619 4. Building Materials 212,980 24,887 5. Food Stores 205,322 11,466 6. Service Stations 125,833 23,934 7. Business, Service & Repair 114,831 3,300 8. Furniture/Appliance 60,261 2,732 9. Drug Stores # # 10. Apparel Stores 35,570 5,598 32.86 16.01 13.20 10.01 9.65 5,91 5.40 2.83 1.67 * Threshold for inclusion, $300 per quarter # Information omitted if fewer than four businesses in the category E i1C "Ai-^'1c8ii05OGc , coullcii item rOVISed.CIOC 3 • Sales Tax by Geographic Area • LOCATION Revenue % of 2004-05 Total PCH 1,258,106 Downtown 516,405 PierNalley/Monterey 246,698 Aviation 88,448 PierNalley! Monterey 14% Aviation 5% Dow ntown 28% 60% 24% 12% 4% Revenue %.of . Total':. '% Chg : 2005-06 • PCH 53% 1,021,198 546,762 259,820 90,096 Utility user tax revenue grew by 2%. It is likely the City will have to consider amending the utility tax ordinance, and perhaps even placing the issue on the ballot, to maintain the existing tax revenue. Staff will keep the City Council apprised as legal issues develop. Transient occupancy tax increased 10% with overall hotel occupancy at 79%. The License and Permit and Charges for Services categories reflect increased fees implemented with the updated user fee study. Fines and forfeitures decreased because fewer parking citations were issued due to staffing shortages and municipal court fines declined due to a change in release policy regarding public intoxication, which resulted in fewer arrests. There was also one-time revenue from prosecution of a fraudulent fire extinguisher case in the prior year. General Fund Expenditures General Fund expenditures increased 13% from 2004-05 and were 5% under budget. GENERAL FUND Legislative & Legal General Government Public Safety Community Development Culture & Recreation Public Works Capital Outlay Total Increase (Decrease) Over FY 04-05 $236,005 450,495 1,486, 308 275,698 165,386 414,832 (162,034) $2,866,690 ncrease:;:ry., .ecreaser % Of Total 4.31 9.48 63.57 5.95 4.95 11.38 0.36 100.00% F:'\B95\FINANCE1ICAFFncafN O6city council item revised.doc 4 • • Salary and benefit increases for changes to employee bargaining units affect all categories. The City is also making the annual required contribution for all employee groups for post employment health benefits, as we do for retirement benefits, which affects all categories. The Legislative/Legal and General Government both increased due to higher overall litigation costs and litigation related to personnel matters. There was also election expense for the special election held. Community Development costs increase with the fluctuation of plan check costs and additional costs to cover vacancies. General Fund Unspent Funds The policy of transferring unspent funds in the General Fund to the Insurance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund (ERF) and Compensated Absences Fund was implemented in 1995-96 to build equity and provide funds for amounts owed to employees for accumulated leave. The policy was changed in 1998-99 to discontinue allocating funds to the Compensated Absences Fund (since the target amount was reached) and create a Capital Improvement Fund for street improvements, etc. The City Council amends the policy, as necessary, when goals or targets are met. For 2005- 06, $2,561,270 was transferred to the Contingency Fund, Insurance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund and Capital Improvement Fund ($640,318 each fund). The next opportunity to review our financial picture will be Midyear Budget Review on February 13, 2007, at which time we will review progress on the financial goals and make any adjustments or transfers, as necessary. Gary Caporicci, the partner in charge of our audit, is on vacation; however Eileen Lin, the manager of our audit, will be available at the meeting for comments or questions. If you have particular questions about details in the reports, we would appreciate knowing them in advance so we can give you a complete answer. CO UR: 111 Viki Copeland, City anager Finance Director The reports are available for review in the library and the Finance Department. F:\895`,FINANCE1\CAFR\cafr0506city council item revised.doc 5 e • Comprehensive Annual Financial Report • • City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the year ended June 30, 2006 PREPARED BY THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA FINANCE DEPARTMENT VIKI L. COPELAND, FINANCE DIRECTOR* • • City of Hermosa Beach Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006 Table of Contents Page INTRODUCTORY SECTION Table of Contents Letter of Transmittal v Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting - Governmental Finance Officers Association Organizational Chart xi Principal Officials of the City of Hermosa Beach xii FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditors' Report 1 Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) 3 Basic Financial Statements: Government - Wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets 19 Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets 20 Fund Financial Statements: Governmental Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet 28 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets 29 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 30 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances to the Government - Wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets 31 Proprietary Fund Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets 36 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets 37 Statement of Cash Flows 38 Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements: Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets 42 Index to Notes to Basic Financial Statements 43 Notes to Basic Financial Statements 45 Required Supplementary Information 79 • • City of Hermosa Beach Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006 Table of Contents, Continued Page FINANCIAL SECTION, Continued Supplementary Information: Non -Major Governmental Funds: Combining Balance Sheet 90 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 96 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Non -Major Special Revenue Funds: Lighting and Landscape District 101 State Gas Tax 102 AB 939 103 Compensated Absences 104 Prop A Open Space 105 Tyco 106 Tyco Tidelands 107 Parks and Recreation Facilities 108 4% Utility Users Tax 109 Building Improvement 110 Bayview Drive Administrative Expense 111 Lower Pier Administrative Expense 117 Myrtle District Administrative Expense 113 Loma District Administrative Expense 114 Beach Drive Assessment District Administrative Expense 115 Community Development Block Grant 116 Prop "A" Transit 117 Prop "C" Transit 118 Grants 119 Office of Traffic Safety Grant 120 Air Quality Management District 121 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services (COPS) 122 California Law Enforcement Program (CLEEP) 123 Taskforce for Regional Auto Theft Prevention 124 Sewer 125 Asset Seizure and Forfeiture Fund 126 Fire Protection 127 Retirement Stabilization 128 Artesia Boulevard Relinquishment 129 Beach Drive 2 Underground District 130 Myrtle Utility Underground Improvement 131 Loma Utility Underground Lnprovement 132 Bayview Drive Underground District 133 Bonnie Brae Underground District 134 Beach Drive Underground District 135 Prospect Utility Underground District 136 • • City of Hermosa Beach Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006 Table of Contents, Continued Page FINANCIAL SECTION, Continued Supplementary Information, Continued: Internal Service Funds: Combining Statement of Net Assets 138 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Assets 139 Combining Statement of Cash Flows 140 Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements: Combing Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets 147 Combing Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities 143 Capital Assets Used in the Operating Of Governmental Funds: Schedule by Source 146 Schedule by Function and Activity 147 Schedule of Changes in Capital Assets by Function and Activity 148 STATISTICAL SECTION (Unaudited) Net Assets By Component 151 Changes in Net Assets 152 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues By Source 154 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 155 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 156 Governmental Activities Tax Revenues By Source 157 Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property 158 Direct and Overlapping Government 159 Principal Property Taxpayers 160 Property Tax Levies and Collections 161. Construction Value and Property Value 162 Direct and Overlapping Debt 163 Legal Debt Margin Information 164 Demographic and Economic Statistics 166 Principal Employers 167 Full -Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function 168 Operating Indicators by Function 169 Capital Asset Statistics by Function 170 iii • • This page intentionally left blank. • • City of 21ermosa lr3each_ Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3885 November 22, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: Introduction I am pleased to present the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the City of Hermosa Beach for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. The report is intended to update readers on the status of the City's financial position and results of operations for the past fiscal year. This is the fourth CAFR prepared using the new financial reporting requirements established by Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34 for state and local governments throughout the United States. The required management's discussion and analysis (MD&A), gives readers an objective and easily readable analysis of the government's financial performance for the year and government -wide financial statements, prepared using accrual accounting for all of the government's activities. Long term assets and liabilities (such as capital assets, including infrastructure and general obligation debt) are measured in addition to current assets and liabilities. This letter of transmittal is designed to complement MD&A and should be read in conjunction with it. The City of Hermosa Beach's MD&A can be found immediately following the report of the independent auditors. The City is complying with a new reporting requirement effective with the 2005-06 fiscal year, GASB Statement No. 44 Economics Condition Reporting: The Statistical Section. This section was revamped to better show the City's economic condition, which is defined in the statement as "a composite of its financial health and its ability and willingness to meet its financial. obligations and con nnitments to provide services." Where possible, ten years of data is shown. Management's representations concerning the finances of the City of Hermosa Beach are contained herein. Consequently, management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information presented in this report. To provide a reasonable basis for making these representations, management of the City of Hermosa Beach has established an internal control framework that is designed both to protect the government's assets from loss, theft, or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for the preparation of the City of Hermosa Beach's financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Because the cost of internal controls should not outweigh their benefits, the City of Hermosa Beach's framework of internal controls has been designed to provide reasonable rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements will be free from material misstatement. As management, we assert that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this financial report is complete and reliable in all material respects. Audit The City of Hermosa Beach's financial statements have been audited by Caporicci & Larson, a firm of licensed certified public accountants. The goal of the independent audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements of the City of Hermosa Beach for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, are free of material misstatement. The independent audit involved examining, on a test basis, evidence v • • supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management; and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. The independent auditor concluded, based upon the audit, that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unqualified opinion that the City of IIermosa Beach's financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, are fairly presented in conformity with GAAP. The independent auditor's report is presented as the first component of the financial section of this report. Profile of the Government The City of Hermosa Beach is a beachfront, bedroom community with a stable population, located four miles south of Los Angeles International Airport. The City occupies 1.3 square miles and serves a population of 19,435, according to the State's latest population estimate. Iowever as a beach city, Hermosa experiences a high visitor population and the associated costs. Due to this high visitor population, the City operates in many ways like a larger city. During the 2005-06 fiscal year, beach attendance ranged from a low of 51,911 in October 2005 to a high of 1,968,700 in June 2006, according to the Los Angeles County Fire Department, Lifeguard Division. The City of Hermosa Beach, incorporated on January 14, 1907 as a general law city, operates under the Council -Manager form of government. Policy-making and legislative authority are vested in a governing council consisting of five members of the City Council elected on a non-partisan basis at large for a four- year term. Council members serve four-year, staggered terms, with an election every two years. One member is chosen by fellow members to serve as Mayor for a period of nine months; one is chosen to serve as Mayor Pro Tern. The Council is responsible for, among other things, establishing policy, passing ordinances, adopting an annual budget; appointing members to various City Commissions and Boards and hiring the City Manager and City Attorney. The City Manager is responsible for carrying out the policies and ordinances of the City Council, for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the government, and for appointing the heads of the various departments. IIermosa Beach offers a full range of municipal services, including police and fire protection, community development (planning and zoning), cultural, recreation and parks, maintenance and construction of public improvements, parking and animal control, and general administration. Financial information for the Downtown Business Area Enhancement District, the Lighting and Landscaping District, the Lower Pier Avenue Assessment District and the Myrtle Avenue, Lorna Drive, Bayview Drive,•and Beach Drive Utility Underground Districts are included in the City's financial statements as required by governmental accounting standards. The annual budget serves as the foundation for the City of Hermosa Beach's financial planning and control. All departments of the City of Hermosa Beach are required to submit requests for appropriation to the City Manager according to a budget calendar. The City Manager uses these requests as the starting point for developing a proposed budget, which is presented to the City Council for review by May 15. The City Council is required to hold a public hearing on the budget, with adoption no later than June 30th. The appropriated budget is prepared by fund and department (e.g., Police Department). The City Manager may make transfers of appropriations between departments within each fund; transfers of appropriations between funds, however, require the approval of the City Council. A midyear budget review is conducted after the first six months of the fiscal year to ensure estimates are on target. Budget -to -actual comparisons are provided in this report for each individual governmental fund for which an appropriated annual budget has been adopted. For the General Fund and major governmental funds with appropriated annual budgets, this comparison is presented as Required Supplementary Information on pages 83-85. For non - major governmental funds with appropriated annual budgets, this comparison is presented as Supplementary Information, after the Notes to the Financial Statements. vi • Factors Affecting Financial Condition The information presented in the financial statements is perhaps best understood when it is considered from the broader perspective of the specific environment within which the City of Hermosa Beach operates. Local economy. As a beachfront community, with more bedrooms than businesses, I-Iermosa Beach had the twelfth highest percentage change in assessed valuation of the 88 cities in Los Angeles County for 2005- 06. Since 2000, the assessed valuation (including exemptions) has risen steadily, averaging 9.5% per year for the past seven years, making property tax the number one revenue source in the General Fund. Median home prices in I-Iermosa Beach as of June 2006 were $1,100,000, compared to $520,000 for Los Angeles County. The average median home price for Hermosa Beach for fiscal year 2005-06 was $1,203,250. Hermosa Beach's three highest employment industries are food services, administrative and support and retail trade, however residents enjoy access to a much more diverse employment base with the close proximity of all of the other cities in Los Angeles County. The unemployment rate in Ilermosa Beach is 1.9%, compared with 4.7% for Los Angeles County, and 4.9% for California. Secured property taxes have increased on the average, 9% over the past five years, corresponding with the increase in assessed valuation mentioned above (and, the increase occurred in spite of the shift of property tax funds from local government to the State to balance their budget). The strength in this area helped offset the decline in the sales tax base due to the loss of several new auto dealerships: Audi/Porsche in 2002, Volkswagen in 2003 and BMW in 2004. The biggest impact was BMW, which was felt in full for the first time in 2005-06. In the same five year period, transient occupancy taxes (the "hotel tax") increased 77%, with two new hotels (Holiday Inn Express and Ilampton Inn) and one hotel expansion (Beach IHouse) during that time. Average occupancy for 2005-06 was 79.1%. Utility user taxes (UUT), grew a scant 2% over 2004-05 . The impending repeal of the federal excise tax, which many UUT ordinances reference, is an area being closely watched by the City. This action, along with several other pending legal actions and changes in the telecommunication industry may have an adverse affect on utility user tax revenue, which is a concern since the UUT represents 11% of General Fund revenue. The City updated all user fees in 2005-06 and outsourced the billing and collection for ambulance transport services, both of which had a positive impact on revenue. California Public Employees Retirement System (Ca1PERS). City retirement rates continue the steep climb for 2005-06 which began in 2003-04, reflecting investment losses sustained by CaIPERS beginning in 2001. With investment rates back in the black at 1.2.3% for 2005-06 and the effects from new employer rate smoothing policies implemented by CaIPERS, the City's rates show a slight increase in 2006-07 and are projected to decline for 2007-08 and 2008-09. 2005-06 is the third year of double digit investment returns from CaIPERS. State Budget. Through passage of Proposition 1A in November 2004, a deal was struck whereby $1.3 billion in local government funds will be shifted to the State in 2004-05 and 2005-06, with funds protected thereafter unless 2/3 of the legislature votes to "borrow" funds again. Therefore, this is supposed to be the last year of any reduction to local revenues. Ilermosa Beach's loss for 2004-05 and 2005-06 was $326,472. The City did receive this year early repayment of three months worth of vehicle license fees, which were "borrowed" by the State in 2003-04. The State scheduled repayment for August 2006 but actually paid the funds to local governments one year early in August 2005, which was a pleasant surprise. The State's structural budget imbalance is still of great concern to local government. vii • Long-term financial planning. Financial policies related to long-term financial planning for specific funds are: Contingency Fund—Goal of fund balance equal to 7.5% of the General Fund appropriations for economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies. Insurance Fund—Goal of $3,000,000 in net assets for claims reserves and catastrophic losses. Equipment Replacement Fund—Goal of net assets equal to the accumulated amount calculated for all equipment, based on replacement cost and useful life of equipment. Compensated Absences Fund—Goal of fund balance equal to 25% funding for accrued liabilities for employee vacation, sick and compensatory time. Another of the City's financial policies is to set aside funds unspent in the General Fund at year-end for specific purposes. For 2005-06, funds were transferred to the Contingency Fund, Capital Improvement Fund, Insurance Fund and Equipment Replacement Fund. Capital Improvement Funds are primarily spent for street improvements. Sewer and storm drain improvements are funded by a portion of the utility user tax revenue which is set aside for that purpose. The City's long term financial planning focuses on the Capital Improvement Plan, which is produced as part of the annual budget. Since the City is built out, the plan primarily addresses maintenance, repair and upgrading of facilities and infrastructure, particularly streets and sewers. Primary projects coming up, (other than street and sewer improvements, which occur every year) are continuing upgrades to the Community Center and Fire Station, refurbishment of the Clark Field Community Building, and a major renovation of the Public Works City Yard. The City will use federal Community Development Block Grant funds for these projects, in addition to City funds. Cash management policies and practices. Temporarily idle cash was invested during the year in obligations of the U.S. Treasury and the State Treasurer's investment pool. The average maturity was 25 months, with an average yield on investments of 3.49% Investment income includes changes in the fair value of investments. Changes in fair value during the current year, however, do not necessarily represent trends that will continue nor do such amounts necessarily become realized, since the City intends to hold the investments to maturity. Risk management. The City is self-insured up to $250,000 for liability claims. Excess coverage up to $10 million is obtained through the Independent Cities Risk Management Authority (ICRMA), a joint powers authority consisting of medium-sized California municipalities. The cost of the insurance depends on both the loss experience of member cities and the loss experience of Iermosa Beach. The City is self-insured up to $500,000 for worker's compensation claims, with statutory limit excess coverage provided through a private insurance carrier. Claims defense and settlement are coordinated by third party administrators for both liability and worker's compensation, with oversight by the City's Risk Manager. Additional information on the City of Hermosa Beach's risk management activity can be found in Note 9 of the notes to the financial statements. Pension and other post employment benefits. The City of Hermosa Beach provides pension benefits to safety and non -safety employees through the California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS). CaIPERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost -of -living adjustments and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. The City pays employee contributions as a negotiated benefit. City employer contributions are actuarially determined on an annual basis. viii • • The City of Hermosa Beach also provides post employment heath care benefits for certain retirees. As of the end of the current fiscal year, there were 19 retirees receiving these benefits. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) do not currently require governments to report a liability in the financial statements in connection with an employer's obligation to provide these benefits. IHowever, Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements 43 and 45 will require different accounting and reporting for these types of "other post employment benefits" (OPEB). For our size City, the effective date will be fiscal year 2008-09. The City intends to establish a trust with an outside party to administer these funds. In the meantime, the City is contributing the annual required contribution for all employees as determined by an actuarial study in the manner as is done for retirement contributions to CaIPERS. Additional information on the City of Hermosa Beach's pension arrangements and other post employment benefits can be found in Note 10 in the Notes to the Financial Statements. Awards and Acknowledgements The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of Hermosa Beach for its comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. This was the sixteenth consecutive year that the government has received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the government published an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR. This report satisfied both GAAP and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current CAFR continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. The preparation of this report would not have been possible without the efficient and dedicated services of the entire staff of the Finance Department, with particular appreciation to Valerie Mohler, the Accounting Supervisor. We would also like to express our appreciation to the City Manager and all of the departments, including the City Clerk and City Treasurer, and to our auditors, Caporicci & Larson, for their assistance and support in preparation of the report. Credit also must be given to the Mayor and the City Council for their unfailing support for maintaining the highest standards of professionalism in the management of the City of Hermosa Beach's finances. Respectfully submitted, Viki Copeland Finance Director • • Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Hermosa Beach California For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2005 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. • I F``'f'C561-.t��S- fUMtEDSTATES 7. AND QANADA c 6PORATION h -�.` rx;co President "0:10 Executive Director x CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ORGANIZATIONAL CHART I ELECTORATE CITY CLERK CITY COUNCIL CITY TREASURER PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION CIVIL SERVICE BOARD BOARD OF APPEALS PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION CITY PROSECUTOR CITY MANAGER CITY ATTORNEY COMMUNITY RESOURCES Parks & Recreation/ Facilities Management Cultural/ Recreational Athletic Programming Special Events Cable T.V. Liaison PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING Plan Checks Field Inspection Code Enforcement Encroachments Capital Improvement TRANSPORTATION Traffic Eng. Traffic Signals Traffic Signage Speed Survey MAINTENANCE Landscaping Irrigation Streets Sewer Storm Drain Building Maint. Vehicle Maint. POLICE Enforcement Investigation Detention Emergency Dispatch Reserves Special Investigations Record Bureau Crossing Guard COMMUNITY SERVICES Parking Enforcement Animal Control Meter Maintenance FIRE 1 Fire Suppression Fire Prevention Rescue Public Education Paramedics Disaster Preparedness Reserves Plan Checking Ambulance Transportation xi PERSONNEL/ RISK MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL Recruitment Training Labor Relations RISK MGT Workers' Comp Claims Liability Claims City Insurance Secretarial Support FINANCE Budget Accounting Payroll Citation Processing Animal Licenses Parking Permits Business License Bus Passes COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING AND SAFETY Plan Checking Field Inspection Code Enforcement PLANNING Current Planning Advanced Planning Environmental Assessment Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) Enforcement • • PRINCIPAL OFFICIALS OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA June 30, 2006 Elected and Administrative Officials City Council Pete Tucker Mayor Sam Y. Edgerton Mayor Pro Tempore Michael Keegan Councilmember J. R. Reviczky Councilmemiber Vacant Council.member John Workman Elaine Doerfling Stephen Burrell. Vik:i Copeland Sol Blumenfeld Lisa Lynn Michael Earl David Barr Richard Morgan Russell Tingley Other Elected Officials Adcn.:in.:istrative Officials x�i City Treasurer City Clerk City Manager Finance Director Community Development Director Community Resources Director Personnel Director and Risk Manager Interim Police Chief Public Works Director Fire Chief • C L Caporicci & 1.Irson Certified Public Accountants • • INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT To the I-Ionorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business - type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Hermosa Beach, California (City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall basic financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the basic financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in financial position and cash flows, where applicable, thereof for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. As described in Note 1 to the basic financial statements, the City adopted the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 42, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Impairment of Capital Assets and Insurance Recoveries, No. 44, Economic. Condition Reporting: The Statistical Section (an amendment of NCGA Statement 1), No. 46, Net Assets Restricted by Enabling Legislation, and No. 47, Accounting for Termination Benefits. The accompanying Required Supplementary Information, such as Management's Discussion and Analysis, budgetary comparison information and other information as listed in the table of contents, is not a required part of the basic financial statements but is supplementary information required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the Required Supplementary Information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. Tull Free Ph: (877) 862-2200 Toll Free Fax: (866) 436-0927 Oakland Orange County Sacramento San Diego ISO Grand Ave.. Suite 1365 9 Corporate Park. Suite 100 777 Campus Commons Rd., Suite 20) 4858 Mercury.. Suite 106 Oakland, California 94612 Irvine. California 92606 Sacramento, California 95825 San Diego, California 92III 4 To the Honorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, California Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The accompanying Supplementary Information is presented for purpose of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. The Supplementary Information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. The Introductory and Statistical Sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on them. Irvine, California September 27, 2006 • • • Management's Discussion and Analysis As management of the City of Hermosa Beach, we offer readers of the City of Hermosa Beach's financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City of I-Iermosa Beach for the fiscal year ended Jame 30, 2006. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that we have furnished in our letter of transmittal, which can be found on pages v - ix of this report. Financial Highlights • The assets of the City of Hermosa Beach exceeded its liabilities at the close of the last fiscal year by $84,015,000 (net assets). Of this amount, $15,459,000 (unrestricted net assets) may be used to meet the government's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. • The government's total net assets increased by $144,000. The increase is attributable to increases to user fees enacted in 2005-06 and increased revenues for taxes which were offset by increased costs for salaries and benefits due to changes in employee memoranda of understanding and the addition of other post employment benefits for all employees. • As of June 30, 2006, the City of Hermosa Beach's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $15,115,000, an increase of $14,000 in comparison with the prior year. Approximately 26% of this amount is reserved to indicate that it is not available because it has been 1) committed for purchase orders or contracts for the prior period and will be reappropriated, 2) committed for advances between funds for the purchase of property adjacent to City Hall, 3) committed for other specific projects or 4) represents an advance to other funds for utility undergrounding startup costs. Another 2% is designated for specific uses, with the remainder available for a variety of purposes. • As of June 30, 2006, the unreserved, undesignated fund balance for the General Fund was $0. Funds remaining unspent in the General Fund at year end are transferred equally to the Contingency Fund, Insurance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund and the Capital Improvement Fund until financial goals are met. See "Financial Analysis of the Government's Funds" for further discussion of these transfers for 2005-06. The unreserved balance in the Contingency Fund (or "rainy day fund") is $3.6 million or 15% of General Fund appropriations and serves as the City's cushion against economic uncertainties. The City of Hermosa Beach currently has no debt. Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City of Hermosa Beach's basic financial statements. The basic financial statements are comprised of three components: 1) government -wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the financial statements. The report also contains other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. Government -wide financial statements. The government -wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City of Hermosa Beach's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business. The statement of net assets presents information on all of the City of Hermosa Beach's assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City of Hermosa Beach is improving or deteriorating. 3 • • The statement of activities presents information showing how the government's net assets changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash /lows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned, but unused, vacation leave). Both of the government -wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City of IIermosa Beach that are principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental activities) from other functions that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business -type activities). The governmental activities of the City of I-Iermosa Beach include legislative and legal, general government, public safety, public works, community development, and culture and recreation. The business -type activities of the City of I-Iermosa Beach include downtown enhancement funds. The Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. Parking lot operations are still maintained in an enterprise fund. The government -wide financial statements include not only the City of IIermosa Beach itself, but also the Lighting and Landscaping District, the Lower Pier Avenue Assessment District and the Myrtle Avenue, Loma Drive, Bayview Drive and Beach Drive Utility Underground Districts. Although these entities are legally separate, they function for all practical purposes as part of the City, and therefore have been included as an integral part of the primary government. The Government -Wide Financial Statements can be found on pages 17-21 of this report. Fund financial statements. A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City of Hermosa Beach, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal requirements. All of the funds can be divided into three categories: governmental funds, proprietary funds, and fiduciary funds. Governmental funds. Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. However, unlike the government -wide financial statements, governmental fund financial statements focus on near-term inflows and o►.►tflozus of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government's near-term financing requirements. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impact of the government's near-term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The City of Hermosa Beach Maintains thirty-nine individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental fund balance sheet and in the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances for the funds below, which are considered to be major funds: General Fund Contingency Fund Capital Improvement Fund Major funds are governmental or enterprise funds whose revenues, expenditures/expenses, assets or liabilities are at least 10% of corresponding totals for all governmental or enterprise funds and at least 5% of the corresponding total for all governmental and enterprise funds combined. 4 • • Data from the other thirty-six governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these non -major governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The City of Hermosa Beach adopts an annual appropriated budget for its General Fund. A budgetary comparison statement has been provided for the General Fund to demonstrate compliance with this budget. The basic governmental fund financial statements can be found on pages 25-32 of this report. Proprietary funds. The City of I-Iermosa Beach maintains two different types of proprietary funds. Enterprise funds are used to report the same functions presented as business -type activities in the government -wide financial statements. The City of I-Iermosa Beach uses an enterprise fund to account for its downtown enhancement operations. The Parking Fund, as previously stated was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. Internal service funds are an accounting device used to accumulate and allocate costs internally among the City of Hermosa Beach's various functions. The City of Hermosa Beach uses internal service funds to account for its fleet of vehicles, information systems and risk management/insurance. Because these services predominantly benefit governmental rather than business -type functions, they have been included within governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. Proprietary funds provide the sante type of information as the government -wide financial statements, only in more detail. The proprietary fund financial statements provide separate information for the Downtown Enhancement Fund which is considered to be a major fund of the City of Hermosa Beach. Internal service funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation in the proprietary fund financial statements. Individual fund data for the internal service funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The basic proprietary fund financial statements can be found on pages 33-38 of this report. Fiduciary funds. Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the government. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the government -wide financial statement because the resources of those funds are not available to support the City of Hermosa Beach's own programs. The accounting used for fiduciary funds is much like that used for proprietary funds. Funds of the Lower Pier Avenue, Myrtle Avenue, Loma Drive, Bayview Drive, and Beach Drive Undergrounding Districts and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) are held as fiduciary funds by the City. OPEB funds will be placed in a trust fund when an outside administrator is hired by the City. The basic fiduciary fund financial statements can be found on pages 39-42 of this report. Notes to the financial statements. The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government -wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements can be found on pages 43-78 of this report. Other information. In addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes, this report also presents certain required supplementary information concerning the City of Hermosa Beach's progress in funding its obligation to provide pension benefits to its employees. Required supplementary information can be found on page 79 of this report. The combining statements referred to earlier in connection with non -major governmental funds and internal service funds are presented immediately following the required supplementary information on pensions. Combining and individual fund statements and schedules can be found on pages 87-100 of this report. 5 • • Government -wide Financial Analysis As noted earlier, net assets may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. As of June 30, 2006, assets exceeded liabilities by $84,01.5,000. By far the largest portion of the City of Hermosa Beach's net assets, $64,966,000, (77%) reflects its investment in capital assets (e.g., land, buildings, machinery, and equipment). The City of Hermosa Beach uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Current and Other Assets Capital Assets Total Assets Long-term Liabilities Outstanding Other Liabilities Total Liabilities Net Assets: Invested in Capital Assets Restricted Unrestricted Total Net Assets Net Assets June 30, 2006 (dollars in thousands) Governmental Activities 2006 2005 $28,490 $28,185 56,668 57,049 85,158 85,234 Business -type Total Activities 2006 2005 2006 2005 $(1,544) $(1,673) $26,946 $26,512 10,443 10,825 67,111 67,874 8,899 9,152 94,057 94,386 3,057 3,766 -- -- 3,057 3,766 6,622 6,181 363 568 6,985 6,749 9,679 9,947 363 568 10,042 10,515 75,479 75,287 56,668 57,049 3,590 3,306 15,221 14,932 $75,479 $75,287 8,536 8,584 84,015 83,871 8,298 8,081 64,966 65,130 3,590 3,306 238 503 15,459 15,435 $8,536 $8,584 $84,015 $83,871 A portion of the City of Hermosa Beach's net assets (4%) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of unrestricted net assets ($i5,459,000) may be used to meet the government's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. At the end of the current fiscal year, the City of Hermosa Beach is able to report positive balances in all three categories of net assets, both for the government as a whole, as well as for its separate governmental and business -type activities. The same position held true for the prior fiscal year. The government's net assets increased by $144,000 during the current fiscal year. As mentioned earlier, this growth is attributable to increases to user fees enacted in 2005-06 and increased revenues for taxes that were offset by increased costs for salaries and benefits due to changes in employee memoranda of understanding and the addition of other post employment benefits for all employees. Both revenue and expense increases are discussed in more detail in the following report sections. 6 • • • Governmental activities. Governmental activities increased the City of Hermosa Beach's net assets by $192,000. Key elements of this increase are as follows: Changes in Net Assets June 30, 2006 (dollars in thousands) Governmental Business -type Activities Total Activities 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 Revenues: Program Revenues: Charges For Services $7,538 $5,640 $1.,187 $4,154 $8,725 $9,794 Operating Grants and Contributions 725 721 -- -- 725 721 Capital Grants and Contributions 1,043 2,466 -- -- 1,043 2,466 General Revenues: Property Taxes 8,362 6,221 -- -- 8,362 6,221 Other Taxes 8,698 8,482 8,698 8,482 Grants and Contributions Not Restricted to Specific Programs 1,537 2,318 -- -- 1,537 2,318 Other 753 741 40 96 793 837 Total Revenues 28,656 26,589 1,227 4,250 29,883 30,839 Expenses: Legislative and Legal 962 738 962 738 General Government 1,999 1,727 1,999 1,727 Public Safety 15,168 12,855 15,168 12,855 Community Development 1,350 1,356 1,350 1,356 Culture and Recreation 1,149 996 1,149 996 Public Works 7,981 6,688 7,981 6,688 Downtown Enhancement 1,130 166 1,130 :166 Parking -- 1,702 -- 1,702 Total Expenses 28,609 24,360 1,130 1,868 29,739 26,228 Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets Before Transfers 47 2,229 97 2,382 144 4,611 Transfers 145 1,507 (145) (1,507) -- Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets 192 3,736 (48) 875 144 4,611 Net Assets - 7/1/05 75,287 71,551 8,584 7,709 83,871 79,260 Net Assets - 6/30/06 $75,479 $75,287 $8,536 $8,584 $84,015 $83,871 • The 34% increase in Charges to Services results primarily from fees related to the combining of the Parking Fund with the General Fund which increased service fees by $3.2 million. This is not an actual increase but simply increases the governmental activities and decreases the business -type activities due to moving parking activities to the General Fund. Service charges in 2005-06 were less by $1.3 million due to one-time fees that were received in 2004-05 for two undergrounding districts. • Capital Grants and Contributions decreased due to reductions in County Proposition A Open Space funds for the Pier Renovation which was completed in 2005-06 and a grant from the State Office of Traffic Safety which is near completion. • Property Taxes overall increased by $2,141,000 with $1,306,000 of the increase attributable to the reclassification of motor vehicle license revenue to this category in 2005-06 since these fees are now distributed via property tax collections. Adjusting for these fees, property tax revenue increased by $835,000 or approximately 13%. Secured property tax revenue grew an average of 9% per year for the past five years. Property tax has been reduced by the state for the past two years by over $300,000 as a budget balancing measure. Fortunately, this is the last year of that reduction. • Other Taxes increased 3% as a result of increased revenue from the utility user tax and transient occupancy tax (tax on hotel stays). • Grants and Contributions Not Restricted to Specific Programs decreased for the following reasons: motor vehicle license fees, as previously stated, were reclassified as property tax in 2005-06 resulting in a reduction of $1,045,000 in this category; the State repaid $328,000 that was borrowed from motor vehicle license fees in 2003-04; $87,000 in traffic congestion relief funding was received; Tyco lease revenues decreased by $225,000 due to a one-time payment due on the first anniversary of the lease in the amount of $300,000 that was received in 2004-05 that was partially offset by an additional $75,000 that was received for the first full year of the lease; Proposition A and C Transit Funds increased by $46,000; the State reimbursed claims in the amount of $18,000 for mandated costs that had previously been put on hold. 7 Expenses and Program Revenues Governmental Activities 16,000,000 - I4,IIII0,000 - 12,000,000 - I0,IIII0,00t - 8,000,000 - 6,000,000 - 4,000,000 - 2,000,000 - 0 rn o n r 0 0 0 ,: n 4 n 0 a, • Expenses ■ Program Revenue Revenue by Source - Governmental Activities Investment Earnings 3% N•liscellancous Grants and Contributions Not II Restricted to Specific Programs I Charges liar Services Other "faxes 26%. 12% Utility User Taxes 10% Sales Taxes 9% Property Taxes 28% Operating Grants and Contributions 3% Capital Grants and Contributions 4% On the expense side, the General Government function increased 7% and the Public Safety function increased 9% due to the inclusion of departments formerly recorded in business -type activities in the Parking Fund. The Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. Other increases, affecting all functions, include 4% for the increase in retirement costs for 2005-06, 4% for changes in employee memoranda of understanding (MOU's) and 1% for the increase in the annual required contribution for other post employment benefits (OPEB). Increased infrastructure maintenance projects and increased depreciation expenses, primarily due to the completion of the $5.7 million Pier Renovation project included in the Public Works category, are largely responsible for the remaining increase in 2006. 8 • • Business -type activities. Business -type activities decreased the net assets by $48,000. The primary contributing factors to this decrease were: • Charges for Services decreased 71% due to combining the Parking Fund with the General Fund. Revenue for parking fines and parking meters are now included in governmental activities. • The Downtown Enhancement operation shows increased expenses primarily because the sale of real property which occurred in the previous year, 2004-05, reduced expenditures since there was a gain of $844,000. Adjusting for the gain, the operation would reflect an increase of $120,000 or 11%, due to the following: depreciation expense increased because a storage lot facility purchased in June 2005 recorded a full year of depreciation, the County of Los Angeles share of net income due for the parking structure increased because of higher parking structure revenue, salary and benefit costs increased due to changes in employee MOU's, the addition of other post employment benefits for all employees and an increase in repairs and maintenance costs for the parking structure due to a major restriping project. The Parking operation shows no activity for 2005-06 since it was combined with the General Fund. Parking expenses now appear in the General Government and Public Safety functions of governmental activities. 1,190,001 1,180,001 1,170,001 1,160,001 1,150,001 1,140,001 1,130,001 1,120,001 1,110,001 1,11111,11111 Expenses and Program Revenues Business -type Activities c 0 n Expenses ■ Program Revenue Revenue by Source - Business -type Activities Charges fo r Services 96% Miscellaneous I% Investment Earnings 3% 9 • • Financial Analysis of the Government's Funds As noted earlier, the City of Iermosa Beach uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal requirements. Governmental funds. The focus of the City of Iermosa Beach's governmental fluids is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows, and balances of spending resources. Such information is useful in assessing the City of Hermosa Beach's financing requirements. In particular, unreserved fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government's net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City of Hermosa Beach's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $15,115,000, an increase of $14,000, in comparison with the prior year. Approximately 74% of this total amount $1.1.,112,000 constitutes unreserved fund balance, which is available for spending at the government's discretion. The remainder of fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not available for new spending because it has already been committed to 1) liquidate contracts and purchase orders of the prior period ($3,156,000), 2) fund transportation development act projects ($11,000), 3) fund traffic congestion relief projects ($90,000), 4) to account for advances to an undergrounding district fund ($200,000) and 5) to account for an advance to the Downtown Enhancement proprietary fund for the purchase of a storage lot facility ($546,000). Three funds qualify as major funds under the GASB Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements - and Management Discussion and Analysis - for State and Local Governments, reporting criteria: the General Fund, Contingency Fund and Capital Improvement Fund. The General Fund is the chief operating fund of the City of Ilermosa Beach. At the end of the current fiscal year, the total fund balance was $370,000, with $159,000 reserved for re -appropriations and $2r1,000 unreserved, but designated for certain purposes. The City's financial policies require that unspent funds in the General Fund transfer to meet specific funding targets at year end. As those targets or goals are met, transfers may be redirected where funds are needed. For 2005-06, the City Council redirected that funds left unspent in the General Fund at year end transfer equally to the Contingency Fund, the Capital Improvement Fund, the Insurance Fund and the Equipment Replacement Fund. The transfer to each fund was $640,318. Key reasons funds were available at year end are as follows: • Property taxes reflect the reclassification of motor vehicle license revenue to this category since the measurement and growth of these fees in now based on assessed valuation. Adjusting for these fees, property tax revenue increase would be 13%. • The State repaid $328,000 that was withheld from vehicle license fees in 2003-04. The fees were scheduled to be repaid in 2006 but were paid earlier in a surprise positive move by the State. • Transient occupancy tax revenue increased 10% with good overall hotel occupancy of 79.1 %. • The Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06 resulting in a net increase to the fund balance of $1.3 million. • Expenditures were 6% less than budgeted, namely due to a number of vacant positions which equates to salary and benefit savings. The Contingency Fund serves as the City's "rainy day fund" or reserve for economic uncertainties. A goal amount of 15% of General Fund appropriations has been established. The unreserved balance of $3.6 million represents 15% of appropriations. Proprietary funds. The City of I-Iermosa Beach's proprietary fund financial statements for the Downtown Enhancement Fund and the Parking Fund, provide the same type of information found in the government -wide financial statements, but in more detail. 10 • • Unrestricted net assets of the Downtown Enhancement operation at the end of the year were $238,000. There is no balance remaining in the Parking Fund because it was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. Other factors concerning the finances of these two funds have already been addressed earlier in the discussion of the City of IHermosa Beach's business -type activities. General Fund Budgetary Highlights Differences between the original budget and the final amended budget were 5% for estimated revenue and 4% for appropriations. Actual revenue was higher than budgeted by 5% due to aforementioned revenue increases. Transfers In increased by $10,000 which was the balance remaining in the Parking Fund when it was closed out to the General Fund. Differences between original and final appropriations other than Transfers Out equaled $859,000 or about3%. They are briefly summarized as follows: • $971,000 in increases to all functions reflect salary and benefit increases for changes to employee memoranda of understanding (MOU's) and the increase in the annual required contribution for other post employment benefits (OPEB). The increase by function is as follows: Legislative/Legal - $16,000, General Government - $83,000, Public Safety - $727,000, Community Development - $53,000, Culture and Recreation - $15,000 and Public Works - $77,000. • $123,000 in increases in the Legislative/Legal category for additional legal costs pertaining to on-going litigation detailed in Note 12, special election costs and a donation to the IHermosa Beach Historical Society building renovation project. • ($416,000) decrease represents General Government funding from Prospective Expenditures for salary and benefit increases for all functions for changes to employee MOU's and OPEB benefits, an increase to Personnel legal costs and Police Chief recruiting services. • ($83,000) in Public Safety decreases for providing the general government function with funding for additional Personnel legal costs and Police Chief recruiting services. • $24,000 in Community Development increases to fund a grease trap inspection program and additional personnel costs for a new position. • $78,000 increase to the Culture and Recreation category - $17,000 in donations appropriated for Sunset Concerts; $1.2,000 in donations appropriated for recreation programs and community events and increased costs for instructor payments due to a growth in recreation class enrollment (offset by increased revenue). • $53,000 to complete building maintenance projects, including a renovation of the Community Services building. • $109,000 in increases for capital outlay for the City's share of a federal fire equipment grant, parks improvement projects and an upgrade to the Police Department heating and air conditioning system. Transfers Out increased due to funding provided to other funds for salary and benefit increases for . changes to employee MOU's and OPEB benefits added for all employees and the year end transfer out to several funds according to adopted financial policies. 11. • • Capital Asset and Debt Administration Capital assets. The City of Hermosa Beach's investment in capital assets for its governmental and business type activities as of June 30, 2006, amounts to $67,111,000 (net of accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes land, buildings and structures, improvements, machinery and equipment, park facilities, roads, highways, and monuments. The total decrease in the City of Hermosa Beach's investment in capital assets for the 2005-06 fiscal year was 1.% (a 1 % decrease for governmental activities and a 4% decrease for business -type activities). Major capital asset events during the fiscal year included the following: Governmental Activities • Construction in progress on a variety of street (widening and expansion projects for existing streets) and sewer projects was $292,000 at the end of the fiscal year. • Construction in progress on Community Center Improvements was $503,000 at the end of the fiscal year. • Construction in progress on Parks .Improvements was $639,000 at the end of the fiscal year. • Construction in progress on Beach Restroom Rehabilitation was $19,000 at the end of the fiscal year. Business type Activities • The Parking Fund was combined with the General fund resulting in a net decrease of ($184,000) in capital assets. City of Hermosa Beach's Capital Assets (net of depreciation) (dollars in thousands) Governmental Business -type Activities Activities Total 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 Land $17,552 $18,052 $5,188 $5,188 $22,740 $23,240 Buildings and Structures 2,732 2,046 5,202 5,406 7,934 7,452 Improvements Other Than 9,336 4,401 5 6 9,341 4,407 Buildings Machinery and Equipment 1,195 1,147 11 12 1,206 1,159 Vehicles 1,566 1,444 1,566 1,444 Infrastructure 22,811 23,251 176 22,811 23,427 Construction in Progress 1,476 6,708 37 37 1,513 6,745 Total $56,668 $57,049 $10,443 $10,825 $67,111 $67,874 Additional information on the City of I-Iermosa Beach's capital assets can be found in note 6 on pages 63-66 of this report. 12 • Economic Factors and Next Year's Budgets and Rates • Median home prices are still strong in Hermosa Beach at this point, although many other areas are experiencing deterioration in prices and sales. The median home prices for June 2006 in Hermosa Beach was $1,100,000, with the average median price for 2005-06 at $1,204,250. We will expect to see some decreases in the coming months, though perhaps not as steep as in other parts of the state. Property by the water is very desirable. The assessed valuation in Hermosa Beach has risen approximately 9.5% for the last five years and increased 11.3% over 2004-05. • Sales tax revenue decreased 3% from last year, reflecting loss of the BMW dealership. A new Lotus dealership (including sales of high-end used vehicles) is operating on a portion of the site but development of the remainder of the site remains in question. Fortunately, transient occupancy taxes are up 10% for the same period and are helping to offset the loss of revenue. • Utility user taxes, which produce 11% of General Fund revenue, grew 2% over 2004-05. The repeal of the federal excise tax (which many UUT ordinances use by reference) is a concern as are the other pending legal challenges to various utility user taxes around the State. These issues, combined with the advent of internet phone service and other changes in service delivery, may erode this tax base as may the outcome of the debate over taxation of the internet at the federal level. • Voters did not approve a supplemental Lighting/Landscaping Assessment District. The City Council will have to consider other options of how best to deal with the shortfall in revenue during midyear budget review. • Retirement contribution rates from the state retirement system, CaIPERS, continue at high levels for 2005-06, with a slight increase predicted in 2006-07. Thereafter, CaIPERS estimates that overall rates will decline for 2007-08 and 2008-09. CaIPERS investment earnings are back in the double digits for 2005-06 and rate -smoothing policies adopted by CaIPERS appear to be working, based on the rate predictions. The City does have its own Retirement Stabilization Fund to set aside funds for use in times of high retirement rates. A snapshot of CaIPERS investment earnings is as follows: 2001, - 7.2%; 2002, -5.9%; 2003, 3.9%; 2004, 16.7%; 2005, 12.7%; 2006, 12.3%. • New Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statements, numbers 43 and 45, will require the city to account for Other Post Employment Benefits, such as retiree payments for health benefits, effective with the 2008-09 fiscal year. The City has already done the actuarial study to determine the required annual contribution for these benefits and is setting those funds aside in a separate fund. The City intends to set up a trust for these funds and hire an outside company to administer them. • Actions taken by the State to date with respect to property tax, sales tax (the "Triple Flip") and vehicle license fees make projecting our share of these revenue sources far more complicated than before. While Proposition 1A, which was passed in November 2004, protects local government revenue to a point, the State's continuing structural budget imbalance is of concern. The State's history of diverting local revenue rather than dealing with their budget imbalance is well documented. A discussion of the factors affecting the City's financial condition may be found in the transmittal letter at the front of this report. Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the City of Hermosa Beach's finances for all those with an interest in the government's finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the Office of the Finance Director, 1.315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. 13 • This page intentionally left blank. 14 • BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 15 • • This page intentionally left blame. 16 • • GOVERNMENT -WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 17 • This page .intentionally left blank. 18 • • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2006 ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments Reimbursable grants receivable Interest receivable on investments Other accounts receivable Property taxes receivable Internal Balance Deposits Other assets Primary Government Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities Total $ 22,993,762 $ 573,776 $ 23,567,538 133,189 133,189 251,859 10,910 262,769 2,071,745 15,241 2,086,986 687,335 687,335 2,144,948 (2,144,948) - 80,000 80,000 127,925 1,000 128,925 Total current assets 28,490,763 (1,544,021) 26,946,742 Noncurrent assets: Capital assets: Non -depreciable Depreciable, net Total capital assets Total noncurrent assets Total assets LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Workers' compensation claims payable - clue within one year General liability claims payable - due within one year Compensated absences - clue within one year Accounts payable and accrued liabilities Accrued wages and compensated absences Refundable deposits Unearned revenue Other liabilities 19,028,195 37,639,715 56,667,910 56,667,910 85,158,673 746,000 302,000 982,901 1,281,643 1,747,159 555,332 955,418 51,647 Total current liabilities 6,622,100 Noncurrent liabilities: Workers' compensation claims payable General liability claims payable Compensated absences Total noncurrent liabilities 2,255,247 552,602 248,958 5,224,729 24,252,924 5,218,009 42,857,724 10,442,738 67,110,648 10,442,738 67,110,648 8,898,717 94,057,390 302;157 11,754 27,012 22,180 746,000 302,000 982,901 1,583,800 1,758,913 582,344 977,598 51,647 363,103 6,985,203 2,255,247 552,602 248,958 3,056,807 - 3,056,807 Total liabilities 9,678,907 NET ASSETS 363,103 10,042,0"10 Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 56,667,910 8,297,790 64,965,700 Restricted for: Capital projects 283,278 283,278 Specific projects 3,307,345 3,307,345 Total restricted assets 3,590,623 - 3,590,623 Unrestricted net assets 15,221,233 237,824 15,459,057 Total net assets $ 75,479,766 $ 8,535,614 $ 84,015,380 See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 19 • • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets For the year ended June 30, 2006 Program Revenues Charges Operating Capital Total for Grants and Grants and Program Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Revenues Primary government: Governmental activities: Legislative and legal General government Public safety Community development Culture and recreation Public works Total governmental activities Business -type activities: Downtown Enhancement Parking Total business -type activities Total primary government $ 962,682 1,999,234 $ 458,900 $ 29,324 $ 488,224 15,167,715 3,89:1,881 288,977 $ 76,312 4,257,170 1,349,891 1,393,212 10,064 1,403,276 1,149,070 986,137 986,137 7,980,811 808,091 396,771 966,542 2,171,404 28,609,403 7,538,221 725,136 1,042,854 9,306,211 1,130,499 1,187,249 1,187,249 1,130,499 1,187,249 - - 1,187,249 $ 29,739,902 $ 8,725,470 $ 725,136 $ 1,042,854 $ 10,493,460 See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. General Revenues: "faxes: Property taxes Sale taxes . Real Property Transfer Tax Franchise Fees Transient Occupancy Tax Business License Utility Users Tax h cent Sales Tax for Public Safety Total taxes Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs Investment earnings Miscellaneous Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net assets Net assets - beginning of year Net assets - end of year 20 • Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Assets Governmental Business -type Activities Activities Total $ (962,682) $ (962,682) (1,511,010) (1,511,010) (10,910,545) (10,910,545) 53,385 53,385 (162,933) (162,933) (5,809,407) (5,809,407) (19,303,192) $ (19,303,192) (19,303,192) 8,361,888 2,511,004 305,0:18 597,754 1,628,394 740,746 2,726,085 188,644 56,750 56,750 56,750 56,750 56,750 (19,246,442) 8,361,888 2,511,004 305,018 597,754 1,628,394 740,746 2,726,085 :188,644 17,059,533 - 17,059,533 1,537,667 - 1,537,667 753,746 33,154 786,900 113 6,323 6,436 144,451 (144,451) 19,495,510 (104,974) 19,390,536 192,318 (48,224) 144,094 75,287,448 8,583,838 83,871,286 $ 75,479,766 $ 8,535,614 $ 84,075,380 • • This page intentionally left blank. 22 • • FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Governmental Fund .Financial Statements Proprietary Fund .Financial Statements Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements • • 77,is page intentionally left blame. ii • GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 25 • • This page intentionally left blank. 26 • • GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Governmental Funds of the City are outlined below: The General Fund - This fund accounts for all revenues and expenditures used to finance the traditional services associated with a municipal government which are not accounted for in the other funds. In I-Iermosa Beach, these services include general government, safety, community development, culture and recreation and public works. Contingency Special Revenue Fund - "Rainy day" funds set aside for unforeseen emergencies, unexpected economic events, etc. City Council adopted goal is 15% of appropriations. Capital Improvement Special Revenue Fund - Funds set aside for Capital Improvement Projects. Other Governmental Funds - Other Governmental Funds is the aggregate of all the non -major governmental funds. 27 • • City of Hermosa Beach Balance Sheet Governmental Funds June 30, 2006 ASSETS Cash and investments Reimbursable grants receivable Interest receivable on investments Other accounts receivable Property taxes receivable Due from other funds Advances to other funds Other assets Total assets LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities: Accounts payable and accrued liabilities Wages and compensated absences payable Due to other funds Refundable deposits Deferred revenue Advances from other funds Other liabilities Total liabilities Fund Balances: Reserved for: Re -appropriations Bike paths Traffic congestion relief Advances to other funds Storage lot purchase loan Unreserved, designated for: Sales tax in -lieu Affordable housing Justice and treasury department Unreserved, undesignated: Special revenue Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. Major Funds General Capital Contingency Improvement Other Special Special Governmental Revenue Revenue Funds Total $ 1,326,878 $ 63,453 1,895,215 675,391 63,650 3,482,394 $ 4,288,438 $ 6,614,845 133,189 40,698 53,185 94,523 172,944 11,944 65,520 148,929 546,316 200,000 2,877 $ 15,712,555 133,189 251,859 2,068,159 687,335 214,449 746,316 66,527 $ 4,024,587 $ 4,134,928 $ 4,541,623 $ 7,179,251 $ 19,880,389 $ 533,827 1,649,262 555,332 864,474 51,647 $ 151,487 $ 396,841 $ 1,082,155 8,309 48,281 1,705,852 2"14,449 214,449 555,332 4,000 86,944 955,418 200,000 200,000 51,647 3,654,542 $ 163,796 946,515 4,764,853 158,854 1,751,627 1,246,072 3,156,553 11,158 11,158 89,918 89,918 200,000 200,000 546,316 546,316 99,360 99,360 '111,831 111,831 10,719 10,719 3,588,612 2,426,200 4,874,869 10,889,681 370,045 4,134,928 4,377,827 6,232,736 15,115,536 $ 4,024,587 $ 4,134,928 $ 4,541,623 $ 7,179,251 $ 19,880,389 28 • • City of Hermosa Beach Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2006 Total Fund Balances - Total Governmental Funds Amounts reported for governmental activities in the Statement of Net Assets were reported differently because: Capital assets used in governmental activities were not current financial resources. Therefore, they were not reported in the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet. Non -depreciable Depreciable, net Total capital assets Internal Service Funds were used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as insurance and equipment replacement to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the Internal Service Funds were included in governmental activities in the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets. Insurance Fund Equipment Replacement Fund Total internal service funds Compensated absences were not due and payable in the current period. Therefore, they were not reported in the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet. Net Assets of Governmental Activities See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 29 Governmental - Wide Statement Internal Service of Net Assets Funds $ 15,115,536 $ 19,028,195 $ (127,829) 18,900,366 37,639,715 (2,252,758) 35,386,957 $ 56,667,910 $ (2,380,587) 54,287,323 1,970,320 5,338,446 7,308,766 (1,231,859) $ 75,479,766 • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Governmental Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 Major Funds General Capital Contingency Improvement Other Special Special Governmental Revenue Revenue Funds Total REVENUES: Property taxes $ 8,361,888 Other taxes 8,697,645 Licenses and permits 868,085 Fines and forfeitures 1,588,815 Use of money and property 312,248 Intergovernmental 559,933 Charges for services 3,765,895 Miscellaneous 71,318 Interest earned on investments 117,730 $ 116,763 $ 193,225 $ 456,163 $ 8,818,051 707,280 9,404,925 868,085 38,459 1,627,274 300,000 612,248 '1,718,836 2,278,769 139,745 3,905,640 317,214 388,532 326,028 753,746 Total revenues 24,343,557 EXPENDTITURES: 116,763 193,225 4,003,725 28,657,270 Current: Legislative and legal 963,031 General government 2,116,181 Public safety 14,186,925 Community development 1,327,389 Culture and recreation 1,105,544 Public works 2,540,396 Capital outlay 79,598 7,028,361 963,031 '103,881 2,220,062 257,409 14,444,334 19,607 1,346,996 18,803 1,124,347 '1,245,158 3,785,554 2,298,611 3,406,570 Total expenditures 22,319,064 - 1,028,361 3,943,469 27,290,894 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 2,024,493 '116,763 (835,136) 60,256 1,366,376 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in 1,244,395 1,348,741 815,864 864,743 4,273,743 Transfers out (3,375,674) (50,000) (85,856) (2,114,258) (5,625,788) Total other financing sources (uses) (2,131,279) 1,298,741 730,008 (1,249,515) (1,352,045) Net change in fund balances (106,786) 1,415,504 (105,128) (1,189,259) 14,331 FUND BALANCES: 13eginning of year 476,831 2,719,424 4,482,955 7,421,995 15,10'1,205 End of year $ 370,045 $ 4,134,928 $ 4,377,827 $ 6,232,736 $ 15,115,536 See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 30 • • City of Hermosa Beach Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Government -Wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets For the year ended June 30, 2006 Net Change in Fund Balances - Total Governmental Funds Governmental Activities in the Statement of Activities were reported differently because: Governmental Funds report capital outlay as expenditures. 1-lowever, in the Government -Wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives as depreciation expense. This is the amount of capital assets recorded in the current period. Total capital outlay expenditures reported in governmental funds Less repair and maintenance expenditures reported in public works Total Depreciation expense on capital assets is reported in the Government -Wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets, but they do not require the use of current financial resources. Therefore, depreciation expense is not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Except for the Internal Service Funds amounts of $353,701 which are reported below. Total depreciation reported in Government -Wide Statement of Activities Less depreciation reported in Internal Service Funds Total Capital assets contributed from the Parking Enterprise Fund to the General Fund was not reported in the General Fund because the contribution did not have any flow of current financial resources. However, the contribution should be reported as transfers on the Government -Wide Statement of Activities. Long-term compensated absences were reported in the Government -Wide Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets, but they did not require the use of current financial resources. Therefore, long-term compensated absences were not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Internal Service Funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as insurance and equipment replacement, to individual funds, The net revenue of the Internal Service Funds is reported with Governmental Activities. Change in Net Assets of Governmental Activities See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 31 $ 14,331 3,406,570 (1,987,560) 1,419,010 (2,517,143) 353,701 (2,163,442) 184,028 (229,708) 968,099 $ 192,318 • • This page intentionally left blank. 32 • • PROPRIETARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 33 • • This page intentionally left blank. 34 • • PROPRIETARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Dozvntozvn Enhancement Fund - All parking lot revenues are deposited to the Downtown Enhancement Fund in order to promote business in general and improve the appearance of the downtown area. Parking Fund - All meter, fine and parking permit revenues are deposited to the Parking Fund in order to finance parking operations and capital improvements. The Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in 2005- 06. 35 City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Net Assets Proprietary Funds June 30, 2006 Major Enterprise Fund Downtown Enhancement ASSETS Pa rking Governmental Total Activities Enterprise Internal Funds Service funds Current assets: Cash and investments $ 573,776 $ 573,776 $ 7,281,207 Interest receivable on investments 10,910 10,910 Other accounts receivable 15,241 15,241 3,586 Advances to other funds 1,598,632 Deposits 80,000 Other assets 1,000 1,000 61,398 Total current assets 600,927 $ 600,927 9,024,823 Noncurrent assets: Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation Total noncurrent assets Total assets LIABILITIES 10,442,738 10,442,738 11,043,665 10,442,738 2,380,587 10,442,738 0 2,380,587 11,043,665 11,405,410 Current liabilities: Current portion of long-term liabilities 1,048,000 Accounts payable 302,157 302,157 199,488 Accrued wages and compensated absences 11,754 11,754 41,307 Refundable deposit 27,012 27,012 Advances from other funds 2,144,948 2,144,948 Deferred revenue 22,180 22,180 Total current liabilities 2,508,051 Long-term liabilities: Workers' compensation claims payable General liability claims payable Less current portion above Total long-term liabilities Total liabilities 2,508,051. NET ASSETS Investment in capital assets, net of related debt 8,297,790 Unrestricted 237,824 2,508,051 1,288,795 3,001,247 854,602 (1,048,000) 2,807,849 2,508,051 4,096,644 8,297,790 2,380,587 237,824 4,928,179 Total net assets $ 8,535,614 $ - $ 8,535,614 $ 7,308,766 See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements 36 • • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Assets Proprietary Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 Major Enterprise Fund Downtown Enhancement OPERATING REVENUES: Parking Governmental Total Activities Enterprise Internal Funds Service Funds Use of money and property $ 224,257 $ 024,257 Charges for services 962,992 962,992 $ 2,936,628 Miscellaneous 6,323 6,323 Total operating revenues 1,193,572 $ - 1,193,572 2,936,628 OPERATING EXPENSES: Salaries and wages 55,615 55,615 312,248 Contractor services 804,171 804,171 765,366 Supplies 72,741 72,741 131,640 Claims expense 1,737,692 Depreciation 197,972 197,972 353,701 Total operating expenses 1,130,499 - 1,130,499 3,300,647 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) 63,073 - 63,073 (364,019) NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Interest earned on investments Proceed from sale of capital assets Total nonoperating revenues (expenses) INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS 33,154 33,154 33,154 19,650 33,154 19,650 96,227 - 96,227 (344,369) Capital contribution to Governmental Funds (184,028) (184,028) Transfers in 53,684 53,684 1,312,468 Transfers out (3,721) (10,386) (14,107) Total contributions and transfers 49,963 (194,414) (144,451) 1,312,468 Change in net assets 146,190 (194,414) (48,224) 968,099 NET ASSETS: Beginning of the year 8,389,424 794,414 8,583,838 6,340,667 End of the year $ 8,535,614 $ $ 8,535,614 $ 7,308,766 See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 37 • • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Cash Flows Proprietary Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 Governmental Major Enterprise Fund 'Total Activities Downtown Enterprise Internal Enhancement Parking Funds Service Funds CAST -I FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash received from customers $ 1,202,664 $ 48,040 $ 1,250,704 $ 357,411 Cash received for services from other funds 2,936,628 Cash payments to other funds for services (598,710) (598,710) Cash payments to suppliers for goods and services (860,035) (47,594) (907,629) (905,992) Cash payments to employees for services (52,384) (194,714) (247,098) (342,154) Insurance premiums and settlements (1,537,333) Other operating revenues 6,323 6,323 Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities (302,142) (194,268) (496,410) 508,560 CASFI FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers in 53,684 53,684 1,312,468 Transfers out (3,721) (10,386) (14,107) Net cash provided by (used for) noncapital financing activities 49,963 (10,386) 39,577 1,312,468 CASH FLOWS CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Proceed from sale of capital assets Acquisition of capital assets 19,650 (532,531) Net cash provided by (used for) capital and related financing activities (512,881) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest receivable on investments 30,233 3,611 33,844 Net cash provided (used) by investing activities 30,233 3,611 33,844 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (221,946) (201,043) (422,989) 1,308,147 CAST -I AND CASH EQUIVALENTS: Beginning of year 795,722 201,043 996,765 5,973,060 Ending of year $ 573,776 $ - $ 573,776 $ 7,281,207 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income (loss) $ 63,073 $ 63,073 $ (364,019) Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities: Depreciation 197,972 197,972 353,701 Changes in operating assets and liabilities: Other accounts receivable (3,673) $ 50,505 46,832 Other assets (1,000) (1,000) (41,729) Worker's compensation claims payable (36,310) General liability claims payable 236,669 Accounts payable 16,877 (47,594) (30,717) (8,986) Accrued wages and compensated absences 3,231 (194,714) (191,483) (29,906) Refundable deposits (2,465) (2,465) Advances from (to) other fund (598,710) (598,710) 399,140 Deferred revenue 20,088 20,088 Total adjustments (365,215) (194,268) (559,483) 872,579 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities $ (302,142) $ (194,268) $ (496,410) $ 508,560 Noncash Transactions DISCLOSURE OF NON-CASFI TRANSACTION: The City's Parking Enterprise Fund contributed its capital assets in the amount of $184,028 to the City's Governmental Funds for the year ended June 30, 2006. See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 38 FIDUCIARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 39 • • This page intentionally left blank. 40 • • FIDUCIARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Agency Funds are used to account for assets held by the City in the capacity of agent for individuals. Agency Fund spending is controlled primarily through legal agreements and applicable State and Federal laws. 41 • • City of Hermosa Beach Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets Fiduciary Funds June 30, 2006 ASSETS Cash and investments Interest receivable Other accounts receivable Total assets LIABILITIES Assessment: Installment account Reserve Requirement OPEB contribution from City Total liabilities See accompanying Notes to Basic Financial Statements. 42 Agency Funds $ 1,098,395 4,626 26,278 $ 1,129,299 337,793 13,943 777,563 $ 1,129,299 • City of Hermosa Beach Index to Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006 Page Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies 45 A. Financial Reporting Entity 45 B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus 46 C. Use of Restricted/Unrestricted Net Assets 49 D. Cash and Investments 49 E. Property Tax Receivable 50 F. Interfund Transactions 50 G. Capital Assets 50 I I. Claims Payable 51. I. Compensated Absences Payable 51. J. Unearned and Deferred Revenue 52 K. Long -Term Debt 52 L. Net Assets 52 M. Fund Balances - Reservations and Designations 53 N. Use of Estimates 53 O. Implementation of New GASB Pronouncements 53 Note 2 - Cash and Investments 54 Note 3 - Receivables 57 Note 4 - Lease Revenues 59 Note 5 - Interfund Transactions 60 Note 6 - Capital Assets 63 Note 7 - Long -Term Debt 66 Note 8 - Other Required Fund Disclosures 69 Note 9 - Risk Management 70 Note 10 -Retirement Plans 71 Note 11 - Commitments and Contingencies 76 Note 12 - Subsequent Events 76 43 • This page intentionally lift blank. 44 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The basic financial statements of the City of IIermosa Beach, California, (City) have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as applied to governmental agencies. The Governmental Accounting Standards Boards (GASB) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. The more significant of the City's accounting policies are described below. A. Financial Reporting Entity The City of IIermosa Beach was incorporated on January 14, 1907, under the general laws of the State of California. The City operates under a Council -Manager form of government and provides the following services: public safety (police, crossing guards and fire), maintenance and construction of public improvements, cultural, recreation, community development (planning and zoning), and general administrative services. As required by GAAP, the basic financial statements present the City and its component units, entities for which the City is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are in substance, part of the City's operations and data from these units are combined with data of the City. Discretely presented component units, on the other hand, are reported in a separate column in the combined basic financial statements to emphasize their legal separateness from the City. Each blended component unit has a June 30 year-end. The City had no discretely presented component units. The following entities are reported as blended component units because the governing board is substantively the same as the primary government: Hermosa Beach Street Lighting and Landscaping District This fund is used to account for the Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District, which was created for street lighting/median maintenance purposes pursuant to Street and highway Code 22500-22679. Lower Pier Avenue Assessment District Improvement Fund This fund is used to account for the funds of the assessment district, which was created in November 1997 pursuant to Street and Highway Code 10000 for improvements in the downtown Pier Plaza. Myrtle Underground Utility District Improvement Fund This fund is used to account for the funds of the utility underground assessment district, which was created in October 1999 pursuant to Street and highway Code 10000. Lorna Underground Utility District Improvement Fund This fund is used to account for the funds of the utility underground assessment district, which was created in October 1999 pursuant to Street and Highway Code 10000. This fund was closed in 2005-06. Bayview Drive Underground District Improvement Fund This fund is used to account for the funds of the utility underground assessment district, which was created in February 2005 pursuant to Street and Highway Code 1.0000. Beach Drive Assessment District Improvement Fund This fund is used to account for the funds of the utility underground assessment district, which was created in July 2004 pursuant to Street and highway Code 10000. 45 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for in a separate set of self -balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues, and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. City resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the purpose for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. Government - Wide Financial Statements These statements are presented as required by GASB Statement No. 34. The City Government -Wide Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Assets and a Statement of Activities and Changes in Net Assets. These statements present summaries of Governmental and Business -Type Activities for the City, the primary government, accompanied by a total column. Fiduciary activities of the City are not included in these statements. The basic financial statements are presented on an "economic reso►.irces" measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all of the City's assets and liabilities, including capital assets, as well as infrastructure assets, and long-term liabilities, are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Assets. The Statement of Activities presents changes in net assets. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred. The types of transactions reported as program revenues for the City are reported in three categories: 1) charges for services, 2) operating grants and contributions, and 3) capital grants and contributions. Certain eliminations have been made as prescribed by GASB Statement No. 34 in regards to interfund activities, payables and receivables. All internal balances in the Statement of Net Assets have been eliminated except those representing balances between the governmental activities and the business -type activities, which are presented as internal balances and eliminated in the total primary government column. In the Statement of Activities, internal service fund transactions have been eliminated because their expenses are reported a second time as expenditures/expenses in the funds that are billed for the goods or services they provide. However, transactions between governmental and business -type activities have not been eliminated. The following interfund activities, if applicable, have been eliminated: • Due to/from other funds - short-term loans within the primary government • Advances to/from other funds - long-term loans within the primary government • Transfers in/out - flows of assets between funds without the requirement for repayment The City applies all applicable GASB pronouncements (including all NCGA Statements and Interpretations currently in effect) as well as the following pronouncements issued on or before November 30, 1989, to the business -type activities, unless those pronouncements conflict with or contradict GASB pronouncements: Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statements and Interpretations, Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinions, and Accounting Research Bulletins (ARB) of the committee on Accounting Procedure. The City applies all applicable FASB Statements and Interpretations issued after November 30, 1989, except those that conflict with or contradict GASB pronouncements. 46 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus, Continued Governmental Fund Financial Statements, Continued These statements are presented as required by GASB Statement No. 34. Governmental fund financial statements include a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and non -major funds aggregated. An accompanying schedule is presented to reconcile and explain the differences in net assets as presented in these statements to the net assets presented in the government -wide financial statements. Major funds are governmental or enterprise funds whose revenues, expenditures/expenses, assets or liabilities are at least 10% of corresponding totals for all governmental or enterprise funds and at least 5% of the corresponding total for all governmental and enterprise funds combined. The City reports the following major governmental funds: General Fund. This is the City's principal operating fund. It accounts for all revenues and expenditures used to finance the traditional services associated with a municipal government except those required to be accounted for in another fund. Contingency Fund. This fund accounts for "Rainy Day" funds set aside for unforeseen emergencies, unexpected economic events, etc. Capital Improvement Fund. This fund accounts for funds set aside for capital improvement projects. All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or "current financial resources" measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, only current assets and current liabilities are included on the Balance Sheet. The Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances presents increases (revenue and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. Revenues are recorded when received in cash, except those revenues subject to accrual (generally 60 days after year-end) which are recognized when due. The primary revenue sources, which have been treated as susceptible to accrual by the City, are property tax, sales tax, intergovernmental revenues and other taxes. The exception to that rule is sales tax. Beginning in 2004-05, the State took sales tax revenue (Sales Tax In Lieu) from cities and counties, in order to use the source of funds as a guarantee for state issued debt to finance budget deficits. Sales tax is received on a monthly basis. Funds will be repaid according to the property tax schedule, with the bulk of payments occurring only twice a year. As such, the City has adopted an accrual policy of 7 to 12 months for recording this revenue. The revenue was earned by June 30, however the payment will not be received until January 2007. A designation in this amount has been set up to reflect that these funds are not available for appropriation. Business license fees are recorded as received. Expenditures are recorded in the accounting period in which the related fund liability is incurred. 47 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus, Continued Governmental Fund Financial Statements, Continued Unearned revenues arise when the government receives resources before it has a legal claim to them, as when grant monies are received prior to incurring qualifying expenditures, or when lease payments, recreation class registrations or facility rentals are received in advance. In subsequent periods when the government has a legal claim to the resources, the unearned revenue is removed from the balance sheet and revenue is recognized. The Reconciliation of the Fund Financial Statements to the Government -Wide Financial Statements is provided to explain the differences created by the integrated approach of GASB Statement No. 34 and is located after the governmental fund balance sheet in the fund financial statements. Proprietary Fund Financial Statements Two types of funds are classified as proprietary funds: enterprise funds and internal service funds. Proprietary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Assets, a Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets, and a Statement of Cash Flows for each major proprietary fund. A separate column representing internal service funds is also presented in these statements. I-Iowever, internal service balances and activities have been combined with the governmental activities in the Government -Wide Financial Statements. The City reports the following major enterprise funds: Downtown Enhancement Fund. This fund accounts for unmetered parking lot and parking structure operations and expenses related to the promotion of business in general in the downtown area. Parking Fund. Prior to 2005-06, this fund accounted for all meter, fine and parking permit revenues and expenditures related to parking operations and capital improvements. The fund was combined with the General Fund in fiscal year 2005-06. The internal service funds are used to account for fleet services, information technology services and risk management services provided to other departments on a cost -reimbursement basis. Proprietary funds are accounted for using the "economic resources" measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities (whether current or non-current) are included on the Statement of Net Assets. The Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets presents increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net assets. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred. In these funds, receivables have been recorded as revenue and provisions have been made for uncollectible amounts if applicable. Operating revenues in the proprietary funds are those revenues that are generated from the primary operations of the fund. All other revenues are reported as non-operating revenues. Operating expenses are those expenses that are essential to the primary operations of the fund. All other expenses are reported as non-operating expenses. 48 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus, Continued Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Assets. The City's Fiduciary funds represent Agency Funds, which are custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and do not involve measurement of results of operations. Fiduciary fund types are accounted for according to the nature of the fund. Funds held as fiduciary funds represent assets resulting from assessments to the property owners in four utility undergrounding districts, two reserve funds for utility undergrounding districts and a downtown improvement district. The assets are used to repay bonds secured by the private property in the district. In addition, a temporary agency fund was established in 2003-2004 to account for contributions and expenditures related to other post employment benefits for the Police Department. In 2005-06, benefits were added to this fund for all city employees. The City intends to establish an agreement with an outside party for the administration of these funds. C. Use of Restricted/Unrestricted Net Assets When both restricted and unrestricted net assets are available for an expense item, the City's policy is to apply restricted net assets first. D. Casli and Investments The City pools cash resources of its various funds to facilitate cash management. Cash in excess of current requirements is invested and reported as investments. It is the City's intent to hold investments until maturity. However, the City may, in response to market conditions, sell investments prior to maturity in order to improve the quality, liquidity or yield of the portfolio. Interest earnings are apportioned among funds based on ending accounting period cash and investment balances. The City's cash and cash equivalents are comprised of cash on hand, demand deposits, and highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at the time of acquisition. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools, highly liquid market investments with maturities of one year or less at time of purchase are stated at amortized cost. All other investments are stated at fair value. Market value is used as fair value for those securities for which market quotations are readily available. The City participates in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), an investment pool managed by the State of California. LAIF has invested a portion of the pool funds in Structured Notes and Asset -Backed Securities. LAIF's investments are subject to credit risk with the full faith and credit of the State of California collateralizing these investments. In addition, these Structured Notes and Asset -Backed Securities are subject to market risk as a result of changes in interest rates. 49 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued D. Cash and Investments, Continued In accordance with GASB Statement No. 40, Deposit and Investment Risk Disclosures (an amendment of GASB Statement No. 3), certain disclosure requirements, if applicable for deposit and investment risk are specified for the following areas: Interest Rate Risk Credit Risk • Overall • Custodial Credit Risk • Concentrations of Credit Risk i Foreign Currency Risk E. Property Tax Receivable Property taxes attach as an enforceable lien on property as of July 1 each year. Taxes are levied on January 1 and are payable in two installments: December 10 and April 10 of each year. The County of Los Angeles, California (County) bills and collects the property taxes and remits them to the City according to a payment schedule established by the County. City property tax revenues are recognized when received in cash except at year-end when they are accrued pursuant to the modified accrual basis of accounting. The City recognizes available taxes or those collected within 60 days as revenue at June 30. The County is permitted by State law to levy taxes at 1% of full market value (at time of purchase) and can increase the assessed valuation no more than 2% per year. The City receives a share of this basic levy, proportionate to what it received during the years 1976 to 1978. F. Interfund Transactions Activity between funds that are representative of lending/borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the fiscal year are referred to as either "due to/from other funds" (i.e., the current portion of interfund loans) or "advances to/from other funds" (i.e., the noncurrent portion of interfund loans)." Any residual balances outstanding between the governmental activities and business -type activities are reported in the government -wide financial statements as "internal balances." G. Capital Assets Capital assets, which include land, buildings, improvements, equipment, furniture, and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, sidewalks, and similar items), are reported in the applicable governmental or business - type activities in the Government -Wide Financial Statements. Capital assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost was not available. Donated capital assets are valued at their estimated fair market value on the date donated. City policy has set the capitalization threshold for reporting capital assets at $5,000 and infrastructure at $100,000. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over estimated useful lives of the assets as follows: Buildings 50 years Improvements other than buildings 20 years Machinery and equipment 3-20 years Infrastructure 15-50 years 50 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued G. Capital Assets, Continued In June 1999, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued Statement No. 34 which requires the inclusion of infrastructure capital assets in local governments' basic financial statements. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City has included all infrastructure as of June 30, 2006 into the 2005-2006 Basic Financial Statements. The City defines infrastructure as the basic physical assets that allow the City to function. The assets include streets, sewers and storm drains, parking meters and monuments. Each major infrastructure system can be divided into subsystems. For example the street system can be subdivided into pavement, curb and gutters, sidewalks, medians, streetlights and landscaping. These subsystems were not delineated in the basic financial statements. The appropriate operating department maintains information regarding the subsystems. Interest accrued during capital assets construction, if any, is capitalized for the business -type and proprietary funds as part of the asset cost. For all infrastructure systems, the City elected to use the Basic Approach as defined by GASB Statement No. 34 for infrastructure reporting. The City commissioned an appraisal of City owned infrastructure and property as of June 30, 2003. This appraisal determined the original cost, which is defined as the actual cost to acquire new property in accordance with market prices at the time of first construction/acquisition. Original costs were developed in one of three ways: (1) historical records; (2) standard unit costs appropriate for the construction/acquisition date; or (3) present cost indexed by a reciprocal factor of the price increase from the construction/acquisition date to the current date. The accumulated depreciation, defined as the total depreciation from the date of construction/acquisition to the current date on a straight line, unrecovered cost method was computed using industry -accepted life expectancies for each infrastructure subsystem. The book value was then computed by deducting the accumulated depreciation from the original cost. H. Claims Payable. The City records a liability to reflect an actuarial estimate of ultimate uninsured losses for both general liability claims (including property damage claims) and workers' compensation claims. The estimated liability for workers' compensation claims and general liability claims includes "incurred but not reported" (IBNR) claims. There is no fixed payment schedule to pay these liabilities. I. Compensated Absences Payable City employees have vested interest in varying levels of vacation, sick leave and compensatory time based on their length of employment. It is the policy of the City to pay all accumulated vacation pay and a portion of sick pay when an employee retires or terminates. The long-term amount is included as a liability in the governmental activities of the Government -Wide Financial Statements. A liability for these amounts is reported in governmental funds only if they have matured, for example, as a result of employee resignations and retirements. All of the liability for compensated absences applicable to proprietary funds is reported in those funds. As mentioned under "Financial Policies," the City's goal is to accumulate funding in the Compensated Absences Fund for 25% of the accrued liability for compensated absences. 51 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued J. Unearned and Deferred Revenue In the Government -Wide Financial Statements, unearned revenue is recognized for transactions for which revenue has not yet been earned. Typical transactions recorded as unearned revenues in the Government - Wide Financial Statements are cell phone site license lease payments received in advance, prepaid charges for services and facility rentals paid in advance. In the Fund Financial Statements, deferred revenue is recorded when transactions have not yet met the revenue recognition criteria based on the modified accrual basis of accounting. The City records deferred revenue for transactions for which revenues have not been earned, or for which funds are not available to meet current financial obligations. Typical transactions for which deferred revenue is recorded are lease payments, quarterly encroachment fees and advance registration for recreation classes which were not yet earned or available. K. Long -Terra Debt Government -Wide Financial Statements The City has no long-term debt. Other long-term obligations are reported on the Statement of Net Assets as liabilities in the appropriate activities. Fund Financial Statements Long -terns debt is not presented in the fund financial statements, but long-term liabilities are shown in the Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets located after the governmental funds balance sheet in the fund financial statements. L. Net Assets Government -Wide Financial Statements In the government -wide financial statements, net assets are reported in one of three categories: Invested in Capital Assets, net of related debt- This amount consists of capital assets net of accumulated depreciation and reduced by outstanding debt, (if applicable), that is attributed to the acquisition, construction, or improvement of the assets. Restricted Net Assets - This amount is restricted by external creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments. Unrestricted Net Assets - This amount represents remaining net assets that do not meet the definition of "invested in capital assets, net of related debt" or "restricted net assets." 52 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, Continued M. Fund Balances - Reservations and Designations In the fund financial statements, governmental funds report reservations of fund balances for amounts that are not available for appropriation or are legally restricted by outside parties to use for a specific purpose. Designations of fund balance represent tentative management plans that are subject to change. N. Use of Estimates The preparation of the basic financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. In addition, estimates affect the reported amount of expenses. Actual results could differ from these estimates and assumptions. O. Implementation of New Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncements The City adopted new accounting standards in order to conform to the following Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements: GASB Statement No. 42 Accounting and Financial Reporting for Impairment of Capital Assets and for Insurance Recoveries establishes accounting and financial reporting standards for impairment of capital assets. A capital asset is considered impaired when its service utility has declined significantly and unexpectedly. This Statement also clarifies .and establishes accounting requirements for insurance recoveries. • GASB Statement No. 44 Economic Condition. Reporting: The Statistical Section (an amendment of NCGA Statement 1.) guides the preparation of the statistical section. The statistical section presents detailed information, typically in ten-year trends, that assists users in utilizing the basic financial statements, notes to basic financial statements, and required supplementary information to assess the economic condition of a government. • GASB Statement No. 46 Net Assets Restricted by Enabling Legislation addresses selected issues and amends GASB Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements and Management's Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments. The Statement enhances the usefulness and comparability of net asset information and clarifies the meaning of legal enforceability. The Statement also specified accounting and financial reporting requirements for restricted net assets. • GASB Statement No. 47 Accounting for Termination Benefits provides accounting guidance for state and local governmental employers regarding benefits (such as early-retirement incentives and severance benefits) provided to employees that are terminated. The Statement requires recognition of the cost of involuntary termination benefits in the period in which a government becomes obligated to provide benefits to terminated employees. 53 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS The City maintains a cash and investment pool which includes cash balances and authorized investments of all funds. This pooled cash is invested by the City Treasurer to enhance earnings. The pooled interest earned is allocated to the fund based on cash and investment balances in these funds at the end of each accounting period. The City had the following cash and investments at June 30, 2006: Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets Funds Financial Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities Total Fiduciary Funds Statement of Net Assets Total Cash and Investments $ 22,993,762 $ 573,776 $ 23,567,538 $ 1,098,395 $ 24,665,933 The City's Cash and Investments at June 30 in more detail: A. Cash Deposits Fair Value City Treasury: Cash Deposits: Demand accounts $ 267,861 Less items in transit (281,328) Total cash deposits (13,467) Investments: Local Agency Investment Fund U.S. government notes Total investments Total cash and investments 21,221,425 3,457,975 24,679,400 $ 24,665,933 The carrying amounts of the City's cash deposits were $(13,467) at June 30,2006. Bank balances at June 30, 2006, were $269,894 which were fully insured and collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institutions in the City's name as discussed below. The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to secure the City's cash deposits by pledging securities as collateral. The law states that collateral pledged in this manner shall have the effect of perfecting a security interest in such collateral superior to those of a general creditor. Thus, collateral for cash deposits is considered to be held in the City's name. The market value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the City's cash deposits. California law also allows institutions to secure city deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the City's total cash deposits. The City may waive collateral requirements for cash deposits, which are fully insured up to $100,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The City, however, has not waived the collateralization requirements. 54 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS, Continued A. Cash Deposits, Continued The City follows the practice of pooling cash and investments of all funds, except for funds required to be held by fiscal agents under the provisions of bond indentures, if applicable. Interest income from cash and investments with fiscal agents is credited directly to the related fund. Interest income earned on pooled cash and investments is allocated on an accounting period basis to the various funds based on the period - end cash and investment balances. Interest is not allocated to the Compensated Absences Fund, funds created to advance costs for utility undergrounding districts, reimbursable grant funds or internal service funds. B. Investments The City's investment policy is more restrictive than the State's, by design. Under the provisions of the City's investment policy, and in accordance with California Government Code, the investments below are authorized. > Securities of the U.S. Government, or its agencies • Banker's acceptances • Time Certificates of Deposits • Negotiable certificates of Deposit • California Local Agency Investment Fund • Corporate Medium -Term Notes In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools, the City's investments are carried at fair market value instead of cost. Accordingly, the City adjusts the carrying value of its investments to reflect their fair value at each fiscal year-end with the effects of these adjustments included in income for that fiscal year. Changes in value for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, amounted to an unrealized decrease of $7.,091.. The City's investments with the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), the State of California's investment pool, at June 30, 2006, included a portion of the pooled funds invested in Structured Notes and Asset - Backed Securities. These investments included the following: Structured Notes, which are debt securities (other than asset-backed securities) whose cash flow characteristics (coupon rate, redemption amount, or stated maturity) depend upon one or more indices and/or that have embedded forwards or options. Asset -Backed Securities, the bulk of which are mortgage-backed securities, and which entitle their purchasers to receive a share of the cash flows from a pool of assets such as principal and interest repayments from a pool of mortgages, such as collateralized mortgage obligations (CMO's), or credit card receivables. As of June 30, 2006, the City had $21,221,425 invested in LAIR . 2.567% of pool investment funds were invested in Structured Notes and Asset -Backed Securities. The City valued its investments in LAIF as of June 30, 2006 by multiplying its account balance with LAIF by *a fair value factor determined by LAIF. This fair value factor was determined by dividing all LA.IF participants' total aggregate fair value by total aggregate amortized cost resulting in a factor of .998185821. 55 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS, Continued C. Risk Disclosures Interest Rate Risk - As a means of limiting its exposure to fair value losses arising from rising interest rates, the City's investment policy limits investments to a maximum maturity of five years. At June 30, 2006, the City had the following investment maturities: Investment Type Fair Value Investment Maturities (in Years) Less than 1. 1 to 2 Federal Home Loan Bank $ 2,472,190 $ 1,482,815 $ 989,375 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 498,440 498,440 Federal National Mortgage Association 487,345 487,345 Local Agency Investment Fund 21,221,425 21,221,425 Total $ 24,679,400 $ 23,202,680 $ 1,476,720 Custodial Risk - The City's investment policy requires that all securities purchased from brokers/dealers shall be held in third party safekeeping. All Treasury bills and most other Treasury securities are "book entry" securities that are held at the Federal Reserve Union Bank of California. Collateral for time deposits in banks and savings an loans are held by the Federal I--Iome Loan Bank or an approved agency of depository of the financial institution. Credit Risk - The City's investment policy recognizes the risk of potential loss of principal, interest or a combination of these amounts on investments. As such, the policy allows for investments only in instruments that are considered very safe. The City's investments are rated by the nationally recognized statistical rating organizations as follows: Moody's U.S. Agencies Standard & Poor's Federal Home Loan Bank Aaa AAA Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Aaa AAA Federal National Mortgage Association Aaa AAA External Pool State of California - Local Agency Investment Fund Not Rated Not Rated Concentration of credit risk - The City's investment policy does not allow for an investment in any one institution that is in excess of 5% of the government's total portfolio. 56 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 3. RECEIVABLES Government -Wide Financial Statements At June 30, 2006, the Government -Wide Financial Statements show the following miscellaneous receivables net of allowances for uncollectible amounts, if any: Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets Fiduciary Funds Governmental Business -Type Statement of Activities Activities Net Assets Total Accounts $ 2,071,745 $ 15,241 $ 26,278 $ 2,113,264 Taxes 687,335 687,335 Interest 251,859 10,910 4,626 267,395 Grants 133,189 133,189 Total $ 3,144,128 $ 26,151 $ 30,904 $ 3,201,183 Fund Financial Statements At June 30, 2006, the Fund Financial Statements show the following receivables: A. Accounts Receivable Accounts receivable consisted of amounts accrued in the ordinary course of operations. The total amount of accounts receivable for each major and non -major fund in the aggregate as of June 30, 2006, were as follows: Governmental Funds: General Fund $ 1,895,215 Non -major Funds 172,944 Total governmental funds 2,068,159 Proprietary Funds: Downtown Enhancement Fund 15,241 Total proprietary funds 15,241 Internal Services Funds Agency Aands Total 57 3,586 26,278 $ 2,113,264 • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 3. RECEIVABLES, Continued B. Taxes Receivable At June 30, 2006, the City had taxes receivable in the following major funds and non -major funds in the aggregate: Property Taxes Governmental Funds: General fund $ 675,397. Non -major Funds 11,944 Total $ 687,335 C. Interest Receivable Interest receivable consists of interest from investments pooled by the City, which is distributed among the funds according to their cash balances at the end of the accounting period, and interest receivable on restricted investments held by the fiscal agents, which are recorded in the funds holding the investment. The interest receivable as of June 30, 2006, was as follows: City Pooled Investments Governmental Funds: General fund $ 63,453 Contingency fund 40,698 Capital Improvement 53,185 Non -major funds 94,523 Total governmental funds 251,859 Proprietary Funds: Downtown Enhancement fund 10,910 Total proprietary funds 10,910 Total 262,769 Agency Funds 4,626 Total interest receivable $ 267,395 D. Reimbursable Grants Receivable Grants receivable consists of a variety of reimbursable grants from other agencies. The total amount of reimbursable grants for each major and non -major funds in the aggregate as of June 30, 2006 were as follows: Governmental Funds: Non -major Funds Total governmental funds 58 $ 133,189 $ 733,189 City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 4. LEASE REVENUES In January 2000, the North Pier Parking Structure was completed. The parking structure contains 400 parking spaces and was funded in part by a downtown developer in exchange for the use of 100 spaces in the structure. The remainder of the funding was provided by the City's Downtown Enhancement Fund and Prop A Open Space funding contributed by the Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbors. In consideration of the County contribution, 50% of the annual net income derived from the parking structure must be shared with the County each year by September 1. The payment to the County for fiscal year 2005-2006 is $220,648. In February 2001, a 50 year lease for the retail space located in front of the North Pier Parking Structure was initiated. The City receives a monthly lease payment in the amount of $2,376. The lease includes a negotiated increase to the monthly lease payment to be calculated every 60 months based on the consumer price index. The next increase is due in January 2011. In February 2004, the City entered into a 5 year lease agreement with Sprint, a cellular telephone company, for placement of an antenna on the North Pier Parking Structure. The City receives a monthly lease payment in the amount of $2,180. In June 2005, the City purchased property adjacent to City T --Tall that includes a self -storage facility. The existing lease for the storage facility was transferred to the City as a condition of the sale. The monthly lease payment increases in February of each year based on the consumer price index up to a maximum of 3% per year. The City receives a monthly lease payment in the amount of $14,749. The City leases a portion of the Hermosa Beach Community Center to nonprofit and cultural organizations. The leases are renegotiated annually. All of the above leases are accounted for as operating leases by the City. The future minimum rental revenues under these leases are as follows: Year Ending June 30, 2007 $ 253,823 2008 239,241 2009 153,300 2010 28,512 2011 28,512 2012-2016 142,560 2017-2021 142,560 2022-2026 142,560 2027-2031 142,560 2032-2036 142,560 2037-2041 142,560 2042-2046 142,560 2047-2051 128,304 Total $ 1,829,612 Lease revenue for fiscal year 2006 was $293,911 with $69,655 reflected in the General Fund and $224,256 in the Downtown Enhancement Fund, an enterprise fund. 59 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 5. INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS A. Government -Wide Financial Statements Transfers At June 30, 2006, the City had the following transfers: B. Fwd Financial Statements Transfers Out Business -Type Activities Governmental Activities $ 144,451 In the year ended June 30, 2006, the following one-time transfers were made: > The Downtown Enhancement Fund made transfer of $3,721 to the General Fund to reimburse for administrative expense. • The General Fund made a transfer of $53,684 to the Downtown Enhancement Fund to finance a Centennial celebration to be held on the Downtown Plaza in 2007. • The Parking Fund made a transfer of $194,414 to the General Fund to combine with the General Fund in fiscal year 2005-2006; Due To/From Other Funds The composition of due to/from other funds at June 30, 2006 is as follows: E 0 v Other Funds Contingency Fund Non -major funds Total Due to Other Funds Non -major Governmental Funds $ 65,520 148,929 $ 214,449 The balance of $65,520 due to the Contingency fund from non -major governmental funds resulted from a loan for the start up of a utility undergrounding district. The remaining balance of $148,929 in non -major funds resulted from the time lag between the dates that reimbursable expenditures occur and payments are received from other agencies. All balances are scheduled to be collected in the subsequent year. O 60 City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 5. INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS, Continued B. Favid Financial Statements, Continued Advances From/To Other Funds At June 30, 2006, the composition of advances to other funds is as follows: Contingency Fund Capital Improvement Fund Internal Service funds Total Advances From Other Funds Downtown Enhancement Fund $ 546,316 1,598,632 $ 2,144,948 Non -major Governmental Funds Total $ 546,316 $ 200,000 200,000 1,598,632 $ 200,000 $ 2,344,948 The balance of $200,000 advanced from the Capital Improvement Fund to the non -major governmental funds resulted from long-term loans for the start up costs of a utility undergrounding district. Since the advances are not scheduled to be collected in the subsequent year, the fund balance of the Capital Improvement Fund was reserved to reflect that the financial resources are not currently available. The balance of $2,144,948 from the Contingency Fund and Internal Service funds to the Downtown Enhancement Fund, represents the balance owed to these funds for the purchase of real property. The advances will be repaid from lease proceeds from a storage facility located on the property and unrestricted net assets available at year end. Transfers At June 30, 2006, the City had the following transfers: Transfer In General Fund Contingency Fund Capital Improvement Fund Non-major GovernmentalFunds Downtown Enhancement Fund Internal Service Funds Transfers Out General Capital Non -major Downtown Contingency ImprovementGovernmental Enhancement Parking Fund Fund Funds Fund Fund $ 640,318 640,3:17 728,887 $ 50,000 $ 85,856 53,684 1,312,468 Total $ 1,230,288 $ 3,72:1 $ 10,386 $ 1,244,395 708,423 175,547 7,348,741 815,864 864,743 53,684 :1,312,468 Total $ 3,375,674 $ 50,000 $ 85,856 $ 2,114,258 $ 3,72:1 $ 10,386 $ 5,639,895 61 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 5. INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS, Continued B. Fund Financial Statements, Continued Transfers, Continued In general, transfers are used to 1) transfer any unexpended balance in the General Fund according to the City's financial policies, 2) use unrestricted revenues collected in one fund to finance various programs accounted for in other funds in accordance with budgetary authorizations, and 3) to reimburse the General Fund for administration services provided to other funds. In the year ended June 30, 2006, the following one-time transfers were made: • The General Fund made transfers of $18,395 to Non -major governmental funds, $2,325 to the Downtown Enhancement Fund and $26,823 to the Internal Service funds to provide funding for changes to employee memoranda of understanding (MOU's); The General Fund made transfers of $10,492 to Non -major governmental funds, $1,359 to the Downtown Enhancement Fund and $5,009 to the Equipment Replacement Fund to provide funding for the annual required contribution for other post employment benefits (OPEB) for all city em ployees; Excess funds in the Retirement Stabilization Fund in the amount of $490,523 were transferred to the Contingency Fund to assist in reaching the goal established by the City's financial policies of 15% of General Fund operating budget appropriations at year end; > Excess funds in the Compensated Absences Fund in the amount of $217,900 were transferred to the Contingency Fund to assist in reaching the goal established by the City's financial policies of 15% of General Fund operating budget appropriations at year end; > The Contingency Fund made a transfer of $50,000 to the Bonnie Brae Utility Underground District Fund to close out the fund after the project was rejected by property owners in the proposed district; > The Capital Improvement Fund made a transfer of $85,856 to the Bonnie Brae Utility Underground District Fund to close out the fund after the project was rejected by property owners in the proposed district; > The General Fund made a transfer of $50,000 to the Downtown Enhancement Fund to finance a Centennial celebration to be held on the Downtown Plaza in 2007. 62 • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 6. CAPITAL ASSETS In accordance with GASB Statement No. 34, the City reports all capital assets, including infrastructure, in the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets. The City elected to use the "Basic Approach" as defined by GASB Statement No. 34 for infrastructure reporting. The basic approach records accumulated depreciation and depreciation expense. A. Government -Wide Financial Statements At June 30, 2006, the City's capital assets consisted of the following: Government Business -Type Activities Activities Total Non -Depreciable Assets: Land $ 17,552,077 $ 5,188,092 $ 22,740,169 Construction in progress 1,476,118 36,637 1,512,755 Total non -depreciable assets 19,028,195 Depreciable Assets: Buildings and structures 4,095,361 Improvements other than buildings 12,816,470 Machinery and equipment 2,493,898 Vehicles 2,925,101 Infrastructure 37,383,985 Total depreciable assets 59,714,815 5,22 4,729 24,252,924 5,978,998 5,6"10 19,267 10,074,359 12,822,080 2,513,165 2,925,7 01 37,383,985 6,003,875 65,718,690 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures (1,363,774) (776,748) (2,140,522) Improvements other than Buildings (3,480,484) (281) (3,480,765) Machinery and equipment (1,298,442) (8,837) (1,307,279) Vehicles (1,359,212) (1,359,212) Infrastructure (14,573,7.88) (74,573,188) Total accumulated depreciation (22,075,100) (785,866) (22,860,966) Total depreciable assets, net 37,639,715 5,218,009 42,857,724 Total capital assets $ 56,667,910 $ 10,442,738 $ 67,110,648 63 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 6. CAPITAL ASSETS, Continued A. Government -Wide Financial Statements, Continued The following is a summary of capital assets for governmental activities for the year ended June 30, 2006: Balance Balance July 1, 2005 Additions Deletions June 30, 2006 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 18,052,495 $ (500,418) $ 17,552,077 Construction in progress 6,708,223 $ 616,028 (5,848,133) 1,476,118 Total capital assets not being depreciated 24,760,718 616,028 (6,348,551) 19,028,195 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings and structures 3,548,424 546,937 4,095,361 Improvements other than buildings 6,906,525 5,909,945 12,816,470 Machinery and equipment 2,375,797 284,776 (166,675) 2,493,898 Vehicles 2,777,489 352,855 (205,243) 2,925,101 Infrastructure 36,637,731 746,254 37,383,985 Total capital assets being depreciated 52,245,966 7,840,767 (371,918) 59,714,815 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures (1,501,764) 137,990 (1,363,774) Improvements other than buildings (2,505,730) (974,754) (3,480,484) Machinery and equipment (1,229,069) (236,048) 166,675 (1,298,442) Vehicles (1,333,595) (230,860) 205,243 (1,359,212) Infrastructure (13,387,042) (1,186,146) (14,573,188) Total accumulated depreciation (19,957,200) (2,489,818) 371,918 (22,075,100) Total capital assets being depreciated, net 32,288,766 5,350,949 - 37,639,715 Total governmental activities $ 57,049,484 $ 5,966,977 $ (6,348,551) $ 56,667,910 The City allocated the depreciation expenses to departments/functions of the government as follows: General Government $ (186,256) Public Safety 191,332 Community Development 7,512 Culture and Recreation 20,347 Public Works 944,359 Infrastructure 1,186,148 Capital Assets held by the governments internal service funds are charged to the various functions based on their usage of the assets 326,376 Total Depreciation Expenses $ 2,489,818 The reclassification of certain assets and their associated depreciation during fiscal year 2005-06 resulted in a negative current year depreciation expense for the General Government function. 64 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 6. CAPITAL ASSETS, Continued A. Government -Wide Financial Statements, Continued The following is a summary of capital assets for business -type activities: Balance Balance July 1, 2005 Additions Deletions June 30, 2006 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 5,188,092 $ 5,188,092 Construction in progress 36,637 36,637 Total capital assets not being depreciated 5,224,729 $ - $ - 5,224,729 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings and structures 6,025,516 (46,518) Improvements other than buildings 14,447 (8,837) Machinery and equipment 38,649 (19,382) I nfrastructu re 235,942 (235,942) Total capital assets, being depreciated 6,314,554 5,978,998 5,610 19,267 (310,679) 6,003,875 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings and structures (619,129) (196,373) 38,754 (776,748) Improvements other than buildings (8,837) (281) 8,837 (281) Machinery and equipment (26,901) (1,318) 19,382 (8,837) Infrastructure (59,678) 59,678 Total accumulated depreciation (714,545) (197,972) 126,651 (785,866) Total capital assets being depreciated, net 5,600,009 (197,972) (184,028) 5,2:1.8,009 Total business -type activities $ 10,824,738 $ (797,972) $ (184,028) $ 7.0,442,738 Business -type activities depreciation expenses for capital assets for the year ended June 30, 2006 are as follows: Downtown enhancement $ 197,972 Total depreciation expense $ 197,972 There is no depreciation expense for the Parking Fund since it was combined with the General Fund in 2005-06. B. Fund Financial Statements The fund financial statements do not present general government capital assets. They are shown in the Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balances Sheet to the Government -Wide Statement of Net Assets located after the governmental fund balance sheet in the fund financial statements. 65 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 7. LONG-TERM DEBT A. Long -Term Debt with City Commitment The following is a summary of compensated absences payable transactions for the year ended June 30, 2006: Classification Balance Balance Due in Due in more July 1, 2005 Additions Retirements June 30, 2006 One Year than One Year Governmental Activities: Compensated absences $ 1,002,151 $ 1,213,730 $ (984,022) $ 1,231,859 $ 982,901 $ 248,958 Total $ 1,002,151 $ 1,213,730 $ (984,022) $ 1,231,859 $ 982,901 $ 248,958 The long-term portion of compensated absences payable has been accrued for the Governmental Activities on the Government -Wide Financial Statement. Typically, the General Fund (major fund), the Lighting and Landscaping District Fund, AB939 Fund and the Sewer Fund (non -major funds) have been used to liquidate the liability for compensated absences. There is no fixed payment schedule to pay these liabilities. The total amount of compensated absences payable at June 30, 2006, was $1,231,859. B. Long -Term Debt without City Comrnitinent At June 30, 2006, the following special assessment bonds are payable from the proceeds of the special assessment levied and collected on all real property within the special districts. The City is in no way obligated to repay the debt in the event of default and the debt is not recorded in the accompanying financial statements. 1998 Lower Pier Special Assessment Bonds In November 1997, limited obligation improvement bonds in the amount of $400,000 were issued for the Lower Pier Avenue Assessment District for street and sidewalk improvements in the downtown area. The City is in no way financially obligated for payments of the bonds, which are secured by private property in the district. The bonds will be repaid from assessments to the property owners as part of their annual property tax bill. The annual debt service requirements by year are as follows: Year Ending June 30, Principal Balance Interest Total 2007 $ 20,000 $ 19,175 $ 39,175 2008 20,000 17,875 37,875 2009 20,000 16,575 36,575 2010 20,000 15,275 35,275 2011 20,000 13,975 33,975 2012-2016 135,000 45,662 180,662 2017-2018 70,000 4,550 74,550 Total $ 305,000 $ 133,087 $ 438,087 66 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 7. LONG-TERM DEBT, Continued B. Long -Terni Debt without City Co-nunitrment, Continued 1999 Myrtle Utility Underground District Special Assessment Bonds In October 1999, limited obligation improvement bonds in the amount of $1,159,114 were issued for the Myrtle Avenue Utility Underground Assessment District for the undergrounding of utilities within the district. The City is in no way financially obligated for payment of the bonds, which are secured by private property in the district. The bonds will be repaid from assessments to the property owners as part of their annual property tax bill. The annual debt service requirements by year are as follows: Year Ending Balance June 30, Principal Interest Total 2007 $ 40,000 $ 45,147 $ 85,147 2008 45,000 43,105 88,105 2009 45,000 40,878 85,878 2010 50,000 35,477 88,477 2011 50,000 35,902 85,902 2012-2016 305,000 129,195 434,195 2017-2020 310,000 36,206 346,206 Total $ 845,000 $ 368,910 $ 1,213,910 1999 Loma Utility Underground District Special Assessment Bonds In October 1999, limited obligation improvement bonds in the amount of $1,324,653 were issued for the Lorna Drive Utility Underground Assessment District for the undergrounding of utilities within the district. The City is in no way financially obligated for payment of the bonds, which are secured by private property in the district. The bonds will be repaid from assessments to the property owners as part of their annual property tax bill. The annual debt service requirements by year are as follows: Year Ending June 30, Principal Balance Interest Total 2007 $ 50,000 $ 52,790 $ 102,790 2008 55,000 50,267 105,267 2009 55,000 47,545 102,545 2010 55,000 44,767 99,767 2011 60,000 41,805 101,805 2012-2016 350,000 156,425 506,425 2017-2020 365,000 43,535 408,535 Total $ 990,000 $ 437,134 $ 1,427,134 67 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 7. LONG-TERM DEBT, Continued B. Long -Terra Debt without City Commitment, Continued 2004 Beach Drive Utility Underground Assessment District Special Assessment Bonds In July 2004, limited obligation improvement bonds in the amount of $404,341. were issued for the Beach Drive Utility Underground Assessment District for the undergrounding of utilities within the district. The City is in no way financially obligated for payment of the bonds, which are secured by private property in the district. The bonds will be repaid from assessments to the property owners as part of their annual property tax bill. The annual debt service requirements by year are as follows: Year Ending Balance June 30, Principal Interest Total 2007 $ 13,129 $ 18,542 $ 31,664 2008 13,752 17,897 31,649 2009 14,412 17,291 31,633 2010 15,104 16,513 31,617 2011 15,828 15,770 31,598 2012-2016 91,296 66,406 157,702 2017-2021 :115,412 41,710 157,122 2022-2025 113,923 11,257 125,180 Total $ 392,849 $ 205,316 $ 598,165 2005 Bayview Drive Utility Underground Assessment District Improvement Bonds In February 2005, limited obligation improvement bonds in the amount of $951,667 were issued for the Bayview Drive Utility Underground Assessment District for the undergrounding of utilities within the district. The City is in no way financially obligated for payment of the bonds, which are secured by private property in the district. The bonds will be repaid from assessments to the property owners as part of their annual property tax bill. The annual debt service requirements by year are as follows: Year Ending Balance June 30, Principal Interest Total 2007 $ 31,138 $ 39,784 $ 70,922 2008 32,462 38,433 70,895 2009 33,841 37,024 70,865 2010 35,280 35,555 70,835 2011 36,779 34,024 70,803 2012-2016 208,714 144,772 353,486 2017-2021 256,999 95,461 352,460 2022-2026 316,454 34,742 351,196 Total $ 951,667 $ 459,795 $ :1,411,462 68 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 8. OTHER REQUIRED FUND DISCLOSURES A. Deficit Fund Balances At June 30, 2006, the following funds had deficit fund balance: Bayview DriveDistrict Administrative Expense $ (10) Beach Drive Assessment District Administrative Expense $ (75) Beach Drive 2 Underground District $ (65,520) Prospect Utility Underground District $ (200,000) The deficits in the Bayview Drive District Administrative Expense and Beach Drive Assessment District Administrative Expense funds represent unanticipated delinquency management costs which will be recouped with 2006-07 assessments. The deficits in the Beach Drive 2 Underground District and the Prospect Utility Underground District funds represent "start up" costs for the districts and will be eliminated once the districts have been formed and assessment collections are received. If the districts are not approved, the costs will be borne by the City and transferred to another fund. B. Excess of Expenditures over Appropriations For the year ended June 30, 2006, expenditures exceeded budget in the Special Revenue Contingency Fund in the amount of $50,000 and the Special Revenue Bonnie Brae Underground District Fund in the amount of $8,925 because the project was rejected by property owners and all district costs needed to be paid in order to close out the fund at year end. C. Fund Closures Three funds were permanently closed during fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. The Enterprise Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund since the practice was to transfer any excess funds remaining after paying all Parking Fund costs to the General Fund. Combining the funds eliminates the need to make this transfer and presents a clearer picture of how General Fund costs are funded. The Special Revenue Loma Utility Underground Improvement Fund was closed because pursuant to Section 10427 of the California Municipal Improvement Act of 1.913, the funds were deemed to be surplus funds for the district. To close the fund, a one-time credit was processed for all outstanding assessments and refunds were processed for those parcels that had previously been paid in full. The Special Revenue Bonnie Brae Underground District Fund was closed because the project was rejected by property owners. Transfers were made from the Special Revenue Contingency Fund and the Special Revenue Capital Improvement Fund to cover all costs for the project. 69 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 9. RISK MANAGEMENT The City maintains an internal service fund to account for the City's general liability and workers' compensation claims, automobile, property, and unemployment insurance. The City is self-insured for individual workers' compensation claims up to $500,000 and for each general liability claim up to $250,000. The City is insured above the self-insured retention for general liability insurance coverage, up to a maximum of $10,000,000 per occurrence, as a member of the Independent Cities Risk Management Authority (ICRMA). Settled claims have not exceeded this coverage in any of the past five years. ICRMA is a joint exercise of powers authority organized and operating pursuant to the California Government Code. ICRMA was formed in 1980 pursuant to joint exercise of power agreements for insurance and risk management purposes, which, as amended, enable ICRMA to provide programs of risk sharing, insurance and risk management services in connection with liability, property, and workers' compensation claims. ICRMA's annual budget is based on estimated payroll, historical loss experience and self insured retention for each participating member. The budgeted weighted risk sharing percentage is one element of determining the City's annual premium but does not necessarily represent the percentage participation in the losses of the ICRMA. Budgeted weighted risk sharing percentages for the last five years are listed below: 2.65% weighted risk sharing percentage for July 1, 2005 to July 1, 2006 2.76% weighted risk sharing percentage for July 1, 2004 to July 1, 2005 3.93% weighted risk sharing percentage for July 1, 2003 to July 1, 2004 2.57% weighted risk sharing percentage for July 1, 2002 to July 1, 2003 3.10% weighted risk sharing percentage for July 1, 2001 to July 1, 2002 The City's premiums to ICRMA in the amount of $387,846 for the fiscal year 2005-2006 are in accordance with formulas established by ICRMA. The City is liable for possible additional assessments and withdrawal costs under terms of the membership agreement, however there has never been an additional assessment since the pool was formed. The City has entered into contracts with third party administrators who supervise and administer the City's general liability and workers' compensation insurance program. Claim loss estimates are determined by the third party administrator based on the nature of an individual claim. The loss estimates include amounts for future compensation, medical, legal and administrative fees. The City also includes estimated claims incurred but not reported (IBNR) provided by an actuary. Reimbursement requests are submitted to the City on a monthly basis as claims are paid. 70 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 9. RISK MANAGEMENT, Continued The workers' compensation and general liability claims payable of $3,855,849 reported at June 30, 2006, are based on the requirements of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 10, which requires that a liability for claims be reported if information prior to the issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability has been incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Changes in the Fund's claims liability amounts were as follows: Current Year Beginning Claims and End Amounts of Year Changes in Claim of Year Due within Liability Estimates Payments Liability One Year 1Norkers' Compensation 2003-2004 $ :1,769,131 $ 2,337,918 $ (1,543,083) $ 2,563,966 $ 453,000 2004-2005 2,563,966 1,566,804 (1,093,213) 3,037,557 690,000 2005-2006 3,037,557 676,379 (712,689) 3,001,247 746,000 General Liabilih/ 2003-2004 573,502 (110,046) (92,781) 370,675 184,000 2004-2005 370,675 983,340 (736,082) 617,933 202,000 2005-2006 617,933 :1,046,991 (810,322) 854,602 302,000 Detailed financial information may be obtained from the ICRMA Program Administrator located at 3760 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 360, Long Beach, California 90806. 10. RETIREMENT PLANS A. Public Employee Retirement System Plan► Descriptio►'i The City contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS), a cost-sharing multiple -employer defined benefit pension plan. CaIPERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost -of -living adjustments, and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. CaIPERS acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by State statute and City ordinance. Copies of the CaIPERS annual financial report may be obtained from their Executive Office located at 400 P Street, Sacramento, California 9581.4. 71 • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 10. RETIREMENT PLANS, Continued A. Public Employee Retirement System, Continued Funding Policy City employees are required by State statute to contribute 7% for miscellaneous employees and 9% for safety employees of their annual covered salary. As a negotiated benefit, the City makes the contributions required of City employees on their behalf. Those contributions amounted to $796,792 for the year ended June 30, 2006. The City, as the employer, is required to contribute for fiscal year 2005-2006 at actuarially determined rates; which are applied to annual covered payroll. The 2005-2006 rate is 13.968% for miscellaneous employees, 49.252% for police employees and 37.176% for fire employees. The contribution requirements of City employees and the City employer are established and may be amended by CaIPERS. Annual Pension Cost For fiscal year 2005-2006, the City's annual pension cost of $2,978,704 for CaIPERS was equal to the City's required and actual contributions, of which $686,428 is for the miscellaneous plan, $1,583,411 for the police plan and $708,865 for the fire plan. The required contribution was determined as part of the June 30, 2003, actuarial valuation using the entry age normal actuarial cost method. The actuarial assumptions included (a) 7.75% investment rate of return (net of administrative expenses); (b) projected salary increases ranging from 3.75% to 13.15% for miscellaneous employees and public safety police employees, and 3.75% to 14.45% for public safety fire employees depending on age, service, and type of employment, and (c) 2% per year cost -of -living adjustments. Both (a) and (b) included an inflation component of 3.0%. The actuarial value of PERS assets was determined using techniques that smooth the effects of short-term volatility in the market value of investments over a three year period. PERS unfunded actuarial accrued liability (or surplus) is being amortized as a level percentage of projected payroll on a closed basis. The amortization period at June 30, 2003 was 20 years for public safety police employees, 20 years for public safety fire employees, and 20 years for miscellaneous employees for prior and current service unfunded liability. THREE-YEAR TREND INFORMATION FOR PERS Fiscal Year Miscellaneous Plan Pension Cost APC Net Pension (APC) Contributed Obligation 6/30/2004 100% 6/30/2005 $ 174,915 :100% 6/30/2006 686,428 100% Fiscal Year Police Plan Annual Percentage of Pension Cost APC Net Pension (APC) Contribu ted Obligation 6/30/2004 $ 827,733 100% 6/30/ 2005 1,123,987 100% 6/30/ 2006 1,583,411 100% 72 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 10. RETIREMENT PLANS, Continued A. Public Employee Retirement System, Continued Annual Pension Cost, Continued Fire Plan Annual Percentage of Pension Cost APC Net Pension Fiscal Year (APC) Contributed Obligation 6/30/2004 $ 35:1,984 100% 6/30/2005 585,337 100% 6/30/2006 708,865 100% B. Other Post -Employment Benefits In addition to the pension benefits described above, the City provides post -employment health care benefits, in accordance with negotiated Memoranda of Understanding. Prior to July 1, 2000 these benefits were available to employees represented by the Management Association, General and Supervisory Bargaining Unit represented by the California Teamsters Public, Professional and Medical Employees' Union and the Professional and Administrative Employee Association. Eligible employees were service retirees, age 55 or over, with a minimum of ten years continuous service with the City. Employees who retired from September 1, 1988 through August 31., 1991 were provided: 1) $60 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) for a minimum of ten years continuous service with the City, or 2) $80 (or the cost of policy, whichever is less) for a minimum of twenty years continuous service, payable to the medical insurance provider. Employees who retired from September 1, 1991 to June 30, 2000 were provided: 1) $40 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) for a minimum of ten years continuous service with the City, or 2) $60 respectively (or the cost of policy, whichever is less) for a minimum of twenty years continuous service, payable to the medical insurance provider. For employees retiring on or after July 1, 2002, post employment benefits are as follows for each bargaining • group: General and Supervisory Bargaining Unit For service retirement at age 55 or over employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of: 1) $80 per month (or the cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of ten years of continuous service with the City, or 2) $140 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of 20 years of service. For service retirement after July 1, 2005, the above amounts changed to $150.00 and $250.00 respectively. 73 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 10. RETIREMENT PLANS, Continued B. Other Post -Employment Benefits, Continued Professional and Administrative En for/ees Association For service retirement at age 55 or over employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of: 1) $80 per month (or the cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of ten years of continuous service with the City, or 2) $140 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of 20 years of service. For service retirement after July 1, 2005, employees age 55 with a minimum of ten years of service receive 3% of the health insurance premium for each year of service up to a maximum of $250.00 per month. Hermosa Beach Management Association For service retirement at age 55 or over employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of: 1) $60 per month (or the cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of ten years of continuous service with the City, or 2) Cost of policy for employee only with a minimum of 20 years of service. Police Management Association For service retirement: 1) At age 55 or over employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of $200 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of fifteen years of continuous service with the City, or 2) At age 50 employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of $200 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of 20 years of continuous service. For service retirement July 1, 2005 or later: 1) At age 50, or for disability retirement (no age restriction), employee will receive an amount up to the employee only HMO premium available through the City's medical insurance provider with a minimum of twenty years total full-time sworn police service with the City, or 2) At age 55, or for disability retirement (no age restriction), employee will receive an amount up to the employee only HMO premium available through the City's medical insurance provider with a minimum of fifteen years total full-time service with the City. 74 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 10. RETIREMENT PLANS, Continued B. Other Post -Employment Benefits, Continued Police Officers Association For service retirement prior to July 1, 2003: 1) At age 55 or over employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of $200 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is Tess) with a minimum of fifteen years of total full-time service with the City, or 2) At age 50 employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of $200 per month (or cost of policy, whichever is less) with a minimum of 20 years of total full-time service. For service retirement July 1, 2003 or later: 1) At age 50, or for disability retirement (no age restriction), employee will receive an amount up to the employee only HMO premium available through the City's medical insurance provider with a minimum of twenty years total full-time sworn police service with the City, or 2) At age 55, or for disability retirement (no age restriction), employee will receive an amount up to the employee only I -IMO premium available through the City's medical insurance provider with a minimum of fifteen years total frill -time service with the City. Firefighters Association For service retirement at age 50 or disability retirement (no age restriction) employee will receive a medical insurance supplement in the amount of: 1) $150 per month \vith a minimum of ten years of service with the City, or 2) $250 per month with a minimum of 20 years of service. Estimated benefits payable are budgeted each fiscal year. For fiscal year 2005-2006, nineteen retirees received benefits at a total cost of $31,700. An actuary was hired to determine the annual required contribution for benefits for police officers retiring after July 1, 2003. A temporary agency fund was established in 2003-2004 to account for contributions and expenditures related to these benefits. In June 2005, an actuary was hired to determine the annual required contributions for all city employees retiring after June 30, 2005. In 2005-06, these benefits were added to the temporary agency fund previously mentioned. The City is in the process of establishing an agreement with an outside party, for the administration of these funds. For fiscal year 2005-2006, three retirees received benefits at a total cost of $8,645. 75 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES A. Cornrnitrnents The City had several outstanding or planned construction projects as of June 30, 2006. These projects are evidenced by contractual commitments with contractors and include: Commitment Project Spent to Date Remaining Infrastructure $ 292,000 $ 224,761 Community Center Improvements 503,000 178,321 Parks Improvements 639,000 161,887 Total $ 1,434,000 $ 564,969 The infrastructure projects include both street and sewer projects that are funded by multiple funds including the Proposition C Fund, the Capital Improvement Fund and the Sewer Fund. The Community Center improvement project is funded by the Capital Improvement Fund. Parks improvement projects are funded by the Parks/Rec Facility Tax Fund, the 4% Utility Users Tax Fund, the Building Lnprovement Fund and the Capital Improvement Fund. B. Contingencies The City is a defendant in a number of lawsuits, which have arisen in the normal course of business. While substantial damages are alleged in some of these actions, their outcome cannot be predicted with certainty. 12. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS MacPherson Oil Project The City entered into a lease with MacPherson Oil in 1986 to allow oil drilling from the City Yard site. During the time that ensued, MacPherson was taking the necessary steps to obtain all required environmental reviews and permits. In 1995.the voters enacted a new ordinance by way of an initiative, entitled Proposition E, to prohibit oil drilling in the City. The issue of whether Proposition E applied to MacPherson's project was the subject of a lawsuit initiated by Proposition E proponents. The City and MacPherson argued that Proposition E did not preclude MacPherson from exercising its rights under the lease. The Court of Appeals, in a final opinion, ruled otherwise, and the oil project is now dead as a result of that decision. MacPherson has now sued the City, by way of a cross-complaint in the legal action referred to above, for damages due to the alleged breach of contract caused by Proposition E. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment in the trial court. In its motion, MacPherson contended, among other things, that enactment of Proposition E worked a breach of its lease with the City, entitling it to damages for lost profits. It claims damages in excess of $100 million. In its motion, the City contended that because the Court of Appeals has ruled Proposition E not to be an unconstitutional impairment of contract, it cannot work a breach. The City further contended that the passage of Proposition E made performance of the lease impossible. Finally, the City contended that if MacPherson is entitled to any damages, it is limited to restitution, and not lost profits. 76 • • City of Hermosa Beach Notes to Basic Financial Statements, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 12. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS, Continued MacPherson Oil Project, Continued In December 2003, the trial court granted the City's motion in its entirety, holding that MacPherson is not entitled to proceed against the City for damages. MacPherson appealed this ruling to the Court of appeals, and in an unpublished decision issued in November 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed, rejecting many of the City's defenses and remanding the case back to the trial court for trial. The City's petition to the Supreme Court for review of this decision was denied. The case returned to the trial court in early 2006 and was assigned to a new judge, JoAnne O'Donnell, because MacPherson filed a timely objection to the previous Superior Court judge. MacPherson filed a motion to amend its cross-complaint to add causes of action for inverse condemnation and civil rights. Judge O'Donnell denied the motion, ruling that it was barred by laches due to the passage of time since the original cross-complaint was filed. Since then, the case has been inactive -- the court has not scheduled a status conference and neither party has yet embarked on discovery. No trial date has been set. The City has engaged new trial counsel to defend it in this case, the Century City law firm of Bird Marella. The new lawyers have been reviewing documents and coming up to speed on the case, and evaluating legal issues. The firm recently prepared a discovery plan. At this juncture, it is not likely that the case will go to trial until late 2007, at the earliest. The City will likely seek to bifurcate the trial, in order first to litigate the issue of whether MacPherson bore the risk of a change in the law such as Proposition E. If the trial court determines as a factual matter that it did, then the City will prevail, and it will not be necessary to try damages. If the trial court determines that MacPherson did not bear that risk, then it will be necessary to try the case for damages. At that point, the court will be asked to determine whether MacPherson is entitled only to restitution or whether it may seek lost profits, and this determination will be based on whether an assessment of lost profits is too speculative. The City continues to vigorously defend the case. The City's new counsel met with MacPherson's counsel to informally discuss settlement, but no progress was made. It is possible that the parties will agree to mediation, if that would prove useful in resolving the case. Both the cost of defense and a potential adverse judgment in this case could have a material effect on the financial position of the City. 77 • • This page intentionally left blank. 78 s • REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 79 • • City of Hermosa Beach Required Supplementary Information For the year ended June 30, 2006 1. FINANCIAL POLICIES In 2001 - 2002, the City established financial goals for the following funds: Contingency Fund - Goal of fund balance equal to 15% of the General Fund operating budget appropriations for economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies. Insurance Fund - Goal of $3,000,000 in retained earnings for claims reserves and catastrophic losses. Equipment Replacement Fund - Goal of retained earnings equal to the accumulated amount calculated for all equipment, based on replacement cost and useful life of equipment. Compensated Absences Fund - Goal of fund balance equal to 50% funding for accrued liabilities for employee vacation, sick and compensatory time. In 2005-2006, the goal for this fund was changed to 25% funding for accrued liabilities for employee vacation, sick and compensatory time. Generally, any funds remaining unspent at year-end in the General Fund transfer equally to the Contingency Fund, Insurance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund and the Capital Improvement Fund. As goals are met according to the above policy, transfers may be redirected to the Capital Improvement Fund (since there are never enough capital improvement funds) or other funds, as the need arises. 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING Budgets are annually adopted for all governmental and proprietary fund types on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. The City is required by its municipal code to adopt an annual budget on or before June 30 for the ensuing fiscal year. From the effective date of the budget, the amounts become the "amoral appropriated budget." The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, department and division. The City Council may amend the budget by motion during the fiscal year. Expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations at the fund level. The City Manager is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts between departments within the same fund, however, any transfers between funds or revisions that alter total appropriations of any fund require City Council approval. The legal level of control is therefore at the fund level. An example of this would be the Finance Department, which has two divisions, Finance Administration, funded by the General Fund and Finance Cashier, funded by the Parking Fund. The City Manager may approve a transfer from Finance Administration to another department within the General Fund, however, a transfer from Finance Administration to Finance Cashier would require City Council approval because the divisions are in two different funds. Supplemental appropriations, which increase appropriations, were made during the fiscal year, therefore, "final" budgeted revenue and appropriation amounts shown in the financial statements represent the original budget, modified for adjustments during the year. Appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year. 80 • • City of Hermosa Beach Required Supplementary Information, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING, Continued Encumbrances - Under encumbrance accounting, purchase orders, contracts and other commitments for expenditures are recorded to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation. Encumbrance accounting is employed as an extension of formal budgetary accounting. Unexpended appropriations lapse at year- end. Following are the budget comparison schedules for the General Fund and applicable major special revenue funds for which an annual operating budget was adopted. Budgetary Comparison Schedule - General Fund Fund Balance, July 1, 2005 . Resources (inflows): Property taxes 7,573,866 8,124,275 8,361,888 Other taxes 8,059,331 8,073,459 8,697,645 Licenses and permits 618,204 656,228 868,085 Fines and forfeitures 1,814,026 1,704,975 1,588,815 Use of money and property 260,070 269,600 312,248 Intergovernmental 187,070 557,921 559,933 Charges for services 3,600,802 3,432,162 3,765,895 Miscellaneous 58,708 104,443 71,318 Interest earned on investments 64,066 93,317 117,730 Transfers in 1,234,009 1,244,395 1,244,395 Positive (Negative) Budgeted Amounts Actual Variance with Original Final Amounts Final Budget 198,923 $ 476,831 $ 476,831 $ Amount available for appropriation 23,669,075 24,737,606 26,064,783 237,613 624,186 211,857 (116,160) 42,648 2,012 333,733 (33,125) 24,413 1,327,177 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Legislative and legal 865,888 1,004,687 963,031 41,656 General government 2,558,858 2,226,125 2,116,181 109,944 Public safety 14,343,876 14,987,169 14,186,925 800,244 Community development 1,335,221 1,413,312 1,327,389 85,923 Culture and recreation 1,029,316 1,122,322 1,105,544 16,778 Public works 2,620,193 2,750,415 2,540,396 210,019 Capital outlay 44,300 152,952 79,598 73,354 Transfers out 700,000 3,375,675 3,375,674 1 Total charges to appropriations 23,497,652 27,032,657 25,694,738 1,337,919 Fund Balance, June 30, 2006 $ 171,423 $ (2,295,051) $ 370,045 $ 2,665,096 81 • • City of Hermosa Beach Required Supplementary Information, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING, Continued Budgetary Comparison Schedule - Contingency Find Positive (Negative) Budgeted Amounts Actual Variance with Original Final Amounts Final Budget Fund Balance, July 1, 2005 $ 2,710,518 $ 2,719,424 $ 2,719,424 $ Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments 60,296 87,569 116,763 29,194 Transfers In 1,348,741 1,348,741 Amount available for appropriation 2,770,814 4,155,734 4,184,928 29,194 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Transfers out 50,000 (50,000) Total charges to appropriations - - 50,000 (50,000) Fund Balance, June 30, 2006 $ 2,770,814 $ 4,155,734 $ 4,134,928 $ (20,806) 82 • • City of Hermosa Beach Required Supplementary Information, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING, Continued Budgetary Comparison Schedule - Capital Improvement Fund Positive (Negative) Budgeted Amounts Actual Variance with Original Final Amounts Final Budget Fund Balance, July 1, 2005 $ 3,245,278 $ 4,482,955 $ 4,482,955 $ Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Transfers in 73,358 181,455 193,225 11,770 175,000 815,865 815,864 (1) Amount available for appropriation 3,493,636 5,480,275 5,492,044 11,769 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 3,291,902 4,481,457 1,028,361 3,453,096 Transfers out 85,856 (85,856) Total charges to appropriations 3,291,902 4,481,457 1,114,217 3,367,240 Fund Balance, June 30, 2006 $ 201,734 $ 998,818 $ 4,377,827 $ 3,379,009 83 • • This page intentionally left blank. 84 • • SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 85 • • This page intentionally left blank. 86 • • NON -MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Special Revenue Funds: Lighting and Landscaping District Fund - This fund is used to account for the Lighting Assessment District, which was created for street lighting/ median maintenance purposes pursuant to Street and highway Code 22500-22679. State Gas Tax Fund - This fund is used to account for the City's share of state gasoline tax, which is restricted for use on public streets. Restricted Transportation Development Act funds from Los Angeles County Transportation Commission for the Strand Walkway Project and Bicycle Path Project are also accounted for in this fund. AB 939 Fund - This fund is used to account for the fees collected in connection with solid waste collection. The fees are used to implement a Source Reduction and Recycling Element and a Household Waste Element. Compensated Absences Fund - This fund is used to account for funds set aside to provide for liabilities associated with vacation time, sick time, etc. accumulated by employees. Prop A Open Space Fund - This fund is used to account for funds generated by passage of the L.A. County Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond Act by County voters for the purpose of improving parks and recreational facilities. Tyco Fund - This fund is used to account for funds received from an easement granted for construction of a transpacific, submarine fiber optic cable system originating in Japan with a landing in I-Iermosa Beach. The project will provide additional capacity. Tyco Tidelands Fund - This fund is used to account for the portion of the funds specific to the tidelands and submerged lands received from an easement granted for construction of a transpacific, submarine fiber optic cable system originating in Japan with a landing in Hermosa Beach that were set aside to build one new restroom and rehabilitate three existing restrooms at the beach. Parks and Recreation Facilities Tax Fund - This fund is used to account for revenue from subdivision fees and park or recreation facility tax fees on new dwellings. Generally, the funds are to be used for acquisition, improvements and expansion of park or recreational facilities. 4% Utility Users Tax Fund - This fund is used to account for funds remaining from a 4% utility users tax which was pledged for lease payments relating to certificates of participation (COPs) for the purchase of open space. The COPs were defeased in 1.997. Remaining funds must be spent for open space purposes. Building Improvement Fund - This fund is intended to provide funds for ongoing building maintenance. Bayview Drive Administrative Expense Fund - This fund temporarily holds funds for payment of administrative expenses for the assessment district. These funds are invested but interest is not allocated to this fund because it is not required by the bond documents. Lower Pier Administrative Expense Fund - This fund temporarily holds funds for payment of administrative expenses for the assessment district. These funds are invested but interest is not allocated to this fund because it is not required by the bond documents. 87 • • NON -MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, Continued Special Revenue Fends, Continued: Myrtle District Administrative Expense Fund - This fund is used to account for all administrative expenditures required for the Myrtle Avenue Utility Underground Special Assessment District. Loma District Administrative Expense Fund - This fund is used to account for all administrative expenditures required for the Loma Drive Utility Underground Special Assessment District. Beach Drive Assessment District Administrative Expense Fund - This fund is used to account for all administrative expenditures required for the Loma Drive Utility Underground Special Assessment District. Community Development Block Grant Fund - This fund is used to account for funds received for participation in the federal block grant program. Projects must be approved by the County CDBG Commission. Proposition "A" Transit Fund - Transit revenue consists primarily of Proposition A fund (the 1/2 cent sales tax for Los Angeles County transportation purposes). The City currently operates a Dial -a -Ride program for seniors, a taxi voucher program, a commuter bus, special event and after school program shuttles and subsidizes bus passes for senior citizens and students. Proposition "C" Transit Fund - The Proposition C Fund is a fund which was added during 1992 to account for funds allocated from the voter -approved 1/2 cent sales tax. Funds must be used for transit purposes. Grants Fund - This fund is used to account for State and Federal grants for specific projects. Office of Traffic Safety Grant Fund - This fund is used to account for a grant from the State of California that addresses decreasing alcohol and hit and run collisions and increasing seat belt, child safety seat and bicycle helmet use through education and enforcement. Air Quality Management District Fund - This fund is used to account for funds distributed by the South Coast Air Quality Management district. The revenues are restricted to programs which promote reduction in air pollution from motor vehicles. Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (COPS) - This fund is used to account for funds received from the Citizen Option for Public Safety (COPS) program, established by the State Legislature in fiscal year 1996-1997. Funds must be used for front line municipal police services and must supplement and not supplant existing funding. California Law Enforcement Equipment Program Fund (CLEEP) - Funds received for the purchase of high technology law enforcement equipment. Taskforce for Regional Auto Theft Prevention (TRAP) Fund - Funds provided by a $1 fee on vehicle• registration implemented by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisor for a program to deter, investigate and prosecute vehicle theft in Los Angeles County. Sewer Fund - This fund is used to account for funds derived from a portion of the 6% utility user tax and miscellaneous services charges. Funds are spent on the Sewer/Storm Drain Department and capital sewer projects. 88 • • NON -MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, Continued Special Revenue Funds, Continued: Asset Seizure and Forfeiture Fund - This fund is used to account for property seized as a result of illegal activity and forfeited to the Police Department. Funds must be used for law enforcement purposes to supplement, not replace or decrease, existing appropriations. Fire Protection Fund - This fund is used to account for fire flow fees which are used to upgrade and enhance the fire flow capabilities of the fire protection system in the City and for upgrades to fire facilities. Retirement Stabilization Fund - This fund is used to account for funds set aside for use when retirement rates are unstable and have therefore increased beyond expectations. Artesia Boulevard Relinquishment Fund - This fund is used to track the costs related to the transfer ownership of Artesia Boulevard from the State to the City. During the fiscal year 2000-01, the State of California determined an estimated cost for the rehabilitation of the street which will be contributed to the City as a part of the transfer of ownership. Beach Drive 2 Underground District Fund - This fund is used to account for funds set aside for the creation of a new utility undergrounding district. The expenditures in this fund will be reimbursed to the City upon formation of the district. Myrtle Utility Underground Improvement Fund - This fund is used to account for expenditures relating to the cost for utility undergrounding in the special assessment district. It is also used to account for proceeds from bonds sold to finance the cost of the undergrounding. The bonds are secured by liens against real property within the district and will be repaid from assessments against the property. The City is not obligated in any way with respect to the bonds. Longa Utility Underground Improvement Fund - This fund is used to account for expenditures relating to the cost for utility undergrounding in the special assessment district. It is also used to account for proceeds from bonds sold to finance the cost of the undergrounding. The bonds are secured by liens against real property within the district and will be repaid from assessments against the property. The City is not obligated in any way with respect to the bonds. Bayview Drive Underground District Improvement Fund- This fund is used to account for expenditures relating to the cost for utility undergrounding in the special assessment district. It is also used to account for proceeds from bonds sold to finance the cost of the undergrounding. The bonds are secured by liens against real property within the district and will be repaid from assessments against the property. The City is not obligated in any way with respect to the bonds. Bonnie Brae Underground District Fund - This fund is used to account for funds set aside for the creation of a new utility undergrounding district. Since the district was rejected by residents in 2005-06, funds were transferred from the Capital Improvement and Contingency Funds to close out the fund. Beach Drive Underground District Irnproverment Fund - This fund is used to account for expenditures relating to the cost for utility undergrounding in the special assessment district. It is also used to account for proceeds from bonds sold to finance the cost of the undergrounding. The bonds are secured by liens against real property within the district and will be repaid from assessments against the property. The City is not obligated in any way with respect to the bonds. Prospect Utility Underground District Fund - This fund is used to account for funds set aside for the creation of a new utility undergrounding district. The expenditures in this fund will be reimbursed to the City upon formation of the district. 89 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Balance Sheet Non -Major Governmental Funds June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Funds Lighting and Landscaping State District Gas Tax Prop A Compensated Open Tyco A13 939 Absences Space Tyco Tidelands ASSETS Cash and investments $ 103,374 $ 98,664 $ 322,347 $ 268,481 $ 3 $ 225,166 $ 265,021 Reimbursable grants receivable Interest receivable on investments 1,497 1,417 4,679 3,503 3,850 Other accounts receivable 24,605 25,403 4,750 Property taxes receivable 11,944 Due from other funds Other assets Total assets LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES $ 141,420 $ 125,484 $ 331,776 $ 268,481 $ 3 $ 228,669 $ 268,871 Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 39,700 $ 22,464 $ 16,268 Accrued wages and compensated absences 12,986 4,848 Due to other funds Deferred revenue 11,944 Advances to other funds Other liabilities $ 76,326 $ 6,797 75,000 Total liabilities 64,630 22,464 • 21,116 $ 151,326 6,797 Fund Balances: Reserved: Re -appropriations 7,700 15,420 Bike paths 11,158 Traffic congestion relief 89,918 Unreserved, designated Unreserved, undesignated Special revenue 69,090 1,944 310,660 268,481 3 61,923 262,074 Total fund balances 76,790 103,020 310,660 268,481 3 77,343 262,074 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 141,420 $ 125,484 $ 331,776 $ 268,481 $ 3 $ 228,669 $ 268,871 90 • • Special Revenue Funds Beach Drive Community Parks and Bayview Dr Lower Pier Myrtle Dist Loma Dist Assessment Development Recreation 4% Utility Building Ad min Admin Aclmin Admin Dist Admin Block Facilities Users Tax Improvement Expense Expense Expense Expense Expense Grant $ 285,879 $ 30,015 $ 4,907 $ 340 $ 1,556 $ 8,450 $ 11,446 $ 354 4,091 455 54 134 160 $ 56,450 $ 289,970 $ 30,470 $ 4,961 $ 340 $ . 1,556 8,584 $ 11,606 $ 354 $ 56,450 $ 9,416 $ 2,811 $ 404 $ 350 $ 335 $ 444 $ 656 $ 429 $ 53,318 3,127 9,416 2,811 404 350 335 444 656 429 56,445 15,000 265,554 27,659 4,557 (10) 1,221 8,140 10,950 (75) 5 280,554 27,659 4,557 (10) 1,221 8,140 10,950 (75) 5 $ 289,970 $ 30,470 $ 4,961 $ 340 $ 1,556 $ 8,584 $ 11,606 $ 354 $ 56,450 91 (Continued) • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Balance Sheet, Continued Non -Major Governmental Funds, Continued June 30, 2006 ASSETS Cash and investments Reimbursable grants receivable Interest receivable on investments Other accounts receivable Property taxes receivable Due from other funds Other assets Total assets LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities: Accounts payable Accrued wages and compensated absences Due to other funds Deferred revenue Advances from other funds Other liabilities Total liabilities Special Revenue Funds Proposition "A" Proposition "C" Transit Transit Grants California Law Office of Air Supplemental Enforcement Traffic Quality Law Equipment Safety Management Enforcement Program Grant District Services (CLEEP) $ 490,915 $ 1,482,436 $ 59,194 $ 17,545 7,139 21,552 2,854 2,877 $ 65,558 $ 133,409 $ 5,610 963 1,925 80 6,132 $ 503,785 $ :1,503,988 $ 59,194 $ 17,545 $ 72,653 $ 135,334 $ 5,690 $ 29,067 $ 20,881 $ 531 $ 15,107 290 1 (3) $ (7) 49,754 2,438 $ 119 29,357 20,882 50,282 17,545 (7) $ 119 Fund Balances: Reserved: Re -appropriations 8,54:1 56,137 Bike paths Traffic Congestion Relief Unreserved, designated Unreserved, undesignated Special revenue 474,428 1,483,106 371 72,660 79,197 5,57:1 Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances 474,428 1,483,106 8,912 72,660 135,334 5,571 $ 503,785 $ 1,503,988 $ 59,194 $ 17,545 $ 72,653 $ 135,334 $ 5,690 92 • • Special Revenue Funds Taskforce for Regional Auto Theft Prevention Sewer Artesia Asset BIvd. Beach Drive 2 Myrtle Utility Lonia Utility Seizure and Fire Retirement Relinquish- Underground Underground Underground Forfeiture Protection Stabilization ment District Improvement Improvement $ 99,241 $ 864,218 $ 66,141 $ 190,619 $ 1,027,223 $ 383,499 $ 8,240 14,653 963 2,754 14,948 5,642 133 10,810 (851) 148,929 99,241 $ 1,038,610 $ 66,253 $ 193,373 $ 1,042,171 $ 389,141 $ $ 8,373 $ $ 86,138 $ 15,280 $ 5,631 24,535 93,610 $ 65,520 99,241 110,673 $ - $ $ 15,280 65,520 $ $ 744,256 20,000 76,531 117,956 10,719 183,681 35,534 116,842 1,042,171 255,905 (65,520) 8,373 927,937 66,253 193,373 1,042,171 373,861 (65,520) 8,373 $ 99,241 $ 1,038,610 $ 66,253 $ 193,373 $ 1,042,171 $ 389,141 $ - $ 8,373 $ (Continued) 93 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Balance Sheet, Continued Non -Major Governmental Funds, Continued June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Funds Bonnie Brae Prospect Bayview Utility Beach Drive Utility Total Other Underground Underground Underground Underground Governmental District District District District Funds ASSETS Cash and investments $ 192,096 Reimbursable grants receivable Interest receivable on investments 2,781 Other accounts receivable Property taxes receivable Due from other funds Other assets Total assets LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities: Accounts payable Accrued wages and compensated absences Due to other funds Deferred revenue Advances from other funds Other liabilities $ 78,878 1,150 $ 6,614,845 133,189 94,523 172,944 11,944 148,929 2,877 $ 194,877 $ - $ 80,028 $ - $ 7,179,251 396,841 48,287 214,449 86,944 $ 200,000 200,000 Total liabilities $ $ - $ 200,000 946,515 Fund Balances: Reserved: Re -appropriations Bike paths Strand walkways Unreserved, designated Unreserved, undesignated Special revenue 180,531 4,000 1,246,072 11,158 89,918 70,779 14,346 76,028 (200,000) 4,874,869 Total fund balances 194,877 80,028 (200,000) 6,232,736 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 194,877 $ - $ 80,028 $ - $ 7,179,251 (Concluded) 94 • This page intentionally left blank. 95 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Non -Major Governmental Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Funds Lighting and Prop t\ Landscaping State Compensated Open District Gas Tax A13 939 Absences Space Tyco Tyco Tidelands REVENUES: Property taxes $ 456,163 Other taxes Fines and forfeitures Use of money and property $ 300,000 Intergovernmental $ 454,900 $ 570,351 Charges for services $ 57,572 Miscellaneous 2,350 Interest earned on investments 4,240 4,424 15,592 11,957 $ 10,781 Total revenues 460,403 459,324 73,164 $ - 570,351 314,307 10,781 EXPENDITURES: Current: General government Public safety Community development Culture & recreation Public works Capital outlay Total expenditures 482,345 67,223 52,898 549,794 734,128 67,973 482,345 52,898 67,223 - 549,794 734,128 67,973 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (21,942) 406,426 5,941 20,557 (419,821) (57,192) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in 9,795 1,542 Transfers out (9,194) (368,985) (282,566) (20,557) (175,000) Total other financing sources (uses) 601 (368,985) 1,542 (282,566) (20,557) (175,000) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (21,341) 37,441 7,483 (282,566) (594,821) (57,192) FUND BALANCES: 13eginning of year 98,131 65,579 303,177 551,047 3 672,164 319,266 End of year $ 76,790 $ 103,020 $ 310,660 $ 268,481 $ 3 $ 77,343 $ 262,074 96 • • Special Revenue Funds Beach Drive Community Parks and Bayview Dr Lower Pier Myrtle Dist Loma Dist Assessment Development Recreation 4% Utility Building Admin Admin Admin Admin Dist Admin Block Facilities Users Tax Improvement Expense Expense Expense Expense Expense Grant $ 21,000 155,372 11,869 $ i 3,936 $ 2,834 $ 1,537 $ 201 15 8,875 $ 9,511 $ 2,500 483 616 30 $ 110,256 188,241 1,537 201 3,951 2,834 9,358 10,127 2,530 110,256 110,893 2,811 404 1,607 1,397 5,478 5,974 1,629 10,062 100,190 110,893 2,811 404 :1,607 1,397 5,478 5,974 1,629 110,252 77,348 (1,274) (203) 2,344 1,437 3,880 4,153 901 4 (2,354) (990) (2,867) (3,277) (1,001) (2,354) (990) (2,867) (3,277) (1,001) 77,348 (1,274) (203) 203,206 28,933 4,760 (10) 447 1,013 876 (100) 4 774 7,127 10,074 25 1 $ 280,554 $ 27,659 $ 4,557 $ (10) $ 1,221 $ 8,140 $ 10,950 $ (75) $ 5 (Continued) 97 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Non -Major Governmental Funds, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Funds Proposition "A" Proposition "C" Transit Transit Grants California Law Office of Air Enforcement Traffic Quality Supplemental Equipment Safety Management La w Program Grant District Enforcement (CLEEP) REVENUES: Property taxes Other taxes $ 315,270 $ 271,010 $ 100,000 Fines and forfeitures Use of money and property Intergovernmental $ 388,435 $ 17,545 $ 23,324 Charges for services 5639 Miscellaneous Interest earned on investments 19,343 67,789 2,815 7,317 $ 314 Total revenues EXPENDITURES: Current: General government Public safety Community development Culture & recreation Public works Capital outlay Total expenditures 340,252 338,799 388,435 17,545 26,139 107,317 314 20,282 42,078 9,545 18,803 291 58,768 4,826 15,421 1,564 34,217 324,324 17,545 58,578 90,708 34,217 387,978 17,545 291 73,999 1,564 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 249,544 304,582 517 - 25,848 33,3"18 (1,250) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES: Beginning of year End of year 249,544 304,582 517 25,848 33,318 (1,250) 224,884 1,178,524 8,395 - 46,812 102,0'16 6,821 $ 474,428 $ 1,483,106 $ 8,912 $ - $ 72,660 $ 135,334 $ 5,571 98 • Special Revenue Funds Taskforce for Regional Auto Theft Prevention Sewer Artesia Asset Blvd. Beach Drive 2 Myrtle Utility Loma Utility Seizure and Fire Retirement Relinquish- Underground Underground Underground Forfeiture Protection Stabilization ment District Improvement Improvement $ 38,459 $ 139,578 $ 14,447 76,534 8,742 $ 153,337 $ (30,243) 49,259 2,164 9,599 $ 71,453 $ 19,386 $ 414 607 139,578 148,982 40,623 162,936 71,453 19,386 $ 414 (29,636) 139,578 680,9'15 4,363 72,709 109,628 38,525 15,517 139,578 790,543 38,525 - 19,880 72,709 (641,56"1) 40,623 124,411 71,453 (494) 414 (102,345) 717,550 (156,397) (1,090,523) (547) 717,550 - (156,397) (1,090,523) - (547) 75,989 40,623 (31,986) (1,019,070) (494) 414 (102,892) . 851,948 25,630 225,359 2,061,241 374,355 (65,520) 7,959 102,892 $ - $ 927,937 $ 66,253 $ 193,373 $ 1,042,171 $ 373,861 $ (65,520) $ 8,373 $ 99 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Non -Major Governmental Funds, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Funds Bonnie Brae Prospect Bayview Utility Beach Drive Utility Total Other Underground Underground Underground Underground Governmental District District District District Funds REVENUES: Property taxes $ 456,163 Other taxes 707,280 Fines and forfeitures 38,459 Use of money and property 300,000 Intergovernmental 1,718,836 Charges for services 139,745 Miscellaneous 3'17,214 Interest earned on investments $ 9,943 $ 3,880 326,028 Total revenues 9,943 $ EXPENDITURES: 3,880 $ 4,003,725 Current: General government 103,881 Public safety 257,409 Community development 19,607 Culture & recreation 18,803 Public works 1,245,158 Capital outlay 22,261 58,925 2,298,611 Total expenditures 22,261 58,925 3,943,469 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (12,318) (58,925) 3,880 60,256 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in 135,856 864,743 Transfers out (2,114,258) Total other financing sources (uses) - 135,856 (1,249,515) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (12,318) 76,931 3,880 - (1,189,259) FUND BALANCES: Beginning of year 207,195 (76,931) 76,148 (200,000) 7,42'1,995 End of year $ 194,877 $ - $ 80,028 $ (200,000) $ 6,232,736 100 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Lighting and Landscaping District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 98,131 $ 98,131 $ Resources (inflows): Property taxes 447,744 456,163 Interest earned on investments 2,427 4,240 Transfers in 9,795 9,795 Amount available for appropriation 558,097 568,329 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public works 527,715 482,345 Transfers out 9,194 9,194 Total charges to appropriations 536,909 491,539 8,419 1,813 10,232 45,370 45,370 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 21,188 $ 76,791) $ 55,602 101 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual State Gas Tax For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 65,579 $ 65,579 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 449,833 454,900 Interest earned on investments 3,091 4,424 Amount available for appropriation 518,503 524,903 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 62,100 52,898 Transfers out 368,985 368,985 Total charges to appropriations 431,085 421,883 5,067 1,333 6,400 9,202 9,202 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 87,418 $ 103,020 $ 15,602 102 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual AB 939 For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 303,177 $ 303,177 $ Resources (inflows): Charges for services 57,160 57,572 Interest earned on investments 14,262 15,592 Transfers in 1,542 1,542 Amount available for appropriation 376,141. 377,883 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government Total charges to appropriations 7"1,516 67,223 71,516 67,223 412 1,330 1,742 4,293 4,293 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 304,625 $ 310,660 $ 6,035 103 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Compensated Absences For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Transfers out Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 551,047 $ 551,047 $ 551,047 551,047 282,566 282,566 282,566 282,566 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 268,481 $ 268,481 $ 104 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Prop A Open Space For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 3 $ 3 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 570,351 570,351 Amount available for appropriation 570,354 570,354 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 549,794 549,794 Transfers out 20,557 20,557 Total charges to appropriations 570,351 570,351 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 3 $ 3 $ 105 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Tyco For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 672,164 $ 672;l64 $ Resources (inflows): Use of money and property 300,000 300,000 Miscellaneous 2,350 2,350 Interest earned on investments 22,605 11,957 Amount available for appropriation 997,119 986,471 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 788,833 734,128 Transfers out 175,000 175,000 Total charges to appropriations 963,833 909,128 (10,648) (10,648) 54,705 54,705 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 33,286 $ 77,343 $ 44,057 106 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Tyco Tidelands For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investment Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 319,266 $ 319,266 $ 11,743 10,751. 331,009 330,047 67,972 67,973 67,972 67,973 (962) (962) (1) (1) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 263,037 $ 262,074 $ (963) 107 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Parks and Recreation Facilities For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 203,206 $ 203,206 $ Resources (inflows): Other taxes 7,000 21,000 14,000 Miscellaneous 103,128 155,372 52,244 Interest earned on investments 10,522 11,869 1,347 Amount available for appropriation 323,856 39'1,447 67,591 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations 257,009 110,893 257,009 110,893 146,116 146,116 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 66,847 $ 280,554 $ 213,707 108 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual 4% Utility Users Tax For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 28,933 $ 28,933 $ 1,419 1,537 30,352 30,470 29,889 2,811 29,889 2,811 118 118 27,078 27,078 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 463 $ 27,659 $ 27,196 109 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Building Improvement For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 4,760 $ 4,760 $ 714 201 4,974 4,961 4,904 404 4,904 404 (13) (13) 4,500 4,500 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 70 $ 4,557 $ 4,487 110 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Bayview Drive Administrative Expense For the year ended June 30, 2006 Budgeted Amounts Final Positive (Negative) Actual Variance with Amounts Final Budget Fund balance, July 1, 2005 $ - $ $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 3,936 3,936 Interest earned on investments 98 15 (83) Amount available for appropriation 4,034 3,951 (83) Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 1,857 1,607 250 Transfers out 2,354 2,354 Total charges to appropriations 4,211 3,961 250 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ (177) $ (10) $ 167 111 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Lower Pier Administrative Expense For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 774 $ 774 Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 2,834 2,834 Amount available for appropriation 3,608 3,608 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 1,900 1,397 Transfers out 990 990 Total charges to appropriations 2,890 2,387 503 503 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 5 718 $ '1,221 $ 503 112 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Myrtle District Administrative Expense For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 7,127 $ 7,127 $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 8,875 8,875 Interest earned on investments 313 483 Amount available for appropriation 16,315 16,485 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 6,000 5,478 Transfers out 2,867 2,867 Total charges to appropriations 8,867 8,345 170 170 522 522 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 7,448 $ 8,140 $ 692 113 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Lorna District Administrative Expense For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 10,074 $ 10,074 $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 9,511 9,511 Interest earned on investments 457 616 Amount available for appropriation 20,042 20,201 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 6,300 5,974 Transfers out 3,277 3,277 Total charges to appropriations 9,577 9,251 159 159 326 326 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 10,465 $ 10,950 $ 435 114 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Beach Drive Assessment District Administrative Expense For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 25 $ 25 $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 2,500 2,500 Interest earned on investments 57 30 Amount available for appropriation 2,552 2,555 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 1,628 1,629 Transfers out 1,001. 1,001 Total charges to appropriations 2,629 2,630 (27) (27) (1) (1) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ (47) $ (75) $ (28) 115 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Community Development Block Grant For the year ended June 30, 2006 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget Fund balance, July 1, 2005 $ I $ 1 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 239,913 110,256 (129,657) Amount available for appropriation 239,914 110,257 (129,657) Charges to appropriations (outflows): Community development Capital outlay 10,700 229,213 10,062 638 100,190 129,023 Total charges to appropriations 239,913 110,252 129,661 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 1 $ 5 $ 4 116 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Proposition "A" Transit For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 224,884 $ 224,884 $ Resources (inflows): Other taxes 284,643 315,270 30,627 Charges for services 6,455 5,639 (816) Interest earned on investments 14,145 19,343 5,198 Amount available for appropriation 530,127 565,136 35,009 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government 23,229 20,282 2,947 Public safety 41,000 42,078 (1,078) Community development 10,258 9,545 713 Culture and recreation 23,124 18,803 4,321 Total charges to appropriations 97,611 90,708 6,903 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 432,516 $ 474,428 $ 41,912 117 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Proposition "C" Transit For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 1,178,524 $ 1,178,524 $ Resources (inflows): Other taxes 236,094 271,010 Interest earned on investments 58,432 67,789 Amount available for appropriation 1,473,050 1,517,323 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations 153,000 34,2:17 153,000 34,217 34,9'16 9,357 44,273 118,783 118,783 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 1,320,050 $ 1,483,106 $ :163,056 118 City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Grants For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 8,395 $ 8,395 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 624,292 388,435 Amount available for appropriation 632,687 396,830 (235,857) (235,857) Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public safety 167,862 58,768 109,094 Public works 13,427 4,826 8,595 Capital outlay 451,324 324,324 127,000 Total charges to appropriations 632,607 387,918 244,689 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 80 $ 8,912 $ 8,832 119 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Office of Traffic Safety Grant For the year ended June 30, 2006 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 174,354 17,545 (156,809) Amount available for appropriation 174,354 17,545 (156,809) Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 174,354 17,545 156,809 Total charges to appropriations 174,354 17,545 156,809 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 120 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Air Quality Management District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 46,812 $ 46,812 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 22,000 23,324 Interest earned on investments 2,174 2,815 Amount available for appropriation 70,986 72,951 Charges to appropriations (outflows): General government Total charges to appropriations 1,000 291 1,000 291 1,324 641 1,965 709 709 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 69,986 $ 72,660 $ 2,674 121 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Supplemental Law Enforcement Services For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 102,016 $ 102,016 $ Resources (inflows): Other taxes 100,000 100,000 Interest earned on investments 6,274 7,317 Amount available for appropriation 208,290 209,333 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public safety 44,788 15,421 Capital outlay 117,855 58,578 Total charges to appropriations 162,643 73,999 1,043 1,043 29,367 59,277 88,644 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 45,647 $ '135,334 $ 89,687 122 City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual California Law Enforcement Equipment Program For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public safety Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Finall3udget $ 6,821 $ 6,821 $ 431 314 7,252 7,135 7,163 1,564 7,163 1,564 (117) (117) 5,599 5,599 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 89 $ 5,571 $ 5,482 123 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Taskforce for Regional Auto Theft Prevention For the year ended June 30, 2006 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget Fund balance, July 1, 2005 $ - $ - $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental 146,605 139,578 (7,027) Amount available for appropriation 146,605 139,578 (7,027) Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public safety 146,605 139,578 7,027 Total charges to appropriations 146,605 139,578 7,027 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ - $ $ 124 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Sewer For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 851,948 $ 851,948 $ Resources (inflows): Intergovernmental •I•I,088 14,447 3,359 Charges for services 130,940 76,534 (54,406) Miscellaneous 9,750 8,742 (1,008) Interest earned on investments 47,327 49,259 1,932 Transfers in 717,550 717,550 Amount available for appropriation 1,768,603 1,718,480 (50,123) Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public works 724,169 680,915 Capital outlay 917,676 109,628 Total charges to appropriations 1,641,845 790,543 43,254 808,048 851,302 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 126,758 $ 927,937 $ 801,179 125 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Asset Seizure and Forfeiture For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 25,630 $ 25,630 $ Resources (inflows): Fines and forfeitures 11,000 38,459 Interest earned on investments 1,242 2,164 Amount available for appropriation 37,872 66,253 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public safety Total charges to appropriations 27,459 922 28,381 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 17,872 $ 66,253 $ 48,381 126 City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Fire Protection For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 225,359 $ 225,359 $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous 87,960 153,337 Interest earned on investments 9,752 9,599 Amount available for appropriation 323,071 388,295 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay 116,825 38,525 Transfers out 156,397 156,397 Total charges to appropriations 273,222 194,922 65,377 (153) 65,224 78,300 78,300 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 49,849 $ 193,373 $ 143,524 127 City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Retirement Stabilization For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Transfers out Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 2,06:1,241 $ 2,061,241 $ 75,157 71,453 2,136,398 2,132,694 1,090,523 1,090,523 1,090,523 1,09(1,523 (3,704) (3,704) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 1,045,875 $ 1,042,171 $ (3,704) 128 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Artesia Boulevard Relinquishment For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 374,355 $ 374,355 $ 18,361 19,386 392,716 393,741 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public works 5,000 4,363 Capital outlay 387,393 15,517 Total charges to appropriations 392,393 19,880 1,025 1,025 637 371,876 372,513 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 323 $ 373,861 $ 373,53S 129 City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Beach Drive 2 Underground District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Amount available for appropriation Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ (65,520) $ (65,520) $ (65,520) (65,520) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ (65,520) $ (65,520) $ :130 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Myrtle Utility Underground Improvement For the year ended June 30, 2006 Ftind balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget 7,959 $ 7,959 $ 369 414 8,328 8,373 45 45 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 8,328 $ 8,373 $ 45 131 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Lorna Utility Underground Improvement For the year ended June 30, 2006 Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget Fund balance, July 1, 2005 $ 702,892 $ 102,892 $ Resources (inflows): Miscellaneous (30,243) (30,243) Interest earned on investments 787 607 Amount available for appropriation 73,436 73,256 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Public works 72,709 72,709 Transfers out 547 547 Total charges to appropriations 73,256 73,256 (180) (180) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 180 $ - $ CI 80) 132 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Bayview Drive Underground District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 207,195 $ 207,195 $ 9,698 9,943 245 216,893 217,138 245 202,793 22,261 180,532 202,793 22,261 180,532 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 14,100 $ 194,877 $ 180,777 133 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Bonnie Brae Underground District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 7, 2005 Resources (inflows): Transfers in Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ (76,937) $ (76,937) $ 135,856 135,856 (76,931) 58,925 135,856 50,000 58,925 (8,925) 50,000 58,925 (8,925) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ CI 26,931) $ $ 126,931 134 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Beach Drive Underground District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Resources (inflows): Interest earned on investments Amount available for appropriation Charges to appropriations (outflows): Capital outlay Total charges to appropriations Positive Budgeted (Negative) Amounts Actual Variance with Final Amounts Final Budget $ 76,148 $ 76,148 $ 3,590 3,880 79,738 80,028 290 290 74,819 74,819 74,819 74,819 Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ 4,919 $ 80,028 $ 75,109 135 • • City of Hermosa Beach Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Prospect Utility Underground District For the year ended June 30, 2006 Fund balance, July 1, 2005 Amount available for appropriation Budgeted Amounts Final Positive (Negative) Actual Variance with Amounts Final Budget (200,000) $ (200,000) $ (200,000) (200,000) Fund balance, June 30, 2006 $ (200,000) $ (200,000) $ 136 • • INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Insurance Fund - This fund was created to account for costs associated with the City's insurances: liability, workers' compensation, unemployment, auto, property and officials' bonds. Equipment Replacement Fund - This fund was created to provide ongoing funds to replace assets at the end of the assets' useful life. 137 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Net Assets All Internal Service Funds June 30, 2006 Equipment Insurance Replacement Fund Fund ASSETS Total Current assets: Cash and investments $ 5,102,674 $ 2,178,533 $ 7,281,207 Other Accounts Receivables 3,586 3,586 Deposits 80,000 80,000 Advances to Other Funds 799,316 799,316 1,598,632 Other assets 1,806 59,592 61,398 Total current assets 5,983,796 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation Total assets 5,983,796 LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Current portion of long-term liabilities Accounts payable Accrued wages and compensated absences Total current liabilities Long-term liabilities: Workers' compensation claims payable General liability claims payable Less current portion above Total long-term liabilities 1,048,000 135,185 22,442 1,205,627 3,00"1,247 854,602 (1,048,000) 3,041,027 9,024,823 2,380,587 2,380,587 5,421,614 "11,405,410 64,303 18,865 1,048,000 :199,488 41,307 83,168 1,288,795 3,00"1,247 854,602 (1,048,000) 2,807,849 - 2,807,849 Total liabilities 4,013,476 NET ASSETS 83,168 4,096,644 Invested in capital assets 2,380,587 2,380,587 Unrestricted 1,970,320 2,957,859 4,928,179 Total net assets $ 1,970,320 138 $ 5,338,446 $ 7,308,766 City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Assets All Internal Service Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 OPERATING REVENUES: Charges for services Total operating revenues OPERATING EXPENSES: Equipment Insurance Replacement Fund Fund Total $ :1,659,134 $ 1,277,494 $ 2,936,628 1,659,134 1,277,494 2,936,628 Salaries and wages 113,655 198,593 312,248 Contractor services 481,525 283,841 765,366 Supplies 616 131,024 131,640 Claims expense 1,737,692 1,737,692 Depreciation 353,701 353,701 Total operating expenses OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Proceed from sale of capital assets Total nonoperating revenues (expenses) INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS Transfers in CHANGE IN NET ASSETS NET ASSETS 2,333,488 (674,354) (674,354) 644,245 (30,109) 967,159 3,300,647 310,335 (364,019) 19,650 19,650 19,650 "49,650 329,985 (344,369) 668,223 1,312,468 998,208 968,099 Beginning of the year 2,000,429 4,340,238 6,340,667 End of the year $ 1,970,320 $ 5,338,446 $ 7,308,766 139 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Cash Flows All Internal Service Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 Insurance Fund CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: equipment Replacement Fund Total Cash received from customers $ 199,585 $ 157,826 $ 357,411 Cash received for services from other funds :1,659,134 1,277,494 2,936,628 Cash payments to suppliers of goods and services (459,524) (446,468) (905,992) Cash payments to employees for services (115,341) (226,813) (342,154) Insurance premiums and settlements (1,537,333) (1,537,333) Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities (253,479) 762,039 508,560 CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: `transfers in Net cash provided by (used for) noncapital financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: 644,245 644,245 668,223 1,312,468 668,223 '1,3:12,468 Proceed from sale of capital assets :19,650 :19,650 Acquisition of capital assets (532,531) (532,531) Net cash provided (used for) by capital and related financing activities - (512,88'1) (512,881) Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 390,766 917,381 1,308,147 CASI-I AND CASH EQUIVALENTS: I3eginning of year 4,71:1,908 1,26:1,152 5,973,060. End of year $ 5,102,674 $ 2,178,533 $ 7,281,207 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income (loss) $ (674,354) $ 310,335 $ (364,019) Adjustments to reconcile net operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities: Deprecia tion 353,701 353,701 Changes in current assets and liabilities: Advances to other funds 199,570 '199,570 399,140 Other assets 15 (4:1,744) (41,729) Worker's compensation claims payable (36,310) (36,3'10) General liability claims payable 236,669 236,669 Accounts payable 22,617 (31,603) (8,986) Accrued wages and compensated absences (1,686) (28,220) (29,906) Total adjustments 420,875 451,704 872,579 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities $ (253,479) $ 762,039 $ 508,560 140 • • FIDUCIARY FUNDS The Agency Fund of the City was established to account for transactions related to payments for limited obligation bonds for the Lower Pier Avenue Assessment District, the Myrtle Avenue Utility Undergrounding Assessment District, the Loma Drive Utility Undergrounding Assessment District and the Other Post Employment Benefits. 141 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets All Agency Funds June 30, 2006 Beach Drive 13avview Lower Pier Assessment Beach Drive Bayview Other Post Drive District District Assessment Myrtle Avenue Loma Drive Drive Runplovment Redemption Redemption Redemption Reserve Assessment Assessment Reserve Benefits ASS L IS Total Cash and investments 5 82,527 $ 34,041 $ 19,519 $ 3,206 $ 76,629 $ 94,387 $ 10,523 $ 777,563 $ 1,098,395 Interest receivable 1,203 481 268 54 1,096 1,364 160 4,626 Other accounts receivable 12,516 4,394 3,604 2;152 3,612 26,278 Total assets 5 96,246 $ 38,916 $ 23,391 $ 3,260 $ 79,877 $ 99,363 $ 10,683 $ 777,563 $ 1,129,299 LIA13l LrFIIS Assessment: Installment account Reserve requirement OPI 13 contribution from City Total liabilities $ 96,246 $ 38,916 5 23,391 $ 79,877 5 99,363 $ 337,793 $ 3,260 $ 10,683 13,943 5 777,563 777,563 $ 96,246 $ 38,916 $ 23,391 $ 3,260 $ 79,877 5 99,363 $ 10,683 $ 777,563 $ 1,129,299 '142 • • City of Hermosa Beach Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities All Agency Funds For the year ended June 30, 2006 ASSETS Bayview Drive Redemption Fund: Cash and investments Interest receivable Other accounts receivable Balance Balance July "1,2005 Additions Deletions June 30, 2006 $ 25,958 $ 100,410 $ (43,841) $ 82,527 262 1,203 (262) 1,203 12,516 12,516 Lower Pier District Redemption Fund: Cash and investments 30,224 46,874 (43,057) 34,041 Interest receivable 299 481 (299) 481 Other accounts receivable 2,857 4,394 (2,857) 4,394 Beach Drive Assessment District Redemption Fund: Cash and investments 18,500 34,299 (33,280) 19,519 Interest receivable 187 268 (187) 268 Other accounts receivable 2,671 3,604 (2,671) 3,604 Beach Drive Assessment District Reserve Fund: Cash and investments 3,060 202 (56) 3,206 Interest receivable 37 54 (37) 54 Myrtle Avenue Assessment Fund: Cash and investments Interest receivable Other accounts receivable Loma Drive Assessment Fund: Casts and investments Interest receivable Other accounts receivable 84,277 101,263 ('108,911) 76,629 842 1,096 (842) 1,096 5,837 2,152 (5,837) 2,152 85,241 143,198 (134,052) 94,387 861 1,3641 (861) 1,364 2,511 3,612 (2,511) 3,612 Bayview Drive Reserve Fund Casts and investments 10,062 623 (162) 10,523 Interest receivable 94 160 (94) 160 Other Post Employment Benefits: Cash and investments 274,180 512,028 (8,645) 777,563 Total assets 5 547,960 $ 969,801 $ (388,462) $ 1,129,299 LIABILITIES Bayview Drive Redemption Fund: Assessment installment account $ 26,220 5 114,129 5 (44,103) $ 96,246 Lower Pier District Redemption Fund: Assessment installment account 33,380 51,749 (46,213) 38,916 Beach Drive Assessment District Redemption Fund: Assessment installment account Beach Drive Assessment District Reserve Fund: Reserve requirement Myrtle Avenue Assessment Funds: Assessment installment account Loma Drive Assessment Fund: Assessment installment account Bayview Drive Reserve Fund Reserve requirement Other Post Employment Benefits: OPE13 contribution from City 21,358 38,171 (36,138) 23,391 3,097 256 (93) 3,260 90,956 104,511 ('115,590) 79,877 88,613 148,174 (137,424) 99,363 10,156 783 (256) 10,683 274,180 512,028 (8,645) 777,563 Total liabilities $ 547,960 $ 969,801 $ (388,462) $ 1,129,299 143 • • This page intentionally left blank. 144 • CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATING OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 145 • City of Hermosa Beach Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds Schedule By Source* June 30, 2006 GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS CAPITAL ASSETS: Land $ 17,448,236 Buildings and improvements 3,823,508 Improvements other than buildings 12,811,925 Machinery and equipment 1,584,163 Vehicles 25,996 Construction in progress 1,452,130 Infrastructure 37,383,985 Total governmental funds capital assets Accumulated depreciation Total governmental funds capital assets, net INVESTMENTS IN GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS CAPITAL ASSETS BY SOURCE: 74,529,943 (20,242,620) $ 54,287,323 State grants $ 152,307 General fund revenues 32,193,146 Special revenue funds revenues 41,866,352 Donated assets 318,138 Total governmental funds capital assets Accumulated depreciation 74,529,943 (20,242,620) Total governmental funds capital assets, net $ 54,287,323 * This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service funds are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 146 • City of Hermosa Beach Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds Schedule by Function and Activity* June 30, 2006 Buildings Improvements Machinery and Other than and Construction Land Structures Buildings Equipment Vehicles Infrastructure in Progress Total GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS CAPITAL ASSETS General government S 307,349 $ 2006,824 $ 97,728 $ 307,431 $ 2,719,332 Public safety 299,189 751,295 971,216 $ 25,996 2,047,696 Community development 99,858 12,755 112,613 Culture and recreation 650,000 572;169 203;154 113,438 1,538,761 Public works 16,490,887 945,326 11,659,890 179,323 $ 37,383,985 $ 1,452;130 68,111,541 Total governmental funds capital assets 17,448,236 3,823,508 12,811,925 1,584;163 25,996 37,383,985 1,452,130 74,529,943 Accumulated depreciation (1,363,774) (3,479,689) (8'18,242) (7,724) (14,573,191) (20,242,620) Total governmental funds capital assets $ '17, 448,236 $ 2,459,734 $ 9,332,236 $ 765,921 $ 18,272 $ 22,810,794 $ 1,452;130 $ 54,287,323 * This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service funds are excluded front the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 147 • • City of Hermosa Beach Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds Schedule of Changes in Capital Assets - By Function by Activity* For the year ended June 30, 2006 Capital Capital Assets Assets July 1, 2005 Additions Deletions June 30, 2006 Function and Activity: General government $ 2,719,332 $ 247,349 $ (247,349) $ 2,719,332 Public safety 1,886,256 161,440 2,047,696 Community development 112,613 112,613 Culture and recreation 1,538,767 1,538,761 Public works 66,720,272 7,123,277 (5,732,008) 68,111,541 Total governmental funds capital assets 72,977,234 7,532,066 (5,979,357) 74,529,943 Accumulated depreciation (18,129,507) (2,163,442) 50,329 (20,242,620) Total governmental funds capital assets, net $ 54,847,727 $ 5,368,624 $ (5,929,028) $ 54,287,323 *This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service funds are excluded from the above amounts. 148 • • STATISTICAL SECTION This part of the City of Hermosa Beach's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures and required supplementary information says about the government' overall financial health. Contents Financial Trends These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the government's financial performance and well being have changed over time. Revenue Capacity These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the government's most significant local revenue source, the property tax. Page 151 154 Debt Capacity 163 These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the government's current levels of outstanding debt and the government's ability to issue additional debt in the future.' Demographic and Economic Information 166 These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the government's financial activities take place. Operating Information 169 These schedules contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the information in the government's financial report relates to the services the government provides and the activities it performs. Since the City of Hermosa Beach has no debt, the following schedules are not included in the Statistical Section: Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstanding Pledged -Revenue Coverage 149 • • This prise intentionally left blank. 150 • • City of Hermosa Beach Net Assets by Component Last Four Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) Governmental activities: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt Restricted Unrestricted Total governmental activities net assets Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 $ 52,434,822 524,561 15,165,745 54,115,206 2,217,823 15,218,039 57,049,484 3,305,478 14,932,486 56,667,910 3,590,623 15,221,233 $ 68,125,128 71,551,068 75,287,448 75,479,766 Business -type activities: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt $ 6,796,868 6,880,925 8,081,080 8,297,790 Restricted 864,024 - - Unrestricted 780,346 827,781 502,758 237,824 Total business -type activities net assets $ 8,441,238 7,708,706 8,583,838 8,535,614 Primary government: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt $ 59,231,690 60,996,131 65,130,564 64,965,700 Restricted 1,388,585 2,217,823 3,305,478 3,590,623 Unrestricted 15,946,091 16,045,820 15,435, 244 15,459,057 Total primary government net assets $ 76,566,366 79,259,774 83,871,286 84,015,380 The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule to coincide • with the implementation of GASB 34. 151 • • City of Hermosa Beach Changes in Net Assets Last Four Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 Expenses: Governmental activities: Legislative and legal $ 810,589 755,591 737,903 962,682 General government 1,415,000 1,816,801 1,727,484 1,999,234 Public safety 10,415,111 11,219,997 12,855,036 15,167,715 Community development 968,000 1,115,600 1,355,888 1,349,891 Culture and recreation 1,045,567 965,440 996,021 1,149,070 Public works 4,136,564 4,592,460 6,687,811 7,980,811 Total governmental activities expenses 18,790,831 20,465,889 24,360,143 28,609,403 Business -type activities: Downtown Enhancement 909,137 939,576 166,732 1,130,499 Parking 1,525,371 1,632,093 1,701,775 2 Proposition "A" Transit 302,907 310,113 - Proposition "C" Transit 103,091 48,119 - Total business -type activities expenses 2,840,506 2,929,901 1,868,507 1,130,499 Total primary government expenses 21,631,337 23,395,790 26,228,650 29,739,902 Program revenues: Governmental activities: Charges for services: General government 89,037 84,745 88,375 458,900 Public safety 833,755 914,655 1,063,594 3,891,881 Community development 768,241 929,695 1,245,622 1,393,212 Culture and recreation 708,296 793,748 874,111 986,137 Public works 203,533 689,457 2,368,076 808,091 Operating grants and contributions 642,214 674,451 721,198 725,136 Capital grants and contributions 475,933 665,806 2,465,698 1,042,854 Total governmental activities program revenues: 3,721,009 4,752,557 8,826,674 9,306,211 Business -type activities: Charges for services: Downtown Enhancement 774,865 879,495 906,857 1,187,249 Parking 2,503,330 2,895,143 3,247,478 - 2 Proposition "A" Transit 14,381 14,384 - Proposition "C" Transit - Operating grants and contributions - - Capital grants and contributions - - Total business -type activities program revenues: 3,292,576 3,789,022 4,154,335 1,187,249 Total primary government program revenues: 7,013,585 8,541,579 12,981,009 10,493,460 152 • • City of Hermosa Beach Changes in Net Assets Last Four Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) Net revenues (expenses): Governmental activities Business -type activities Total net revenues (expenses) Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 (15,069,822) 452,070 (15,7:13,332) 859,121 (14,617,752) (14,854,211) (15,533,469) 2,285,828 (19,303,192) 56,750 (13,247,641) (19,246,442) General revenues and other changes in net assets: Governmental activities: Taxes: Property taxes 5,282,147 5,885,480 6,221,535 8,361,888 Sales tax 2,508,346 2,596,135 2,584,015 2,511,004 Other taxes 5,1.66,21.2 5,559,070 5,897,908 6,186,641 Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs 3,111,569 1,229,911 2,318,501 1,537,667 Investment income 439,050 177,757 467,923 753,746 Other general revenues 400,658 615,309 272,664 113 Transfers 990,593 2,356,585 1,507,304 144,451 Total governmental activities 17,898,575 18,420,247 19,269,850 19,495,510 Business -type activities: Investment income 96,117 73,519 96,365 33,154 Other general revenues 498,276 530,773 - i Miscellaneous 10,812 12,966 243 6,323 Transfers (990,593) (2,356,585) (1,507,304) (144,451) Total business -type activities (385,388) (1,739,327) (1,410,696) (104,974) Total primary government :17,513,157 :16,680,920 17,859,754 19,390,536 Changes in net assets Governmental activities: 2,828,753 2,706,9:15 3,736,381 792,318 Business -type activities: 66,682 (880,206) 875,132 (48,224) Total primary government $ 2,895,435 1,826,709 4,611,513 144,094 The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule to coincide with the implementation of GASB 34. 'Transit operations were transferred to special revenue funds in fiscal year 2005. 2The Parking Fund was combined with the General Fund in fiscal year 2006. 153 • • City of Hermosa Beach Governmental Activities Tax Revenues By Source Last Four Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) 1/2 cent Fiscal Real Sales Tax Year Property Extension Transient Utility Ended Property Sales Transfer Franchise for Public Occupancy User's Business June30 Tax Tax Tax Fees Safety Tax Tax License Total 2003 $ 5,282,147 $ 2,508,346 $ 194,035 $ 5"17,907 $ 150,453 $ 1,054,272 $ 2,137,975 $ 689,270 $ 12,534,405 2004 5,885,480 2,596,135 243,390 514,403 162,902 1,291,689 2,652,821 693,865 14,040,685 2005 6,221,535 2,584,0'15 279,627 590,372 178,539 1,477,612 2,675,196 696,562 14,703,458 2006 8,361,888 2,511,004 305,018 597,754 188,644 1,628,394 2,726,085 740,746 17,059,533 The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule to coincide with the implementation of GASB 34. 154 • • City of Hermosa Beach Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Last Four Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 General Fund: Reserved $ 231,701 $ 230,527 $ 103,014 $ 158,854 Unreserved 461,115 403,455 373,817 211,191 Total general fund 692,816 633,982 476,831 370,045 All other governmental funds: Reserved 909,806 1,459,679 4,107,762 3,845,091 Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds 11,053,526 12,038,695 10,516,612 10,900,400 Total all other governmental funds $ 11,963,332 $ 13,498,374 $ 14,624,374 $ 14,745,491 The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule to coincide with the implementation of GASB 34. 155 • • City of Hermosa Beach Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Last Four Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 Revenues: Property Taxes $ 5,736,937 $ 6,339,123 $ 6,668,515 $ 8,818,051 Other taxes 7,323,267 8,262,205 9,085,304 9,404,925 Licenses and permits 571,682 664,169 701,468 868,085 Fines and forfeitures 278,334 371,802 459,106 1,627,274 Use of money and property 2,185,382 590,605 871,782 612,248 Intergovernmental 2,175,932 2,168,077 4,333,949 2,278,769 Charges for services 1,2541,917 1,414,665 1,852,726 3,905,640 Miscellaneous 645,335 793,633 2,053,250 388,532 Interest earned on investments 450,116 177,757 467,925 753,746 Total revenues 20,621,902 20,782,036 26,494,025 28,657,270 Expenditures: Current: Legislative and legal 832,157 752,541 727,026 963,031 General government 1,245,306 1,259,275 1,340,435 2,220,062 Public safety 10,040,618 10,555,169 12,139,133 14,444,334 Community development 951,856 1,089,056 1,325,219 1,346,996 Culture and recreation 966,621 932,447 940,158 1,124,347 Public works 3,082,096 3,189,361 3,374,363 3,785,554 Capital Outlay 4,281,144 3,119,265 6,425,895 3,406,570 Debt service: n/a n/a n/a n/a Total expenditures 21,399,798 20,897,114 26,272,229 27,290,894 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (777,896) (115,078) 221,796 1,366,376 Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in 4,016,062 6,962,841 7,368,202 4,273,743 Transfers out (3,625,668) (5,371,555) (6,621,149) (5,625,788) Total other financing sources (uses) 390,394 1,591,286 747,053 (1,352,045) Net change in fund balances Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures $ (387,502) $ 1,476,208 $ 968,849 $ 14,331 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule, to coincide with the implementation of GASB 34. The City has no debt, therefore Debt Service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures is 0.0% for all years. 156 • • City of Hermosa Beach General Government Tax Revenues By Source Last Four Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) Fiscal Real Year Property Transient Utility Ended Property Sales Transfer Franchise Occupancy User's June 30 Tax Tax Tax Fees Tax Tax Other Total 2003 $ 5,736,937 $ 2,508,346 $ 194,035 $ 517,907 $ 1,054,272 $ 2,137,975 $ 910,732 $ 13,060,204 2004 6,339,123 2,596,135 243,390 514,403 1,291,689 2,652,821 963,767 14,601,328 2005 6,668,515 2,584,015 279,627 590,372 1,477,612 2,675,196 1,478,482 15,753,819 2006 8,818,051 2,511,004 305,018 597,754 1,628,394 2,726,085 1,636,670 18,222,976 The City of Hermosa Beach has elected to show only four years of data for this schedule, to coincide with the implementation of GASB 34. The City has no debt, therefore Debt Service as a percentage 157 • • City of Hermosa Beach Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property Last Ten Fiscal Years (In Thousands) Fiscal Total Estimated Year Total Taxable Direct Actual Ended Residential Commercial Industrial Less Assessed Tax Taxable Percentage June 30 Property Property Property Other Exemptions Value Rate Value Increase 1997 $ 1,483,733 $ 145,488 $ 8,766 $ 85,386 $ (30,812) $ 1,692,561 1.00 $ 1,723,374 1998 1,523,254 140,020 7,198 86,796 (31,169) 1,726,099 1.00 1,757,268 1.97% 1999 1,604,556 142,533 6,653 95,797 (31,151) 1,818,388 1.00 1,849,539 5.25% 2000 1,785,340 145,703 6,735 101,038 (29,734) 2,009,081 1.00 2,038,816 10.23% 2001 1,959,668 148,003 7,004 105,278 (30,692) 2,189,260 1.00 2,219,952 8.88% 2002 2,163,509 163,177 7,552 91,586 (26,278) 2,399,546 1.00 2,425,824 9.27% 2003 2,342,017 175,517 7,340 101,252 (29,039) 2,597,087 1.00 2,626,126 8.26% 2004 2,581,409 191,355 7,867 93,753 (27,925) 2,846,459 1.00 2,874,384 9.45% 2005 2,834,252 201,708 7,276 98,635 (31,158) 3,110,712 1.00 3,141,870 9.31% 2006 3,158,374 228,948 7,853 102,802 (29,415) 3,468,562 1.00 3,497,977 11.33% NOTE: In 1978, the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 13 which limited taxes to a total maximum rate of 1% based upon the assessed value of the property being laxed. Each year, the assessed value of property may be increased by an "inflation factor" (limited to a maximum of 2%). With few exceptions, property is only reassessed as a result of new construction activity or at the time it is sold to a new owner. At that point, the properly is reassessed based upon the added value of the construction or at the purchase price (market value) or economic value of the property sold. The assessed valuation data shown above represents the only data currently available with respect to the actual market value of taxable property and is subject to the limitations described above. Source: Los Angeles County Auditor -Controller Note: Assessed valuations available from the County of Los Angeles are based on 100% of full value per Section 135 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. 158 • • City of Hermosa Beach Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates Last Ten Fiscal Years (rate per $100 of assessed value) City Direct Rate Overlapping Rates El Camino Flood Fiscal Basic Hermosa Beach Community Los Angeles Control Metropolitan Year Rate School District College District County District Water District Total 1997 1.000000 0.001604 0.001991 0.008900 1.012495 1998 1.000000 0.001584 0.0021 97 0.008900 1.012681 1999 1.000000 0.001422 0.001765 0.008900 1.012087 2000 1.000000 0.001451 0.001953 0.008900 1.012304 2001 1.000000 0.001314 0.001552 0.008800 1.011666 2002 1.000000 0.001033 0.000881 0.006700 1.008614 2003 1.000000 0.001033 0.000881 0.006700 1.008614 2004 1.000000 0.019308 0.019025 0.000992 0.000462 0.006100 1.045887 2005 1.000000 0.016685 0.016558 0.000923 0.000245 0.005800 1.040211 2006 1.000000 0.014660 0.018380 0.000800 0.000050 0.005200 1.039090 Source: Los Angeles County Auditor -Controller 159 • • City of Hermosa Beach Principal Property Tax Payers Current Year and Nine Years Ago "taxpayer International Chinch of The Four Square (42) Regency Centers Limited Partnership (7) Beta Group (2) Robert J. & Ranae R. Desantis Trust (1) Barbara. K. Robinson (3) Barks PCH (1) Cheng Yi and Ying Yin Chang (1) Formosa Hotel Inc. (1) Crico of Fountain Place (1) J.D. and Gina R. Stewart (6) JMB Income Properties Limited XII (7) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1) Playa Pacifica Limited (2) Allen H. Ginsburg Trust (2) Rogert E. Bacon (4) Vasek Polak (15) Simon Mani (2) California (Nater Service Company (4) George L. Schuler Trust (1) 2006 1997 Percent of Percent of Total City Total City Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Value Value Value Value $ 17,463,663 0.50% $ 0.00% 13,215,124 0.38% 0.00% 11,412,878 0.33% 0.00% 11,026,410 0.32% 0.00% 10,267,455 0.29% 0.00% 8,200,000 0.24% 0.00% 7,646,216 0.22% 6,584,514 0.39% 7,555,111 0.22% 0.00% 7,504,168 0.22% 7,341,124 0.21% 0.00% 18,884,683 1.12% - 0.00% 11,475,000 0.68% - 0.00% 10,284,955 0.61% 0.00% 8,573,156 0.51% - 0.00% 4,903,368 0.29% - 0.00% 4,724,558 0.28% 0.00% 3,574,074 0.21 % 0.00% 3,263,703 0.19% 0.00% 3,260,000 0.19% $ 101,632,149 2.93% $ 75,528,011 4.47% Source: HdL Coren & Cone, Los Angeles County Assessor Combined Tax Rolls Numbers in parentheses represent the number of parcels owned by the tax payer. 160 • • City of Hermosa Beach Property Tax Levies and Collections Last Ten Fiscal Years Collected within the Fiscal Taxes Levied Fiscal Year of Levy Collections in Total Collections to Date Year Ended for the Percent Subsequent Percent June 30 Fiscal Year Amount of Levy Years Amount of Levy 1997 $ 3,362,402 $ 3,149,979 93.68% $ 168,289 $ 3,318,268 98.69% 1998 3,434,310 3,252,801 94.71% 143,098 3,395,899 98.88% 1999 3,623,653 3,442,675 95.01% 132,062 3,574,737 98.65% 2000 4,002,324 3,808,235 95.15% 119,930 3,928,165 98.15% 2001 4,370,463 4,239,808 97.01 % 152,899 4,392,707 100.51 % 2002 4,790,920 4,576,910 95.53% 112,090 4,689,000 97.87% 2003 5,193,796 5,017,148 96.60% 140,296 5,157,444 99.30% 2004 5,688,428 5,489,332 96.50% 115,084 5,604,416 98.52% 2005 6,215,435 5,708,000 91.84% 121,467 5,829,467 93.79% 2006 6,938,764 6,717,516 96.81% - 6,717,516 96.81% Source: Los Angeles County Auditor -Controller 161 • • City of Hermosa Beach Construction Value and Property Value Last Ten Fiscal Years Residential Commercial Fiscal Year Ended Number of June 30 Permits Valuation Number of Permits Valuation Total Assessed Value 1997 363 $ :12,034,307 67 $ 4,508,672 $ 1,723,373,748 1998 612 29,728,509 73 3,977,221 1,757,267,759 1999 594 37,648,012 55 6,857,053 1,849,539,164 2000 476 27,553,549 57 6,044,503 2,038,815,726 2001 540 32,136,129 56 7,402,324 2,219,952,219 2002 591 19,260,802 43 2,142,566 2,425,823,846 2003 630 23,174,222 65 2,499,590 2,626,125,947 2004 596 28,114,344 75 6,7:13,988 2,874,383,847 2005 610 33,433,982 74 4,388,664 3,141,870,060 2006 696 4:1,088,855 66 4,101,562 3,497,977,443 Source: City of Hermosa Beach Community Development Department Los Angeles County Auditor -Controller 162 • • City of Hermosa Beach Direct and Overlapping Debt June 30, 2006 City Assessed Valuation Redevelopment Agency Incremental Valuation Total Assessed Valuation Overlapping Debt Repaid with Property Taxes: Los Angeles County Detention Facilities 1987 Debt Service Los Angeles County Flood Control Storm Drain Debt Service West Basin Water District Debt Service El Camino Community College District Debt Service Total overlapping debt repaid with property taxes City Direct Debt Hermosa Beach City School District Debt Service 2002 Hermosa Beach School Debt Service 2005 Total city direct debt $ 3,468,562,161 $ 3,468,562,161 Estimated Share of Percentage Outstanding Overalpping Applicable Debt 6/30/06 Debt 0.472% $ 8,395,000 0.480% 1,080,000 0.510% 182,369,156 5.530% 52,647,335 100.000% 100.000% 39,657 5,182 929,579 2,911,605 $ 244,491,491 3,886,023 2,259,401 11,024,372 2,259,401 11,024,372 13,283,773 Total direct and overlapping debt $ :17,169,796 Source: I-IdL Coren & Cone Los Angeles County Assessor's Office 163 • • City of Hermosa Beach Legal Debt Margin Information Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year 1997 :1998 :1999 2000 2001 Assessed Valuation $ 1,723,373,748 $ 1,757,267,759 $ 1,849,539,164 $ 2,038,815,726 $ 2,219,952,219 Conversion percentage 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% Adjusted assessed valuation $ 430,843,437 $ 439,316,940 $ 462,384,791 $ 509,703,932 $ 554,988,055 Debt limit percentage 15% 15% :15% 15% 15% Debt limit $ 64,626,516 $ 65,897,541 $ 69,357,719 $ 76,455,590 $ 83,248,208 Total net debt applicable to limit $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Legal Debt margin $ 64,626,516 $ 65,897,54:1 $ 69,357,719 $ 76,455,590 $ 83,248,208 Total debt applicable to the limit as a percentage of debt limit 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% California Government Code section 43605 provides for a legal debt limit of 15% of gross assessed valuation. This provision was enacted when assessed valuation was based on 25% of market value. Effective fiscal year 1981-82, each parcel was assessed based on 100% of market value as of the most recent change in ownership. The computations shown above convert the assessed valuation data for each fiscal year from the full valuation perspective to the 25% level that was in effect at the time that the legal debt margin was enacted. Source City of Hermosa Beach Finance Department County of Los Angeles, Auditor -Controller 164 • • Fiscal Yeai 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 $ 2,425,823,846 $ 2,626,125,947 $ 2,874,383,847 $ 3,141,870,060 $ 3,497,977,443 25% 25% 25% ')5% ')5% $ 606,455,962 $ 656,531,487 $ 718,595,962 $ 785,467,515 $ 874,494,361 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% $ 90,968,394 $ 98,479,723 $ 107,789,394 $ 117,820,127 $ 131,174,154 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ 90,968,394 $ 98,479,723 $ 107,789,394 $ 117,820,127 $ 131,174,154 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% t • City of Hermosa Beach Demographic and Economic Statistics Last Ten Calendar Years Personal Income Per Capita City Per Capita Unemployment School Calendar Population (in thousands) Personal Income Personal Income Rate Enrollment Year (1) (2) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1997 18,919 $ 232,359,702 $ 25,239 1.8% 1,324 1998 19,098 253,515,785 27,220 $ 44,791 1.6% 1,346 1999 19,401 263,987,283 27,973 1.4% 1,384 2000 19,631 279,049,532 29,232 54,244 1.5% 1,420 2001 18,912 294,508,314 30,503 54,184 1.4% 1,430 2002 19,175 301,002,945 30,828 51,979 1.4% 1,471 2003 19,365 310,043,501 31,452 1.7% 1,489 2004 19,549 329,048,068 33,179 1.8% 1,498 2005 19,608 2.3% 1,475 2006 19,435 1.9% 1,462 Source: (1) State of California Department of Finance. (2) U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (data shown is for Los Angeles County). Not available for 2005 or 2006. (3) Personal income figures for 1998, 2001 and 2002 are from the Internal Revenue Service individual income tax statistics by zip code and for 2000 from the U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000. Internal Revenue Service figures are not an ongoing statistical project therefore all years are not available. Census information is available every 10 years. (4) State of California Employment Development Department. (5) State of California Department of Education. 166 • • City of Hermosa Beach Principal Employers Current Year and Nine Years Ago Employer 2006 1997 Percent of Percent of Number of Total Number of Total Employees Employment Employees Employment Lotus South Bay 219 5.62% 0.00% City of Hermosa Beach 202 5.19% 175 0.00% 24 Hour fitness 138 3.54% 0.00% Von's Companies 130 3.34% 100 0.00% Hope Chapel 62 1.59% 130 Vasek Polak, Incorporated 0.00% 122 Hermosa Beach School District 103 2.65% 100 0.00% Shorewood Realtors 96 2.47% 0.00% Comedy and Magic Club 61 1.57% 0.39% Lucky's Grocery 65 Ralph's Grocery 65 I-lennesey's Tavern 60 1.54% 100 0.00% Patrick Molloy's 55 1.41% Rocky Cola Cafe 0.00% 47 Body Glove - 0.00% 40 Club Sushi Restaurant - 0.00% 40 Source: City of Hermosa Beach Finance Department 1 Percent of total employment is not available for 1997. 167 • City of Hermosa Beach Full-time and Part-time City Employees by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years Full-time and Part-time Employees as of June 30 Function 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 General Government 20 20 21 19 19 19 20 20 19 18 Public Safety 105 107 117 105 105 109 114 106 115 112 Community Development 8 8 11 9 10 9 11 11 11 11 Culture and recreation 37 35 38 38 42 26 29 32 37 40 Public Works 21 21 24 . 22 22 22 23 21 23 22 Total 191 191 211 193 198 185 197 190 205 203 Source: City of Hermosa Beach Finance Department 168 • • City of Hermosa Beach Operating Indicators by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Public safety Police: Physical arrests 857 624 692 629 873 1,027 1,343 1,413 1,064 887 Traffic citations issued 3,357 3,241 3,133 3,209 2,870 3,086 3,631 3,372 2,101 1,518 Parking citations issued 59,625 50,766 57,981 45,810 43,139 45,339 46,342 49,379 54,010 47,770 Fire: Number of emergency calls 434 450 498 538 527 605 598 899 866 Inspections 845 535 680 486 391 28 182 179 Community development: Building permits issued 421 689 648 530 594 636 691 676 696 762 Culture and recreation: Number of recreation classes 132 106 124 124 115 139 139 135 159 165 Total enrollment 3,683 4,692 4,807 5,131 4,039 5,112 4,778 4,616 5,969 5,228 Public works: Graffiti removal (hours) 357 256 382 289 422 285 410 456 217 414 Permits issued 303 382 504 538 1,335 528 567 529 706 875 Source: Various city departments. Note: Indicators are not available for Fire emergency calls in 2001 or Fire inspections in 2001 and 2002. 169 • City of Hermosa Beach Capital Asset Statistics by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years Public safety Police: Police stations Parking meters' Fire: Fire stations Culture and recreation Community centers Community theatres Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1,611 1,611 1,666 1,666 1,666 1 Public works: Beach (acres) 37 256 382 289 422 285 410 456 217 414 Greenbelt (acres) 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 Parks 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Parks (awes) 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 Sanitary sewers (miles) 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 34 34 34 Streets (miles) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Streetlights 395 399 399 399 399 399 399 399 399 392 Storm drains (miles) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7. Traffic Signals 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Source: City of Hermosa Beach Finance Department 'Number of parking meters is not available for fiscal years 1997-2001. 170 Honorable Mayor and Members of November 29, 2006 Regular Meeting of The Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 PROJECT NO. CIP 03-418 SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, UPGRADE SEWAGE LIFT STATIONS - APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO.2 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Approve Change Order No. 2 for Project CIP 03-418 Sewer Improvements — Upgrade of Sewer Lift Stations for extra work encountered during the construction of the Sewer Lift Station at 35th Street and The Strand and the abandonment of the Sewer Lift at Ingleside Drive and 31St Street; and 2. Authorize additional appropriation of $63,462 from the 301 Capital Improvement Fund. Background: On May 23, 2006, the City Council awarded the construction contract for Project No. CIP 03-418 Sewer Improvements, Upgrade of Sewer Lift Stations to Fleming Environmental, Inc. (Fleming) based on their bid amount of $316,473. The approved construction budget was $348,473, including contingency. The contingency funds were expended for a previously issued change order, Change Order No. 1 (C.O. #1). The original scope of work did not anticipate conflicts between the sewer improvements and existing underground facilities/utilities. In addition, the existing sewer infrastructure was discovered to be in poor condition. During construction of the temporary sewer by-pass system of The Strand Lift Station, the existing 4" cast iron force main was discovered to be badly corroded with little serviceable life remaining. The new force main, consisting of high density polyethylene, was re -aligned and connected to an existing manhole on Neptune Avenue. In addition, the placement of the pump station was modified so that it would provide additional space for future extension of the Strand Bikeway should it be necessary. These two items constituted C.O. #1 and were performed for a cost of $21,640.07. As an additional benefit of replacing the cast iron force main, additional service life can be expected because less work is now needed to pump the effluent uphill. Change Order No. 2 (C.O. #2) represents payment for extra workperformed by Fleming during the construction of this project. The reason for this extra work was due to the following unknown field conditions, which were not reflected on the plans: 21 The Strand Lift Station: • An existing concrete sea-wall and access ramp was encountered during excavation and interfered with portions of the underground work; • Buried electrical pull -boxes and conduits which fed service from the Strand to the street lights on the upper Strand and a flashing beacon on 35th Street were encountered during excavation. These facilities were replaced and re -installed to new grades while still maintaining service; • The meter panels to the pump station and street lighting were relocated differently than shown in the plans in order to avert temporary overhead service to the pump station and street lighting on the Strand. For protection, all conduits placed in the sand (beach area adjacent to the stairs) were slurry backfilled; • A portion of the existing sewer main in the Strand required to be excavated and re -aligned in order to be in line with modified pump location performed per C.O. #1, • After cleaning the dry and wet wells, concrete was added to the floors to improve the surface conditions; • The walkway placed on top of the wet well was reinforced to provide support to any potential/future traffic loads should the Strand Bikeway be extended; and • Additional by-pass pumping and temporary shoring rental costs due to delays encountered in performing above listed additional work. Ingleside Drive between Longfellow Avenue and Francisco Avenue: • An existing concrete encased 8" VCP connector pipe between the Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach sewer manholes in the street intersection was encountered during excavation. The existing encased sewer pipe was unusable and a portion was required to be removed. The new connector pipe between the two manholes was re -aligned in order to minimize demolition of the old encased pipe; • The connection stub at the inlet to the Manhattan Beach manhole was concrete encased and precluded the use of a typical pipe coupling connection method; • Connection to the 10" concrete sewer connector pipe between the Hermosa Beach manholes at the southeast and southwest corners of Ingleside Drive and Longfellow Avenue was not possible because of the severely corroded condition of the pipe. The entire length of the pipe between the two manholes (approximately 24 linear feet) was removed, replaced with 10" VCP, and slurry backfilled. Other work included curb and gutter, asphalt, and landscape restoration; • The manhole in 31st Street and Ingleside Drive was abandoned in place by removing manhole shafting to a level two feet below the street surface, slurry backfilling, and completing with pavement restoration; and 2 • • Additional pavement work was performed at the corner of Francisco Avenue and Ingleside Drive in order to clean-up the area. To avoid delaying the project, this extra work was performed on a time -and -material basis. Daily reports were compiled for all extra work, including labor, equipment and materials. Staff has reviewed all submittals and has negotiated deductions for all questionable charges. Staff recommends approval of this final negotiated amount of $63,462. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact will require the appropriation of $63,642 from the 301 Capital Improvement Fund. No additional funding is available in the 160 Sewer Fund. Respectfully submitted, Frank Senteno, P.E. Associate Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Ric '-'ard D. Morgan, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Ste City Manager F:\B95\PWFILES\CCITEMS\03-418 Change Order 2 12-12-06.doc 3 1 • December 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council • Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2007 Purpose: To set a schedule for City Council meetings in 2007. Background: City Council meets on the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month, with the exception of the months of August and December when Council meets only once to accommodate the summer vacation and winter holiday seasons. This break in the council meeting/staffreport cycle permits staff to concentrate on "work in progress" and is a very productive time. There have been comments in the past about having a break after school is out to accommodate family vacations. If the City Council wishes to add or change the summer hiatus, it is best to know in advance so staff is able to plan ahead. Recommendation: Approve attached City Council meeting schedule for 2007. Respectfully submitted, City Manager 2m CITY eOUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2007 JANUARY 9, 2007 1 -- JANUARY 23, 2007 4 FEBRUARY 13, 2007 FEBRUARY 27, 2007 MARCH 13, 2007 MARCH 27, 2007 APRIL 10, 2007 APRIL 24, 2007 MAY 8, 2007 MAY 22, 2007 JUNE 12, 2007 APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEMPORE JUNE 26, 2007 JULY 10, 2007 January 10.12, 2007 League of California Cities Mayor & City Council Academy Leadership Institute @ Sacramento February 1-4, 2007 ICA Winter Seminar @ Santa Barbara May 16-17, 2007 League of California Cities Legislative Action Days @ Sacramento July 12-15, 2007 .41._d ICA Summer Seminar @ Rancho Bernardo JULY 24, 2007 I AUGUST 14, 2007 NOMEET/NG AUGUST 28, 2097 July 25-27, 2007 League of California Cities Mayor & City Council Academy Executive Forum @ Monterey SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 SEPTEMBER 25, 2007 OCTOBER 9, 2007 OCTOBER 23, 2007 NOVEMBER 13, 2007 NOVEMBER 27, 2007 DECEMBER 11, 2007 -.NOMEETING DECEMBER 25,:2007 • September 5-8, 2007 League of California Cities Annual Conference @ Sacramento December 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council Recommendation: December 12, 2006 INSTALLATION OF STORM DRAIN TRASH EXCLUDERS It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the attached agreement with the County of Los Angeles to assume responsibility for maintenance of 34 Trash Excluders to be installed on catch basin openings along Hermosa Avenue. Summary: Los Angeles County Flood Control District has obtained a grant under Proposition 50 with the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Grant Program to provide Trash Excluder devices on catch basins to reduce the amount of trash entering storm drains. Staff has worked with the County in identifying 34 catch basins to be included in this program. The locations are situated at intersections along Hermosa Avenue and Pier Avenue. The new Trash Excluder devices are a significant improvement over the trash screens the City currently has on all of the catch basins at the intersection of Pier Avenue and Hermosa Avenue. This old system has screens which have to be physically removed at the beginning of the rain season to prevent flooding when debris build-up occurs during a storm event. The new Trash Excluders have an automatic retractable screen which opens inward when water pressure is applied. This has the advantage of leaving them in place year-round resulting in much higher reduction of trash reaching the storm drain system. The County will be installing all of these devices at their cost and the agreement is to commit the City to maintain these devices in good working order. It will require periodic inspection and making repairs when necessary. Staff strongly recommends support for this project as it enhances our NPDES program for reducing pollutants from contaminating our beaches and ocean. Fiscal Impact: Costs for maintenance are considered negligible. Attachment: Agreement Respectfully submitted, Concur: Richard D. rgan, P.E. Stepurr Director Public Works/City Engineer City anager Noted for fiscal impact: VikiCopel nd Finance Director i 2n • . f AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a municipal corporation in the County of Los Angeles, (hereinafter referred to as CITY), and the LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, a body corporate and politic, (hereinafter referred to as DISTRICT): WITNESSETH WHEREAS, DISTRICT is a political entity separate and distinct from the County of Los Angeles, (hereinafter referred to as COUNTY) and is governed by the COUNTY Board of Supervisors, pursuant to Section 3 of the Los Angeles County Flood Control Act; and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 56-3/4 of the COUNTY Charter, the DISTRICT'S functions are performed by COUNTY'S Department of Public Works; and WHEREAS,it is understood that the rights and obligations of DISTRICT herein apply solely to DISTRICT and not to COUNTY, and that itis intended that any. provision herein for the protection of DISTRICT shall also apply to COUNTY, its Director, officers, employees, and agents performing. functions on behalf of DISTRICT; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to reduce the amount of trash entering storm drains within CITY by having DISTRICT install 34 TRASH EXCLUDERS, which partially block the openings of catch basins within CITY streets, in approximately 34 DISTRICT -owned catch basins, to keep trash from entering the catch basins; and WHEREAS, . DISTRICT will administer the procurement and installation of TRASH EXCLUDERS in the CITY, (hereinafter referred to as PROJECT); and WHEREAS, DISTRICT has obtained grant funding on a reimbursement basis, under the Proposition -50, Santa Monica Bay Restoration Grant Program from the State Water Resources Control Board, (hereinafter referred to as SWRCB), for PROJECT; and WHEREAS, DISTRICT is willing to finance CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT COST at no cost to CITY, currently estimated to be $95,000, to be reimbursed by SWRCB; and WHEREAS, DISTRICT is willing to finance CONTRACT DOCUMENT PREPARATION and CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION COSTS, currently estimated to be $30,000. WHEREAS, CITY is willing to accept TRASH EXCLUDERS and be responsible for the operation (which includes patrolling TRASH EXCLUDERS, especially during storms, to make sure that they are functioning properly and to relieve plugging when necessary), maintenance, repair, and future replacement of TRASH EXCLUDERS in perpetuity upon completion of PROJECT; and Page 1 of 6 I • • WHEREAS, PROJECT is entirely within the jurisdictional limits of CITY. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties mutually agree as follows: (1) DEFINITIONS: a. CONTRACT DOCUMENT PREPARATION, as referred to in this AGREEMENT, shall consist of environmental documentation; preparation of location map showing locations of TRASH EXCLUDERS, specifications, and cost estimates, based on records and measurements provided by CITY; and advertisement of PROJECT for construction bids. b. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT COST, as referred to in this AGREEMENT, shall consist of all payments to the contractor for construction of PROJECT currently estimated to be $95,000. c. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION, as referred to in this AGREEMENT, shall consist of construction contract administration, construction inspection, materials testing, construction survey, changes and modification of location map and specifications for PROJECT, necessitated by unforeseen or unforeseeable field conditions encountered during construction of PROJECT, and all other necessary work after advertising of PROJECT for construction bids to cause PROJECT to be constructed in accordance with the location 'map and specifications approved by CITY. d. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION, as referred to in this AGREEMENT, shall consist of investigation and preparation of search maps for right-of-way identification; property appraisals; title reports; preparation of legal descriptions; acquisition of any parcel of land and easements including negotiations, condemnation activities, and escrow costs; clearing any improvements within right of way; obtaining permits to enter other property; incidental and litigation expense; and all other work necessary to acquire right of way for construction of PROJECT. e. TRASH EXCLUDERS, as referred to in this AGREEMENT, shall consist of any device placed at the opening of a catch basin along the curb, which partially blocks the opening to prevent most trash from entering the storm drain system. (2) CITY AGREES: a. To review various " types of TRASH EXCLUDERS suggested by DISTRICT, perform appropriate analysis, and then select the most appropriate type for the 34 DISTRICT -owned catch basins, at no costto the DISTRICT. CITY shall inform DISTRICT of its selection within 15 calendar days of receiving the specifications for TRASH EXCLUDERS from DISTRICT. Page 2of6 • • b. To review location map and specifications for PROJECT and provide comments to DISTRICT within fifteen (15) calendar days at no cost to DISTRICT. c. To perform and finance RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION. necessary to complete PROJECT. • d. To seek community support. e. To grant to DISTRICT any temporary or permanent CITY right of way and easements that are necessary for the construction of PROJECT at no cost to DISTRICT. f. To issue all necessary permits for PROJECT on a no -fee basis. g. Upon field acceptance of PROJECT by DISTRICT and at no cost to DISTRICT, to accept ownership of TRASH EXCLUDERS and to operate and maintain TRASH EXCLUDERS, including all associated costs and liabilities, in perpetuity. CITY'S operation and maintenance shall include, without limitation, the following: i. Routinely inspect and repair TRASH EXCLUDERS to ensure that they are functioning properly. ii. Replace any damaged or misplaced parts of TRASH EXCLUDERS with parts equivalent to those specified in the design specifications. iii. Patrol and relieve plugging, especially during storms. h. To authorize and direct the City Engineer and/or Director of Public Works to sign the attached acceptance form, Exhibit A. To be solely liable for any damages resulting from CITY'S actions . or inactions with regards to the operation and maintenance of TRASH EXCLUDERS. To indemnify, defend, and hold harmless COUNTY and DISTRICT, their agents, officers, and employees, from and against any and all liability and expense arising from any act or omission of CITY, its officers, employees, agents, or contractors of any tier, in conjunction with PROJECT or TRASH EXCLUDERS, and its ownership, maintenance, .and inspection thereof including, but not limited to, defense costs, legal fees, claims, actions, and causes of action for damages of any nature whatsoever including, but not limited to, bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damage. Page 3 of 6 f (3) DISTRICT AGREES: a. To finance and perform CONTRACT DOCUMENT PREPARATION and CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION for PROJECT at no cost to CITY. b. To finance the CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT COST of PROJECT, currently estimated to be $95,000, to be reimbursed by SWRCB. c. To provide CITY a list of suggested TRASH EXCLUDERS for CITY to select. d. To submit location map and specifications for CITY'S review. e. To submit final location map and specifications for CITY'S approval. f. To be and remain responsible for operation and maintenance of DISTRICT catch basin before, during, and after construction of PROJECT. (4) IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS: a. PROJECT consists of the work shown on DISTRICT'S location map and specifications, which will be located in the map vault at the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Alhambra Headquarters. b.. DISTRICT shall have the right to reject all bids after notifying CITY and may readvertise PROJECT if DISTRICT deems such action is to be in the best interests of the DISTRICT. c. DISTRICT may unilaterally terminate this AGREEMENT without cause, in DISTRICT'S sole discretion at any time by giving thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice to CITY. d. Each party shall have no financial obligation to the other party under this AGREEMENT, except as herein expressly provided. e. This AGREEMENT may be modified only by the mutual written consent of both parties. f. During construction of PROJECT, DISTRICT shall furnish an inspector or other representative to ensure that PROJECT is completed according to approved location map and specifications. CITY may also furnish at no cost to DISTRICT, an inspector or other representative. Said inspectors shall cooperate and consult with each other. CITY'S inspector shall not issue any directive(s) to DISTRICT'S contractor for PROJECT, but shall work through DISTRICT'S inspector. The orders of DISTRICT'S inspector to the contractor or any other person in charge of construction shall prevail and be final. Page 4 of 6 g. • • It is understood and agreed that the provisions of the Assumption of Liability Agreement No. 34342 between CITY and COUNTY, adopted by the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors with an effective date of March 12, 1979, and currently in effect, are inapplicable to this AGREEMENT. h. This AGREEMENT contains the complete and final understanding of the parties in connection with the subject matter herein and shall supersede any and all previous contemporaneous oral or written agreements between the parties regarding said subject matter. J• 11 l/ I/ ll 11 I1 // I/ // /l I/ The provisions of this AGREEMENT. shall be interpreted and enforced pursuant to the laws of the State of California. Any correspondence, communication, or contact concerning this AGREEMENT shall be directed to the following: CITY: Mr. Richard Morgan Director of Public Works City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3884 DISTRICT: Mr. Donald L. Wolfe Chief Engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works P.O. Box 1460 Alhambra, CA 91802-1460 Page 5 of 6 1 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed by their respective officers, duly authorized, by the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH on , 2006, and by the LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT on , 2006. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES acting on behalf of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District By ATTEST: Chairman, Board of Supervisors SACHI A. HAMAI Executive Officer of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles By Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: RAYMOND G. FORTNER, JR. County Counsel By Deputy CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By Mayor ATTEST: By: City Clerk By City Attorney P:lpdpubTlood\PROJECTS1Santa Monica Bay Watershed Trash Excluders (Prop. 50)\Oraft Agreement with HERMOSA BEACH revised per CITY 11-30-06.doc Page 6 of 6 December 4, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of The Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT NO.2 TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR THE SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIA TMDL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO JOINTLY FUND REQUIRED REPORT TO THE LOS ANGELES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute an amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan in order to jointly fund a technical report required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This action will allow the City to contribute its $4,897 share of the jointly funded technical report. Background: On July 15, 2003, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) adopted the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria (SMBBB) TMDL, which sets numerical standards for bacteria loading in water at 44 beaches from the Los AngelesNentura County line to the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The SMBBB TMDL identifies multiple agencies that are responsible for compliance and groups those agencies into Jurisdictional Groups for the purpose of implementing programs to meet the numerical water quality standards. Hermosa Beach is included in Jurisdictional Group Five and Six (J5&6) along with the Cities of El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach and Torrance and the County of Los Angeles and Caltrans. Per the SMBBB TMDL, Jurisdictional Groups were responsible for submitting an Implementation Plan to the Regional Board by July 2005 to describe how the responsible agencies planned to achieve the TMDL bacteria water quality standards. In July 2004, City Council approved a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Hermosa Beach and the other J5&6 responsible agencies (Attachment A). The purpose of this MOA was, to allow the responsible agencies to jointly develop and submit an IP to the Regional Board. Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc (CDM) was selected by J5&6 to assist with the development of the plan. CDM gave a presentation to City Council on February 15, 2005 regarding the draft IP; and the final IP was submitted to the Regional Board on July 15, 2005. The J5&6 IP, which was developed with a thorough watershed land use review and hydrologic analysis, includes three phases of program implementation focused on reducing bacteria loading in runoff that eventually reaches the ocean. These programs include both structural activities, such as installation of pervious pavement, and non-structural activities, such as an inspection and certification programs for restaurants following pollution prevention best management practices. The three program phases are to be iterative and adaptive so that the activities that work well to reduce bacteria loading will. be expanded and those activities that are less effective will be modified or eliminated. 2o On April 6, 2006, the Regional Board held a public hearing to review the IP's submitted by the various SMBBB TMDL Jurisdictional Groups, including J5&6. The Regional Board summarized that the plans were good "in concept" but would require additional technical information. On that date, the Regional Board adopted Resolution No. 2006-007 (Attachment B), which directs the TMDL responsible agencies to submit a supplemental report to demonstrate that the IP's justify an 18 -year, rather than a 10 -year, timeframe for implementation and compliance. The information required in the report includes technically defensible quantifiable estimates of the water quality benefits provided by the proposed structural and non-structural IP activities. The responsible agencies must also provide a quantitative analysis linking the water quality benefits proposed for the IP activities to achievement of the numeric bacteria water quality standards. These estimates and analysis must be provided to the Regional Board by January 2007. Discussion: The staff representatives to the J5&6 Group, in addition to the representatives to the other Jurisdictional Groups, agree that the 18 -year implementation schedule is much more feasible than the 10 -year schedule for meeting the TMDL bacteria loading standards though implantation of the activities in the City's IP's. Staff representatives also determined that the best way to provide the necessary technical report to the Regional Board was to contract with a professional consulting firm. J5&6 has decided to contract with CDM because the firm developed the City's 1P and is most familiar with the related programs and the Regional Board's information request. In order to move forward with the development of the technical report, the J5&6 agencies needed to 1) extend the term of the MOA and 2) agree to additional cost sharing for the development of the report. In June of 2006, the City Council approved the City entering into an extended SMBBB TMDL MOA term. The original MOA term expired in July 2006 and the extension was approved through July 2008. This time frame was selected to allow for the development of the technical report and for the Regional Board's review of that report. At this time, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the additional funding required to develop the technical report. The development of this report will be jointly funded by the J5&6 agencies according to the percentage of land each agency owns that is tributary to the Santa Monica Bay Beaches from 45th Street in Manhattan Beach to the southern border of Redondo Beach (which is the watershed for J5&6 Group as defined in the SMBBB TMDL). This formula is the same cost sharing formula that was used to develop the IP. The table below summarizes the cost sharing formula, the original amount each agency paid to develop the IP and the additional funds required for the development of the technical report. The City's contribution to the funding of the technical report is $4,897. Fiscal Impact: Sufficient funds have been budgeted (160-3102-4201) to cover the City's portion of this jointly funded technical report. 2 Table 1: SMBBB TMDL IP and Supplemental Technical Report Cost Sharing Formula and Funding Amounts Contributed by J5&6 Responsible Agencies Jurisdiction Tributary Area (acres) Contribution Percentage Original IP Development Contribution Amount Supplemental Technical Report Contribution Amount Total Contribution Amount Manhattan Beach 2023 24.991% $46,233 $10,996 $57,229_ Hermosa Beach 901 11.130% $20,591 $4,897 $25,488 Redondo Beach 2623 32.403% $59,946 $14,257 $74,203 Torrance 2289 28.277% $52,312 $12,443 $64,755 El Segundo 21 0.259% $479 $114 $593 County of Los Angeles 172 2.125% $3,931 $935 $4,866 Caltrans 66 0.815% $1,508 $358 $1,866 Total 8095 100% $185,000 $44,000 $229,000 3 Attachments: A. July 2004 SMBBB TMDL Implementation Plan Development J5&6 MOA B. April 2006 Regional Board Resolution No. 2006-007 C. Amendment No. 1 to the July 2004 SMBBB TMDL MOA D. Amendment No. 2 to the July 2004 SMBBB TMDL MOA Respectfully submitted, 'Se h Gf-,- Homayoun Behboodi Associate Engineer Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Richard D organ, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Concur: Steph City Mafiager 4 District Agreement No. 07-4705 07 -LA -1 -PM 17.4/23.49 07 -LA -107 -pm 2.45/3.49 Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan Development Group 5 and 6 District Agreement No. 07-4705 EA 910204 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIA TMDL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT JURISDICTIONAL GROUPS FIVE AND SIX This Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") is entered into, effective as of July 1, 2004 when fully executed, by and among the City of Redondo Beach ("Redondo Beach"), a chartered municipal corporation; the City of Manhattan. Beach ("Manhattan Beach"), a body corporate and politic; the City of Torrance ("Torrance"), a municipal corporation; the City of Hermosa Beach ("Hermosa Beach"), a body corporate and politic; the City of El Segundo (El Segundo), a general law city; the County of Los Angeles ("County"), a political subdivision of the State of California and the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") (individually "Party" and collectively, "Parties"), with respect to the following: RECITALS A. WHEREAS, on December 12, 2002, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (RWQCB) approved Resolution No. 2002-022, adopting a Total Maximum Daily Load for bacteria during wet weather for Santa Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement ATTACHMENT • District Agreement No. 07-4705 Monica Bay Beaches ("Bacteria TMDL"), a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein; and B. WHEREAS, on June 19, 2003 the United States Environmental Protection Agency approved the TMDL, and on July 15, 2003 the RWQCB issued a letter stating that the "Effective Date" of the Bacteria TMDL July 15 , 2003; and C. WHEREAS, the Bacteria TMDL identifies several "Jurisdictional Groups" within the Santa Monica Bay watershed, with each "Jurisdictional Group" having a "Primary Jurisdiction," defined to be the jurisdiction comprising greater than fifty percent (50%) of the Jurisdictional Group's watershed area; and D. WHEREAS, the City of Manhattan Beach is the "Primary Jurisdiction" for Jurisdictional Group Five and El Segundo, Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles County and Caltrans are "additional responsible jurisdictions and agencies" in "Jurisdictional Group Five"; and E. WHEREAS, the City of Redondo Beach is the "Primary Jurisdiction" for Jurisdictional Group Six and Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Torrance, County of Los Angeles, and Caltrans are "additional responsible jurisdictions and agencies" in "Jurisdictional Group Six"; and 2 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement N t_ 07-4705 F. WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that the Bacteria TMDL is not self executing and has not been incorporated into the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Storm Water and Urban Runoff Discharges within the County of Los Angeles, and the Incorporated Cities Therein Except the City of Long Beach dated December 13, 2001 ("NPDES Permit"), in the manner required by law to be enforceable; and G. WHEREAS,.the Parties, nonetheless, desire to enter into a cooperative agreement to voluntarily develop and submit to the RWQCB a draft written report by 20 (twenty) months after the Effective Date of the Bacteria TMDL, and a final written report (collectively "Implementation Plan") by two (2) years after the Effective Date of the Bacteria TMDL outlining how each Party intends to cooperatively achieve the goals of the Bacteria TMDL. H. WHEREAS, the Parties desire to submit an Implementation Plan that may adopt the "integrated water resources approach" ("IWR Approach") identified in the Bacteria TMDL or an "end of pipe" ("EOP") approach, wherever technically, economically, and politically feasible, which will provide for final compliance within no more than 18 (eighteen) years after the effective date of the Bacteria TMDL; and 3 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705 I. WHEREAS, the Parties desire to enter into this MOA voluntarily to, among other things: 1) set forth their intent to develop and submit an Implementation Plan that is consistent with the provisions of the Bacteria TMDL; 2) establish the roles of the Parties to prepare and submit an Implementation Plan; and 3) establish a formula to calculate the respective financial share of the costs to be contributed by each Party hereinto develop and prepare the Implementation Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and representations made herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT ARTICLE I — Purpose of MOA 1. Purpose of MOA — The Parties voluntarily enter this MOA to cooperatively and voluntarily devise and jointly fund an implementation plan that is consistent with the provisions of the Bacteria TMDL and which shall include the development and submittal of an Implementation Plan, with any incidental documentation necessary to achieve the goals consistent with the Bacteria TMDL. The activities described in this Article I, Section 1, shall be referred to hereinafter as the "Work." 2. "Maximum Extent Practicable" Standard — Nothing in this MOA, nor the described Work, nor any activity approved or carried out by the Parties hereunder shall be interpreted as a waiver of the position that the maximum effort to be undertaken by the Parties is subject to the "Maximum Extent Practicable" standard set forth in the Clean Water Act. 4 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No, 07-4705 ARTICLE II — Organization 1. Meetings — The Parties agree that their respective Representatives (as defined below) shall meet, at minimum, once per month to discuss the development, preparation and submittal of the Work ("Work Meetings"). The Parties at Work Meetings shall meet in person, although teleconference meetings may be held upon agreement of the Representatives. The Chair, as defined below, shall prepare and distribute a draft written agenda for each Work Meeting to all Representatives for comments. The Parties shall mutually agree upon a final agenda for each Work Meeting. The agenda shall be distributed at least four (4) business days prior to the date of each Work Meeting to the Representatives, except in the case of a Special Meeting wherein the agenda shall be distributed 24 hours before the Special Meeting. The Chair or any three (3) Parties may call a Special Meeting to discuss urgent issues that require immediate attention or action by the Parties prior to the date of the next Work Meeting. Special Meetings may be held in person or by teleconference. The Parties must be given two (2) days written notice of the Special Meetings as provided by this MOA 2. Quorum — A quorum shall exist if a Work Meeting or Special Meeting is attended in person or via teleconference by at least five (5) Representatives; except however, no quorum shall exist unless one of the Primary Jurisdictions, Manhattan Beach or Redondo Beach, is present. No official or binding action may be taken at any meetings without a quorum 5 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 3. Representatives — Each Party shall appoint one or more representative(s) ("Representative").authorized to vote that party's single vote at the Work Meetings or Special Meetings, although other individuals of Party may also attend the meeting the name(s) of the Representative(s) shall submit be submitted at least two (2) days before the first scheduled Work Meeting. A Party may designate a new Representative(s) to act on its behalf by providing written or electronic mail notice to both Primary Jurisdiction Representatives at anytime thereafter but at least two (2) days before the next Work Meeting. A Representative from each Party shall make every effort to attend every Work Meeting and Special Meeting. If a Party Representative will be absent from a Work Meeting or Special Meeting that Party may appoint another Party's Representative to act as its proxy, with full power to vote as directed by the absent Party. Any such proxy arrangement shall be memorialized in writing or by electronic mail transmitted to both Primary Jurisdictions at least 24 hours before the date of the Work or Special Meeting. Proxy representation shall be counted in determining a quorum. 4. Chair — The two (2) Primary Jurisdictions shall act as Co-chairs, with the position of Chair rotating among the two Co-chairs on a month to month basis. In the event the Chair, for any particular month, is unable to perform its responsibilities, the Co-chair shall become Chair. The Primary Jurisdictions shall jointly sign all written communications made on behalf of all Parties. All written communications shall be copied to all Parties to this MOA. 6 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 5. Information Sharing — The Parties mutually agree to share, to the extent not otherwise prohibited by law or by legal or trade secret privilege, all information required to develop, prepare and submit documents required for the Work, including monitoring data, CADD and GIS or other electronic data. Such sharing shall be subject to any applicable license agreements or other restrictions. All data shared among the Parties shall be provided "as is" and without warranties as to accuracy or as to any other characteristic, whether express or implied. The intent of this data -sharing provision is to facilitate the Work. The Parties agree not to use such data for tasks not related to the Work. 6. Voting — Any action taken at any Work Meeting or Special Meeting shall be approved by a 2/3 majority vote of the Representatives attending the meeting or properly noticed proxy, and each said approval vote must include an affirmative vote by one (1) of the Primary Jurisdictions to be effective and binding. Each Party shall be bound by any action approved by the Parties at a Work Meeting or Special Meeting, whether that Party was present or absent from the Work Meeting or Special Meeting. Each party shall have one vote. 7. Subcommittees — The Representatives acting in a Work Meeting or Special Meeting may appoint such subcommittees as they believe appropriate and useful to conduct the work set forth in this MOA. 8. Minutes — The Chair shall select a secretary to draft and distribute written minutes of all Work and Special Meetings to the Party Representatives at the addresses designated below within five (5) work days after each Work or Special Meeting. 7 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 ARTICLE III — FUNDING AND CONTRACTING 1. Funding Agreements — Any funds contributed for the Work, including contributions for consultants or other services as agreed upon by the Parties, shall be calculated using the cost-sharing formula described in Exhibit B. All funding shall apply to the Work, and shall not be used to implement the Work. The total contribution by all of the Parties shall not exceed $185,000 unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties by written amendment of this MOA. Caltrans funding encumbered under this MOA is evidenced by the signature of its District Budget Manager certifying as to funds in the maximum sum of $1,508 having been allocated and encumbered to pay Caltrans share of the Work costs. Any cost to be invoiced above this sum will require an amendment to this MOA. 2. Contracting — Should the Parties agree to obtain goods or services from a Third Party for the development, preparation and submittal of the Work, the Parties shall agree upon one Party to enter into an agreement with the Third Party. Said Party will be the "Contracting Agency." The Parties agree that Redondo Beach be the Contracting Agency. The Third Party contract shall incorporate the contracting requirements and policies of Redondo Beach that may be attached to the Request for Proposal (RFP). The Third Party contract shall recite, however, that it is for the benefit of the Parties, and the Third Party shall be paid solely from the contributions from the Parties in the amounts set forth in Exhibit B. The Third Party contract shall require the Third Party to look solely to Redondo Beach for payment of the funds contributed by the Parties and look solely to Redondo Beach to resolve any issues regarding that contract. The 8 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 Scope of Work of Third Party contract shall be presented to the Representatives for review and approval prior to execution of the contract. The Third Party contract shall also provide that it may be terminated upon sixty (60) days written notice by Redondo Beach, and shall otherwise be in compliance with Redondo Beach's regulations, ordinances and policies. No Party shall be obligated hereunder to bring any action against the Third Party for breach of its obligations under the contract. 3. Supervision of Third Party —Redondo Beach shall be responsible for coordinating the activities of Third Party, including coordinating the scope of work to be performed by the Third Party. Redondo Beach shall forward all invoices submitted by the Third Party to the Representatives for review and comment. 4. Payment — Upon contract execution with a Third Party, Redondo Beach shall invoice each Party for its respective share of the contracts total costs based on the formula described in Exhibit B. Each Party shall pay that invoice within sixty (60) days of receipt. Any change orders costs will be invoiced separately up to the maximum amount shown in Exhibit B. 5. Caltrans Budget Contingency — All obligations of Caltrans under the term of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of the resources by the Legislature and the allocation of resources by the California Transportation Commission. This MOA has been signed by Caltrans before ascertaining the availability of federal or state legislative appropriation of funds, for the mutual 9 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 benefit of the Parties in order to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the MOA was executed after that determination was made. This MOA is valid and enforceable as to Caltrans, as if sufficient funds have been made available to Caltrans by the United States Government or California State Legislature for the purposes set forth in this MOA. If the United States Government or the California State Legislature does not appropriate sufficient funds for Caltrans to participate in this MOA, this MOA may be amended in writing by the Parties to reflect any agreed upon reduction in the percentage of funds contributed by Caltrans to continue its participation in this MOA. Caltrans however has the option to withdraw from this MOA in the event sufficient fund are not appropriated for Caltrans. Should Caltrans exercise its option to withdraw from this MOA, Caltrans shall remain responsible for its share of liability, if any, incurred while participating in this MOA. ARTICLE IV — GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Term of MOA — This MOA shall continue in effect until the earlier of July 1, 2006 or six (6) months after the Implementation Plan is approved in writing by the RWQCB, unless earlier terminated or extended by agreement of all Parties to the MOA. A Party may withdraw from this MOA ('Withdrawing Party") by sending a letter to each Party including the Primary Jurisdictions stating that Party's decision to withdraw from this MOA. However, prior to withdrawing, the Withdrawing Party must be current on all financial obligations resulting from this MOA. Once the Party withdraws from the MOA it will no longer be a participant 10 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • s District Agreement No. 07-4705 in the Work prepared under this MOA. Further, the Withdrawing Party forfeits any funds contributed prior to withdrawal from the MOA. Withdrawal is effective sixty (60) days after the date of written notice to the Primary Jurisdictions. If, however, the Withdrawing Party is Redondo Beach, withdrawal is effective sixty (60) days after executing an assignment of the Third Party contract to another Party to the MOA to serve as the new Contracting Agency. 2. Amendment — This MOA may be amended in writing in the same manner the MOA was entered. 3. Authority — Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a Party represents and warrants that they are authorized to sign this MOA on behalf of such Party. 4. Counterparts - This MOA may be signed in counterparts, and each counterpart shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. A copy of all signature pages is attached hereto as Exhibit C and made a part of this Agreement. 5. Indemnification- Each Party shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each of the other Parties, including their Special Districts, elected and appointed officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all liability, including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses (including attorney and expert witness fees), arising from or connected with the acts arising from and/or relating to this MOA. 6. Mutual Grant of Entry- During the term of this MOA, each Party hereby grants to every other Party the right of access and entry to all storm 11 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705 drains, creeks, beaches, and existing monitoring stations at beaches subject to this MOA (the "Property") to achieve the purposes of this MOA. Prior to exercising said right of entry, the entering Party shall provide written notice to the Party who owns and/or retains jurisdiction over the Property. For the purposes of this provision, written notice shall be delivered to the Party Representative at least 48 hours in advance of entry and the Party seeking entry must receive confirmation to proceed from the Party that owns and/or retains jurisdiction over the Property before entering the Property. The Parties shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless each other Party, their Special Districts, elected and appointed officers, employees, and agents, from and against any and all liability, including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses (including attorney and expert fees), arising from or connected with the entry onto the Property. This indemnification is in addition to the other indemnities made herein. 7. Access to Caltrans Facilities- Any Party intending to enter onto a Caltrans right of way shall first make a written request to the Caltrans party listed in Exhibit B; identifying the site location, extent of access by persons (and equipment if any), dates and times of entry, as well as an explanation of the purpose of that entry. Caltrans will thereafter determine, within ten (10) working days, if that entry will be allowed without a formal encroachment permit issued by the District Permit Engineer as an authorized presence of non -Caltrans parties not interfering with or threatening the safety of the traveling public or the integrity of the Caltrans' infrastructure. In such case, Caltrans will condition that right of 12 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705 entry on the accompaniment of a Caltrans representative who shall be empowered to restrict or limit the access of those permitees as deemed necessary, in the sole discretion of Caltrans. Where adverse impacts to traffic or the traveled way can be anticipated by Caltrans, Caltrans may require the applicant Party to submit a formal encroachment permit application, to be filed and completed together with Traffic Control Plans when necessary (which must be prepared by or under the supervision of a traffic engineer licensed in the State of California) with the District Permit Engineer. An encroachment permit may require as much as six (6) weeks to be issued depending upon the extent of coordination and development of traffic controls required for that access. 8. Notices— Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports relating to this MOA, and any request, demand, statement or other communication required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the Representative of the Party at the addresses set forth herein below. Written notice shall include notice delivered via email. A notice shall be deemed to have been received on (a) the day of delivery, if delivered by hand during regular business hours or by confirmed facsimile or by confirmed email; or (b) on the third business day following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid to the addresses set forth herein. 9. Relationship of the Parties- The Parties are, and shall at all times remain as to each other, wholly independent entities. No Party to this MOA shall have power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of any other Party except as expressly provided by this MOA No employee, agent, or officer of a 13 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • Dist l:t Agreement No. 07-4705 Party shall be deemed for any purpose whatsoever to be an agent, employee or officer of another Party. 10. Governing Law — This MOA shall be governed, interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the law of the State of California. 11. Severability- If any provision of this MOA shall be determined by any court to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this MOA shall. not be affected and this MOA shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this MOA. 14 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • District Ao cement. Nn 07-4705 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have signed this MOA on the date afterwards indicated. City of Manhattan Beach By: Date: Geoff Dolan, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Liza Tamura, City Clerk Robert V. Wadden, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Manhattan Beach Public Works Department 3621 Bell Ave. Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 City of Hermosa Beach By: Date: Art Yoon, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Dr Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 15 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement 1 'District Agreement No. 07-410 City of Redondo Beach a Chartered Municipal Corporation By: Date: Gregory C. Hill, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sandy Forrest, City Clerk John Eastman, Assistant City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Redondo Beach Engineering and Building Services Department 415 Diamond Street Redondo Beach, CA 90277 City of Torrance a Municipal Corporation By: Date: Dan Walker, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sue Herbers, City Clerk John L. Fellows, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Torrance Public Works Department — Engineering Division 20500 Madrona Torrance, CA 90503 16 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. n7-4705 City of El Segundo a General Law City By: Date: Mary Strenn, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney By: By: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney Mailing Address: City of El Segundo Public Works Department 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 17 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement District cIreement No. 07-4705 County of Los Angeles Acting on behalf of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District By: Date: Don Knabe, Chair - Board of Supervisor By: Date: James A. Noyes, Chief Engineer Attest: Approved as to Form: VIOLET VARONA-LUKEN Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL By: By: Deputy Deputy Mailing Address: Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Watershed Management Division, 11th Floor 900 South Fremont St. Alhambra, CA 91803 18 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • District Agreement No. 07-4705 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Tony V. Harris Director of Transportation, Acting By: Date: Douglas R. Failing District Director Approved as to Form & procedure: Certify as to funds: By: By: William B. Bassett District Budget Manager Attorney Certify as to Financial Terms and Conditions: By: Accounting Administrator Address: California Department of Transportation District 07 120 South Spring Street, MS 13 Los Angeles, Califomia 90012 Attention: Bob Wu 19 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement • Exhibit A District Agreement No. 07-4705 Copy of Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial Total Maximum Daily Load Resolution No. 2002-022 (6 pages) Attachment A (17 pages) Attachment B (1 page) Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement w District Agreement No. 07-4705 Exhibit B Cost Sharing Formula All Parties agree to share the cost of preparing the draft and final implementation plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 & 6 on a tributary area basis. The following table shows cost sharing distribution and maximum contribution amount: Jurisdiction Tributary Area (acres) Contribution Percentage Maximum Contribution Amount Manhattan Beach 2023 24.991% $46,233 Hermosa Beach 901 11.130% $20,591 Redondo Beach 2623 32.403% $59,946 Torrance 2289 28.277% $52,312 El Segundo 21 0.259% $479 County of Los Angeles 172 2.125% $3,931 Caltrans 66 0.815% $1,508 Total 8095 100.000% $185,000 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Memorandum of Agreement State of California California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region RESOLUTION NO. 2006 007 April 6, 2006 Statement of support for the efforts of responsible iurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional roups 5 and 6 to utilize an integrated water resources approach to achieve G. full co.mpliance With the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria Wet Weather TMDL t the shortest possible timeframe and no later than 2021 WHEREAS, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, I.os Angeles Region, finds that: 1. • The federal Clean Water Act(CWA) requires the California Regional Wates Quality Control Board, Los. Angeles Region (Regional: Board) to develop water quality standards which include beneficial use designations and criteria to protect beneficial uses for each water body found within its region. 2. The Regional Board carries out its CWA responsibilities through California's Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act and establishes water quality objectives designed toprotect beneficial uses contained in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles. Region (Basin Plan). 3. Section 303(d)of the CWA regpires'states to identify and to prepare a list of water bodies that do not meet water quality standards and then to establish load and waste load allocations, or a total maximum daily toad (TMDL),, for each water body that will ensure attainment of water quality standards and then to incorporate those allocations into their water quality control plans. 4. Many of the beaches along Santa Monica Bay were listed on California's 1998.section 303(d) List, due to impairments for coliform or for beach closures associated. with :bacteria generally. The beaches appeared on the 303(d) List because the elevated bacteiia and beach closures prevented full support of the beaches' designated use for water contact recreation(1). 5. A consent decree between the LJ.S..Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Heal the B.ay,.Inc. and Santa Monica BaAeeper, Inc. was approved on March 22, 1999_ This court order required completion of a TMDL to reduce bacteria at Santa Monica Bay beaches by March 2002. 6. The Regional Board adopted two TMDLs to address bacteriological water quality impairments for 44 beaches along Santa Monica Bay located in Los Angeles. County, California. The Regional Board adopted a TMDL to address water quality impairments during dry weather on January 24, 2002 and a ThfDL to address wet weather impairments on. December 12, 2002 (Resolutions 2002-004 and 2002-022, respectively). 7. The Regional Board incorporated the dry weather and wet weather TMDLs along with appropriate implementation measures into its Basin Plan as required (40 CFR 130.6(c)(1), ATTACHMENT 2 Resolution No. 2006.407 Page 2 130.7). The Basin Plan and applicable statewide plans serve as the State Water Quality Management Plans governing the watersheds under the jurisdiction. of the Regional Board. 8. .The Regional Board established the above-mentioned TMDLs to preserve and enhance the water quality at Santa Monica Bay beaches and for the benefit. of the 55 million beachgoers, on average, that visit these beaches each year. At stake is the health of swimmers and surfers and associated health costs as well as sizeable revenues to the Iocal and state economy. Estimates are that visitors to Santa Monica Bay beaches spend. approximately $1.7 billion. annually. 9. The Regional .Board's goal in establishing the above-mentioned TMDLs is to reduce the risk of illness associated with swimming in marine waters contaminated with bacteria. Local and national epidemiological studies compel the conclusion that there is a causal relationship between adverse health effects, such as gastroenteritis and upper respiratory illness, and recreational water quality, as measured by bacteria indicator densities: The water quality objectives on which the TMDL numeric targets are based will ensure that the risk of illness to the public from swimming at Santa Monica Bay beaches generally will be no greater than 19 illnesses per 1,000 swimmers, which is definedby the USEPA as. an "acceptable health risk" in marine recreational waters. 10. The Dry Weather and Wet Weather.Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDLs cover 44 beaches and 29 subwatersheds, with multiple jurisdictions and agencies that are responsible D for compliance. Therefore, in the Wet Weather TMDL for implementation planning the Regional Board grouped the subwatersheds into Jurisdictional Groups. Each Jurisdictional Group is comprised of one or more subwatersheds, the beach(es) associated with these subwatersheds, and all responsible jurisdictions and agencies within the subwatershed(s). Each Jurisdictional. Group is assigned a primary jurisdiction. A.primary jurisdiction is that jurisdiction comprising greater than fifty percent of the subwatershed land area..The primary jurisdiction is responsible for submitting an implerirentation plan for the Jurisdictional Group per the requirements of the Wet Weather TMDL. 11. Jurisdictional Group 5 is responsible for one subwatershed, referred to as the Hermosa subwatershed. The primary jurisdiction is the City of Manhattan Beach. Other participating responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Group 5 include the Cities of El Segundo and Hennosa..Beach, County of Los Angeles and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 12. Jurisdictional Group 6 isresponsible for one subi,vatershed, referred to as the Redondo subwatershed. The primary jurisdiction is the City of Redondo Beach. Other participating responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Group 6 include the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and Torrance, County of Los Angeles and Caltrans. 13. During the adoption of the wet weather TMDL, the Regional Board recognized two broad approaches to implementing the TMDL. One possible approach is an. integrated water resources approach that takes a holistic view of regional water resources management by integrating planning for future wastewater, storm water, recycled water, and potable water needs and systems; focuses on beneficiaire-use of storm water, including groundwater infiltration, at multiple points throughout a watershed; and addresses multiple pollutants for which Santa Monica Bay or its watershed are listed on the CWA section 303(d) List as impaired. The other possible approach is a non-integrated water resources approach in which As Adopted on 04/06/06 Resolution No. 2006-007 Page 3 implementation is achieved by focusing on narrowly tailored, end -of -the -pipe solutions to improve bacteriological water quality without incorporating other environmental and public goals. 14. The Regional Board recognized that. an integrated water resources approach not only provides water quality benefits to the people of the. Los Angeles Region, but also that the responsible jurisdictions implementing this TMDL canserve a variety of public purposes by adopting an integrated water resources approach. An integrated water resources approach will address multiple pollutants, and as a result, responsible jurisdictions can recognize cost -savings because capital expenses for the integrated approach will implement several TMDLs that. address pollutants in storm water. In addition, jurisdictions serve multiple roles for their citizenry, and an integrated approach allows for the incorporation and enhancement of other public goals such as water supply, recycling and storage; environmental justice; parks, greenways and open space; and active and passive recreational and environmental education opportunities. 15. The Regional Board acknowledged that a longer timeframe is reasonable for anintegrated water resources approach because: it requiresmore complicated planning and: implementation such as identifying markets for the water and efficiently siting storage and transmission infrastructure within the watershed(s) to realize the multiple benefits of such an approach. Therefore, after considering testimony, the Regional. Board revised the implementation provisions of the TMDL to allow for a longer implementation schedule (up to 18. years) if the responsible jurisdictions and agencies clearly demonstrate their intention to undertake an. integrated water resources approach and justify the need for a longer implementation schedule. In contrast, the Regional Board required a shorter implementation schedule (up to 10 years) for non-integrated approaches because the level of planning is not as complicated, 16. The Regional Board has the authority to provide compliance schedules through the basin planning process. In the wet weather TMDL, adopted by the Regional Board, the Regional Board established dual schedules for implementation that afford the responsible jurisdictions and agencies up to ten or eighteen years, depending on the implementation approaches pursued, to implement. the wet weather TMDL. 17. The implementation provisions in Table 7-4.4 of the wet weather TMDL state that, 'the implementation schedule. will be determined.on the basis of the implementation plan(s), which must be submitted to the Regional. Board by responsible jurisdictions and agencies within two years of the effective date of the TMDL" (Resolution 2002-022, Attachment A). 18. The implementation provisions in Table 7-4.4 further state that, -responsible jurisdictions and agencies must clearly demonstrate in the above-mentioned plan whether they intend'to pursue an integrated water resources approach." If the responsible jurisdictions and agencies prefer an integrated approach, there must. be a clear demonstration' of need for the longer implementation schedule in the implementation plan. Otherwise, at most a 10 -year implementation timeframe will be allotted by the Regional Board, depending upon a clear demonstration of the time needed in the implementation plan. 19. Per the requirements set forth in the wet weather TMDL, responsible jurisdictions and . agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 3 and 6 jointly submitted a draft'Implementation Plan to the Regional Board on March 15, 2005. Regional Board staff met with the responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 to review and provide comments on the. draft implementation Plan. Regional Board staff also provided written comments to As Adopted on 04/06/06 Resolution No. 2006-007 Page 4 the responsible jurisdictions and agencies in a letter dated May 26, 2005. The responsible jurisdictions and agencies submitted a final Implementation Plan to the Regional Board on July 15, 2005. 20. The Implementation Plan submitted by Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 is an iterative, adaptive implementation plan designed to address wet- and dry -weather TMDL issues. The Implementation Plan incorporates the principles of an integrated water resources approach by addressing' additional pollutants, integrating water conservation methods, and identifying beneficial reuse opportunities as detailed in section 4.4 of the Plan. 21_ The Implementation Plan lays out three management approaches within an iterative framework that is designed to identify and implement those implementation actions that. are found. to be most effective in achieving compliance with the TMDL. The three broad management approaches are programmatic solutions, structural best management practices (BMPs), and source identification and control. 22. The implementation schedule proposed by Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 is phased over 16 years with a final compliance date of 2021 ( 18 years after the effective date of the TMDL). The implementation plan is divided into three phases. Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 will begin Phase of the three management approaches described in (22) simultaneously. 23. At the first interim milestone in July 2009 (10% wet -weather reduction in exceedance days), Phase I of programmatic solutions will have been. implemented -and Phase 1 source identification investigations will be complete. Phase Ti of these two management approaches will be underway. At the second interim.milestone in. July 2013 (25% wet -weather reduction), one entire cycle of all three phases of programmatic solutions and source control measures will be complete. Additionally the pilot phase and.final assessment of site-specific structural BMPs will be: complete (Phase II). The combined effect of source controls implemented in high priority drainage areas with appropriate expansioninto other drainage areas, and all three phases of programmatic solutions implemented throughout Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 is expected to achieve the first two interim Milestones of a 1.0% and 25% reduction in wet weather exceedances. 24. Regional solutions are a secondary, resort in managing runoff and reducing bacteria loading at the. beaches. However, due to scientific uncertainties it is not. possible to guarantee that the irplementationactions outlined in the Implementation Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 will achieve the necessary reductions in exceedance days as required by the TMDL. Therefore, it is essential to start the feasibility and conceptual analyses for regional solutions early in the implementation schedule (prior to 2013) in order to identify potential land requirements, physical. limitations, and implementation issues. Because these regional solutions require a significant amount of time to plan and implement, beginning the feasibility analyses early will. provide the responsible jurisdictions. and agencies sufficient time to make changes and other arrangements and still keep to the implementation schedule. 25. Interested persons and the public have had reasonable opportunity to participate in the development and review of the Implementation Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6. The responsible jurisdictions. and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 held two half-day stakeholder workshops during the development of the Implementation Plan. These were .held on October 19, 2004 and January 18, 2005. As Adopted on 04/06106 • Resolution No. 2006-007 Page 5 26. The final Implementation Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 submitted by the responsible jurisdictions and agencies to the Regional Board was posted' on the Regional Board's website in advance of the April 6, 2006 Board heating. A Notice of Hearing was published and circulated 30 days preceding Board action; Regional Board staff responded to oral and written comments received from the public; and the Regional Board held a public hearing on April. 6, 2006 to consider the Implementation. Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6. THEREFORE, be it resolved that pursuant to Regional Board Resolution 2002-022} Attachment A, Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan — Los Angeles Region to incorporate Implementation Provisions for the Region's Bacteria Objectives and to incorporate the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Wet Weather Bacteria TMDL, Table 7-4.4, "Implementation", adopted by the Regional Board on December 12, 2002 and effective on July 15, 2003: I. The Regional Board hereby acknowledges the submission of a draft Implementation Plan and final Implementation Plan dated July 15, 2005 by responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6, including the Cities of Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo arid Torrance, County of Los Angeles and Caltrans, per requirements of the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria Wet Weather TMDL as set forth in Resolution 2002.4)22, Attachment A, Table 7--4.7. 2. The Regional Board hereby determines that tie responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 as identified in :(1).have demonstrated at a. conceptual level in the Implementation.Plan that they intend to pursue an:integrated water resources approach as defined in the.Santa _Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria Wet -Weather TMDL, Table 7=4,4. 3. The Regional, Board. hereby determines that assuming the responsible.jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 as, identified in (1) 'adequately comply with the terms of this:resolution, they will have demonstrated based on their conceptual plan the need for the longer implementation schedule as outlined in the final Implementation Plan dated July 15,: 2005, which commits to a final compliance date of July 2021. 4. Given the conceptualcommnitment to an integrated water resources approach. and to achieving final compliance by July 2021 outlined in the: Implementation Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6, the Regional Board strongly supports and encourages the efforts of the responsible jurisdictions and agencies to (1) aggresaively implement early actions. as outlined in the Implementation Plan and (2) make timely'adjustments and refinements to the Implementation Plan to ensure that bacteriological water quality impairments at Santa Monica Bay beaches are resolved in the shortest possible timeframe. 5, The Regional Board encourages an integrated water resources approach and recognizes that additional time may be necessary to pursue such an approach to TMDL implementation. In order to clearly justify an extended implementation schedule beyond 1.0 years and up to 18 years from the effective date of the TMDL, the responsible jurisdictions and agencies are required to submit additional quantifiable analyses as described below to demonstrate (1) the proposed plans Will meet the interim and final WLAs and (2) the proposed implementation actions will achieve multiple water quality benefits 'and other public goals. As Adopted on 04/06106 Resolution No. 2006-007 Page 6 The Regional Board strongly encourages responsible jurisdictions and agencies pursuing an integrated water resources approach to employ natural methods as opposed to end -of -pipe, whenever it would be effective and feasible. 6. Per the provisions of the TMDL, the Regional Board will determine, when the TMDL is reconsidered in 2007, if a longer implementation schedule (up to 18 years from the TMDL effective date) shall be granted if there is a clear demonstration that an integrated water resources approach will be pursued. The types of approaches proposed coupled with quantifiable estimates of the integrated water resources benefits of the proposed structural and non-structural BMPs included in the Implementation Plan would provide the obligatory demonstration that an integrated water resources approach is being pursued. This demonstration shall provide numeric estimates of the benefits, including reductions in other pollutants, groundwater recharged; acres of multi- use projects and. water (e.g. stormwater, runoff, wastewater) beneficially reused among other integrated water resources criteria outlined in the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Wet Weather Bacteria TMDL. Responsible jurisdictions and agencies should .submit to the Regional Board technically defensible quantifiable estimates of integrated benefits for actions to meet the first and second interim'co_mpliance deadlines (6 and 10 years after the effective date of the TMDL, respectively). This information must be submitted within 9 months to allow sufficient time for staff analyses prior to the Board's reassessment of the TMDL, scheduled for July 2007. 7, The Regional Board recognizes that it is critical to establish a technically defensible quantitative linkage to the interim and final waste load allocations (WLA.$) to measure process ttwaid achieving the WLAs. The linkage should include: target .reductions: in storrnivater runoff and/or total coliform, fecal coliform and enterococcus using the 901b percentile year for the jurisdictional group and each individual subwatershed. The Regional Board .also recognizes that it is essential to establish quantitative estimates of the water quality benefits provided by the proposed structural and. non-structural BMPs to meet the first interim compliance deadline (6 years after the effective date of the TMDL), and preliminary estimates of the benefits provided by the proposed BMPs to meet the second interim compliance deadline (10 years after the effective date of the TMDL). These estimates, including a quantitative analysis of their linkage to the interim WLAs, are necessary to provide assurance that interim compliance deadlines will' be achieved given the uncertainties involved in an integrated water resources approach: Estimates should address reductions in exceedance days, bacteria concentration andloading, and flow in the drain and at each beach compliance monitoring location. Responsible jurisdictions and agencies should submit such information to the Regional Board within nine months so that the Regional Board staff will have time to assess the information in time for the reconsideration of the TMDL. S. The Regidnal Board directs staff to develop draft language for Board consideration that incorporates into the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System. (MS4) NPDBS permit at reissuance explicit requirements for responsible jurisdictions and agencies in Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 to submit single coordinated regularreports to the Board on progress toward achieving the required reductions set forth in the TMDLs. These single coordinated regular reports may be submitted as part of the Los Angeles County MS4 Annual Program and Annual Monitoring reports. Reports on progress toward compliance with the TMDL shall. include data and information on (1) water quality improvements in the receiving water, (2) the effectiveness of BMPs implemented as part of the Implementation Plan for As Adopted on 04/06/06 Resolution No. 2006-007 Page 7 Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 measured in terms of water quality improvement and quantity of wet weather runoff reduced, captured, treated, or infiltrated; and (3) the performance of other programmatic solutions, source identification activities and source control measures. Data on water quality improvements may include for example reductions in exceedance- days compared to historical data and interim milestones, where appropriate; the proportion of wet weather days that exceed the water quality objectives by storm year as defined in the TMDLs; and corresponding rainfall data as set forth in the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacterial T?biDLs Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring Plan submitted by responsible jurisdictions and agencies. Given the iterative approach outlined in the Implementation Plan for Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6, reports shall also include documentation on changes and refinements to the Implementation Plan based on the results of shoreline monitoring data, data on BMP effectiveness, and evaluations of pilot projects and other implementation actions under consideration. Such updates to the Implementation Plan shall include revised quantitative estimates of the water quality benefits of the proposed BMPs and the linkage to the waste load allocations identified pursuant to (7) above. 9, The Regional Board further directs staff to develop draft language for Board consideration that incorporates into the Los Angeles County MS4 NPDES permit at reissuance specific provisions to reopen the TMDL section of the permit and incorporate, after providing the opportunity for public comment, TMDL-related provisions as well as additional implementation actions, including but not limited to. institutional controls, source identification and control, and structural and treatment controls if adequate progress is not being made to achieve compliance with Santa. Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDLs. 10, The Regional Board anticipates the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as a responsible agency to work cooperatively with the responsible jurisdictions and agencies under the Los Angeles County MS4 NPDES permit to achieve compliance with the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL,including requirements as set forth pursuant to (8) and (9) above. In the event that Caltrans decides to proceed independently to address compliance with the TMDL, Caltrans will be required to meet.the applicable significant dates for responsible jurisdictions and agencies as contained in Attachment A to Resolution No. 2002- 022, Table 7-4.7. 1.1. The Regional Board encourages responsiblejurisdictions and agencies to begin feasibility studies and planning for regional solutions to managing wet weather runoff and bacteria loading: early in the implementation schedule (prior to 2013) to ensure sufficient time to redirect implementation activities if necessary to include regional solutions and still achieve the final compliance deadline. 1, Jonathan Bishop., Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a fulj, true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control. Board, Los Angeles Region, on April. 6, 2006. e— than. S, Bishop xecutive Officer As Adopted on 04/06106 • • District Agreement No. 07-4705/A1 07 -LA -1 -PM 17.4/23.49 Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan Development Groups 5 and 6 District Agreement No. 07-4705/A1 EA 910204 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIA TMDL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT JURISDICTIONAL GROUPS FIVE AND SIX This is an Amendment No. 1 to the Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") effective on July 1, 2004, entered into by and among the City of Redondo Beach ("Redondo Beach"), a chartered municipal corporation; the City of Manhattan Beach ("Manhattan Beach"), a general law city; the City of Torrance ("Torrance"), a municipal corporation; the City of Hermosa Beach ("Hermosa Beach"), a body corporate and politic; the City of El Segundo (El Segundo), a general law city; the County of Los Angeles ("County"), a political subdivision of the State of California and the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") (individually "Party" and collectively, "Parties"), a fully executed copy of the MOA which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. This Amendment No. 1 modifies the MOA with respect to the following: Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement ATTACHMENT 3 District Agreement No. 07-47051A1 RECITALS A. WHEREAS, on July 15, 2005, the Parties submitted the Implementation Plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (RWQCB); and B. WHEREAS, on April 6, 2006, the RWQCB held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2006-007, a copy is attached hereto as Exhibit B, which requires the responsible agencies within Jurisdictional Groups 5 & 6 to submit a report to the RWQCB by January 6, 2007. The report will contain information specified in said resolution that will support the schedule as delineated in the Implementation Plan; and C. WHEREAS, the Parties of both responsible jurisdictions in either Jurisdictional Group 5 or 6 need to work together cooperatively in order to complete the report described in Paragraph B above within the allotted 9 months; and D. WHEREAS, the MOA is set to terminate on July 1, 2006 and the Parties need to extend the term of MOA to cooperatively complete said report within the allowed time period. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and representations made herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 1. Article IV, Paragraph 1 of the MOA is modified as follows: "1. Term of MOA — This MOA shall continue in effect until July 1, 2008, unless earlier terminated or extended by agreement of all Parties to the MOA. A Party may withdraw from this MOA 2 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705/A1 ("Withdrawing Party") by sending a letter to each Party including the Primary Jurisdictions stating that Party's decision to withdraw from this MOA. However, prior to withdrawing, the Withdrawing Party must be current on all financial obligations resulting from this MOA. Once the Party withdraws from the MOA it will no longer be a participant in the Work prepared under this MOA. Further, the Withdrawing Party forfeits any funds contributed prior to withdrawal from the MOA. Withdrawal is effective sixty (60) days after the date of written notice to the Primary Jurisdictions. If, however, the Withdrawing Party is Redondo Beach, withdrawal is effective sixty (60) days after executing an assignment of the Third Party contract to another Party to the MOA to serve as the new Contracting Agency." 2. All other terms or conditions of the MOA shall remain in full force and affect and are not modified by the Amendment No. 1. 3 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional. Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705/Al IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto agree to sign this Amendment No. 1 to Memorandum of Agreement on the date afterwards indicated. City of Manhattan Beach By: Date: Geoff Dolan, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Liza Tamura, City Clerk Robert V. Wadden, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Manhattan Beach Public Works Department 3621 Bell Ave. Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 City of Hermosa Beach By: Date: Art Yoon, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Dr Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 4 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705/Al City of Redondo Beach . a Chartered Municipal Corporation By: Date: Mike Gin, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sandy Forrest, City Clerk Michael W. Webb, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Redondo Beach Engineering and Building Services Department 415 Diamond Street Redondo Beach, CA 90277 City of Torrance a Municipal Corporation By: Date: Dan Walker, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sue Herbers, City Clerk John L. Fellows, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Torrance Public Works Department — Engineering Division 20500 Madrona Torrance, CA 90503 5 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705/Al City of El Segundo a General Law City By: Date: Jeff Stewart, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney By: By: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney Mailing Address: City of El Segundo Public Works Department 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 6 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-47051A1 County of Los Angeles Acting on behalf of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District By: Don Knabe, Chair - Board of Supervisor By: Donald L. Wolfe, Chief Engineer Attest: SACHI A. HAMAI Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles By: Deputy Mailing Address: Date: Date: Approved as to Form: RAYMOND G. FORTNER, Jr. County Counsel By: Deputy Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Watershed Management Division, 11th Floor 900 South Fremont St. Alhambra, CA 91803 7 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 0 4705/A STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Will Kempton Director of Transportation By: Date: Douglas R. Failing District Director Approved as to Form & procedure: Certify as to funds: By: By: William B. Bassett District Budget Manager Attorney Certify as to Financial Terms and Conditions: By: Accounting Administrator Address: California Department of Transportation District 07 100 South Main Street, Suite 100, MS 13 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: Bob Wu 8 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • DistrictAariment n Exhibit A Copy of Memorandum of Agreement Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Implementation Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • Exhibit B District c: it gr,.met No 07 Copy of RWQCB Resolution No. 2006-007 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Implementation Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705/A2 07 -LA -1 -PM 17.4/23.49 Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan Development Groups 5 and 6 District Agreement No. 07-4705/A2 EA 910204 AMENDMENT NO.2 TO MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIA TMDL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT JURISDICTIONAL GROUPS FIVE AND SIX This is Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") effective July 1, 2004, entered into by and among the City of Redondo Beach ("Redondo Beach"), a chartered municipal corporation; the City of Manhattan Beach ("Manhattan Beach"), a general law city; the City of Torrance ("Torrance"), a municipal corporation; the City of Hermosa Beach ("Hermosa Beach"), a body corporate and politic; the City of El Segundo (El Segundo), a general law city; the County of Los Angeles ("County"), a political subdivision of the State of California and the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") (individually "Party" and collectively, "Parties"). A fully executed copy of the MOA is attached hereto as Exhibit A. This Amendment No. 2 modifies the MOA with respect to the following: 1 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement ATTACHMENT 4 District Agreement No. 07-47051A2 RECITALS A. WHEREAS, on July 15, 2005, the Parties submitted the Implementation Plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (RWQCB); and B. WHEREAS, on April 6, 2006, the RWQCB held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2006-007, a copy is attached hereto as Exhibit B, which requires the responsible agencies within Jurisdictional Groups 5 & 6 to submit a report to the RWQCB by January 6, 2007. The report will contain information specified in said resolution that will support the schedule as delineated in the Implementation Plan; and C. WHEREAS, the Parties of both responsible jurisdictions in either Jurisdictional Group 5 or 6 need to work together cooperatively in order to complete the report described in Paragraph B above within the allotted 9 months; and D. WHEREAS, the MOA termination date was extended to July 1, 2008, by Amendment No. 1 executed on July 28, 2006; and E. WHEREAS, the Parties need to modify the 'Work" and the monetary contribution of all of the Parties. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and representations made herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 1. Article I, Section 1 of the MOA is modified as follows: "1. Purpose of MOA — The Parties voluntarily enter this MOA to cooperatively and voluntarily devise and jointly fund: 1) an 2 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705!A2 implementation plan that is consistent with the provisions of the Bacteria TMDL and which shall include the development and submittal of an Implementation Plan, with any incidental documentation necessary to achieve the goals consistent with the Bacteria TMDL and 2) prepare a report as required by RWQCB Resolution No. 2006-007. The activities described in this Article I, Section 1, shall be referred to hereinafter as the 'Work." 2. Article I1, Section 8 of the MOA is modified as follows: "8. Minutes — The Chair may select a secretary to draft and distribute written minutes of all Work and Special Meetings to the Party Representatives at the addresses designated below within five (5) work days after each Work or Special Meeting." 3. Article I11, Section 1 of the MOA is modified as follows: "1. Funding Agreements Any funds contributed for the Work, including contributions for consultants or other services as agreed upon by the Parties, shall be calculated using the cost- sharing formula described in Exhibit B. All funding shall apply to the Work, and shall not be used to implement any recommendation contained in the Implementation Plan or the report, as required by RWQCB Resolution No. 2006-07. The total contribution by all of the Parties shall not exceed $229,000 unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties by written amendment of this MOA. Caltrans funding encumbered under this MOA is evidenced by the signature of its 3 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4705/A2 District Budget Manager certifying as to funds in the maximum sum of $1,866 having been allocated and encumbered to pay Caltrans share of the Work costs. Any cost to be invoiced above this sum will require an amendment to this MOA." 4. Existing Exhibit B — Cost Sharing Formula table of the MOA is modified as follows: Jurisdiction . Tributary Area (acres) Contribution Percentage Original Maximum Contribution Amount Change in the Maximum Contribution Amount Modified Maximum Contribution Amount Manhattan Beach 2023 24.991% $46,233 $10,996 $57,229 Hermosa Beach 901 11.130% $20,591 $4,897 $25,488 Redondo Beach 2623 32.403% $59,946 $14,257 $74,203 Torrance 2289 28.277% $52,312 $12,443 $64,755 El Segundo 21 0.259% $479 $114 $593 County of Los Angeles 172 2.125% $3,931 $935 $4,866 Caltrans 66 0.815% $1,508 $358 $1,866 Total 8095 100.000% $185,000 $44,000 $229,000 5. All other terms or conditions of the MOA shall remain in full force and affect and are not modified by the Amendment No. 2. 4 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No.07-4705/A2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto agree to sign this Amendment No. 2 to Memorandum of Agreement on the date afterwards indicated. City of Manhattan Beach By: Date: Geoff Dolan, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Liza Tamura, City Clerk Robert V. Wadden, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Manhattan Beach Public Works Department 3621 Bell Ave. Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 City of Hermosa Beach By: Date: Sam Edgerton, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Dr Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 5 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-47051A2 City of Redondo Beach a Chartered Municipal Corporation By: Date: Mike Gin, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sandy Forrest, City Clerk Michael W. Webb, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Redondo Beach Engineering and Building Services Department 415 Diamond Street Redondo Beach, CA 90277 City of Torrance a Municipal Corporation By: Date: Frank Scotto, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Sue Herbers, City Clerk John L. Fellows, City Attorney Mailing Address: City of Torrance Public Works Department — Engineering Division 20500 Madrona Torrance, CA 90503 6 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement • • District Agreement No. 07-4705/A2 City of El Segundo a General Law City By: Date: Jeff Stewart, City Manager Attest: Approved as to Form: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney By: By: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney Mailing Address: City of El Segundo Public Works Department 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 7 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreement No. 07-4.705/A2 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Acting on behalf of itself and the LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT By: Michael D. Antonovich Mayor, Los Angeles County Attest: SACHI A. HAMAI Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles By: Deputy Mailing Address: Date: Approved as to Form: RAYMOND G. FORTNER, Jr. County Counsel By: Deputy Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Watershed Management Division, 11th Floor 900 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803 8 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement District Agreemen.. No. 07-4705/A2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Will Kempton Director of Transportation By: Date: Douglas R. Failing District Director Approved as to Form & procedure: Certify as to funds: By: By: William B. Bassett District Budget Manager Attorney Certify as to Financial Terms and Conditions: By: Accounting Administrator Address: California Department of Transportation District 07 100 South Main Street, Suite 100, MS 13 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: Bob Wu 9 Santa Monica Bacteria TMDL Jurisdictional Groups 5 and 6 Implementation Plan Development Amendment to Memorandum of Agreement s AGENDA S PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 December 6, 2006 7:00 P.M. Kent Allen Langley Kersenboom Sam Perrotti Ron Pizer Peter Hoffinan 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call ALL PRESENT. 3. Oral / Written Communications Chairman Anyone wishing to address the Commission regarding a matter not related to a public hearing on the agenda may do so at this time. Section I Consent Calendar Any Planning Commissioner or public wishing to pull an item from below may request to do so at this time. 4. Approval of October 17 and November 21, 2006 minutes ACTION: APPROVED (5-0). 5. Resolution(s) for adoption Section II Public Hearing(s) 6. CUP 01-1 -- Modification or Revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for on -sale alcohol, live entertainment with two stages and additional bar and added seating, outside dining and outsidewaiting area in conjunction with a restaurant at 705 Pier Avenue, Club 705/Saffire (continued from November 21, 2006 meeting). 2p Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate. ACTION: CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY 16, 2007 MEETING AS REQUESTED BY THE BUSINESS OWNER (5-0). 7. CON 06-11/PDP 06-10 -- Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 67594 for an eight -unit residential condominium development and adoption of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 731,737 and 739 21st Street (continued from October 17 and November 21, 2006 meetings). Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. ACTION: APPROVED (5-0). 8. CUP 06-10 -- Conditional Use Permit amendment to modify the conditions of approval for an existing restaurant with on -sale alcohol and live entertainment to permit the use of televisions within the outdoor seating area on Pier Plaza at 22 Pier Avenue, Dragon. Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate. ACTION: DENIED, PENDING ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION AT THE NEXT MEETING (3-2; COMMISSIONERS HOFFMAN AND KERSENBOOM NO). CON 06-14/PDP 06-15 -- Conditional Use Permit and Precise Development Plan for a two - unit condominium at 1634 Loma Drive. Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. ACTION: APPROVED WITH MODIFICATION (5-0). Section HI Hearing(s) 10. TEXT 06-5 -- Text amendment regarding City Yard and Civic Center rezoning. Staff Recommended Action: To initiate a General Plan Text Amendment, General Plan Map Change, and Zone Change for the City owned property referenced above. ACTION: SET THE MATTER FOR A FULLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING (5-0). Section IV 11. Staff Items a. Tentative future Planning Commission agenda. b. Community Development Department Activity Report of October, 2006. ACTION: RECEIVED AND FILED. (5-0). 12. Commissioner Items 13. Adjournment 2 Jc/c December 4, 2006 City Council Meeting December 12, 2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 06-1276 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 17 — ZONING, PERTAINING TO RECONSTRUCTION OF NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS." Submitted for waiver of full reading and adoption is Ordinance No. 06-1276, relating to the above subject. At the meeting of November 28, 2006, the ordinance was presented to the City Council for consideration and was amended at the end of the first paragraph under both "A. Residential Building" and "B. Commercial/Industrial Buildings" to read "...as long as the cause of the destruction is not intentionally perpetrated by the owner and..." The ordinance, as amended, was then introduced by the following vote: AYES: Keegan, Reviczky, Tucker, Mayor Edgerton NOES: Bobko, ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Noted: Stephe anager Elaine Doeriling, City Clerk ORDINANCE 06-1276 AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 17 — ZONING, PERTAINING TO RECONSTRUCTION OF NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 17, 2006, and recommended amending the Zoning Ordinance with respect to reconstruction of nonconforming buildings. SECTION 2. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on November 28, 2006, to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission to amend the Municipal Code pertaining to reconstruction of nonconforming buildings. SECTION 3. The subject text amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to the general rule set forth in Section 15061(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, as there is no possibility that the proposed modifications to the text may have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance contained herein are consistent with the Hermosa Beach General Plan in that the proposed amendments modify and clarify the provisions that pertain to the reconstruction of nonconforming buildings, which will allow reconstruction of damage buildings in order to preserve the existing character of neighborhoods, consistent with the policies of the Land Use Element. SECTION 5. Hermosa Beach Municipal Code; Title 17 -Zoning; Chapter 17.52, Nonconforming Buildings and Uses; Section 17.52.070 is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.52. 070 Reconstruction of a damaged nonconforming building. A. Residential buildings A nonconforming residential building damaged by fire, explosion or other casualty or act of God, or the public enemy, may be restored to its pre -damaged condition and the occupancy or use of such building or part thereof which existed at the time of such destruction may be continued 1 06-1276 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 as long as the cause of the destruction is not intentionally perpetrated by the owner and provided that: 1. The rebuilt structure conforms as closely as possible to current parking and other zoning standards (such as setbacks); 2. There is no increase in any nonconformity; 3. The density of the buildings or buildings on site does not exceed forty-five (45) units per acre; 4. The height of the building or buildings does not exceed twenty (20) percent more than permitted by the zone in which it is located; 5. The basic structural features, setbacks, floor area, and room sizes can be duplicated in compliance with current building and safety codes; Should the restoration deviate in any respect from the pre -damaged condition of the building, any such deviation shall conform in all respects with the current requirements of this title. B. Commercial/Industrial Buildings A nonconforming commercial or industrial building located in the commercial or manufacturing zones damaged by fire, explosion or other casualty or act of God, or the public enemy, may be restored to its pre -damaged condition and the occupancy or use of such building or part thereof which existed at the time of such destruction may be continued as long as the cause of the destruction is not intentionally perpetrated by the owner and provided that: 1. The rebuilt structure does not exceed the gross floor area and footprint of the building prior to damage or destruction; 2. There is no increase in the occupant load of the building or of any nonconforming condition; 3. The damaged building can be duplicated to its pre -damaged condition in compliance with current building and safety codes; 4. Reconstruction includes installation of a fully code complying fire sprinkler system. 2 06-1276 \. Should the restoration deviate in any respect from the pre -damaged condition of the building, any such deviation shall conform in all respects with the current requirements of this title. C. If damage to structures is so widespread throughout the city due to a major emergency (such as an earthquake or citywide fire) that the city council or other government authority declares a state of emergency, this section will be superseded by any action of the city council taken at that time in regards to reconstruction of damaged buildings. SECTION 6. 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 7. 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 o general circulation published and circulated, in the City of Hermosa Beach in the manner provided by law. SECTION 8. 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 12th day of December 2006, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney 3 06-1276 aet 6-1271- ▪ 0 5/3 ) "?z -LC)- 6,S/Y C Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council SUBJECT: CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 10, 2006 MEETING December 4, 2006 /44 Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 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 11170 RECONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CAR WASH (AUTO DETAILING) WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION APPLICANT: GENE SHOOK Planning Commission Recommendation To sustain the Planning Commission decision to approve the requests subject to conditions of approval as contained in the attached separate resolutions for approval of the restaurant and car detailing service. Background: PROJECT INFORMATION: ZONING: GENERAL PLAN: EXISTING RESTAURANT AREA: PROPOSED NEW RESTAURANT AREA: PARKING IN HERMOSA PAVILION: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION, SPA 8 -Specific Plan Area Commercial Corridor 912 Sq. Ft. (Stillwater Bistro) 6,704 Sq. Ft. 540 spaces, (454 standard, 42 tandem, and up to 44 parallel valet spaces) Categorically Exempt On August 15, 2006, the Planning Commission approved the applicant request for a Conditional Use Permit for on -sale alcohol at Stillwater Bistro, and approved a modification to the building Parking Plan to allow a larger proportion of the Pavilion to be allocated for the restaurant,' subject to standard conditions for on -sale alcohol and more restrictive 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 On October 10, 2006, the City Council conducted a public hearing to review and reconsidered the Planning Commission decision and continued the matter in order to address the following issues: 1 5a&5b • 1. New parking survey to determine if the building parking spillover problems have been resolved relative to occupancy of the garage and parking operations. 2. Review of lower level parking parallel parking stall dimensions and aisle clearance. 3. Review of adjoining resident complaint of excessive HVAC noise from the building; 4. Review of noise from parking gates and garage ventilation fans. 5. Review of traffic circulation and striping on 16th Street. On October 17, 2006, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow a car wash (automobile detailing) within the Hermosa Pavilion parking structure, allowing the use of four parking stalls on the entrance level for the water -less auto detailing service. On October 24, 2006, the Council voted to review and reconsider the Commission's approval with the restaurant appeal at the December 12, 2006 meeting. Issues: 1. The applicant submitted a parking study prepared by Walker Parking Consultants to supplement the previous analysis prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (L.L.G) conducted in February, 2006. The new study updated the shared parking analysis based on existing occupancies and ;provides detailed hourly parking counts both within the structure and on nearby streets. The L.L.G. shared parking analysis is based on the projected peak demand of all existing and anticipated uses and differs from the Walker Study which uses actual parking data from gate entries in the building (at 80% current occupancy). The new study is based on actual counts from ticket validations (See Table 7 on Page 10), and then adds the "worst-case" projected future demand with the remaining restaurant and retail uses. In sum, the study corroborates that parking supply is adequate, and concludes that when the building is fully occupied there will be a parking demand of 420 spaces at the peak demand time of 6:00 P.M. on weekdays, for surplus of 76 spaces (not including the tandem parallel valet stalls --see Page 10 of the Study). The L.L.G. study had projected a peak demand at 5:00 P.M. on weekdays of 426 spaces, for a surplus of 70 spaces so the parking projection of 76 spaces is comparable to actual parking count supplied by Walker. The analysis also looks at neighborhood street spillover parking, but without the intercept survey in the L.L.G Study. The new study includes on street parking counts and concludes that the problem has largely been resolved since free parking is available within the Pavilion and there is no longer any economic incentive to parking on nearby residential streets (Page 13).2 The on -street parking data in conjunction with the hourly data that shows high usage of the parking structure between 5:00 and 8:00 P.M. and suggests that the free parking has reduced the use of on -street parking by fitness club members. Staff has also conducted its own parking count of lower level parking within the building during Monday peak periods identified in the LLG report. Staff's counts show that during the peak times between 5:00 and 8:00 P.M. weekdays that ample parking is available for restaurant use (over 50% of the 271 spaces in the lower levels are still available). Staff also observed that attendants or signs were at the garage entry during these periods to divert traffic to the lower levels. These observations further corroborate the data in the Walker study, and also suggest high usage of the structure at the peak times for the fitness club means the demand for on -street parking has been reduced. 2 • • 2. Staff inspected the garage parallel stalls and adjacent aisles and confirmed that all parking stalls, driving lanes and valet parallel parking stalls meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The parallel parking stalls are intended for valet parking use only and stripped per the layout on the approved plans. Field measurements show that these stalls are painted at 8'-6" wide with no stall length painted, but the area allows up to 19 stalls on floor two, 20 stalls on floor three and 5 stalls on floor one for a total of 44 stalls. The access aisle abutting the parallel spaces provides 8.5' of clear space, consistent with approved plans and is adequate for circulation. 3. The HVAC noise complaint was investigated by the Senior Building Inspector who examined the building plans and the site conditions and found that the roofrop units have been installed consistent with approved plans. It is not possible to install a shroud on the unit to reduce noise without compromising the unit exhaust system. Also a wall installed around the unit will not eliminate sound transmission to the adjacent property. Therefore it is not possible to meet the stringent noise ordinance standard of no noise transmission audible at the adjacent residential property. 4. The Senior Building Inspector investigated the noise complalv that garage exhaust fans produced noise that is "clearly audible at adjacent residential property." The garage ventilation fans contain sound baffles (IAC 7MS " Sound Traps") to dampen sound while removing carbon monoxide from the parking structure as required under the Building Code. The Senior Building Inspector inspected the four (4) fan rooms (Two (2) at the north wall and one each on the west and east wall). Each fan room contained the required sound dampers. The size of the sound dampers varied in width and height. But each were a minimum of 8' in depth. Between the exhaust fan motor and sound damper, there is little if any room to add additional or larger dampers. The Senior Inspector checked the noise from the fans at ground level after the fans were turned and found that they are audible at adjacent residential property lines. He also contacted sound trap or duct silencer supplier (Industrial Acoustics Company) to see if there are other models that move the same quantity of air but have more effective sound dampening. No other products are available that fit in the discharge fans that also meet the air exchange requirements for the garage with more effective sound dampening features. Also using a smaller fan unit will not meet the air exhaust requirements under the Building Code.3 Therefore, it is not possible to meet the stringent noise ordinance standard of no noise transmission to adjacent residential property while complying with the garage air exhaust requirements of the Building Code. 5. Staff examined the parking gates and they do not transmit excessive noise and a catch basin cover located near the gate has been caulked to eliminate noise related to cars driving over the cover. 6. Staff conducted traffic counts alon 16th Street over a two week period east and west of PCH and prepared a striping plan on 16t Street to remedy the problem of west bound vehicles swinging wide to enter the Pavilion garage and then queing up and blocking west bound through traffic. (Pleases see Attachment No. 5) 3 • • New Building Program On December 4, 2006 the applicant submitted a new interior floor plan that shows the elimination of the retail wine shop within the restaurant business. The restaurant floor area has been reduced to 6,704 square feet (approximately 334 square feet less) and the wine and cheese shop is now a separate retail business with a separate address and entry containing 945 square feet. The retail shop located next door, will sell high quality wine and cheese and this retail use ("of sale beer and wine") is a listed permitted use when it closes by 11:00 P.M. In the original configuration the retail business that included wine tasting was connected through the interior to the restaurant and approved by the Planning Commission under the restaurant CUP for on -sale alcohol. Now that the businesses, are separate, wine tasting is considered as consumption, similar to "on -sale beer and wine" under the permitted use list which requires a separate C.U.P. This determination that the secondary use of wine tasting within a wine shop requires a C.U.P. was also made for the business at 302 Pier Avenue, Smokey Hollow, which obtained a C.U.P. for wine "sampling" in February, 2005. Also, the ABC requires a Type 42 on -sale license for any amount of tasting or sampling in conjunction with a Type 20 license for off -sale. Consequently the CUP for on -sale alcohol to include wine tasting must be considered under a separate application. 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 as originally included as part of the CUP application encompassing approximately 1,500, but the owner has redesigned the restaurant to exclude it from the restaurant business. The applicant indicates that wine tasting services will be provided in the wine retail area but will not provide any fixed seating in this area. (Please see attached revised plan.) 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 preliminary seating plan identifies 51 table s with 209 seats indoors, and 3 tables with 6 seats outdoors.. The applicant indicates that the lunch and dinner hours for the restaurant will be 11:00 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 are 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. The applicant is also requesting a special provision to allow operating hours to 1:00 A.M. on New Years Eve, and is requesting that televisions be allowed in the lounge bar area, and that patrons be allowed to use the outdoor patio area, both items that were prohibited by the Planning Commission. 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 4 • • 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 a separate retail and wine shop, that will only be connected to the restaurant by name. 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 range of businesses and services found along 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 Pacific Coast Highway and found that of the 306 business there are sixteen restaurants. Of the sixteen restaurants located on the 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 (with the exception of the slight redesign of the restaurant), 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), which was also confirmed by the Walker 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 slightly 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 restaurant customers and review of the CUP if there is a problem identified with the building parking adequacy or efficiency. 5 The slight reallocation of restaurant to retail use does not impact project parking since slight adjustments are allowed within the shared parking allocations. With the latest changes the approximate square footage for restaurant purposes is now approximately 6,704 square feet. The slight increase in the retail allocation for the larger wine shop may have an impact on the final tally for retail uses and will have to be evaluated with plans for the remaining 20% build -out for the project. The Parking Plan, however, allows the owner to make slight adjustments in the allocation as long as it consistent with the general allocations from the L.L.G.- shared parking analysis (Condition No. 19). Car Wash At their meeting of October 17, 2006, the Planning Commission approved the request for a Conditional Use Permit for the auto detailing business within the Pavilion: Auto detailing and car washing is a use found in many building garages and is not prohibited in the Building Code4. The auto detailing uses a waterless system with chemicals or steam that is applied for car cleaning. The residue is then vacuumed and no fluids are discharged into the storm drain system. The Commission approval was based on the minimal impact associated with this small business operation that would involve only 4 parking spaces, and that would have no impact on parking demand. The Walker parking study also briefly addresses the issue of the auto detailing business, stating that it's a detailing service for vehicles already parked on the premises generated by the site demand. Also, with parking attendants cars could be parked and/or serviced in tandem. CONCUR: Sol Blumen i-ld, irector Community I evelopment Stephen R. Burrell City Manager -n ' obert :'' Senior Planner Rick Mo gan, Director Public Works Pavilion Permit 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 area and 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 Variance for a modified development program (Total square feet 108,430 -office 25,380, health club 68,000 and retail 15,050). 6 • • 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 Planning Commission review of updated shared parking analysis submitted per Conditions of Approval of 03-45, based on existing and anticipated allocation of uses and neighborhood parking analysis and evaluation of spillover parking. • 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. 2. This conclusion is supported by the data presented in Appendix B of the Walker Study showing the actual hourly parking accumulation counts within the structure and on nearby streets, and on observations of the consultant. The hourly counts show that the on -street parking on 16th Street west of P.C.H. is still fully occupied almost all hours of the day between 6AM and 12AM, which suggests that these spaces are likely being used by residents of the condominium/apartments near this on -street parking supply, although this cannot be confirmed. Also, the counts clearly show that on -street parking east of P.C.H. typically is not fully occupied, without any clear trend that the usage increased during the peak use times of the health and fitness club. 3. The purpose of the sound baffles is to dampen sound. As sound baffles are added they add resistance to air flow of the exhaust fan and too many will render the exhaust system ineffective. Also there are physical space limitations on the number of baffles that can be installed on the system. 4. There are four (4) types of garages identified in the Building Code: H-4 Repair garages (Not limited to exchange of parts - open flame or welding permitted) Section 307.1.1 and 307.2.10). S-3 Repair garages (Limited to exchange of parts - no open flame or welding permitted) and parking garages (Mechanical ventilation required) Section 311.1 and Section 311.2.2 to 311.2.3) S-4 Open parking garages (no mechanical ventilation required) Section 311.1 and 311.9) U-1 Private garage - Section 312.1 through 312.8 The Pavilion garage is classified an S-3 Occupancy which does not prohibit car washing. Attachments: 1. Proposed Resolutions sustaining the Planning Commission re: restaurant and car wash 2. Walker Parking Study (separate attachment) 3. Staff parking review 4. LLG Parking Study excerpts 5. Public Works Traflic Survey and Alternate Striping Plan 6. PCH Restaurant/Bar Survey 7. Correspondence 8. Restaurant floor plans (separate attachment) 9. Car Wash plan (separate attachment) F:\B95\CD\CC\CUP1605PCH-stilhvater-revised. doc 7 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 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 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 Contemporary American Bistro, seeking approval for new restaurant proposed in the Hermosa Pavilion, Resolution 03-45) to modify and update the allocation analysis. Stillwater, LLC, on behalf of Stillwater on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a and amendment to the Parking Plan (P.C. of uses approved as part of the shared parking Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing 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, and December 12, 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. 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. 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 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, and the supplemental parking analysis prepared by Walker Parking Consultants dated December 4, 2006 the City Council makes the following findings pertaining the application to amend the Parking Plan to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion: 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 projected peak shared parking 2 9 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 • 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. Therefore, the study indicated that the shared parking impacts were immaterial to the supply of parking (Linscott Law and Greenspan; Parking Study Report, pg. 27) and the supplemental analysis prepared by Walker Parking Consultants, confirms that shared parking impacts, based on the existing actual peak parking counts with 80% of the building occupied and adding a worst case project parking demand for the remaining restaurant and retail uses, will easily be satisfied by the existing supply of parking. 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, have already been mitigated with the free validated parking applicable to the restaurant and to the entire building, and will continue to be mitigated with the condition that this validation program remain in effect for the Pavilion parking structure. Section 8. Based on the foregoing, the City Council sustains the decision of the Planning Commission 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 shall be substantially consistent with the plans submitted and reviewed by the City Council December 12, 2006. a. The Conditional Use Permit is for on -sale alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant and . 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. The kitchen shall remain open during operating hours to ensure that the use is maintained primarily as a restaurant. 3 /0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • 3. No televisions are permitted in any part of the restaurant. 4. The exterior access at the south east corner of the restaurant shall be used for emergency exiting only with appropriate signage and panic hardware. 5. The business shall not operate in a manner as to have an adverse effect on or interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of neighboring residential and commercial property. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. The restaurant shall not require any cover charge or fee for general entry into the restaurant or appurtenant areas. 9. If the Police Chief determines that there are a disproportionate number of police calls to the business due to the disorderly or disruptive behavior of patrons and the inability or refusal of the business to manage its patrons, the Chief may require on an interim basis thatthe business employ private security personnel. The Chief shall notify the Director of Community Development of this action, who shall forthwith schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider modification or revocation of this Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The exterior of all the premises shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and maintained free of graffiti at all times. 13. 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 4 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 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. 14. The project and operation of the business shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Municipal Code. 15. 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. 16.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. 17. 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 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 snack shops) 8,000 Auditorium 3,000 Storage 10,600 Total 110,600 Any material change to this allocation that increases parking demand requires amendment to the Parking Plan, and approval of the Planning Commission. 18. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to Planning Commission review 6 months after commencement of business operations and annually thereafter. Section 9. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owners of the property involved have filed at the office of the Planning Division of the Community Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. 5 j 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 i The Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan Amendment 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:\1395\CMCC\CUPr1601PCH-stillwatencloc 6 1 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 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 HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ON RECONSIDERATION, TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH 'AUTO SPA' WITHIN THE PARKING STRUCTURE OF THE HERMOSA PAVILION AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 13 AND 14, BLOCK 81, SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit for a car wash 'Auto Spa' within the parking structure of the Hermosa Pavilion and approved the request subject to conditions as contained in Planning Commission resolution 06-32. Section 2. On December 12, 2006, the City Council, pursuant to Section 2.52.040, initiated review and reconsideration of the decision of the Planning Commission. Section 3. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on December 12, 2006 to reconsider the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the subject Conditional Use Permit. Section 4. Based on the evidence received at the public hearing, and the record of the decision of the Planning Commission, the City Council makes the following factual findings: 1. The applicant is proposing to occupy four parking stalls within the parking structure of the Hermosa Pavilion to operate an automobile detailing business. 2. The City's Zoning Ordinance requires a Conditional Use Permit to operate an automobile detailing business, which is similar in both use and intensity as a car wash. Section 5. Based on the foregoing findings, and the findings contained in the Planning Commission Resolution 06-32, the City Council makes the following findings pertaining to the application for a conditional use permit: 1. The site is zoned S.P.A. 8 and is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the proposed development and the proposed use complies with the development standards contained therein; 2. The project, as conditioned, will conform to all zoning laws and criteria and will be compatible with neighboring residential properties; 3. The project is located in a large commercial building, the Hermosa Pavilion, which contains a mix of commercial uses, including a health and fitness club, offices, and retail uses 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 and large parking structure, containing sufficient shared parking to satisfy the peak demand of these mix of uses. The proposed use which occupies parking stalls that are in exceed of the required parking for thecurrent and proposed use of the entire shopping center, does not conflict with the stated purpose and general intend of the commercial zone. 4. The project is Categorically Exempt from the requirement for an environmental assessment, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Sections 15303(b) and 15315 with the finding that the project is in an area with available services. Section 6. After considering the decision of the Planning Commission and their record of decision, and the testimony at the public hearing, the City Council hereby sustains the decision of the Planning Commission on reconsideration to approve the conditional use permit for a car wash 'Auto Spa' within the parking structure of the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, subject to the conditions contained within Planning Commission Resolution 06-32, which are incorporated herein by reference, and amended to add the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The development and continued use of the property shall be in conformance with submitted plans, received and reviewed by the Commission at their meeting of October 17, 2006. 2. The business shall comply with all State and local laws and licensing requirements involving the operation of an automobile detailing or a car wash business. 3. The business shall not discharge water or fluids of any type into the storm drain system. 4. The operating hours shall be limited to between 8:00 A.M. and 11:00 P.M. 5. There shall be compliance with all requirements of the Building and Safety Division of the Community Development Department and Fire Department. 6. The establishment shall not adversely affect the welfare of the residents, and/or commercial establishments nearby. 7. Noise emanating from the property shall be within the limitations prescribed by the City's noise ordinance and shall not create a nuisance to surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. 8. Any significant changes to the parking layout, which would alter the primary function of the business as an automobile detailing or car wash business, or any changes that increase the intensity or type of use shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. 9. The project and operation of the business shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Municipal Code. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 • • 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\rs 1601 auto 16 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PAVILION PARKING OPERATIONS SURVEY December 6, 2006 This parking review was taken on four consecutive Monday evenings to evaluate the claim that the lower levels of the parking structure contained enough spaces to accommodate the anticipated demand of the proposed new restaurant. Reviews were made at 5, 6, & 7:00 p.m. Noted in the review were: 1. The presence of parking attendants and/or signs to divert traffic from the upper to the lower levels. 2. The number of open parking spaces on levels 2 and 3. 3. The number of vehicles parked in the parallel or "valet" parking spaces. 4. The number of vehicles parked in the tandem spaces which, according to the proposal would also be used for "valet" parking. Based on the documentation submitted, there are 271 total spaces in the two lower levels, of which 44 are parallel spots, for a total of 227 non -parallel spaces. The results of the survey are: At 5:00 p.m. there was an average of 182 open spaces, not counting parallel spaces, meaning that 45 spaces were taken, or that the lower levels were 20% occupied. At 6:00 p.m. there was an average of 134 open spaces, not counting parallel spaces meaning that 93 spaces were taken, or that the lower levels were 42% occupied. At 7:00 p.m. there was an average of 122 open spaces, not counting parallel spaces meaning that 105 spaces were taken, or that the lower levels were 46% occupied. At no time of observation were any of the 44 parallel parking spaces, sometimes referred to as "valet"spaces, being used. Another area of concern has been the size of the parking spaces. Our review and measurements found the following: All of the areas striped for parallel parking are at least 180 feet long and are divided into ten spaces, equaling an average of 18 feet per space. The width of the driving lanes, from pillar to pillar, is 25'6". The parallel spaces are 8'6". When parallel spaces are used, it will leave a drive lane 17' wide. DATE/TIME PKNG ATTNDNT SIGN OPEN SPACES LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 Oct. 16 — 5 pm NO NO Oct. 16 — 6 pm YES NO Oct. 16 — 7 pm YES NO 105 71 68 63 54 48 # CARS IN TANDEM SPACE # CARS IN PARALLEL SPACES Oct. 16 — 5 pm Level 3 = 5 Level 2 = 0 Oct. 16 — 6 pm Level 3 = 13 Level 2 = 5 Oct. 16 — 7 pm Level 3 = 11 Level 2 = 7 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 October 16 — 5:00 p.m. Both entries are open with no attendants. Right, no parallel parking on level 2. DATE/TIME PKNG ATTNDNT SIGN OPEN SPACES LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 Oct. 23 — 5 pm YES YES Oct. 23 — 6 pm YES YES Oct. 23 — 7 pm YES YES 111 78 64 72 49 67 # CARS IN TANDEM SPACE # CARS IN PARALLEL SPACES Oct. 23 — 5 pm Level 3 = 6 Level 2 = 0 Oct. 23 — 6 pm Level 3 = 15 Level 2 = 4 Oct. 23 — 7 pm Level 3 = 14 Level 2 = 6 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 5 p.m. Barriers at self parking, attendant directs traffic into lower levels. Bottom of level 2 has several cars, employees park here. • • DATE/TIME PKNG ATTNDNT SIGN OPEN SPACES LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 Oct. 30 — 5 pm NO NO Oct. 30 — 6 p YES YES Oct. 30 — 7 pm YES YES 106 79 72 70 64 69 # CARS IN TANDEM SPACE # CARS IN PARALLEL SPACES Oct. 30 — 5 pm Level 3 = 7 Level 2 = 2 Oct. 30 — 6 pm Level 3 = 17 Level 2 = 5 Oct. 30 — 7 pm Level 3 = 16 Level 2 = 7 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 6 p.m., some tandem spaces taken on level 3. 7 p.m. traffic directed into lower levels. DATE/TIME PKNG ATTNDNT SIGN OPEN SPACES LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 Nov. 6 — 5 pm YES NO Nov. 6 — 6 p NO NO Nov. 6 — 7 pm NO NO 104 75 65 60 72 68 # CARS IN TANDEM SPACE # CARS IN PARALLEL SPACES Nov. 6— 5 pm Level 3= 9 Level 2= 1 Nov. 6 — 6 pm Level 3 = 16 Level 2 = 3 Nov. 6 — 7 pm Level 3 = 12 Level 2 = 4 6 pin- Open parking spaces on level 2. rq Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 Level 3 = 0 Level 2 = 0 5 pm — Both levels are open attendant is inside. • • TO: SOL BLUMENFELD, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JAMES M. GUERRA, BUILDING DIVISION MANAGER DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2006 SUBJECT: 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (THE PAVILION) GARAGE EXHAUST FANS Per your request I reviewed the previous permit and inspection records for the installation of the parking garage exhaust fans at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway (The Pavilion). While I was unable to locate the approved mechanical plans for project, I was able to find and review the as -built mechanical plans. The plans called for the replacement of the existing garage exhaust ducts with four (4) new Twin City exhaust fans Model Numbers 441, 631 (2 each) and 771. Two (2) exhaust fans were to exhaust to North property line one (1) each to the west and south property line. In addition, each exhaust duct was to have a "sound trap" or duct silencer IAC Model 7MS. I contacted the manufacturer of the duct silencer, Industrial Acoustics Company, (IAC) via e-mail and asked the question if a different duct silencer could be installed to further reduce the noise. Their e-mail responses were as follows: "The short answer is yes, but everything in duct selection is the compromise between acoustical performance and acceptable pressure drop". "..there is always a trade-off between acoustic and aerodynamic performance. There are silencers that will you give you a higher acoustic performance than the model MS, but they will also result in a higher pressure loss. I would imagine that the model MS was originally chosen because it gave the best attenuation, while operating with the allowable pressure limit range." I also contacted Richard Holzer, M.E., Glumac Engineering, the designer of replacement exhaust system. He verified that the use of MS duct silencer was the based on the exhaust design requirements and the most sound efficient silencer that could be installed and have the exhaust system function as designed: I also reviewed the permit inspection records from Koury Engineering & Testing who performed the field inspections on behalf of the City for the exhaust replacements. The mechanical inspector, Michael Lewis, inspected and gave final approval on June 28, 2005. I arranged for a field inspection of the exhaust systems with Mr. Shook for Thursday, November 2, 2006. Mr. Holzer was to be present for the inspection but did not show up. With Mr. Shook and his assistant I inspected all four (4) exhaust fans and silencers and verified that they were installed per the as -built plans. As part of my inspection, I verified Model Number for each IAC MS Duct Silencer. I also verified the installation of the carbon monoxide sensors throughout the various garage levels. When CO2 is detected in the • • garage, the exhaust fans activate and air is exhaused from whatever level or section of the garage where the CO2 was detected. As part of my inspection, I had each exhaust fan manually turned on so I could listen to the noise level at the three (3) property lines. Per section 8.24.040 of the municipal code, when each exhaust fan is in operation it is "plainly audible" at each property line. It is apparent that occupants of the condominiums at both the west and north property line can hear the exhaust fans when in operation. The noise level is greater at the north property line due to both the size of the exhaust fans and "echo effect" of the north property line wall. Based on the design of original exhaust fans and duct silencers and distance to property lines, I concluded that no modification of the existing exhaust systems would bring the systems into compliance with section 8.24.040 of the municipal code. I 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 bf.• %2 •$ Clare. M. Look -Jaeger, Principal LINSCOT.T .LAW & GRRENSP; Linscott, law & Greenspan, Enyinee 234 E Colorado Bivd. Suite 400 :Pasadena, CA 91101 6.6.76Z72:7 626.792.0941 r vI'wwil geng ineers.coi 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 parkinganalysis complies with the project's Condition of Approval, whereby a parking study update (i.e., 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,.. as well ..as for .the ..planned. future 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, HBP 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. UNSCOTr, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers Z3 LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP Parking Study Report O VDR_flLE1i6"S54cpora a:-1202.due • Kids Kabaret: s auditorium type use is designed t8/provide a facility 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 LINSC017, IAW.& GREENSPAN, enghleers LW Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP Parking Study Report 0:vod FILEstin J snpx.dor 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. LUNscorr, LAW & GREENSPAN. engineers LLG Ref. 1-06-3625 HBP 'Parking Study Report 0:110R F1LE1S615WportLti2SRs2.6s • w 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 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 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 HBP 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. LiNSCOFr, LRA' & GREENSPAN, engineers 2(� LLG Ref 1706-3625 • NBP Parking Study Report OA) OB Rt.0.ss+cmtltotis-40..doc • 16TH STREET - SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC COUNTS WEEKDAY 24 HOUR TOTALS LOCATION 02/07/06 06/23/06 09/26/06 11/21/06 11/27/06 W/O PROSPECT N/A 149 879 1255 1238 E/O PCH 822 889 866 1192 1215 W/O PCH 3538 4284 5048 6165 N/A E/O ARDMORE N/A N/A N/A 3462 N/A y4t y VI LII I • TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY LOS ANGELES COUNTY * * * HEPJ.jOSA BEACH * * * /OUL44JOO 10.2 16TH 5/0 ARDMORE 11-15-06 1,479 EB 2,039 NB 3,518 TOTAL 16TH E/O ARDMORE 11-16-06 1,476 EB 2,020 WB 3,496 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 ARDMORE 11-17-06 1,449 EB 1,948 WB 3,397 TOTAL 16TH E/O ARDMORE 11-18-06 1,213 EB 1,494 WB 2,707 TOTAL 16TH E/O ARDMORE 11-19-06 1,040 BB 1,374 16TH WB 2,414 TOTAL E/O ARDMCRE 11-20-06 1,620 EB 1,545 WB 3,566 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 ARDMORE 11-21-06 1,550 3B 1,912 WB 3,462 TOTAL 16TH W/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-15-06 2,775 EB 3,605 WB 6,380 TOTAL 16TH W/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-16-06 2,632 RB 3,430 WE 6,062 TOTAL 16TH W/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-17-06 2,677 EB 16TH 3,142 WE 5,619 TOTALW/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-18-06 2,233 EB 2,701 WE 4,934 TOTAL LETH W/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-19-06 2,029 EB 2,548 WB 4,577 TOTAL 16TH W/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-20-06 2,777 ES 16TI-i 3,546 WB 6,323 TOTAL W/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-21-06 2,727 EB 3,438 WB 6,165 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-15-06 614 EB 501 WB 1,115 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-16-06 660 EP 521 WE =6TH 1,181 TOTAL E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-17-06 665 EB 549 WE 1,214 TOTAL 16TH E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-:8-06 535 EB 434 NB 969 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-19-06 493 EB 16TH 332 WE 825 TOTAL E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-20-06 591 EB 577 WB 1,168 TOTAL 16TH 5/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-21-06 674 EB 518 W$ 1,192 TOTAL 16TH W/O PROSPECT 11-15-06 801 38 386 WB 1,187 TOTAL 16TH W/O PROSPECT 11-16-06 821 EB 365 WE 1,186 TOTAL 16TH W/O PROSPECT 11-17-06 683 EH 437 WE 1,120 TOTAL 16TH W/O PROSPECT 11-18-06 551 EB 335 WB 886 TOTAL 16TH N/0 PROSPECT 11-19-06 396 EB 16TH 254 V76 600 TOTAL W/0 PROSPECT 11-20-06 711 EB 418 wB 16TH W/Q PROSPECT 11-21-06 TOTAL 11-21-06 662 EB 393 WE 1,255 TOTAL 1,....1111 Sal WI I • TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY LOS ANGELES COUNTY *** HERMOSA BEACH *** OUL�f 'fOOO p,L 16TH ST E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-23-06 426 TB 0 B 426 TOT 16TH ST E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-24-06 739 TB 16TH ST E/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 0 B 739 TOT 11-25-06 750 TB 0 B 750 TOT 16TH ST E/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-26-06 717 TB 0 B 717 TOT. 16TH ST E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-27-06 16TH ST 1,215 TB 0 B 1,215 TOT. E/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-28-06 1,066 TB 16TH ST E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 0 B 1,066 TOT. 11-29-06 1,057 TB 0 B 1,057 TOT. 16TH ST E/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 11-30-06 1,067 TB 16THST B 1,067 TOT. I/OE/0 PACIFIC COAST HWY 12-01-06 1,074 TB 16TH ST E/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 0 B 1,074 TOT, 12-02-06 774 TB 0 B 774 TOT; 16TH ST I/O PACIFIC COAST HWY 12-03-06 731 TB 16TH ST 0 B 731 TOT; E/O PACIFIC COAST HNY 12-04-06 1,053 TB 16TH ST0 B 1,063 TOT; W/O PROSPECT 11-23-06 402 TB 0 B 402 TOTi 16TH ST W/O PROSPECT 11-24-06 16TH ST 673 TB 0 B 673 TOT/ W/O PROSPECT 11-25-06 668 TB 0 B 16TH ST W/O PROSPECT 11-26 0 B fi66 TOT/ -06 666 TB 666 TOT/ 16TH ST W/o PROSPECT 11-27-06 1,238 TB 16TH ST 00 B 1,238 TOT/ W/O PROSPECT 11-28-06 1,035 TB 0 B 1,035 TOT; 16TH ST W/O PROSPECT 11-29-06 1,085 TB 16TH ST 0 B 1,085 TOT. W/0 PROSPECT 11-30-06 1,093 TB 0 B 1,093 TOT. 16TH ST W/O PROSPBCT 12-01-06 1,090 TB 0 H 16TH 5T W/O PROSPECT 1,090 TOT.. 12-02-06 739 TB 0 B 739 TOT. 16TH ST W/O PROSPECT 12-03-06 694 TB 0 B 699 TOT 16TH ST P. W/O PROSPECT 12-04-06 1,030 TB 0 B 1,030 TOTP. Weekly Traffic Count Summary After PCH & 16th Signal installation .7, j �1 ;I MINI' iV•S•a•!,1 _. a.1 .. ..........:. I.r ,......,I,] .t'... , ......In...,a ......,.. l'Srd,,... ::...., _..,. :: �rPC':. .:r,::.S,.r.., f....# ............... ..................................._._...............•...,....?...i;;..: ..,....., ..:.:,•,•::, :,?ksas;+,;ks?!i:k!?:7; 5::::!.,..., ??;_. ::.::..:::::::.........:::::::::::::::::::::!..............�::::::.��iiii''i;:.:..:::..:,_:.....:........,... ?�? I? r�,aS?id:c'i IIF ''pp• h ,' it 1 s .c uir .., .n•.�d�,!� Yik .� ...� _E.. - R :. - k, . r ,... _m I ......a......� j�f.�� ,, � • � a.,..f ‘h:. -IE.' ..... If:a .. ..•h::. "±::..:,.. ;x,.ai^rl^,�: .--,.r.•7G: ea.n.._.., .;. _,-...,....,......Location., .,..... L, :::-::. ..........._.. ,.........:.. , ..... • r 1 Pi.d•r.a �Pn:-"144 _ hi ,,.,9,u. pr ;;auni:r•��t', k . .•� .....4.1 71 �I ' ?•1! .GI .i:. ti a,.._,.... ``l1�I:!�s•, 1._7>.; :e!?!r.�•m. .; l.r........,.i, r ? f ......... ..D...._.....1::-::......,...,: ................................. :,:,::::,•• :.. ..........• .:::.:::::::::::::::::::r:: :.. F �> rgi -�. s�, ,�r �' b..,b._.iCN � . 11 f', _c..._..... ... s::::.. ..uf�.,-5•.•n,..,.n, ,:uu,... . Cr'�,;i!S:,!,a1: .... , •::,�[.--�tuir " �� i L . , - ,4,1'',.f -Et h.. . k.r.. rlik'y�?r�! , n}F ,.... ,'ti. :1..,.M. _..,....:.,n,.,...ri ..........�.T.ue_............. ,........:.•::......, ,....,. •. ........ ...711 l,,,�. , ....,.0 , :?.'LV ) .. .olurnes::b..:Da ,s ?1' . iY.il �i:�•rc:Y-n• _ ,.i 7i�,._...,_...,.<.,.,_..,.,.,.r.,,...L,iV...._L :,........................:. ...Wed.......... _..._.... :=,,:.P? 'sp<::::,.:y::?s n..k ,? (Np.::..,s..?... , Y Y :,, ,•rrr. -., r• it i ,r,i:................ • of:W.eekd_1;5. ......:...::::::m:a,erS!�.•_,..,.,.i)•,.,.,..u.....,1.1.........,..1,,,.,..x.._,.,.,.,.,.,...,1, - hu<;i;;!!.� .... ,.,.-09/28/06,.......:.09/22/06:.:...:::=..'•09/23/06"s�:: .�a1', ❑;,,_PPt1e?! ?E!°y. , . ,.k... ,t ,a..0 Ixl:::i ::r:•= . r,!-1. � Fri:::... � ,-, .,q , li{ . t - ;Sl�, l it ,i. 111!r !r. -:. _ P,1 t .. r , , I ,� �S.s •�I , I 1 , , n..n. l : aa:::.:.. Sat:.......,•... .......... w u ::, ::•, i ,..p,, i �..r,:,�r!, I,, ,!,i :}H:at,;..: �. f) ,.. . ,. , . . I:'I;? ::,:::r,:; °i= i !:.,:,. Sun::;: ,'::0/2470'6 ;' .r Mon.......... r ......,.. :;ar:O9/25IO,..,:,... 09/25/06........09/26L06.::,.......09127(06 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 ;5,112;3'' : 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 : ;29'0;;;;;;;; 237 193 248 127 127 Total 806 8.79 ;;; 847 822 869 556 521 4 17th Street East of PCH Eastbound 181 202 149 239 212c''` 206 190 Westbound 103 132 219 142 1°9.0;`;; 155 ' 126 Total 284 334 368 381 !:"''';'402:.;:. 361 316 5 18th Street East of PCH Eastbound 206 308 369 ;:13:7,7;;;"'° 272 248 242 Westbound 76 206 114 '1,3'$ :;' • 217 224 156 Total 282 514 483 ;::5;1:5: ':::; 489 472 398 • • .........,....a.a.•••••••yoneaff , , , VIZ ' • " v;,,, Iggigpo, rS treltidiffrIgi.tag 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 vdlumeS. Daily Traffic Counts With Signal installed •.- 1:,..14-,-414-fAi-VIAlo:- -, .4g!ze:-.: geo.-tp_A-2,4.1,070.1:.5.,t. 'v,:iiN7.6.4i.V;;. •)-rwmA,f,-.5;.1,. • 9 : e.,' a-11,;Ksi Vet:kj,' .;:.'"' ati2-7:0;.:, F. At.,,,, - - . — - • ,,,1,-N , ri' a ' El 0 a . tr;..616- , V 0 li1 'WM 11,1..M'., -Y, 1,,,,,:et,r- •;-_-:,..4... Ar,i,P elf pkup 16th W/O Prospect Eastbound 72 63 n/a Westbound 77 88 n/a . 141 t tRP.; 16th E/O PCH Eastbound 550 482 568 Westbound 339 286 254 l::::,",,. l't";;F:PL!";i:-::1.:. :: 6.•:!-:,':;':.::::..? il l'i;-)41.4;7011N 16th W/O PCH Eastbound 1927 1588 1478 Westbound 2357 1961 2060 ..'4,AVVIIR.. Isi‘At04110:':V14M q:A167-1,-4;grai 17th E/O PCH Eastbound 267 242 n/a Westbound 121 90 n/a 0).W•i?i.,PO..1 ....,!?1W,i',§4 18th E/O PCH Eastbound 185 160 n/a Westbound 162 151 n/a Itta:00.4!--",:41: P*I'S,'•:'-',...if 'I 100'1 Bold Indicates Day With Higher Volume n/a Indicates Count Data Not Available masmanwasmcza wriamsDE masunatimaxam misimmun"63 momminamermsE cemnrimansmna L C- FNA1-11P6 sTrmt9LN.G- PLAN ori )4-N ST "to ) (1\11W R0\11E. RCCESS Ta PA \1 )1_.Lt0 N G RP GE I� t� D D U CO NG E S'T t o SPac�s 446 ,‘Dt 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 300 Feet 450 600 16th Street between Ardmore and PCH Dept. of Public works GIS Chris HaMenbrook October 2006 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. Tif{OP 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 33 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-4 FOR "ON -SALE" ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT, "STILL WATER CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN BISTRO," AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT 06-2 TO MODIFY THE ALLOCATION OF THE USES WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST #170." Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated October 2, 2006, and memorandum from Public Works Director Richard Morgan dated October 5, 2006. Supplemental traffic information (corrected page two) received October 9, 2006 from Director Morgan, and supplemental letter from Patty Egerer received October 9, 2006. Supplemental photographs were submitted by Ron Miller at the onset of the meeting. Community Director Blumenfeld presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing opened at 8:10 p.m. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Gene Shook — Pavilion owner/applicant, agreed that the "lot full" sign shown 'in the submitted photographs was badly worded and said he would change it; explained his attempt to direct cars from two overlapping classes to different parking entrances and said a parking attendant wasdirecting the cars; said the parking structure was never completely full but that more spaces could be provided by valet parking and employees parked in tandem; said he needed the midnight closing time because it was common for a dining party to remain 1-1/2 hours or so; said he hoped to have a TV in the bar area, with no sound, for sports fans, like other high-end restaurants; described experiments he conducted with an assistant, shouting and listening from various locations, and said the shouting was not as loud as the traffic noise; asked that smokers be allowed to step outside onto the patio; noted the additional storage areas required by the Health Department were not . reflected in thesquare footage figure quoted by the Planning Commission, that the square footage was not accurately presented in other cases, noting he did not want that to cause problems later; Ron Miller — Hermosa Beach, said he lived in the unit closest to the Pavilion parking garage and saw no attendant when he took the photographs; said the neighborhood's quality of life had decreased since the Pavilion opened; said the restaurant would make the still unresolved problems worse and should not be approved until the current street parking problems were solved; Bud Pfister — Hermosa Beach, said there are too many bars in town already and the noise from the people coming and going at the bars was worse than the parking problems; City Council Minutes 10-10-06 Page 12022 3`-j' • Lee Grant — Hermosa Beach, said there were successful restaurants and bars in the city, which was good, but with these successful businesses came numerous law enforcement problems;. asked if these businesses represented enough revenue for the City to pay for the increased law enforcement required; was concerned that the entertainment district was being expanded to PCH, with more of an impact to residents; Linda Miller — Hermosa Beach, said a comparison had been made between the proposed restaurant and some existing restaurants in Manhattan Beach and El Segundo, but that those businesses were not in close proximity to residential areas; was concerned that there had been meetings with Mr. Shook which were not public; Alan Thomen — Hermosa Beach, said he did not want another bar in town and that better parking control was needed in the neighborhoods near the Pavilion; suggested the use of red and green lights depending on which parking entrances were available instead of a "lot full" sign; Alan Strusser --. Hermosa Beach, said progress was good but not at the expense of the residents; said the two hours of free parking had not reduced Pavilion patrons parking on neighborhood streets and he had many confrontations with peopleparking on his street; wanted a safe school route for his children and said this facility had threatened that; Dave Peterson — Hermosa Beach, noted that the CUP stayed with the location, not the business; said a bar on PCH provided more potential DUI's than bars on the Plaza; said the wine shop should be approved separately, not as part of the restaurant; Nathan Coors an employee of Mr. Shook, said he had assisted with the noise -level testing in the neighborhood and that the traffic noise was louder than the noise they generated by shouting; Rosalind Bender —. Hermosa Beach, said the street parking problems had not been resolved; said the studies indicated that peak hours for 24 -Hour Fitness were 5 to 9 p.m. and peak hours for the proposed restaurant would be 7 to 9 p.m., which would overlap customers; questioned the need for a midnight closing if the restaurant's peak hours were 7 to 9 p.m.; said Fleming's Restaurant in El Segundo hada closing time of 10 p.m. on weeknights and 11 p.m. on weekends;• Howard Lonqacre — Hermosa Beach, said the Council's denial of a 2 a.m. closing at Mediterraneo at the last meeting had been a start in the right direction; questioned why anyone would want to patronize a high-end. restaurant located near a gym where patrons would be walking by in their sweats; said that a better business for this location might be a sport medicine center or some other type of professional offices; said if approved, the bar should not be open past 11 p.m.; Patty Eqerer -- Hermosa Beach, said the City had become a regional drinking district and parking was still' a problem near the Pavilion; doubted the figures shown in the traffic study; said if this project were approved, she would like to see a three-year sunset clause for protection should the restaurant prove to be unsuccessful; said there should be no advertising promoting the sale of alcohol;. said the restaurantshould not be approved because of incomplete data; City Council Minutes 10-10-06 Page 12023 r3S • • Jim Lissner — Hermosa Beach, asked for clarification regarding an ABC permit allowing the service of alcohol until 2 a.m. at a restaurant that is restricted by the City to an earlier closing time; said employees would leave later, even with a midnight closing and hoped they would be parked in the garage rather than on the neighborhood streets; Karl Newman — Hermosa Beach, said high-end restaurants had not always been successful in Hermosa and sometimes turned into bars; was concerned about noise enforcement; said parking signage issues had arisen before and not been resolved; said residents had a right to the comfortable enjoyment of their homes; asked that the Council not add to the current problems by allowing this restaurant; Sandy Seaman — Hen-nosa Beach, said the city did not need another bar and two hours of free parking was not enough; said he was a current and past owner of restaurants and that Mr. Shook was talking about having special banquets, which would increase parking requirements dramatically; said noise from taxis honking horns. would increase if this restaurant were approved; Tom Hudson — Hermosa Beach, said a midnight closing would mean that people wouldleave this restaurant and head to Pier Plaza for later hours whichwould mean many taxis honking their horns in residential areas; Carla Merriman — 'Executive Director of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and Visitors' Bureau, said she represented 350 member • businesses and the Chamber's Board of Directors, who supported the proposed Still Water 'Contemporary American Bistro as a fine dining establishment for residents and visitors staying in the City's hotels; said there would be a maximum of 178 diners at 35 tables and that the bar area was too small to qualify as an actual bar; said many residents welcome such an establishment but often only those opposed express their opinion; said sheunderstood the public's concern about noise and drunkenness, and did not condone that behavior, but asked the Council to have faith in this new business; noted that the PCH commercial corridor has 30 businesses and only two restaurants with liquor licenses; Greg Sampson — Hermosa Beach, said neither traffic nor parking issues had been properly addressed and that they should be resolved before any decision is made; Gene Shook — Pavilion owner, in rebuttal, said the seating plan submitted showed a total of 143 diners, not 178; said even though Fleming's website indicated a closing time of 10 p.m. on weeknights and 11 p.m. on weekends, anyone phoning would be told that customers arriving before those times would be allowed to stay until midnight; said the rooftop fans were 'in the same location as when building was constructed and that silencers had been added in accordance with noise levels approved by City. Action: To continue • the public hearing to the City Council meeting of December 12, 2006, and direct staff to report back on the size and number of City Council Minutes 10-10-06 Page 12024 3L parking spaces, roof equipment noise, improved parking garage signage, and to arrange for another traffic count by a different consultant, with the neighbors being made aware of the time the study is being performed. Motion Edgerton, second Tucker. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. T - meeting recessed at 9:53 p.m. The ' eeting reconvened at 10:22 p.m., with item 6(b). 6. NICIPAL MATTERS a. REQ ST FOR WAIVER OF BANNER PERMIT FEES FR MM THE HERM•.A BEACH WOMAN'S CLUB FOR THE ANNUAL/PANCAKE BREAKF T ON OCTOBER 22, 2006. Memorandum from :City Manager Stephen Bu ell dated October 4, 2006. City Manager : , rrell presented the staff report and re onded to Council questions. (This - m was acted on during public parti patios, but is shown in order for clarity.) Action: To approve the .taff recommendation to aive the $245 banner fee for the Woman's Club Ann .1 Pancake Breakfas on October 22, 2006. Motion Edgerton, second Re 'czky. The motiocarried by a unanimous vote. b. PIER AVENUE IMPROVEMEN PROJ Works Director Richard Morgan da : d Oc Public Works Director Morgan prese Council questions. T. Memorandum from Public ber 2, 2006. d the staff report and responded to Coming forward to address the Council n this item re: Diana Albergate — Hermosa Bach, supported ' aintaining the two lanes but questioned whether signals on Pier Avenu could be timed to improve the traffic flow; sal. she liked the change o two lanes because it slowed down traff and encouraged acts of indness by motorists; said a beach to n should be laid back; also ought the two-lane change was goad for the retail businesses on Pier enue; Joan Arias — Herm. a Beach, said the change on Pier Av ue from four to two lanes . d resulted in more traffic on 8th Street; : id there were backups the signal at PCH, the air quality has decre ed and her house ook with the increased traffic; said she would sub .ort traffic lights .n Pier Avenue and beautiful landscaping but wanted q e street retu r ed to four lanes; John Cr. diess — Hermosa Beach, concurred that traffic was worse o ' 8th reet; said he was concerned about the safety of his two s .1I /children because cars were either racing up the hill to make the gree light at PCH or speeding downhill; City Council Minutes 10-10-06 Page 12025 3� . : .. .. . . . . ... . . . . ...... „ November 30, 2006 City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Re: CUP for 8,000 square feet Restaurant with on -sale alcohol at the Hermosa *Beach Pavilion at 1601 (1605) Pacific Coast Highway HonorabfeCoimcil Members: .• As owner of the Hermosa Beach Pavilion (the "Subject Property"), I respectfully urge you to pass the CUP for my restaurant. t believe this will be an asset for the City: In regards to what was passed by the Planning Commission I would ask that the :following modifications be made. ,•,, : 1. ,Aft:Q.Nc9OKI.:to,tiipi:iiidiliglit close for New Years EVe:tO;Pharige the close to ....(........ UP) This is for only January lst of each year and no company will book a New Years eve party if they have to leave before New Years eve:: 2. The wine and cheese shop are now a separate entity that does not require to be part of the CUP (item 3 on CUP), their will be wine and cheese tasting at wine and cheese shop 3..... Allow the use of TV in lounge/bar area. Flemings and other fine dinning restaurants do have a TV in their bar area (item 5 on CUP). 4. Allow patrons of restaurant to be outside on the patio, although no food or drink will be served outside (item 6 and 9a on CUP). 5. That the current floor plan that is submitted with the package for the 12-12-06 meeting be used for purposes of CUP. 6. That on item 19 the words "or less than" shall be deleted (end of 3th line). . . . . .. .. .......... . : . . .... ...... .. : . ::.:• ". . . . . . .. : ..... .... . •• •••• •" " ....... . : . : •..• • ..... . . :.• .. .... . , . . . .... , ........... •:...• ••' .. ••• ...•.••, ........... • . • ..... 1 :; . ..... ...... •., ......... ..:.:.....: .... . „:: ..... • ...... ... .... . ..„ . . . ........ .. .. ...., . : . : .. .. ::': . : : : : . • • • • • • . •:':i ':•:. .. ':::.: .. .':- . :-:- • ' i' . i .. •:., .. ''•.' . ':.: ... ''.. .. . . :.:....:: .: .. 1•1..:. . . . . .. :: .. :.'..:.„1„ss'L.1_, ,......,„:„..,,,,..< 0. .,.e.- .zn. ..f.A..p.,,k..,,%+ ..,;2•I'ANt t4s• iZ•1. • ,..?..b.ct,.•;,:a• • oe.k• 1 4:4. :••.,:..,k V 1.L.g.• ',AVM..., :,•'S...:... .iv.,...,i,... •ik.x ..ck, 4d41:**".1*(i. N,,... • • ... : . ."' Sincerely, Gene Shook President Shook Development Corporation Fax 310 698-0701 Email gshook(@,shookdeyelOPMent.com . • ... • ..... . . ..... • ............. ......... k3. M • () NI 1 , P etoast,HIghlAW ... s SHLEMMER+ALGAZE+ASSOCIATES inferiors and architecture To: Walker Parking Consultants 2550 Hollywood Way Ste 303 Burbank, Ca. 91505 From: Gary Bouchard Shlemmer+Algaze+Assoc 6083 Bristol Parkway Culver City, Ca. 90230 Re: Hermosa Pavillion Parking Analysis Dear sirs, 6083 Bristol Parkway Culver City, CA 90230 310.553.3252 Phone 310.553.9449 Fax 3300 Irvine Avenue, Suite 130 Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.724.8958 Phone 949.724.1981 Fax Due to program changes within the Hermosa Pavilion, please make the appropriate changes to the Shared Parking Analysis Report you have submitted to Mr. Gene Shook. These changes most notably shall be reflected on page six of your report. Area Report S.F. Revised S.F. Stillwater Bistro 7038 S.F. 6704 S.F. Ste. 165/ Wine Retail 548 S.F. 945 S.F. Please review any and all impacts these changes create on the remainder of your report. Thank you. Gary J. Bouchard Cc: G.Shook R.l rmer L0 • • RESTAURANT AREA ANALYSIS WINE RETAIL 945 SF RESTAURANT DINING 3676 SF RESTAURANT BAR 655 SF RESTAURANT BACK -OF -HOUSE 2373 SF TOTAL SF 7649 SF STREET LEVEL 6 AREA USE ANALYSIS HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS • • WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 removed from this analysis). The current program for the Hermosa Pavilion is provided in Table 1. Table 1: Development Breakdown Current Land Uses 24 Hour Fitness Glen Ivy Kids Koboret Stit'water Cafe Keller Williams Seaside Office Suites Coast Capital Future Land Uses Gym Day Spa Auditorium Cafe/Restaurant Office Office Office Sq. Ft. 46,049 13,038 3,036 912 9,347 9,274 1,732 83,388 Stillwater Restaurant Suite 140 Suite 150 Suite 160 Suite 165 Suite 180 Suite 185 Suite 190 6 Kiosks Restaurant Retail Retail . Retail Retail, wine sale/tasting Retail Retail Retail Retail Non -demand Generating Land Uses (Warehouse) Warehouse VIP Lockers 7,038 1,499 4,442 688 548 1,537 423 417 360 16,952 12,180 600 12,780 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 113,120 Source: Shook Development, LLC, 2006. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PARKING REQUIREMENTS The City of Hermosa Beach evaluates whether a development is providing enough parking supply based on Chapter 17.44 of the City's Municipal Code. The minimum requirements for land uses in the Hermosa Pavilion have been summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2: City of Hermosa Beach Parking Requirements Current land Uses Gym Day Spo Auditorium Cafe/Restaurant Office Future land Uses Restaurant Retail Required Ratio 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 50sf 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 250sf Required Ratio 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 250sf Source: City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, 2006. Lf2 2 BITTONDESIGN group 29229 Canwood Street. Suite 105 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 P 818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 bittondesign.com Monday, December 04, 2006 Company Overview Bitton Design Group is a full service hospitality design firm giving its clients a comprehensive package of services that include interior, exterior, and graphic design. Eddy Bitton- President/Owner was born in Montreal, Canada, Eddy moved to Los Angeles in 1974 and was raised in North Hollywood, CA. The 42 - year -old designer is a graduate of California State University, Northridge with a degree in Interior Design. Over his 20 -year career Eddy has completed numerous projects for national and international corporations that have earned him the reputation as one of the top restaurant designers in the industry. Two years in a row the United States Historical Register gave Eddy an award for "Design Excellence". With his experience in the hospitality design field Eddy has gained the knowledge that it takes to shape raw ideas into innovative design concepts that capture the essence of a clients dream. He takes pride in the success of his designs regardless of the size. Some of are most noteworthy projects include the Ruth's Chris Steak House, located in Pasadena, California which was featured in their web site as "The most beautiful restaurant in the chain." Another spectacular restaurant with extraordinary design concept is Flemings Steak House located in El Segundo, California. Several restaurants concepts for the Kimpton Hotels including Grand Cafe located in San Francisco California, Sazerac located in Seattle Washington, Kuleto's located in Los Gatos California and Bambara located in Cambridge Massachusetts. Bitton design Group prides itself on providing world class destination restaurant with each different design. The proposed Stillwater Bistro located in Hermosa Beach has timeless architectural and design elements that are utilized to create a breath taking environment with endless appeal. Some of the highlights include an exhibition cook line highlighting the fresh food preparation, blended mahogany and walnut wood in contrasting stain, wood beam ceiling and crown molding, a fantastic onyx fireplace. • • One of the featured dining experiences include a wine cellar complete with a groin vaulted brick ceiling and columns along with antique chandeliers and wall scones. There simply is no other restaurant experience in the South bay that will compare to Stillwater Bistro. Please visit our website at Bittondesign.com and feel free to contact Bitton Design Group with any and all questions that you might have. Lf -q- • • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 7:33 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro Please include as part of the packet. R.ECEWED DEC 0 5 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT From: Dawn Alzina [mailto:dawna@pacificone.us] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 9:32 AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Plus I'd like to ad that I'm tired of going to Manhattan Beach for a "nice" dining experience. Our choices are slim here in Hermosa...we have very few nice dining establishments...and too many cheap party places....for example; Sangria, Patrick Malloys, Dragon...the list goes on...Then for food we have fun places; Buona Vita and Cantina Real...not sure which group to put Henessey's in?? The only adult place with great food is Cafe Boogaloo and Mediterraneo...but Boogaloo gets too loud sometimes with the music -and it's not fine dining. Hermosa Beach needs to grow up a little bit...a nice fine dining restaurant is a great addition to the city. Thank for taking your time to read this letter, Dawn Alzina 124/2006 • • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 7:37 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Grill Please include as part of the packet. RECEWED UEL 0 5 2006 COMMUNITY DEV, DEPT. From: Albro Lundy [mailto:Albro@BBLSURFLAW.com] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 6:37 PM To: Steve Burrell Cc: Maureen Hunt; Carla Merriman Subject: Stillwater Grill Dear Steve, I am writing this letter not as an attorney representative but as a homeowner, businessman and property owner here in Hermosa. I know you know that I am against the proliferation of establishments providing alcohol as well as the current practices of many of the establishments now serving alcohol. After the Mediterraneo hearing, I received many phone calls, emails and letters commending me for my thoughtful and persuasive arguments. Certain individuals especially appreciated my suggestion that we start truly enforcing our public drunkenness ordinance. The Beach Reporter even chose that argument to quote me in the article about the hearing. That being said, my arguments in favor of Mediterraneo being allowed to stay open on the weekends to 2 are the same ones I would opine for Stillwater (which, by the way, are inserted by reference herein). We need to change the atmosphere of HB. We need upscale restaurants with upscale clientele. This bring us visitors the general populace desires --law abiding citizens who enjoy a cocktail but do not get drunk, throw up on our sidewalks or people's lawns and break the law (or my windows, by the way). Call me and we can discuss this further. I would also like to discuss various transportation opportunities here in HB. Sincerely, Albro Lundy 12/4/2006 • • Jackie Drasco rage 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 7:33 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: STILLWATER BISTRO Please include as part of the packet rhEHa E1VE r. utL 0 5 2006 COMMUNITY ®FN. DEFT From: Mary Terrell [mailto:mjterrell@verizon.net] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 8:35 AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: STILLWATER BISTRO To: Members of the City Council 1 would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway . As a businessperson, 1 believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. 1 encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. 1214/2006 • Jackie Drasco • Page 1 of 1 • From: Sent: To: Steve Burrell Monday, December 04, 2006 7:35 AM Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: PLEASE SEND A SUPPORT LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL Please include as part of the packet RECEIVED From: Ron Newman [mailto:ron@sharkeez.net] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 7:06 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Fw: PLEASE SEND A SUPPORT LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL To: Members of the City Council u.0 0 5 2006 G:OMMUNIIY DEV, DEPT. I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Thank you Ron Newman No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.2/560 - Release Date: 11/30/2006 1214/2006 • • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 7:34 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro Please include as part of the packet RECEIVE DEC 0 5 2006 From: Zellweger [mailto:l.zellweger©att.net] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 8:15 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro To: Members of the City Council COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, 1 believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. 1 encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Meredith Zellweger/Owner, Toy Jungle 4:9 12/4/2006 • • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 7:34 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: stiliwater Please include as part of the packet RECEIVED DEC 0 5 2006 From: suzanne larkin [mailto:smlarkin@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 8:06 AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: stillwater (X MMUNITY DEV, DEPT ! am in support of the Stillwater Restaurant project. It will be a welcomed addition to Hermosa Beach dining. Suzanne Larkin Shorewood Realtors (310) 720-4033 Sr 12/4/2006 D • • From: Donald Hales [mailto:donaldhales2000©yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 3:26 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro Importance: High In the earlier e-mail, I sent there were some typos that have been corrected in this copy, Thank you, Donald Original Message From: Donald Hales [mailto:donaldhales2000@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 3:19 PM To: 'Steve Burrell' Subject: Stillwater Bistro Importance: High To: The Members of the City Council, Page 1 of 1 DEC 0 5 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. As a long time resident and native of Hermosa Beach (since 1954), I would like to lend my support for the Stillwater Bistro to be located in the Hermosa Pavilion, at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, Hermosa Beach. Hermosa Beach should join other adjacent neighboring cities (such as Manhattan and Redondo Breaches) by providing the addition of an upscale restaurant that will not only serve the community, but add a level of sophisticated dinning for residents (their guests), businesspeople (visiting or otherwise), and tourists to this City — as well as needed revenue for the City. Earlier this Summer I had the opportunity to meet with the owner, Gene Shook, who took the time to show me the plans for his restaurant and walk me through the area allocated for the Stillwater Bistro. Plans on paper are one thing, but actually walking the area gives one a better perspective of his thoughts and ideas for his restaurant. I would encourage the City Council to approve the C.U.P. (Conditional Use Permit) at the December 12th public hearing meeting and allow the owner, Gene Shook, to begin construction of the Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Sincerely Yours, Donald M. Hales Donald M. Hales, 2411 Prospect Avenue, Suite 123, Hermosa Beach, Calif. 90254-2726 Phone: 1.310.372.1510 E-mail: donaldhales2000@yahoo.com si 12/4/2006 • • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:19 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro RECEIVED liEL 0 5 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT From: Tracy Barton [mailto:tracy.b@beachtvl.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 3:15 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro ✓!._/•.fir Jt•.r/. _r c v To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Linda Monosmith Owner 57- 1 x/4/2006 • S Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 2 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:19 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Support for Stillwater Bistro ECEIVED ur.L052006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. From: Day [mailto:Day@IndigoH.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 2:58 PM To: Steve Burrell Cc: 'Barrett Patel' Subject: Support for Stillwater Bistro To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Deirdre. C: Murray Director of Sales & Marketing Hawthorn Suites Manhattan Beach 5 Star Attitude / Exceptional Value Tel. 310-546-8942 ext. 410 Fax 310- 546-5314 Email: day(a)indigoh.com Earn Hyatt Gold Passport Points Become a member today and start earning your rewards! www.hyatt.com wvw. h awth orn s u i to s- l ax. c om 53 12/4/2006 Jackie Drasco From: Sent: To: Subject: Steve Burrell Monday, December 04, 2006 9:19 AM Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco FW: Still Water Bistro RECEIVED LitI. 0 5 2006 CC)MMuNv DEV. DEPT. Original Message From: beachcitiescycles@verizon.net [mailto:beachcitiescycles@verizon.net) Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 11:38 AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Still Water Bistro To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin Bistro without further delay. Brian Lindquist Beach Cities Cycles 219 Pacific Coast Hwy. Hermosa Beach, Ca. 90254 will serve the I encourage the City Council to construction of Stillwater • Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:18 AM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro Include in packet. RECEIVED I�c1, 0 6 2006 (, n✓tnun�IYY JEV. DEPT. From: Dianaalbergate@aol.com [mailto:Dianaalbergate@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 10:43 AM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro Dear Steve, The beloved Mermaid has been a part of Hermosa for oh so many years...Boots has been the owner since 1954 and it was doing business before that! How many of our residents have celebrated important events in their lives at the Mermaid...birthdays, anniversaries, promotions, first dates and even a recent well attended memorial for Junior, Anna Belchee's dog!? Can you imagine if he tried to open the business today? The "anti - bar crowd" would howl in protest. The Mermaid is more than just a restaurant and BAR, it is a place of celebration. A place to enjoy. From what I know of Gene Shook's plans for the Stillwater Bistro, this upscale restaurant (with a small bar area), will serve our community well. It willl be a place to enjoy a good meal with good friends to celebrate what a beautiful thing it is to be in Hermosa Beach. I wholeheartedly support the Stillwater Bistro and believe it will be good for our city. Let's grant the CUP and keep our upscale dining dollars in Hermosa. The Mermaid welcomes some competition! Sincerely, Diana Albergate (Proud Resident of Hermosa Beach and manager of The Mermaid Restarurant) 1214/2006 i Jackie Drasco Page 1 of 1 From: Steve Burrell Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 2:05 PM To: Sol Blumenfeld; Jackie Drasco Subject: FW: Stillwater Bistro °RECEIVED uLL 0 5 2006 G)MMyNITY DEV. DEPT. From: Cindey Liberto [mailto:cindey@cindey.net] Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 12:53 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, Located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Would you also grant a liquor license for their opening? Thank you for your consideration. Cindey Liberto 12/4/2006 • OCEAN REALTORS® Established 1971 I t • 1600 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 Phone (310) 376-2415 REALTOR® FAX (310) 376-3922 RECEIVED DEC 0 4 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. December 4, 2006 Community Development Department, Planning Division do City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 1) Conditional Use Permit to Allow Car Wash in the Hermosa Pavilion, 2) Conditional Use Permit for On -Sale General Alcohol in conjunction with a Restaurant, Still Water. We, as property owners across the street from Hermosa Pavilion, are in favor of the projects. Thank you, /// //A Willis D. Ha es J,is eG gree 1600 Pacific Coast Hwy. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 S'� SURVEY OF D TOWN EATING AND DRINKING ESiABL1SHMENTS EstablIshmont ddress Hours of Operation AI License 900 Manhattan Club 900 Manhattan Ave, M -Th 11am-12 am F 11am-1 am Sat gam-12am Sun 9am-12am Full Liquor _a( pa -Cy ell nl yqr' Cdoco Noche 1140 Hogtttand Ave. Su -Th 6,am•lOpm FSa 6am-11pm , Beer and Wine Beaches 117 Manhattan Beach Blvd. M•F 10am-tam Sa•Sun 8 am•1am Full Liquor Cate Pierre 317 Manhattan Beach Blvd, Su -SD gam -lam Fula Liquor Pasta Pomodoro 401 Manhattan Beach ©tvd. Su-Sa Tam -1 1pm Beer and Wine Ebizio 229 Manhattan Beach Blvd. M -Th Bath -11pm F-Sa 6am-12ant Beer and Wrote Et Sombrero '1005 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 7am-11pm F-Sa 7am-12am Beer and Wine Fut! Liquor Full Liquc4r Emotes .1101 Manhattan Ave. 1017 Manhattan Ave, Su•Sa 11am-2am Su 9am-Spm M -Th 5:30am-10pm F•Sa 5:30arn-11 pm Fonzs Francesca 1209 Highland Ave. M -7h llam-10.pm F -Su 730am-11 pm Beer and Wine Good Stuff (closed 9105! 1300 Highland Ave. Su-Sa 24 Hours Beer and Wine . Hennesseys 313 ManhattanBeach Blvd. Su=Sa 11am-2am Full Liquor Fusion Sushi 1150 Morningside Or. Su•W Sam -11 pm Th-Sa 7am-12atn Full Liquor Keltle 1138 FIighlarld Ave. Su•Sa 24 Hours Beer and Wine Mama D's 1125 A Manhattan Ave. Su-Sa7am-tam Beer and Wine Mengiama 12B Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su•Sa 8am-12arn Full Liquor Manhattan Brewing Company 124 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 7am-12am F•Sal 7am-tam Full Liquor Sharks Cove,Codt.Y1' 309 Manhattan Beach Blind. Su-Sa 7am-2am Full Liquor Manhattan Pizzeria 133 Manhattan Beach Blvd.. No Rose Beer and Wine Michi 903 Manhattan Ave. Su•T 11am-12em f -Sat 11am-2am Full Liquor Octopus 1133 Highland Ave. M -F 11:30am•2:30pm to 530prn-11 pm FSa 5:30pm-12am Beer and Wine Old Venice 1001 Manhattan Ave. Su-Sa 10am-12am Beer and Wine Penny Lane 820 Manhattan Pae. Su -Th 7am-10:3Opm F-Sa lam-11:30pm Beer and Wine Rock N Fish 120 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su -Th 7am-12am F-Sa 7am-tam Full Liquor Sidedoor 900 Manhattan Ave. M -Th 11am-12 am F 11am•1 am Sat Sam•12am Sun 9am-12am Full Liquor Shellback 116 Manhattan Beach Blvd.. No Reso Full Liquor Sun & Moon Care 1131 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 6am-11 pm F-Sa 6am-12am Deer and Wine Tatia's 1146 Manhattan Ave, Su•W 7am•11pn1 Th•Sa 7am•120111 Full Liquor Tovme 1142 Manhattan Ave. ht -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-tam Fun Liquor Wahoo's 1129 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 6am-11 pm F -So 6am•12am Beer and Wine Avenue 1141 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 1lem•11pm F•Sa 11am-12am Full Liquor Shade Hotel 1221 Valley Drive Lobby Bar- day 5prn•ttpm Courtyard Su.Th 6am•11pm F- Sat6am•12am Roordeck daily 6am•10pm Full Liquor Petro's 451 Manhattan Beach Blvd Suite 8-110 Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor Jr.'s Callboy 45T" Manhattan teach Blvd Suite D•126 1200 tdornIngsido • Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor ed,eJ 5cA'/ 4' e2q0/ j//Ghlc/ano c.9G�r C:.TlannmatedgedDtre•nte..n L 144 LW 07,114+5 • • Elaine Doerfling From: Sandy Saemann [ssewww@gte.net] Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 3:05 PM To: Elaine Doerfling Subject: Stillwater This is a joke the parking, the place and need for another outlet with alcohol in the city of HB, when are you going to stop. And if you do allow it should be close at 10:00, if not its a bar, we all know that except for a few on the council that blind. Sandy Saemann SSE 2541 Hermosa Ave Hermosa Beach Ca. 90254 310.374.6868 SSEWWW@GTE.NET 1 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a • Elaine Doerfling Page 1 of 1 From: MMiller896@aol.com Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 3:43 PM To: Elaine Doerfling Subject: Still Water American Bistro Dear Sirs, I wholeheartedly endorse the conditional use permit for Still Water American Bistro and ask you approve it without further conditions or delay. I want to see Hermosa Beach become a more business friendly environment. Best regards, Mike Miller 2022 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 12/12/20(6 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a • • Original Message From: colleen berg [mailto:cb©colleenberg.com] Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 1:28 PM To: Steve Burrell Subject: Stillwater Bistro To: Members of the City Council I would like to voice my support for Stillwater Bistro in the Hermosa Pavilion, located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As a businessperson, I believe that the addition of an upscale restaurant will serve the community well by providing a sophisticated dining option for residents and tourists. I encourage the City Council to approve this CUP at the December 12 public hearing, and permit the owner to begin construction of Stillwater Bistro without further delay. Thank you, Colleen Berg www.colleenberg.com 310.947.5373 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a • • Elaine Doerfling Page 1 of 1 From: Daniels, Lawrence [Larry.Daniels@Grubb-Ellis.com] Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 4:14 PM To: Elaine Doerfling I live at 415 24th place and do not think we need another club 705, where the former Decanso Restaurant and Marie Calendars was located. The fact, that those 2 restaurants didn't make it but 705 is thriving by selling liquor and bringing in bands so patrons can dance. Now I understand they may have their CUP revoked. It appears that the restaurant proposed for 16th and PCH will not survive on food only but pattern itself after Club 705. I am not in favor of the use. Larry Daniels Local Presence Global Reach Tubb &EUis Cnrt►panyu 91391 S ;Vetmon Avenue ranee. C90502 , A ....�.. .:mow SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a 12/12/20(16 • • Tuesday, December 12, 2006 City of Hermosa Beach 1316 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: The Pavilion Public Hearing, December 12, 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. We request that the CUP for the restaurant and the car wash be denied for the following reasons. The plans call for a 6704 sq. ft. restaurant. 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 'Use Other Entrance' sign out around 6 pm several times a week in the evening. Where are these additional 200-300 plus cars for the restaurant going to park. The installation of the traffic light at PCH/16th 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. The addition of traffic into the Pavilion has further increased the volume of traffic on the Street. Speed levels have increased on 16th 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. 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. Opening up the parking garage with 2 hour free parking was supposed to reduce parking problems locally but can not work when the 'Use Other Entrance' sign is posted outside of the self park entrance. Traffic is so bad that parking elsewhere and walking is easier than waiting to enter the parking garage in the evenings. The following diagram shows the activity from traffic on 16th Street (West of PCH). 1 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 5a • • PCH Pavilion Building Valet Entrance i Valet Exit Self Park Entrance Self Park Exit Residence Commodore 16t 0 Street Von's Store Entrance/Exit USE OTHER ENTRANCE Von's Truck Unload Area LEGEND New Sign • t Orange Cones Traffic To Self Park Thru Traffic Pavilion Egress & Ingress Traffic Traffic U -Turns The Pavilion management stated that they have an attendant on duty during peak times. I have attached several pictures over the past several months that does not support this statement. This is true some of the time but many times the attendant is not around and 2 • I traffic just passes up the Self Park entrance and makes a U-turn to go back to the valet entrance. One has to wonder who signed off on the egress and ingress to the parking structure. Note the traffic patterns leaving the structure. Traffic is often at a bottleneck. Traffic entering and leaving MUST create a problem for other vehicles on the street. Noise from frustrated drivers blowing horns is creating noise at all hours for the residents. The diagram above illustrates: 1. Pavilion patrons traveling West on 16th street do not see the safety cones and the new sign which are placed before the Self Park Entrance until they are past the entrance that the new sign says to use (Use Other Entrance), the Valet entrance. 2. Because of the fact that the patrons have passed the Valet entrance these cars are using the Von's truck unloading area to make a u -turn. East bound cars often must wait for these cars/trucks making u -turns and often raises their frustration levels causing horn noise for the residents across the streets. 3. Just normal traffic patterns into the Pavilion cause a lot of noise. Traffic at 6 pm thru 8 pm is often gridlocked. 4. Drivers trying to go westbound on 16th street often must wait for traffic to clear before they can contine. 5. Drivers using the north turn lane can not make the turns into the Pavilion garage because of the tight turns into the entrance. The city council's comment on moving the garage gates farther into the building have been ignored. 6. Driver now use the south most west bound lane to turn into the garage. Thru traffic must wait. 7. Pavilion patrons driving east on 16`h street must turn across traffic to go into the garage. The gates to the garage allow on one car which is at street level so that other cars wishing to get in line must block the westbound traffic lanes. 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 have to install sound reduction doors/windows for our condo. Maybe the Pavilion would opt to pay for them. 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 16`h street. How can a Car Wash in the Pavilion NOT ADD to the parking problems. Solutions do exist. 1. Create a parking district requiring stickers for resident cars. 2. Place speed strips on 16`h street. 3. Consider making 16th street one-way 4. City should not allow charges for `event parking'. 5. 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? 3 • • The new bar/restaurant will be within 600 feet of the Hermosa Valley Elementary School. School children flow up and down 16`x' street going to and returning from school. Passing a liquor establishment with your kids is not high on parents/residents priority lists. Hermosa Beach is already holding hearings on the CUP for the Saffire 705 on Pier Avenue. The city should make sure that the bars in Hermosa Beach are beyond the 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 10 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.. 6. No TV's inside or outside of building 7. Require a noise study before allowing an outside patio 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. The residents believe that there 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. 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. Thank you for your consideration, Ron and Linda Miller 1600 Ardmore #213 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310-937-9052 ron wamba@verizon.net Attachments: 4 • • 6 • • 7 i I • 8 Elaine Doerfling From: Lee Grant [appomattox65@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 4:21 PM To: Elaine Doerfling Cc: Appomattox65@msn.com Subject: Hermosa Pavilion Stillwater Bistro and wine shop and City Council Hermosa Beach City Council, Because of a death in my family, I am not in town to attend this evening's council meeting. Yet, my dad would have said this is too important an issue in Hermosa Beach to let it pass without comment. As our fair city has grown, we have seen commercial development owned by local residents as well as more and more outside investors. Many times the influx of investment money is needed and wanted but in most cases it has been by individuals who also have an interest in the quality of life in Hermosa. Now I believe we are at a crossroads. Our bar and restaurant scene predominantly serves those who do not live in Hermosa. In fact, Stillwater has said it will only survive if it can draw patrons from well beyond Hermosa borders. But visitors to our city have always been welcome because there seemed to be a respect for our city. It is a place to have fun and to relax but it is also home to many families, long time residents, and children. Those who come to party have to respect that; the city exits because we residents give it life, pay the bills, elect and participate in the government, support the schools and call it home. Our downtown bar scene has brought a new look to the city but at the same time, it has brought new and larger problems. Neighborhoods that surround downtown have been impacted. And now we face the possibility of downtown spreading beyond Pier and Hermosa Avenues. Stillwater says it will be a high end restaurant. Coincidentally Club 705 says it will be high end if granted a new CUP. These will be two very different clubs and yet they will both have the same problems. And what one club manages to extract from the Planning Commission and City Council, the other will eventually want. Do we want the problems from downtown migrating up the hill? Do we have sufficient resources to provide police and public safety to an expanding club scene? Do we recoup enough revenue from the clubs to pay for extra police and public safety. Do we want to degrade our neighborhoods and our City image by allowing more bars and clubs to expand throughout the city. If you don't think the city has been degraded by the clubs then walk the streets after midnight and see what you see. We far exceed the recommended number of acohol outlets for population and area. For many of us, our city is home to expensive houses and apartments with families that love the outdoor beach life where our children are safe to play. Ask yourself is drunk drivers contribute to the safety of our children. Ask yourself if excessive drinking and associated behavior is an example we want to set for our families and friends. Ask yourself if the business interests currently seeking to move into our city really care about our city and our residents or if they are just "poaching" a business opportunity for a quick turn over or to extract as much cash as possible with the least amount of expense. Honestly ask yourself, if you lived on a neighboring street that was once a quiet neighborhood, if this new bar and club development really contributes to the quality of your life as well as to Hermosa's. We are a small town riding on the crest of a wave, seeking a future that we all can be proud of, that our children can thrive in, that our homes and our residents can be safe in. Do more clubs and bars provide that? Or is that wave merely a swirl of polluted water as we all are flushed down the toilet bowl. You have a choice. Make it a good one for the city and the residents you represent. Sincerely, Lee H.Grant 1011 16th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 1 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ...)Ct Elaine Doerfling • • Page 1 of 10 From: Alan Benson 2 [albenson2@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:25 PM To: Elaine Doerfling Subject: Letter for the Still Water Bistro Public Hearing for: The Hermosa Beach City Council Meeting for December 12, 2006 at 7:10 pm Attachments: Still Water Public Hearing 12 12 06.doc To: Elaine Doerfling Hermosa Beach City Clerk 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 From: Alan Benson 1924 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Elaine, Can you include this letter and e-mail attachment part of the written testimony for the Hermosa Beach City Council meeting on December 12, 2006. I want this information to be included in the public hearing for: The Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH I have included a Word attachment titled: Still Water Public Hearing 12 12 06.doc This attachment will is set up to print in "landscape" format. Thank you, Alan Benson The Hermosa Beach City Council Meeting for December 12, 2006 at 7:10 pm The Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH Agenda for: The Hermosa Beach City Council Meeting for December 12, 2006 at 7:10 pm http://www. hermosabch.orp/departments/cityclerk/agenmin/cca20061212/ City Council Chambers, 1315 Valley Drive. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 7:30 P.M. 12/12/2006 SUPPLEMENTAL � q INFORMATION Page 2 of 10 a. REVIEW AND RECONSERATION OF THE PLANNING C-ISSION 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] ' I (Continued from meeting of October 10, 2006). b. REVIEW AND RECONSIDERATION OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION ON OCTOBER 17, 2006, TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CAR WASH (AUTOMOBILE DETAILING) WITHIN THE HERMOSA PAVILION PARKING STRUCTURE - AUTO SPA - AT 1601 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld dated December 4, 2006. 1 ' 1 RECOMMENDATION: To sustain the Planning Commission decision to approve the requests subject to conditions of approval as contained in the resolutions for approval of the restaurant and car detailing service. ABC Issue - Undue Concentration alcohol licenses in a census tract. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23950-23962 23958.4. (a) For purposes of Section 23958, "undue concentration" means the case in which the applicant premises for an original or premises -to -premises transfer of any retail license are located in an area where any of the following conditions exist: (1) The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 20 percent greater number of reported crimes, as defined in subdivision (c), than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency. (2) As to on -sale retail license applications, the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located. (3) As to off -sale retail license applications, the ratio of off -sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off -sale retail licenses to population in the -county in which the applicant premises are located. Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Do any of the following conditions in the ABC Act pertain to the Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro matter before you? 12/12/2006 1) The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 20 percent greater number of reported crimes, as defined in subdivision (c), than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency. Page 3 of 10 The Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH, is located in the Hermosa Beach Police Department — Crime Reporting Area # 2 Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Does HBPD Crime Reporting Area # 2 have a 20 percent greater number of reported crimes, that the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within Hermosa Beach? (2) As to on -sale retail license applications, the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of on -sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located. The Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH, is in a Census Tract 6210.01 with a year 2000 population of 4026. There appears to be 8 On -Sale Alcohol Licenses currently operating in Census Tract 6210.01, the addition of Stillwater American Bistro location would make 9 On -Sale Alcohol Licenses in Census Tract 6210.01, which is more than double the number of ABC On -Sale Licenses set by California State Law and the ABC Act. Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: If the City of Hermosa Beach decides to grant an On -Sale alcohol license to the Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH, would the City of Hermosa Beach incur a greater amount of legal liability than if this On- Sale alcohol license is denied by the city? (3) As to off -sale retail license applications, the ratio of off -sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off -sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located. Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Do the number of Off -Sale Licenses currently operating in Census Tract 6210.01, exceed the number of ABC Off -Sale Licenses set by California State Law and the ABC Act? Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: If the City of Hermosa Beach decides to grant an Off -Sale alcohol license to the Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH, would the City of Hermosa Beach incur a greater amount of legal liability than if this Off- Sale alcohol license is denied by the city? 12/12/2006 Page 4 of 10 ABC Issue: The premises and/or Olitking facilities are located or adjent to a residential area. Issuance of this license will cause residents to be affected by increased crimes, late night noise, disturbance, and competition for parking. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23000-23047 23000. This division shall be known and may be cited as the "Alcoholic Beverage Control Act." 23001. This division is an exercise of the police powers of the State for the protection of the safety, welfare, health, peace, and morals of the people of the State, to eliminate the evils of unlicensed and unlawful manufacture, selling, and disposing of alcoholic beverages, and to promote temperance in the use and consumption of alcoholic beverages. It is hereby declared that the subject matter of this division involves in the highest degree the economic, social, and moral well-being and the safety of the State and of all its people. All provisions of this division shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of these purposes. The Stillwater American Bistro premises and the parking facilities are abutting and directly next to residential areas to the west and the north of the property. And there is a large residential neighborhood directly to the east of the premises. There are numerous residential apartment buildings and condo buildings located adjacent and next to the Stillwater location. 1600 Ardmore Ave, 1720 Ardmore Ave, 1820 Ardmore Ave, 1707 Pacific Coast Highway, 1901 Pacific Coast Highway, 2001 Pacific Coast Highway Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Will there be an increase of "alcohol related crime and nuisance" in these Hermosa Beach neighborhoods, by granting new alcohol licenses? ABC Issue: Rule 61.4, that the license of the premises will not interfere with the quiet enjoyment of local residences. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23770-23793 23790. No retail license shall be issued for any premises which are located in any territory where the exercise of the rights and privileges conferred by the license is contrary to a valid zoning ordinance of any county or city. Premises which had been used in the exercise of those rights and privileges at a time prior to the effective date of the zoning ordinance may continue operation under the following conditions: (a) The premises retain the same type of retail liquor license within a license classification. (b) The licensed premises are operated continuously without substantial change in mode or character of operation. 12/12/2006 • • Excerpts from: The Easy Reader — May 20, 2004 Bar owners meet with Hermosa Beach police by David Rosenfeld Page 5 of 10 - -- "The city has attracted more people every year since construction of the Pier Plaza in 1997, coinciding with an increase in crime." --- "In 2003, police saw 140 assaults, compared to 77 in 1998. There were 1,315 arrests in 2003 compared with 608 in 1998, and 285 DUI arrests compared to 150 in 1998." - -- In February, police chief Michael Lavin cited "an ever-increasing level of violence in the downtown." --- Several residents from Manhattan Avenue voiced their complaints that the neighborhood was turning into a pig's sty with beer cans, bottles and trash strewn about along with urine and vomit. --- One resident remarked, "Listening to someone throw up outside your window for a half hour at 2 in the morning is disgusting." ER ABC Issue: The premises will create a law enforcement problem and also add to the existing law enforcement problems and to the existing concentration of assault related violence. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23815-23827 23815. It is hereby determined that the public welfare and morals require that there be a limitation on the number of premises licensed for the sale of distilled spirits. 23816. The number of premises for which an onsale general license is issued shall be limited to one for each 2,000, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the county in which the premises are situated. No additional onsale general licenses, other than a renewal or transfer or as permitted by Section 23821, shall be issued in any county where the number of all premises for which onsale general licenses are issued is more than one for each 2,000, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the county. No onsale general license shall be issued in lieu of or upon the cancellation or surrender of an onsale beer and wine license. Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Has there been an increase in assault related violence in Hermosa Beach since the Pier Plaza renovation? From 1995 to 2004 the Hermosa Beach numbers of for All Assaults, Arrests, Criminal Citations and Disturbance Calls had reached all time highs. 12/12/2006 • Excerpts from: The Easy Reader — February 3, 2005 HB Arrests Hit an All -Time High by Robb Fulcher Page 6 of 10 --- The year 2004 saw a record number of arrests in Hermosa at 1,388. Topping the old record of 1,315 set the year before. Those high-water marks go back at least to 1991, when the Hermosa Beach Police Department began keeping detailed arrest records, Chief Mike Lavin said. --- The downtown area with its active and sometimes rowdy nightlife has contributed to the increased arrests, Lavin said. "That is a reflection, I would have to say, of the downtown. We have so much activity there," he said. --- The number of assaults rose barely in 2004, from 140 the previous year to 143. Burglaries of buildings and cars dropped from 143 to 140. Theft, which covers the grabbing of stray bicycles and the like, dropped from 388 to 359. Auto theft decreased from 56 to 45. --- In another possibly downtown -related development, misdemeanor citations ballooned from 989 to 1,419. Disturbance calls to police rose from 3,025 to 4,201. ER ABC Issue: Issuance of the license will add to public nuisance in the area, specifically, it will be injurious to the health of, offensive to the senses of, and obstruction to the free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property of an entire neighborhood. Hermosa Beach Crime Categories That Have Shown an Increase from 1998 thru 2004 All Criminal Adult Total Calls Disturbance Burglary Robbery Assaults DUI Citations Arrests For Service Calls 1998 -- 113 17 77 150 562 608 19,951 3,199 2004 -- 140 20 143 195 1,419 1,388 30,215 4,201 All Criminal Adult Total Calls Disturbance Burglary Robbery Assaults DUI Citations Arrests For Service Calls Up Up Up Up Up Up Up Up 23.9 % 17.6 % 85.7% 30 % 152 % 128 % 51.4% 31.3 % Manhattan Beach 1998 to 2004 Crime Statistics Burglary Robbery All DUI Criminal All Total Calls Assaults Citations Arrests For Service 1998 -- 227 42 133 278 1,487 20,766 2004 -- 213 31 162 158 807 1,026 18,983 Down Down Up Down --- Down Down 6.2 % 26% 22 % 43 % n/a 31 % 8.6 % Source: HBPD and MBPD reported crime statistics. 12/12/2006 • Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Page 7 of 10 Will there be an increase of "alcohol related crime and nuisance" in Hermosa Beach, by granting new alcohol licenses? ABC Issue: The premises is located within the immediate vicinity of religious, school, or youth facilities and normal operation of the premises will interfere with their functions. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23770-23793 23789. (a) The department is specifically authorized to refuse the issuance, other than renewal or ownership transfer, of any retail license for premises located within the immediate vicinity of churches and hospitals. (b) The department is specifically authorized to refuse the issuance, other than renewal or ownership .transfer, of any retail license for premises located within at least 600 feet of schools and public playgrounds or nonprofit youth facilities, including, but not limited to, facilities serving Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, or Campfire Girls. This distance shall be measured pursuant to rules of the department. The Stillwater American Bistro location appears to be within 600 feet of the Hermosa Beach Valley School, and within 600 feet of the Hermosa Beach Community Center and the Hermosa Beach Skateboard Park. The Hermosa Valley School 1645 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 The Hermosa Beach Community Center 710 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Hermosa Beach Skate Park - 710 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Will the safety of Hermosa Beach school children be put at increased risk because the alcohol outlet location is within 600 feet of the Hermosa Valley School? Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Why does CA Law and the ABC Act specifically prohibit alcohol outlets within 600 feet of schools? 12/12/2046 Page 8of10 ABC Issue: The premises is local within and on the access route IL public recreational facilities and normal operation of the premises will interfere with the functions of their recreational facilities. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23770-23793 23789. (a) The department is specifically authorized to refuse the issuance, other than renewal or ownership transfer, of any retail license for premises located within the immediate vicinity of churches and hospitals. (b) The department is specifically authorized to refuse the issuance, other than renewal or ownership transfer, of any retail license for premises located within at least 600 feet of schools and public playgrounds or nonprofit youth facilities, including, but not limited to, facilities serving Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, or Campfire Girls. This distance shall be measured pursuant to rules of the department. The Stillwater location is on 16th Street and PCH, appears to be a "safe route to school" for the Hermosa Beach Valley School. The Stillwater location parking garage has a blind exit onto the 16th Street sidewalk. The location is also on an access route to public recreational facilities. Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Is the 16th Street "Still Water Bistro" parking garage entrance and exit located on a "Safe Route to School"? Question for each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: In the future, will drivers over the "DUI limit", drive out the "blind exit" from the parking garage exit, onto the 16th Street sidewalk? ABC Issue: The applicant is requesting a new ABC Off -Sale license that would violate the moratorium of the issuance of a new ABC Off -Sale licenses. ABC Act, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 23815-23827 23815. It is hereby determined that the public welfare and morals require that there be a limitation on the number of premises licensed for the sale of distilled spirits. 23817.4. The Legislature finds and declares that the public welfare and morals require that there be a limitation on the number of premises licensed for the off sale of beer and wine. 23817.5. (a) (1) The number of premises for which an off -sale beer and wine license is issued shall be limited to one for each 2,500, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the city or county in which the premises are situated. No additional off -sale beer and wine license, 12/12/2006 Aik other than a renewal or Whnsfer or as permitted by SeSon 23821, shall be issued in any city or county where the number of premises for which all off-sale beer and wine licenses are issued is more than one for each 2,500, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the city or county. (2) The number of premises for which an off -sale beer and wine license is issued in a city and county, in combination with the number of premises for which an off -sale general license is issued in a city and county, shall be limited to one for each 1,250, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the city and county in which the premises are situated. No additional off -sale beer and wine license, other than a renewal or transfer or as permitted by Section 23821, shall be issued in any city and county where the number of premises for which all off -sale beer and wine licenses in combination with off -sale general licenses are issued is more than one for each 1,250, or fraction thereof, inhabitants of the city and county. 23817.7. (a) Notwithstanding Section 23817.5, the department may approve an application for an off -sale beer and wine license in areas covered by Section 23817.5, if the applicant shows that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance, and where all of the following conditions are found to exist: (1) The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that is below that specified pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 23958.4. In considering an application, the department may take into account adjacent crime reporting districts, if the applicant premises are located within 100 feet of the boundaries of any adjacent district. The department shall use an average of reported crimes in the crime reporting district in which the premises are located and reported crimes in any adjacent crime reporting district, if the total of crimes reported in the adjacent district or districts is greater than the crime reporting district in which the premises are located. (2) The applicant premises are located in an area that falls below the concentration level provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 23958.4. (3) The local governing body of the area in which the applicant premises are located, or its designated subordinate officer or body, determines that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance. (b) The department may impose reasonable conditions on a licensee as may be needed in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare regarding signing, training .for responsible beverage sales and hours, and mode of sale. Page 9 of 10 Questionfor each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: Does the proposed "wine shop" at the 1601 PCH location, violate an ABC moratorium on new Off -Sale Alcohol Licenses in Hermosa Beach? Questionfor each Hermosa Beach City Councilmember: 12/12/2006 Why has the ABC imposed a moratoi on granting new Off-Sale license. Hermosa Beach? Thank you, Alan Benson 12/12/2006 Page 10 of 10 CA Department of Justice - Criminal Justice Statistics Center — CJSC For Years 1998 to 2004 - Offense by Jurisdiction - Percentage Change over 7 Years DATA SOURCE: CA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - Criminal Justice Statistics Center - CJSC CJSC Homepage: http://www.caaq.state.ca.us/cjsc/index.htm To be included in the written testimony for the Dec. 12, 2006 public hearing for: The Stillwater Contemporary American Bistro location at 1601 PCH All Adult Felony Arrests Increased 106% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. All Adult Felony Arrests Increased 7% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. All Adult Misdemeanor Arrests Increased 209% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. All Adult Misdemeanor Arrests Dropped 40% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Felony Assault Arrests Increased 84% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Felony Assault Arrests Dropped 12% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Felony Theft Arrests Increased 63% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Felony Theft Arrests Dropped 17% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Misdemeanor DUI Arrests Increased 51% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Misdemeanor DUI Arrests Dropped 52% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Misdemeanor Assault Battery Arrests Increased 511% in Hermosa Beach, from 1998 to 2004. Misdemeanor Assault Battery Arrests Increased 30% in Manhattan Beach, from 1998 to 2004. All Adult Felony Arrests - Years 1998 to 2004 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change Hermosa Beach 110 Manhattan Beach 267 Redondo Beach 707 El Segundo 302 93 94 124 175 191 227 145 275 194 302 279 244 286 264 632 611 582 504 615 659 616 231 292 246 287 301 350 287 106% - Increase in 7 Years 7% - Increase in 7 Years -7% - Decrease in 7 Years 16% - Increase in 7 Years All Adult Misdemeanor Arrests - Years 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 535 663 611 908 1135 1306 1652 973 1074 1206 1164 804 695 778 643 909 2042 2122 1805 1602 1371 1289 1549 1683 767 672 653 643 564 608 484 627 209% - Increase in 7 Years -40% - Decrease in 7 Years -24% - Decrease in 7 Years -37% - Decrease in 7 Years All Juvenile Arrests - Years 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 52 59 47 53 68 50 57 55 332 256 244 275 322 325 222 282 905 840 738. 878 686 610 588 749 264 181 208 123 86 62 88 145 10% - Increase in 7 Years -33% - Decrease in 7 Years -35% - Decrease in 7 Years -67% - Decrease in 7 Years Misdemeanor Assault Battery -1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 19 28 35 33 48 87 116 52 27 19 24 28 24 31 35 27 95 54 87 81 93 66 70 78 14 6 15 21 17 31 12 17 511% - Increase in 7 Years 30% - Increase in 7 Years -26% - Decrease in 7 Years - 14% - Decrease in 7 Years Misdemeanor Drunk - 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 171 227 232 297 332 422 530 316 200 210 206 114 92 98 106 147 417 426 380 323 301 298 310 351 86 104 125 117 100 82 59 96 210% - Increase in 7 Years - 47% - Decrease in 7 Years - 26% - Decrease in 7 Years - 31% - Decrease in 7 Years Misdemeanor Drug - 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 61 61 43 51 74 74 82 64. 48 42 55 67 51 36 55 51 125 145 135 132 76 57 80 107 119 85 103 106 112 109 87 103 34% - Increase in 7 Years 15% - Increase in 7 Years -36% - Decrease in 7 Years -27% - Decrease in 7 Years Misdemeanor Driving Under the Influence -1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 141 199 148 157 206 288 213 193 298 224 300 171 115 136 143 198 422 476 396 386 327 352 434 399 161 170 122 163 114 149 135 145 51% - Increase in 7 Years -52% - Decrease in 7 Years 3% - Increase in 7 Years -16% - Decrease in 7 Years Misdemeanor Disturbing the Peace -1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 6 6 9 27 35 42 64 27 5 6 0 6 3 3 2 4 16 9 5 1 2 4 4 6 0' 1 0 1 0 12 0 2 967% - Increase in 7 Years -60% - Decrease in 7 Years -75% - Decrease in 7 Years 0 % - Decrease in 7 Years Felony Assault - 1998 to 2004 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change Hermosa Beach 25 Manhattan Beach 41 Redondo Beach 124 El Segundo 32 21 12 35 34 34 46 30 19 15 40 43 29 36 32 77 95 106 86 90 89 95 20 40 39 31 40 29 33 84% - Increase in 7 Years -12% - Decrease in 7 Years -28% - Decrease in 7 Years -9% - Decrease in 7 Years Felony Drug - 1998 to 200 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 23 20 19 22 51 42 62 34 10 22 20 20 25 37 44 25 134 146 130 123 82 136 144 128 53 43 54 49 67 79 125 67 170% - Increase in 7 Years 340% - Increase in 7 Years 7% - Increase in 7 Years 136% - Increase in 7 Years Felony Theft - 1998 to 200 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 19 14 14 15 18 19 31 19 69 61 42 57 50 40 57 54 163 141 128 127 117 145 172 142 79 56 64 30 29 32 30 46 63% - Increase in 7 Years -17% - Decrease in 7 Years 6% - Increase in 7 Years -62% - Decrease in 7 Years Felony Burglary - 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 7 Years 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 18 12 18 17 27 48 25 24 41 69 40 58 69 69 70 59 79 78 79 58 69 65 91 74 50 36 48 63 53 54 56 51 39% - Increase in 7 Years 71% - Increase in 7 Years 15% - Increase in 7 Years 12% - Increase in 7 Years Felony Motor Vehicle Theft - 1998 to 2004 Hermosa Beach Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach El Segundo 1998 1999 2 6 16 10 26 21 35 24 7 Years 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Avg. % Change 2 5 7 5 19 7 14 19 22 19 9 16 20 26 16 21 24 22 16 12 31 24 22 23 850% - Increase in 7 Years -44% - Decrease in 7 Years -8% - Decrease in 7 Years -37% - Decrease in 7 Years • Elaine Doerfling • 1 Page 1 of 1 From: Maureen Ferguson [bchrunrmaureen@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:08 AM To: Elaine Doerfling; Kit Bobko; Sam Edgerton; Peter Tucker; JR Revisky; Michael Keegan Subject: Stillwater Bistro Dear Mayor & members of City Council, I would like to voice my support in favor of the Planning Commissions decision on August 15, 2006 to approve, with modifications, a CUP for on -sale general alcohol in conjunction with a restaurant, Still Water Contemporary Bistro, and parking plan amendment to modify the allocation of uses within the Hermosa Pavilion at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. As an older patron of the local bars & restaurants, I do not think we have enough establishments that cater to our local crowd who would like to enjoy dinner and a cocktail without having to negotiate through the rowdy crowds on a Saturday night, hopscotch over vomit & witness endless brawls. PCH is a perfect location to establish a sophisticated bistro. There are many fine dining establishments in Redondo Beach & Manhattan Beach that are on PCH and close to neighborhoods, parks, and schools. Those restaurants have worked with the city and are destination dining spots for all of the South Bay. Gene Shook has proven that he is a responsible owner and has consistently affected change as directed by the city during the past years to comply with all the city's direction. I would like to see this restaurant and business structure have the chance to succeed. It will bring much needed revenues to the city and will enhance the quality of life for those of us who enjoy a nice peaceful meal. Thank you, Maureen Ferguson 425 25th Street 12/12/2006 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 6:00pm, 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. RECEIVED OCT 1 0 2006 COMMUNITY DEV DEPT 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 cg SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION IREcegvb O C r 2 2005 cOMMUNrry 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, iilis D. Hayes James M. Welch October 3, 2006 Sol Blumenfeld City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 ,„Ye *POO orp 0 C T 3 2006 r OMMUNiTY 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 H ER MOS A AVILION vvww.hermosapavilion.com 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 establislunent 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 16th 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 PCHI16t 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. S Speed levels have increased on 16th 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 16a' 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 16'x' 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 aregetting 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. 63 • 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 • City of Hermosa Beach Mayor and Council Members 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF CUP 06-04 "PAVILION" 1601 PCH. Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of Council: I September 12, 2006 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 7s 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 partners 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 1 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. 1b 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. Flemi_ng'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. I would like to suggest that those hours be only on weekends, with earlier closing during the week, like Manhattan Beach is doing. Specifically, 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 information 775E 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 transaussion at no cost to you. 9fother ti; yu.n f . ,Staters. : (your choice of one): Yves'.Hoihemade Granola Vanilla infused yogurt; fresh:.berries. StillWgter Arouse Salad. . . . • Fieldgreens, Maytag blue cheese." candied pecans. drlgd Bing cherries, balsaiiiic vinaigrette. Baby Spinach Salad • Dried apricots, pistachios, feta cheese, -caramelized onion, raspberry Yihaigrette.. • (your choke of one) - *Ail entrees e'otne with breakfast.: potatoes Charnomile and Hikkory$mokedRainbo)v Trout Sweet.polato hash, poached eggs; chipotle eoulis.. . . Eggs Benedict _:Situ Wti or S'lyle . rlpplewood smokedbacon. poached egg Eirglish.mu n blue crab. saiaq iialltbiidriise. . - • New Of'lericii ; SrciYt»;ble : Scrambled .eggs, Andouille sauspge, t vtiS red belll peppers; red . onion: smoked Glaudp:.: . . ' • . - :Pail. icrdiie Caramdlized apples; vanilla -bean infused cream. . •• • > :10.1 ttr%K::1 es Fresh strawberries •arid•bananas,'vatstllq• bean- infused cream. Hickory Smoked Pork: Teitdertuin. • :Bing cherry reduction, roasted garlic potato,' +sppragtcs, Martis Ranch-RT,beye and Frites Maytag blue cheese criitftbles, lemon zest.aioli. 1)e:sett. • An Assdrtnsenr of Fine Pastrs *All mother's. get boat mless Mimosas- . " Price: • Adults; $55 per. person pins taz Children(12 and under): $15 per person plus tax((ni`ree and Dessert) • • (//‘4,)(d.d!.1/.? -r2jr, bo 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, Crirnini Mushrooms, Pine Nuts, Cilantro, Soy Lime Sauce. Si'. Tomato Basil Bisque Goat Cheese Toast Points, $9. Vega and cS'al d 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. 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 Derni 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 Fettuccine. $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. $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 Tornato.Orzo, Sugar Snaps, Strawberry Balsamic Reduction: $26. 8114,. & s; 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. ,„„476,1-, a c;0/ 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 88.95 Miso Soup, Soy Broth served with Tofu, Scallions and Seaweed 82.95 Shrimp Tempura with Sticky Rice and Soy Chili Sauce $7.95 Calamari Roll, Papaya Salsa & Wasabi Creme Fraiche . 87.95 Rock Shrimp Potstickers, Vegetable Slaw, Oriental -Butler Sauce 89.95 Soft Shell Crab Tempura Style with Mirin Glaze 88.95 served with Wasabi Mashed Potatoes Fresh Mixed Vegetable Tempura served with Sticky Rice 84.95 Seared Ahi, Sesame -Chill Noodles. Mirin Glaze 88.95 Crab Cakes with Roasted Red Bell Pepper Cream 812.95 Rainbow Plate- Salmon, Ahi, Shrimp, Yellowtail, 810.95 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, 85.95 Red Onions, Balsamic Herb Dressing Arugula & Baby Greens- Goat Cheese, Roasted Pecans, $7.95 Tomatoes & An Herb Dressing Romaine and Radicchio, Garlic Bruschetta, Parmesan 86.95 & Romano with Caesar Dressing 705- Baby Greens, Artichokes Tomatoes, Feta Cheese $7.95 Herb Vinaigrette, Olive Flat Bread • Chinois Chicken, Chopped Greens, Vegetables, Wantons, 88.95 Spicy Thai Dressing Pius Italian Sausage, Caramelized Onions, Tomatoes, MarinanaSauce $8.95 Margherita Pizza- Basil. Tomatoes, Mozzarella & Tomato Sauce 86.95 BBQ Pizza- Red Onion, Grilled Breast of Chicken, 88.95 ella, To xatoes, & Cilantro Leaves .proscutfb'%.sa-Mozzarella, Tomatoes, Fresh Black Pepper 88.95 & Basil Oil Thai Chicken Pizza- Scallions, Carrots & Morella Cheese $8.95 Pepperoni and Mozzarella 86.95 Z • • • Pastas & Noodles Mixed Vegetables, Crushed Tomatoes, llerk Chili Flakes, Fussili Pasta Lunghi r '5 Szechwan Beef Vegetables & Orzo Pasta $14.95 Charred Ahi with Pasta Puttanepca, Olives Capers, Tomatoes, and Onions $16.95 Chicken Penne, Roma Tomatoes &Romano $12.95 in a Garlic Cream Sauce Spicy Cashew Shrimp, Stn' Fry Vegetabks, & Noodles $14.95 in a Cilantro Thai Sauce Lobster Ravioli- Peso 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 Mixed Mushrooms. Roasted Corn Salsa, Mashed Potatoes with Barbecue Butler Seared Ahi, Mirin-,butler Sauce, Roasted Shit take Mushrooms, Cucumber Relish, Sushi Rice $17.95 $17.95 Paas 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 516.95 Tomatoes, Spinach, Creole Butler Sauce Mongolian Beef Tenderloin Stirfry, Sizzle Sauce. $14.95 Assorted Vegetables, Stemmed Rice Honey BBQ Glazed Chicken Breast, Sauteed Spinach, $15.95 Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes and Mesquite Potato Chips Blackened Ahi; Sake Sauce, Sesame Vegetable Stisyry ' $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 Jac Da Wsfiat, acceptA>tserdoatErge nut 3S Prior Mondays: Half Price Stahl 5-1O.,t Two for One If AY Is Bar • Thosdapr Possis fib Miner far twu S2V 1�at 5:644AOpm ifi price Sara! Snndaya: All U C1t4Rat SQIW $19.95 per porsoo . Shane ayd Scott McCartsae, Praprieton Skkltayel, lixocNtirs tier ?3 • • PATRICK, M O L LOY'S el APPETIZERS SEASONAL SOUP OF THE DAY 4.25 SHRIMP FILLED WONTONS over a, cuccunber sa.i¢a, 6.00 FRESTi BAKED CHICKEN ROT PIE with, griped, corn, bread, 5.25 GRILLED CHICKEN KABOB with. a,Tiu4,peowua-icu.Lce, 5.95 BREADED MARYLAND CRAB CAKES with, grilled, pea.,- gru.i.ry nu ku..'ti., sauce, 8.25 SEARED AHI TUNA andtwo- bean, naiad.wixh.fails g.vr.P,►za, 8.75 SALADS SPINACH SA LAD witi., whit, nu cs3woomj and, a, wa.nx, bacon, vi:na.ifp-attz, 6.00 PIER AVE. CHOPPED SALAD icebe rrtk a ra sta,i ne, lettuce, ‘4,441, cucu.+t1,e+-, tsrma ttr, nudbhevo t4o...bo l - bea vw,, Aga go- cheese fit a, red, wane, viAa.4e-rettz, 6.00 WARM GOAT CHEESE SALAD ave+- ba.lry Sree4i3, w it3t, Ica/Ali/1, avid a, chaMepa$+►e viunae.grem 6.50 PASTA /1USQ 170 CAPE LLIN I wid,wi.lci,iltuau-vomtia.ncisangd tomo es- 7.25 SPINACH AND RICOTTA RAVIOLI with, & wn.-butt - and, pine, ruaty 7.95 LINGUINI with# Mat la,ciatxwa.nda,wh%tp,wi.to.gstriic.sauce, 8.50 ROAST DUCK RISOTTO wi,tit,a,biendoffresivherbs- 10.95 ENTREES GRILLED/STEAMED SEASONAL VEGETABLES with, herirba snat'arice' and, a, izghtvegetubiepuree, 10.25 FREE-RANGE CHICKEN served, witb,po s,anndChefs-cho ce.vegetables, 13.50 FRESH GRILLED SALMON with, ba,sr►tat'avices black, beanie, grteen,art;.o,,,s, and, an, avocado cl2a4,. g- sc 14a, 13.00 SEABASS ma.rivtated, over stu•- - fin ed, weetablek and, cw riee, rue, 14.25 CALIFORNIA HA LI'BUT crusted with, ha.5eiru4 and, sale, over a,tlyntatty- coecl'vw�th,steamed, spCrta.ch 14.95 RIB -EYE STEAK with, rikitt✓ria-.t,stpotZi.to and, blue^WE/ green,bean* 16.50 RACK OF AUSTRALIAN LAMB utak a,ma4,dcrust, mashed, potatoes, art, staa.vned ava,qu.guy /7.95 Fri. ETMIGNON wail, mashed,po atae,yauia,wad,re.,,,shrooyniu,,u. e, 18.25 GRILLED PORTERHOUSE STEAK with, twice, ixxked,potaxtra.vul, cornrowtite-cvlrwith,herb- butter 19.95 Exec Chef CJul* Socchin • WINE Lrsr l/IiVE 131' TWE 6t14.5S Domaine, e, Steffi M icheU.e/ Brut Cha pa.tne- Belvedere Chardonnay DeLoach, 'Son o»na, C twee) C harcl onn,a y Saverada-SawvignorvBla.n , rove' Street Whte'ZC.**d.eZ'eL Sonoma. Creek Pinot Noir Fet7ier 'Ea, Pea.k) -1e+-lot Se heigArZinfruldel. kWINEsY7?OEBOT7-LE Chap pagne Spark, )iJ DomcJ.wSt. Michelle Brut Rued erer Estate, Veuve- Ctigu.ot!Yeltow Label Brut Wave, Cl %guot 'Gold. Label V i vttnery ReAerve%, 88 • 1/2 boat& 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 WluXei k/ RobertMonclavi.Rune/8 Law/ 22.00 Ferrari.-Carano-Fuone' B la.nc' 25.00 Sanferd,Sawvignon.Blanc 24.00 CaymeAteScukvbgnon,i3Lanci 28.00 Kettuizir PLnDt gr(gfo- 16.00 Ranco-debOne ile'Fra i) Pinot- Qri tio- 31.00 $eat li V4liya,rds''Carnero-s% Chardonnay 18.00. Raymond/Chardonnay 22.00 Sanford. C hardonnay . 26.00 Kenda2,LJacksow'Ca.rvtelot' Chardonnay 35.00 Re.‘ 1W/i Rayynwru%Piriot Nair 18.00 K.encialb jackson,'Vininers,R&serve% PULot Noir 26.00 Michel Lyncly Bord ea, ot, 16:00 .Ca n, ccwee. 'nzerlot cabernet bte uli 28.00 LesJasxelle�Mertot 17.00 Shafer Mertot 34.00 Staf%s' Leap Petrte'Syrah, 33.00 Beaulieu/ ford Cabernet 24.00 KendaWJackson/ViAtner's-Re4 rvee Cabernet 32;00 Cha rl eis, Krug `Vattage, Sel ctro rv' Cabernet, 88 _42.00 Far N ie nte• Cabernet' 58.00 Nwit St. 0earge-Burg-uncly . 27. ,01) 1/2 bottle- 14.00 75- • • ***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. .340 • • 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 change has 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 Lisa Brannan & Dili, Brannan 1610 Raymond Av (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 a lack 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 INFORMATION 2 k 944 15TH PLACE HERMOSA BEACH,,CA 90254 SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL 1.315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 RE: CLOSING HOURS FOR STILLWATER DEAR H,Be 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 tQW IMPACT ON THE CITY. OR. NEIGHBORHOOD,. THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPEAL THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS DECISION., SEVERAL OTHER FINE DINING RESTAURANTS' IN THE SOUTH BAY CLOSE AT 12 MIDNIGHT ON WEEKENDS AND AT 11. Pel, ON WEEKDAYS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE STILLWATER DO THE SAME! SINCERELY, BARBARA Ross SUPPLEMENTAL �� INFORMATION • •q- 7. 6. Co)U-V1 e/i/fili10/4eVS UJec-Ced 4ei/e (IC 4con ed0,f-ei/ ist) JM (.4:14 4,111»•01-- rhivr rtek keel o e 4ete cjoce 11. • // meek• - s • 11,st yew 1,11 ithee4eif4 oe)e 11)6/ ented if I/0404 •I 4,41 1.614.1,1 st• 4.4/('e q30 17 S h<e. (Y10) 9;7 3roZ•G SUPPLEMENTAL 2k INFORMATION September 13, 2006 • City of Liermosa Teaelt. Gene Shook, President Shook Development Corporation 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 300 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3885 SEP I3 NZ 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 HERMOSA 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 Councilmember 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. Sincerely, ackie Drasco Deputy City Clerk 3 10-3] 8-0204 cc: City Council Community Development Director City Manager • 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 AUG 1 5 2006 `7N'DEVIDEP ( 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 1 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 SUPPL`MEN i.At_ INFORMATION r'.,t ili,iciTIUN 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. I 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 Pavilion 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 Pavilion 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 $3 • in writing that the garage as 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. 8. Make responding to a problem reported by the community regarding parking, speeding or the Pavillion a priority. No one appears to be doing anything rightnow. 7/27/2006 • • 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. I 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 7/2'1/2006 litTraffic at 6 pm or so. ote SUV illegallyP arked. One of the many traffic jams on 16th St. 7/27/2006 421. Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 grl Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 Truck blocking the street in the Morning. 7/27/2006 More pictures of the traffic on 16th 7/27/2006 9 0 This is part of the 5:30 pm crowd 91 7/27/2006 * .,C ._110 .C.. - t;-; • .:• - 4 -ti; ---•sp 4i...• . • N. . .t:i-wilt # . •••,-.,*, 4 A, -A- -ft, . : 4) „.. ....10 ,f.i.' - ''''..7 r,...t:2,e. ti -• t . t', s .,:N* ±"'"'‘Co,l' • "..: "" .. •P':;:`,4 , .., , : • . • . • • ••• Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area in morning. 7/27/2006 p•,:,•-:•-•-'ai .:.•,,,,.'„1,4, ....,.,,. • - -,,* ..-•;:,.....• ••:,-2..' ',.1.. -'.,t47:::•,*41'.7:-:,....-..-, • -'' . ryte, e . ...-.,,,,...,.. .,..Q,,.., 6'. (1,53'.' ' . - ' • ‘,,.,„.,.:5,,,,,z,„.,, •?!•••.7tvnf-„,..0.110li-., f t'•••••Pal s• ' • . .•• , •• ••,. „.. ,..,7.:‘,.,.... :fg..,•54..., ...m... - • :', ,,,141144-... ,L. -•_;•f?-..: --..zt--,1,4.44.-i.4.:‘,' ' .:: ' : 4 .1'. ... '' • ,...41-1.PAr. .i.?‘.'":';‘.:.- -,.....'-.7."::1.--.1i.-ii: „„..,;•:„4.:... -7. ''''':''''''' . ... .. _ . . , 4!:?.;;;;,;„,;-:,?-<• • „ - „,...,4,,, . , . g• . , .....,•-•' 444" Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 q if- Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 9 c Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 Truck parking illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 crl Car unloading illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 8 e�. }��ic,es,a F 3,!VP .'?`_b_:.-,ii..._i.?�:Pr.+..r r. Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 99 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 /0, ll-'•ti4•:',.....Naile0.}0•M • • " • • • 11Z. Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 102- Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 /03 Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 0 if Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 f-. Car parking illegally in Vons loading area 7/27/2006 Ids Car parking illegally in Red Curb zone - police no show 7/27/2006 Car parking illegally in Von's loading area 7/27/2006 D g Cars parking illegally in Von's loading area and Red Curb zone 7/27/2006 1 e Car parking illegally in Von's loaing area Check out AOL.contoday. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free. 7/27/2006 110 Sol Blumenfeld I 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 2 G 20N r� DEV. DEP F. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION )JF Stephen Burrell, City Manages) All Hermosa Ge l Members (PIc .v,,,, ti g Com rn tsS fc-it,) 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 JUN 1 9 2 . DEV. DEP'. June 16, 2006 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. 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 par on onlyone side of the SUPPLEMENTAL ii 2- INFORMATION 8 street. Many of us have very sminarrow driveways that were not built" 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, T 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, Rosalind and Alan Thomen 909 16th Street. The fo](owing list has been compiled from observations by Rosalind and Alan Thomen, only after observing people park their car on 16th St. or Mira St., walk down the street, cross P.C.H. and walk to the 24 hr. Fitness Center. All people witnessed had one or more of the following items with them: a towel, a gym bag, a water bottle. All sightings were take etween 2:00 - 8:00 p.m. on weekdays. weekends: 1/23/06 Silver Toyota Scion 5KTF816 CA 1/30 Grey Chevy 510 Pickup 7131163 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 Bm 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 4Y0U161 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 1'03 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) 131k Hummer DKY 1264 NY (again) 1973 Plymouth Duster 1BYR813 CA (again) 5/19 Blue Mercury Lynx FBM191 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 131k 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 2XHL114 CA 6/09' Blk Hummer DKY 1264 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. • James Lissner 2715 El Oeste Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 8-15-06 Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Venue: Planning Commission Meeting of 8-15-06 S.ubject:'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, r, s 1, �: � ` � := �— iii;' tR SUS �:;a�sl _a . INFORMATION .6 l' a y $ 1n� ch Sgltfd 7P et1 apricofs p�stnchios f kr cheese e rar�ieliiecl onion raspberry ::vn'agrette: ' - (ygir:eh.: ; of one' I *A11 ehfrees orn� wrt/i bye#1 fast pota oes 3 aii omlk iiia kory. rout Swee,{,potatq hasp poached Qggs; clz{potLee'cbults... ppletivoarl,sttiokedbhconrpb4ch:el g E<Eh 1ish=i)iu :txi`'.bluecrah. s &4: v/r/h{}.(2't .Pa/ re -twee 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 Tan Seared Shrimp, Criinini Mushrooms, Pine Nuts, Cilantro, Soy Lime Sauce. $11. Tomato Basil Bisque Goat Cheese Toast Points. $9:.: sodsa`i French; Onion Soup Traditional Favorite. $7. Still Water 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. Dob. 06 Pan Seared New Zealand Sea Bass Grilled Corn and Black Bean ReIish, 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 Mahi Indonesian Fried Rice, Roasted Pineapples, Grilled Asparagus, Curry Coconut Sauce. $26. Organic Grass Fed Filet Mignon Mango Steak Sauce, Asparagus Risotto, Seasonal Vegetables. $33. 12 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. • 41,5- 8.7444,‘,37,..., 'G 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, Calamari, Fish•Stock, Rustic Toast Points. $26. • 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 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, •Tn,atoes, & Cilantro Leaves • Proscyle0' a- Mozzarella, Tomatoes, Fresh Black Pepper $8.95 &Basil Oil Thai Chicken Pizza- &allions airots:&Mozzarella Cheese . $8.95 • Pepperoni and Mozzarella $6.95 L fse. `i::' ... • V v.+w • Pastas & Noodles O` vv / r Mixed Vegetables, Crushea' Tomatoes, Herbs, Chili Flakes, Fussili Pasta Lunghi )5 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 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 Panuescm 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 Stitfry, Sizzle Sauce, $14.95 Assorted Vegetables, Steamed Rice Honey BBQ Glazed Chicken Breast, Sauteed Spinach, Roasted Garlic Mashed Potatoes and Mesquite Potato Chips Blackened Ahi, Sake Sauce, Sesame Vegetable Stirfy and Wasabi Mashed Potatoes $15.95 $17.95 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: T 1 We gladly accept American Express, M4srq;Cm d,#14 Visa Price Mondays: Half Price Sushl 5-k.*�MyTweibr One II Gall It Bar Tuesdays: Prime Rib dinner for tivo'.7µr:. Tues. -Sat. 5:00-1:OOpm i1 price Sushi Sundays: All II Can Eat Sushi $19.95 per person Shane and Scott McColgan, Proprietors Rick Reyes, Executive Chef -24 • • PATRICK. MOLLOY's C'ir-`` 1 erg APPETIZERS SEASONAL SOUP OF THE DAY 4.25 SUR/MP FILLED WONTONS over a, cucumbersa-lsa, 6.00 FRESH 'BAKE'D CHICKEN POT PIE wall, grrlled,corn, breaci. 5.25 GRILLED CHICKEN KABOB with,a'Tho pea.vuttsauce, 5.95 BREADED MARYLAND CRAB CAKES wail, gri..Ile .,pear a*.td, , whop., gtrucsv rnusta,rd, sauce, 8.25 SEARED 74 HI TUNA and two- bea.ry }a -lad, with, Lara greeny 8.75 SALADS SPINACH SALAD witivwhite,rfu;4hroamya.nd.a,warmbacory vi,nzaffrette, 6.00 PIF AVE. CHOPPED SA LAD iceberg- and, ro-ma,i,r,,e Lettuce w; th, cucumber, to -mato; nucshrao,n g:a rbon beavts; Asi.ago-cheese. 5r a, red wine, vc.rta4rette, 6.00 WARM GOAT CHEESE SALAD overba.by green,wit3,,waltu,tya-nd a,champa.cjn,e'vi u -ette, 6.50 RASrA/RISO7To. CAPELLINI with.wildmukshrtyo-tivka.nd,}uw- dried, tomatoe, 7.25 SPINACH AND RICOTTA RAVIOLI with, brawn: hooter andpinen,.i-. 7.95 LINGUINI with,Manilla,c4.a.owa4Ac, whit& wine.,ga,riiisatcc , 8.50 ROAST DUCK RISOTTO wail- a, . 1 -of fre-avherb., 10.95 ENTREES GRILLED/STEAMED SEASONAL VEGETABLES with, herb- ba+ma.ti,rice, aril a, light vegetadrteptow, 10.25 FREE -RANGE CHICKEN served wtth,potatoey anti/Chef choice ve , 13.50 FRESH GRILLED SALMON witiv baisma tt rice; black, bea ,, g•rneh, on on,i, aqui, an, avoca.do'caanliv sat a, 13.00 SEA BASS mar-i,nated, in, miri,n, over stcr- - fr ed, vegetables a-nd curried rice, 14.25 CALIFORNIA HALIBUT cncsted witivh-l.u1a a,lci &over a, o - Coins' w ith, satea m,ed spinach, 14.95 RIB -EYE STEAK witivrustic, roastpotatoeyanal.iriuet kegreen/beany 16.50 RACK OF AUSTRALIAN LAMB wii3va,mastedgas-i;acrust; etta,shed, potatoeyandsteamed/ ava.rag.cus, 17.95 FILET MIGNON wail/ »cashedpot'atoeyc nda,wad, nu; *-rjo t,sa.u.ce, 18.25 GRILLED PORTERHOUSE STEAK with/ a, Naze. ba.kecLpotato- ate corvv-o-vv-the-- cab- witis,herb- butter 19.95 ExecChe Owl* BocchLrw- r22— S • eJr-Cii, /TV • • WINE LIST WINE BY ri(E 6LASS ' DoitutAA," te.St0,. Michelle/Brut Cha4npag41.e, 4.75 'Belvedere, Charcloivetay 4.00 De -Las -chi 'So-vtama,Cavee) Chardonnay 4.75 StUerado-Saikvad‘navv'8/a~ 4.75 •rove. Street Wkiir.e.ZiAla,nziel. 4.00 •So-no-ma/Creek, pivtottvq-cr 4.75• Fetlrer lEacate, ?Deco(/' 1.1er/ot • 4.75 $egh&go-Znfa,ndel. 4.25 WINE gl> TWE gorrzE Chawipagne/Spcu-ki.Oui- Wine DoinaZne. St: Mi;chelle,Brut gaeclere,r T'state. Veave,C1,14juot Laixe/) Brut Veuve, C 1.4aot Label/14tnerkRe4erve), 88 1/2 bottle. 19:00 4.00 46.00 24.00 65.00 Where- Ro-lYert MovtdaNi.FLU4le/Bla,ne, 22.00 Ferrari.-CarartcrFtone.Bict.n& 25.00 Sa.nford/ Sawvig-non. lartc, 24.00 Cayintor S exco4Aort, la,no •28.00 Pidtot 16.00 Rona:- ctel/Opt 'Frttai) Pihtiot-Oro- 31.00 BeauliewViAyarol.4- 'Carne,ro:s% Charcloiv!wcy 18.00 Ray mon& Chardonnay 22.00 Sanford/ Cha.rck 26.00 Kert4.zaljacksovv'Ca4trelot Charol.cryveta)y •35.00 Reek gayknottcl.pcnot Noir Kentialljacio'lhiettners-Re,serve) Pt Noir Mithel.,Lyn.eiv8orclea,w/i Cain/ Cuivee. '11w-1ot-cabernet 61erui) Les-jamelle*Merlot Shafer lvierlot Sta)k Leap Petite/ Syrali. Beaew VCrtyarcl.4- 'Rutherford; Cabers em.dalljack4o1j. Vai.tpter's- Re/serve Cabernzt harlakKruo- Vaqtage. Selection) Caberrwt, 88 Far Ni.ente, Cabernet Nita' St. GeorgeiBurgandy • 1/2bottle, 12-3 18.00 26.00 16.00 28.00 17.00 34.00 33.00 24.00 32.00 42.00 58.00 27.00 14.00 -Og Week( #(1/ .c. "gonepi( 44ik,r4,ava-Joitli FIR'CETVED AUG 1 5 2006 (-30M DEV, DEP r. SUPP-LEMENTAL ItIF MAIM_ • • 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 corrimunity, 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 n s t the 'optmlar huh riiipact'gyin�i'enant iliac operates 247 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 • AUG 1 52446 ;Cafe DEV. DEM-. 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 ew and existing restaurant/bar businesses that want more square footage and with in- creasingly late liquor -selling hours. Thus removal at electionor by recall of those on council with continuing restaurant and liquor expansion voting records may be the only way Hermosa residents take back their city. as 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 August 13, 2006 Planning Commission City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Sirs: • AUG 1 5 2006 COM DEV. DEP 1. SOUTH :BAY C 0ALI7:10 rl "working topet%or to prevent tub th,nce, chose" re -;eat 121 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. Medical 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 irresponsib.le. Research shows that youth who start drinking early in Iife arc 4 tunes more likely to become alcoholics and underage drinking costs the U.S: more than $50 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 a Director South Bay Coalition Cc: City Clerk, Hermosa Beach, CA City Manager, Hertriosa Beach., CA 320 Knob Hill Redondo Beach, CA, 90277 (310) 714-2967 (310) 792-8187 (24 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 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 l: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION • ShookDevelopmentCor To: Sol Blumenfeld From: Nathan Koher 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 1 have conducted'this research' I have; taken pictures as well as walked the neighboring communities of Manhattan, and Hermosa Beach. I have found stunning similarities. The similarities are as follow. Hermosa Beach: ➢ Ittakes *fly 2 min 50 sec to legally walk from the front entrance of the i uosa Pavilion to get to the parking spaces in front of Pet Care. res exactly 4 minutes (200 paces) to legally walk from the front entrance of 'Hermosa Pavilion to get to the free parking space on 829 17th street. ➢ Ittakes:: exactly 118 paces to legally walk from the free parking space by 832 16th streetr...::' 5 and 16street have free parking in a residential neighborhood > The Hermosa Pavilion has neighboring residential areas that offers free parking H E R • IML sO N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P: Www.hermosa avilion.com /23 • 1 ShookDevelopment Corti ➢ 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. 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 r' paces (2 min 30 sec) to legally walk to the Metlock Center property from 1,20;0: 120i 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. HERMOSAA �/ I L 1 O N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P:01111111.11, www.hermosapavilion.com • ShookDevelopment Corp METERS ENFORCED 9 AM TO 8 PM 8 HOUR TIME LIMIT .`tigL;rpt f •. ti r I trt H; i The Parking Garage for the Metlock Center serves a number of the same businesses as the Hermosa Pavilion. H E R M O S A `_Av LIo N 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA. 90254 P: www.hermosapavilion.com /3c, ShookDevelopment Cor unique Spin' and Yoga' Studio Come See.U$tipst2.is�c'� 310-545-4243L:i;: iiww.spacemb.com' '3; t^ 'f _)iLL MICHELLEs.E A • WATERtEAF;Ibrrg S? SP/NN/NG: I so'note that the Metlock Center has multiple restaurants located in their ;enter. dere is an adjacent condo across the street from the Metlock Center that offers sitor parking. ➢ ArdifioireAvenue_has parking that is not restricted T1e:'Green`Build'has metered parking. ettock;Ceter is also located adjacent to a Vons shopping center. /H� E `,R M O S A !'1 Y 1ON 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P:www.hermosapavilion.com (3/ > 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. n'offers discounted parking for their gym members. The price is cents' for the first 4hrs of parking. Gym members can also buy monthly parking passesfor $6 and yearly parking . asses for $72. 40.1 CROWNE PLAZA HO Redondo Beach Marina & Hot > 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 AV IL I o NN 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 P: www.hermosapavilion.com � p ilion.com l'3z ShookDevelopment (or Delusion, the Metlock Center and the Hermosa Pavilion are similar properties Oa is not required to validatetor restaurants:` AV IML I SON 1601 Pacific Coast HighwayHermosa Beach,CA 90254 P: www.hermosapavilion.com /33 ' •UUt5i it i LtJtJb 10:J1 M t Ut7t HIUHWAYKUBBERY.NET PAGE 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 REcEIVESt AUG 1 0 2005 COM. DEV, DEP C 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 in7rmation 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. fay- 'Jb/1U7/ LL1L7b i.: 1 L1L1L1L1bQIWLJL1 • HIGHWAYROBBERV.NET • PAGE 02 SURVEY OF DOWNTOWN EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Establishment Address Hours of Operation Alcohol License 900 Manhattan Club 900 Manhattan Ave. M -Th 11am-12 am F 11 am -1 am Sat 9am-12am Sun 9am-12am Full Liquor _Iverre 1y $,4,I,/ Cdoco Noche 1140 Highland Ave. Su -Th 6am-10pm F-Sa 6am-11pm Beer and Wine 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-lam Full Liquor Pasta Pomodoro 401 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Su-Sa 7am-11pm 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 llam-lOpm 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 11am-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-lam Full Liquor Sharks Covee/viers 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 l lam-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 900 Manhattan Ave. M -Th 11 am -12 am F 11am-1 am Sat 9am-12am Sun 9am-12am Full Liquor Shellback 116 Manhattan Beach Blvd. No Reso Full Liquor Sun & Moon Cafe 1131 Manhattan Ave, Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Beer and Wine Talia's 1148 Manhattan Ave. Su -W 7am-11 pm Th-Sa 7am-12am Full Liquor (.3 M Al VVI 1VI L.VVV 1U• U1 V VV UUV'JU UU nlunwMTKUULJtKY.. IYt I I-'Hlat 0.1 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-lam Full Liquor Wahoo's 1129 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 6am-11 pm F-Sa 6am-12am Beer and Wine Avenue 1141 Manhattan Ave. Su -Th 11 am -11 pm F-Sa l lam-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-11 pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor Jr.'s Deliboy 451 Manhattan Beach Blvd Suite D-126 1200 Morningside Su -Th 6am-11pm F-Sa 6am-12am Full Liquor e oRK 5C, u/ a c' oi /1/6 H4/4,.✓L3 Lf G:/Planning/Ledger/Downtown Alcohol & Hrs List 07/11/06 4eceiVed 1 -.&7,c -:o 06/' i(d-41(7014 /e = �'deerui wry_7 vat//s /vj = /!16`�/ox (.1��n�ryre✓d-- I 31, / M. SHEPPARD°:MULLIN SHEPPARD MULUN. RICHTER &,HAMPTON LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 18 7 '. 4th Floor 1 650 Town Center Drive j Costa Mesa, CA 92625-1993 714-513-5100 office .j 714-513-5130 fax j vkµFw�;stieRp'ardrpu!l1ri.ebm 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 c/o 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 13'7 i:sHE?PARD M ultst.RICHTER Et HAMPTON L4P, ATTORNEYS July 18, 2006 VIA FACSIMILE (310) 937-6235 AT LAW VIA EMAIL sblumenfeld@hermosabch.org 4th Floor 1 650 Town Center Drive 1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1993 714-513-5100 office 714-513-5130 fax 1 www.sheppardmullfn.com mstewart@sheppardmullin.com sheppardmullin.com Our File Number: OGLC-064504 Planning Commission c/o Sol Blumenfeld, Director Community Development Department City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 S 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 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. I3, SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION s S.HEPPARD MULLIN RICHITE & HAMPTON I,LP July 18, 2006 Page 2 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 recentlyy 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. 13c SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER S 17AME'TON LLP 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. Sincerely, W 02-WEST:NA314000383 66.1 Michael D. Stewart for SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP • I f July 18, 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 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. HB 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 Plea bar scene, even when things are going smoothly...." 3. Written communication from Patricia Egerer, dated June 13, 2006, RE: HERMOSA 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 ... ACT SHEET .....3rr SEUINA..: Y r M ;:._ megi...,.. s. h�ee`,y`t_ Effects of Alcohol Outlet Density on Economic Development East County Community Change Project • February, 2003 Rmesearch shows that a high concentration of alcohol outlets in a location can hamper economic development. While such businesses 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.6 This fact sheet was produced by the Institute for Public 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 www. 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. 3 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. 8 Ontkush, M.: "Violent crime and alcohol availability: relationships in an urban community.' Journal of Public Health Policy 19(3):303- 318. 1998. s '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. e 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 (FL Your views HB bar plana 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 thinkers 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 fmd 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 therestaurant 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 our kids 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 dorCtallow 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. — RICHARDHALLIBIIRTON 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,.and 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 to 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 extend a per- sonal invitation to John Fer to attend our next Northwest San Pedro Neighborhhood. Council meeting on Aug. 14 at Peck Park and to join our Fireworks Reduction Task Force. Our first-year goal was to significantly 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 Departrn>ant 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 ri r t v r Reachus Mike Carroll 310-540-5511 Ext. 381 mike.carroll@dailybreeze.com Editorial Page Editor Mail 5215 Torrance Blvd. Torrance, CA 90503-4077 Internet www.dailybreeze.com E-mail letterdailybreeze.com Guides Opinia r -2 City of Hermosa Beach Sol BIumenfeld, Director Community Development Department 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 June 14, 2006 JUN 1 4 2006 DEV. DEP [. 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, arty Eg Residen SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 6, 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. JUN ? 4 20GS 0M. DEV. DEPT 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. /rz Line A: Signature, Line 8: Printed Name, Line C: Street Address 1. A. B. �,� Xrd/CO , �E 6 C. r ' ... NI IMC e - . g ' o ,'..,y 2. A. / 77 B. C. /-*- !f /,/,U4-� Al i : e r 6 ,: (' j _ S" 3. A. B. C. rlu�j .<) 6)4-10k � - 9vl ( /"?.--757 ? ' 4. A. B. C. .."11q" `:!.. gi WWII a moos iSm 1, :9®..%g. 5. A. B. C. .%�.e)--- � . /tL.4JLS f'7( "L& tte.ct l tett% A: itlegiAL - -.I. / 2',a 1 o S y 6. A. B. C. .1 tis., atv..w"_ s) tAg ,i •-s,grcv vf......r /4:1-3 0.../^-nb ►,7 Ate R.. Le C• -ozSY 7. A.-eelr---- B. c. . i /%?/Gl >° ! !Pg.. -1- tp/ Lc? 4 cP,avn2 0 4 lit ace nevi G ,mss/ 8. A. 11 c _ icItc �, f ►-) ...I _ TVg0 iY\ a l.D - B. C. lo.....-.wirr , ;;:' Ric,i2f"--ei.4 1 ,U3.�� f .s Lc,,,�. l� ,,i•....0-2? 4--.a,�ceuar r •��/i t 9Ci . . /rz �- L. IVB• 1%.0 t t IL. i...uttavix 1 III 1 1, v.. I v1 1i-s\iflvvr• 1-71J'1vf-i 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 eguard our living environment. Due to the close proximity to residential neighborhoods �r uitand undesirable. and schools this typef:otion would be 1 Line A: Signature, Line B: Printed Name, Line C: Street Address 1. A. B.V,_---:?4____411....:„,/( ti CL_-1-1 0� (' 2. A. B. C. 3. A. B.. C. 4. A. B. C. ' 5. A. B. C. • . A. B. C. 7.. A. B. C. - B. A. B. C. 9. A. B. C. 1 • • 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/BAR 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 willhinge 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. "High bar density changes the character and environment of the neighborhood and the routine activities of those living or visiting that block."' 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. l*7 • • 9. Pathway to School: Children everyday walk along 16`1' 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 Ilermosa 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 Preventing Problems Related to Alcohol Availability: Environmental Approaches U.S. DHHS Pub No. (SMA) 99-3298. cc: City Clerk Page 2 of 2 • QUERENCIA WOODWINDS To the attention of the Commissioners Subject: Proposed Pavilion restaurant/bar IIjl z yIF6 „`�� =•Li TEUFAX (310) 379-6764 MOBILE: (310) 755-5078 QIJERENCIAFLUfES@AOL.COM W W:W. QUER ENCIA W OOD WIN DS.COM 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. • • TO : HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION FROM : ALAN STRUSSER / KAMVII HOWLETT 824 SEVENTEENTH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA. 90254 PH # ( 310 ) 372 - 3099 JULY 9, 2006 s!(! 1 0 L FLJ iV I 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 long 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 communicatein council's agenda packet for July 11, 20 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 16`h 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. Impactis 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 • 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 vehicles that 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,. I..aw & 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. Everyday 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 • • WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS HERMOSA PAVILION HERMOSA BEACH, CA Prepared for: Shook Development Corporation December 4, 2006 ,d � ;PO DECECEPVE 0 4 2006 COMMUNITY DEV. DEPT. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS December 4, 2006 Gene Shook President Shook Development Corporation 1601 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Hermosa Pavilion —Shared Parking Analysis Walker Project # 37-7808.00 Dear Mr. Shook, Walker Parking Consultants 2550 Hollywood Way, Suite 303 Burbank, CA 91505 Voice: 818.953.9130 Fax: 818.953.9331 www.walkerparking.com Walker Parking Consultants is pleased to present our shared parking analysis for the Hermosa Pavilion development in Hermosa Beach, CA. Our analysis considers whether the existing non -valet spaces (496 spaces) would adequately supply parking to meet the on site parking demand at full build out and occupancy of the Hermosa Pavilion. In performing this analysis we conducted occupancy counts, which correspond directly to the suites that are currently occupied. The land uses currently found at Hermosa Pavilion include: fitness center, office, auditorium, and restaurant (cafe). Proposed land uses include upscale restaurant and retail. Our study provides an analysis of the City of Hermosa Beach unadjusted parking ratios, an analysis of existing land uses and their current parking demand, and analysis of how the new land uses are anticipated to affect parking demand on the site. Our findings indicate that upon completion of the proposed restaurant and retail there will be a ±76 - space surplus at the peak hour. It has been a pleasure performing this study. We remain available to discuss any of the findings within this report upon your review. Sincerely, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Ezra D. Kramer Parking Consultant J:\37-7808.00 Hermosa Pavilion Shared Parking\Report\Final\RPT 1 13006 -Hermosa Pavilion.doc • • WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS HERMOSA PAVILION HERMOSA BEACH, CA Prepared for: SHOOK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 37-7808.00 DECEMBER 4, 2006 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 INTRODUCTION 1 Hermosa Pavilion 1 City of Hermosa Beach Parking Requirements 2 SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS 5 Current Parking Demand & hourly Accumulations 5 Base Ratios 5 Modal Split Adjustment 5 Noncaptive Adjustment 6 Hourly Adjustment 6 Monthly Adjustment 7 Occupancy Counts 7 On -street Parking Observations 8 Garage Queuing Observations 8 Parking Operator Data 9 Future Parking Demand and Parking Accumulation 10 Other Services at Hermosa Pavilion 1 1 FINDINGS 13 Parking Adequacy 13 Neighborhood On -street Spillover 13 Queuing 13 APPENDIX A: Scope of Services A APPENDIX B: Additional PCI Data B TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Development Breakdown 2 Table 2: City of Hermosa Beach Parking Requirements 2 Table 3: Application of Hermosa Beach Requirements to Hermosa Pavilion 3 Table 4: Stillwater Bistro Hourly Activity 6 Table 5: Hermosa Pavilion Seasonality 7 Table 6: Hermosa Pavilion Occupancy Counts 8 Table 7: Hermosa Pavilion Ticket Data 10 Figure 1: Hermosa Pavilion Location 1 Figure 2: Hermosa Pavilion Future Parking Accumulation - Monday 11 Figure 3: Hermosa Pavilion Future Parking Accumulation - Friday 11 S HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Walker Parking Consultants ("Walker") was retained by Shook Development Corporation ("Shook") to perform a shared parking analysis for the Hermosa Pavilion development in Hermosa Beach, CA. The development is located at 1601 Pacific Coast Highway, and bounded by Pacific Coast Highway to the east, 16th Street to the south, 1600 Ardmore Place Condominiums to the west, and Hermosa Surf Condominiums to the north. Figure 1: Hermosa Pavilion Location Source: Lennor, 2006. HERMOSA PAVILION Hermosa Pavilion is a mixed use development containing a fitness center, office, auditorium, and restaurant w/o dining area. Proposed land uses include upscale restaurant and retail. Parking is provided on site within a 540 -space, above/below-grade parking structure. This total may be broken into: 454 standard parking stalls, 42 tandem parking stalls, and 44 parallel valet stalls (currently not in use and INTRODUCTION 1 • • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 removed from this analysis). The current program for the Hermosa Pavilion is provided in Table 1. Table 1: Development Breakdown Current Land Uses 24 Hour Fitness Glen Ivy Kids Kabaret Stillwater Cafe Keller Williams Seaside Office Suites Coast Capital Future Land Uses Gym Day Spa Auditorium Cafe/Restaurant Office Office Office Sq. Ft. 46,049 13,038 3,036 912 9,347 9,274 1,732 83,388 Stillwater Restaurant Suite 140 Suite 150 Suite 160 Suite 165 Suite 180 Suite 185 Suite 190 6 Kiosks Restaurant Retail Retail Retail Retail, wine sale/tasting Retail Retail Retail Retail Non -demand Generating Land Uses (Warehouse) Warehouse VIP Lockers 7,038 1,499 4,442 688 548 1,537 423 417 360 16,952 12,180 600 12,780 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 113,120 Source: Shook Development, LLC, 2006. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PARKING REQUIREMENTS The City of Hermosa Beach evaluates whether a development is providing enough parking supply based on Chapter 17.44 of the City's Municipal Code. The minimum requirements for land uses in the Hermosa Pavilion have been summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2: City of Hermosa Beach Parking Requirements Current Land Uses Gym Day Spa Auditorium Cafe/Restaurant Office Future Land Uses Restaurant Retail Required Ratio 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 50sf 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 250sf Required Ratio 1 space per 100sf 1 space per 250sf Source: City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, 2006. 2 • • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 In general, parking requirements developed by cities consider each land use to stand alone, without consideration for the possibility of sharing parking with surrounding land uses. Under this scenario, we have applied the minimum parking requirement to the program data from Table 1. We find a total parking requirement of 852 spaces as illustrated in Table 3. Table 3: Application of Hermosa Beach Requirements to Hermosa Pavilion Current Land Uses Sq. Ft. Required Ratio Required Gym 46,049 1 space per 100sf 460.49 Day Spa 13,038 1 space per 100sf 130.38 Auditorium 3,036 1 space per 50sf 60.72 Cafe/Restaurant 912 1 space per 100sf 9.12 Office 20,353 1 space per 250sf 81.41 Subtotal Required 742.12 Future Land Uses Sq. Ft. Required Ratio Required Restaurant 7,038 1 space per 100sf 70.38 Retail 9,914 1 space per 250sf 39.66 Subtotal Required 110.04 TOTAL REQUIRED 852.00 Source: Shook Development, LLC, and City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, 2006. Within Chapter 17.44 there is also provision for 'common parking facilities'. This provision can be found in section 060. In these special situations additional analysis is required to determine the amount of parking that should be provided for a site. Section 060 reads as follows: Common parking facilities may be provided to wholly or partially satisfy the off-street parking requirements of two or more uses when one or more of such uses will only infrequently generate use of such parking area at times when it will ordinarily be needed by patrons or employees of the other uses. Under Section 060 we find that a shared parking study may be performed for developments with a combination of uses that have differing peak parking demands. Based on the variety and mix of land uses on site, Shook wishes to explore whether sharing the parking supply between some user groups would be efficacious in meeting the parking demand of the development. Walker has prepared this analysis with the intent of helping gauge the parking demand considering efficiencies based on a shared parking model. 3 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Generally when these analyses are performed the subject site is either still in the planning phase or under construction. This is not the case with the Hermosa Pavilion, where over 80% of the development is occupied. Several tenants have been in business there for over a year. Therefore, using current building occupancy and parking occupancy data we will first present how parking on site is being utilized currently over the course of a week. Then we will overlay parking demand generated by the proposed restaurant and retail land uses. The theories supporting this analysis stem from the concept of shared parking. The Urban Land Institute first published Shared Parking in 1983. This publication has been used ever since to explain the concept of. shared parking and to create models that forecast peak parking conditions for mixed-use developments, and/or urban settings. Walker contributed to that original publication and also led the team that researched and wrote Shared Parking, 2' Edition, published in 2005. 4 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Shared parking is the use of a parking space to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict or encroachment. The ability to share parking spaces is the result of two conditions: 11 Variations in the accumulation of vehicles by hour, by day, or by season at the individual land uses, and 21 Relationships among the land uses that result in visiting multiple land uses on the same auto trip. The key goal of a shared parking analysis is to find the balance between providing adequate parking to support a development from a commercial standpoint while minimizing the negative aspects of excessive land area or resources being devoted to parking. CURRENT PARKING DEMAND & HOURLY ACCUMULATIONS In general, a shared parking analysis considers the types, quantities and user groups of land uses for a development, as well as site and market specific characteristics. BASE RATIOS To begin a parking analysis we first start with the type and quantity of land use to be analyzed. Each land use has a specific metric considered by the parking industry to be a reliable meter of parking demand for that use. For office building that metric is square footage, for residential that metric is the number of bedrooms, etc. The quantity for each metric on the site is multiplied by a ratio for each land use. This ratio, called the base ratio, is based on industry research of stand- alone sites. When multiplied by the given quantity for a land use, the base ratio is considered to produce the peak parking that land use would require. For a mixed-use site this calculation provides the maximum amount of parking needed for the site without consideration to the dynamics of the site and market, and interplay between activity levels for each land use. MODAL SPLIT ADJUSTMENT Modal split for Hermosa Beach is lower than most communities in Southern California. This is due in part to the active lifestyle of the residents, and climate in Hermosa Beach. Many residents choose to walk or ride a bicycle to their destination, or run to their gym. Another contributing factor is the density of development and proximity of services to residential areas. Hermosa Beach is also a pedestrian friendly environment with clearly marked crosswalks, stop signs along most arteries west of PCH, and few blind intersections. Hermosa SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS 5 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Beach, along with the other beach communities, is well served by taxis, further contributing to a lower percentage of single occupant vehicle trips. NONCAPTIVE ADJUSTMENT Noncaptive parking considerations for any mixed use development take into account that some users of a land use may already be parked on-site as an employee etc. of another land use on the site. Sometimes these land uses are more of an amenity to primary uses (i.e. Stillwater Cafe provides food for Glen Ivy Spa, and is also available as a lunch destination for the employees on site). 24 Hour Fitness may also be utilized by employees on site during lunch. The parking generated by these patrons has already been accounted for as their vehicles are parked as employee vehicles. HOURLY ADJUSTMENT Hours of operation and hourly activity for a land use may be very different from one day to the next. Appendix A in the prior Shared Parking study prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan contains letters from the existing Kids Kabaret and the proposed Stillwater Bistro. These letters explain the normal schedule of activity for each throughout the week, and over certain periods within each day. Although Kids Kabaret is listed as Auditorium space (City requirement of 20/Ksf for 3,036sf, or 61 spaces) only 10-25 vehicles are generated on peak event nights (Friday and Saturday) as several parents choose to carpool or walk. For non-event nights (classes) parents generally drop their children off at the site with classes running from 3:00 PM through 6:00 PM. On most weeknights the business is closed by 7:00 PM Stillwater Bistro is a high-end restaurant currently operating three restaurants in Orange County. Table 4 was provided by the Stillwater Bistro, LLC. Table 4: Stillwater Bistro Hourly Activity Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun 6am-l2pm 5%* 5%* 5%* 5%* 5%* 5%* 5%* l2pm-5pm 40% 50% 60% 70% 70% 30% 30% 5pm-l2am 50% 60% 70% 60% 100% 100% 70% All numbers reflect percentage of occupancy of the restaurant. *Staff only occupancy Source: Stillwater, LLC, 2006. As is evident from the breakdown above, the majority of activity, and therefore parking accumulation, for the Stillwater Bistro falls in the evenings/nights between Thursday and Saturday. 6 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 MONTHLY ADJUSTMENT Seasonality usually has very little effect on the parking generation at mixed use sites. This is of course because most mixed use developments offer restaurant, retail, and some office or residential component. Both restaurant and retail have similar seasonalities, so most of these developments hit their peak based on the combined peak for these two uses. Because 24 Hour Fitness is such a large component of this mixed use development it actually offsets the restaurant and retail seasonality as seen in Table 5. This table pulls out excerpts from the shared parking model monthly adjustment factors. Table 5: Hermosa Pavilion Seasonality Land Use/User Group Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Community Retail 56% 57% 64% 63% 66% 67% 64% Employee 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% Fine/Casual Dining 85% 86% 95% 92% 96% 95% 98% Employee 95% 95% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Health Club 100% 95% 85% 70% 65% 65% 65% Employee 100% 100% 95% 80% 75% 75% 75% Office <25,000sq ft 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% Employee 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% Land Use/User Group Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Late Dec Community Retail 69% 64% 66% 72% 100% 80% Employee 80% 80% 80% 90% 100% 90% Fine/Casual Dining 99% 91% 96% 93% 100% 95% Employee 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Health Club 70% 80% 85% 85% 90% 95% Employee 80% 90% 95% 95% 100% 100% Office <25,000sq ft 95% 100% 100% 100% 100% B0% Employee 95% 100% 100% 100% 100% 80% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2006. The following sections provide empirical data to support the assumptions about the Hermosa Pavilion site and local adjustments to parking demand. OCCUPANCY COUNTS Walker performed occupancy counts on the three days of the week that the parking operator identified as generating peak occupancies. These days fall in line with the current group fitness class schedule at 24 Hour Fitness (Monday and Tuesday evening), and as well on a Saturday afternoon. The operator identified the peak period for the weekdays as 6:00 PM, and on Saturday at 1 1 :00 AM. We performed counts every hour on the hour from 2:00 PM until 8:00 PM on weekdays, and 9:00 AM until 3:00 PM on Saturday. Walker's counts were used to verify PCI counts over that same time period. PCI has been collecting hourly accumulation statistics for nearly a month prior to this study. Data for the week of our counts can be found in Appendix B. 7 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS v WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Table 6: Hermosa Pavilion Occupancy Counts Date 9AM 10AM 1 1 AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 3PM Saturday, November 11 213 I 271 I 219 157 133 119 139 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM Monday, November 13 160 164 182 247 Tuesday, November 14 130 154 236 245 Peak Hour 310 308 227 292 287 222 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2006. ON -STREET PARKING OBSERVATIONS During these counts Walker also performed observations of the on - street parking proximate to the site in order to speak to overflow under peak conditions. These observations were performed on 17h Street east of PCH, 16'h Street east of PCH, the east side of PCH between Pier and 18'h Street, the west side of PCH between Pier Avenue and Peppertree Apartments, and along 16th Street west of PCH. These observations suggested that on -street parking was not impacted by Hermosa Pavilion patrons or employees on the streets east of PCH. At each hourly observation there were spaces available on both 16'h and 17'h Streets. Parking along both east and west PCH is intended for use by retail patrons of businesses, and tenants and service vehicles for the residences along PCH. These spaces are performing according to their intended use. The west side of PCH is a no parking zone until 7:00 PM as it is a major artery for southbound traffic during the evening commute. Parking along 16'h Street west of PCH (13 spaces) is nearly always impacted. The parking operator, Parking Concepts Inc. or PCI, for Hermosa Pavilion also performs hourly counts of the on -street. Their data includes only the neighborhood streets given above, but omits on -street parking along PCH. On -street parking counts for the week beginning November 8 can be found in Appendix B of this report. GARAGE QUEUING OBSERVATIONS Shook also requested that we observe the operation of the garage at peak times. There were no queuing issues greater than 2 vehicles at an entry gate (10-15 second wait) during our scheduled observations of the site. Both PCI and Shook acknowledge, and we have personally observed from being local to the development, that on occasion at the peak hours of entry some back ups do occur. Each vehicle waits no longer than one minute, and this period lasts only about five minutes on Mondays before 6PM and sometimes on Tuesdays at 6PM as well. When we observed these back ups they do 8 • • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS v WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 not interfere with traffic along the major artery of PCH because of the designated right turn lane on southbound PCH, and a left turn signal at the intersection for northbound vehicles hoping to turn west onto 16'h Street. It should be noted that there are very few land uses (retail or residential) that would be served directly by turning west on 16'h Street at PCH. Therefore any queuing that does occur along this street should not be an inconvenience as it occurs for no more than 5 minutes at peak entry times on Mondays and Tuesdays. At Shook's request PCI currently provides staffing at the entrances to help speed entry and reduce queuing times over these important periods. Stephen Burrell (Hermosa Beach City Manager) noted in a recent meeting that both the police department and planning department have expressed interest in having the City alter the street layout to better accommodate the traffic along this short span of road. It is heavily traveled in the afternoon commute as a "shortcut" due to backups on Pier Avenue at the intersection of the Greenway between Ardmore and Valley. It also provides a back entrance to the Plaza Hermosa shopping center parking lot. PARKING OPERATOR DATA One of the best ways to analyze parking accumulation is to collect reports and ticket information from the parking operator, if available. As was stated earlier in this report, in general we are not privy to this sort of information because the mixed use development has not yet been built and/or occupied. But with over 80% of the space occupied we have a very valuable resource in information from the parking operator. The parking operator at this site is the same one used by the City in the Hermosa Avenue parking structure, Parking Concepts, Inc. (PCI). They were able to provide parking tickets for our peak observed day, Monday, November 13. PARKING TICKET DATA The ticket data provides information about the hourly parkers on the site throughout the day. Analyzing this data we can find hourly accumulations by validation type, peak hourly accumulation, average length of stay by validation type, and entry and exit volumes. For this analysis the important information is hourly accumulation. Table 7 shows the breakdown of tickets for the period when Walker performed occupancy counts. Utilizing the occupancy count information we can back out the hourly porkers to find the number of monthly (employee) parkers for the site as well. The peak accumulation for Hermosa Pavilion occurred at 6PM (likely from 6PM to 7PM) on Monday, November 13. We observed 310 vehicles utilizing the parking garage at that time. Considering a parking supply of 496 stalls, and 9 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 a peak parking demand of 310 stalls, Hermosa Pavilion currently is operating at roughly a 186 -space surplus. Table 7: Hermosa Pavilion Ticket Data Hourly Parkers 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM 24 Hour 74 79 95 162 244 285 216 Kids Kabaret 0 2 2 0 0 1 2 Glen Ivy 3 5 6 6 4 1 0 Office 4 3 7 6 2 3 1 Total 81 89 110 174 250 290 219 Occupancy Counts 160 164 182 247 310 308 227 Monthly Porkers 79 75 72 73 60 18 8 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2006. PCI also performs hourly counts of the garage and surrounding residential streets. As this information may be of interest, it has been provided in Appendix B. FUTURE PARKING DEMAND AND PARKING ACCUMULATION To finalize this analysis we intend to overlay the parking demand for the proposed retail and restaurant land uses on top of the parking demand for the existing land uses. As shown in Table 3, under municipal code requirements the restaurant is required to provide 70 parking stalls, and the retail is required to provide 40 parking stalls. With a surplus of roughly 186 stalls at the peak hour of operations Hermosa Pavilion will not only meet the City requirement for these additional land uses, but provide a surplus of approximately 76 stalls. Recall that this analysis does not consider the 44 parallel valet - only stalls; only 496 of the 540 stalls are being counted toward this surplus. Figure 2 below illustrates the parking supply and demand for the Hermosa Pavilion at the current peak hour, with the City's requirement of 1 10 additional spaces for the proposed restaurant and retail patrons and employees. Although ULI data supports hourly adjustments in parking accumulation throughout this period, we have elected to show that the site will maintain a surplus even if no hourly adjustment is made. This also does not take into account that the current peak is found on a Monday night at 6PM; a time which, based on current Stillwater Bistro activity, reaches only 50% of its peak activity (refer back to Table 4). 10 • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 Figure 2: Hermosa Pavilion Future Parking Accumulation - Monday 450- 400- 350- 300- 250- 200- 150- 100- 50 0� 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2006. We have provided a second table showing Friday accumulations with the proposed new land uses overlaid as well for a more realistic illustration of the peak hour parking demand. Figure 3: Hermosa Pavilion Future Parking Accumulation - Friday 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2006. OTHER SERVICES AT HERMOSA PAVILION Additionally, the Hermosa Pavilion garage provides a detailing service for vehicles already generated by the site. This service has been approved by Council for 4 spaces closest to the entrance for the lower parking area. Note that these vehicles are not being generated in ❑ Retail ❑ Stillwater Bistro ❑ Monthly Parkers ❑ Office ❑ Glen Ivy ® Kids Kabaret II 24 Hour ❑ Retail ❑ Stillwater Bistro ▪ Existing • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 addition to those for the Hermosa Pavilion development, and in fact because of the type of service more than one car may be parked in a single space, or 'stacked'. Stacking commonly occurs in an attendant - assist or valet assist situation, which is how this service operates. 12 • . HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 FINDINGS PARKING ADEQUACY In review, we find that the current peak hour accumulation of the Hermosa Pavilion is 6PM on a Monday, when the peak parking demand reaches roughly 310 parking stalls. City of Hermosa Beach municipal code requirements for the proposed new land uses on the site would be an additional 110 parking stalls. Therefore the total parking demand for the site under proposed future conditions would be no greater than 420 parking stalls. Hermosa Pavilion currently provides 496 stalls (omitting the 44 parallel valet -only stalls on site). Parking supply for Hermosa Pavilion is greater than projected peak parking demand by 76± spaces and is therefore adequate with roughly a 76 -space cushion. NEIGHBORHOOD ON -STREET SPILLOVER Based on our observations and data provided by PCI, we do not believe that this development currently impacts on -street parking in the neighborhoods east of PCH. There are many spaces along PCH which are closer to the development are still available even at Hermosa Pavilion's peak parking period. There is currently no economic incentive for visitors or patrons of the site to search for free parking because Hermosa Pavilion currently offers free parking. Data provided by PCI for on -street parking along 16th Street west of PCH indicates that it is nearly always full. We observed several work and delivery trucks (this portion of the street feeds into the Vons loading dock area) parked in these spaces throughout the day. PCI's data indicates that these spaces are also heavily occupied at 12 midnight (their last count), and at 6AM (their first count) the following day which suggests that these spaces are being used by residents of the condominiums/apartments near this on -street parking supply. QUEUING As stated within the report, on the days that we observed the parking operations at Hermosa Pavilion for this study, there were no significant queuing issues. On days other than our observation days for this study we have observed a backup. This backup is alleviated within a few minutes, and only occurs at peak times (just before 6PM Mondays). The 24 Hour Fitness offers both a spinning class and a generally aerobics class at 6PM, which causes this backup. Regardless, the queuing has not created a situation where parking generated by the development is spilling over into the on -street parking. 13 • • APPENDIX A: SCOPE OF SERVICES • • HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DECEMBER 4, 2006 37-7808.00 APPENDIX A: SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Meet with Shook once to clarify study objectives, review the work plan and update the schedule. 2. Obtain from Shook detailed information regarding the amount of each land use type. The land use data should be broken down by square footage for all commercial space. Also obtain any market, traffic, shuttle or other studies that may provide background information on anticipated utilization patterns. 3. Research the City of Hermosa Municipal Code for applicable parking requirements. 4. Conduct occupancy counts at key periods for the development. Key periods have been identified by Shook and their parking operator as Monday and Tuesday Evenings, and Saturday Afternoons. Counts will be performed hourly between 2PM and 8PM for weekdays and between 9AM and 3PM Saturday. 5. Observe on -street parking one block east of development on 17h Street and 16th Street, as well as along the south side of le Street adjacent to the development, and on Pacific Coast Highway proximate to the development. 6. Observe parking operations, including any queuing issues at the entry and exit of the parking facility during key periods. 7. Obtain activity reports from parking operator to for a sample week (including the days when occupancy counts were performed). 8. Overlay parking demand proposed to be generated by the addition of retail and restaurant employee and patron activity. 9. From our analysis of current and proposed parking demand, determine "design day" demand for the development. 10. Prepare a draft report that summarizes the study methodology and findings. 1 1. Discuss draft report with Shook upon submittal. 12. Discuss with Shook any comments, questions, or requested changes to the draft report. 1 3.Incorporate necessary and applicable changes to the report and issue a final document. 2 • • APPENDIX B: ADDITIONAL PCI DATA HERMOSA PAVILION SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS I_ DECEMBER 4, 2006 APPENDIX B: ADDITIONAL PCI DATA Structure (496 spaces) 11/8/2006 11/9/2006 11/10/2006 11/11/2006 11/12/2006 11/13/2006 11/14/2006 E 16th (9 spaces) 11/8/2006 11/9/2006 11/10/2006 11/11/2006 11/12/2006 11/13/2006 11/14/2006 6AM 7AM 8AM 9AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM " no data , 109 130 160 209 ? 180 164 ji 180 no data 114 140 189 108 11 166 1 112 147 1; no data 73 117 140 '' 158 = 182 174 i 158 j 28 51 133 198 204 298250 js. 215 - 13 38 48 72 143 F 154 41� 131 T 110 39 80 95 147 193 17011 181 # 178 9 0 133 160 191 180 210 186 162 W 16th (12 spaces) 11/8/2006 11/9/2006 11/10/2006 11/11/2006 11/12/2006 11/13/2006 11/14/2006 E 17th (7 spaces) 11/8/2006 11/9/2006 11/10/2006 11/11/2006 11/12/2006 11/13/2006 11/14/2006 6AM 7AM 8AM 6 6 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 2 6AM 11 11 11 12 12 11 10 9AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 4 4 1 3 1 s 4 1 5 s.311 3 i 5 5 4 4 ° �' 5 6 4 2 5 5 ''' _ 4 T 5 t 5 2 4 5 4 1- 4 3 - 0 o _ 0 1[0 0 33 11 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 7AM 11 8 11 12 12 11 10 6AM 7AM 4 4 3 3 3 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 169 ' 155 p 216_ 291 '' 124 141 ° 155 184 .. 141 1 155 fl 172 j 186 207 195 160 130 122 135 1 142 121 185 155 1 162 220 146 " 174 E 182 260 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 4 4 1 2 II 3 4 4 5 ,i 5 5 5 IL 6 L 6 5 - 4 11 4 11 3 1 2 3 11 3 2 2 3 li 3 3 3 3 3 8AM 9AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 9 10 ' 10 1 8 1 11 9 10 1 9 8 10_1 11-�_ 11 10 • 11 10 11 12 i 12 1 I� 11 4 9 10 11 12 12J�10 12 12 J 11 12 12 12 1, 11 11 12 10 s 7 8 11 11- 1 12 11 11 3 1 0 r 0 12 12 � 12 8AM 9AM 4 3 0 0 4 5 4 4 3 3 11 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 6PM 323 204 203 122 113 297 279 6PM 3 4 4 3 2 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 10 11 N 12 11 12 1., 10 12 12 1 12 12 - 11 11 11 10 a 10 11 11 1 11 12 12 j 12 7PM 394 185 196 85 73 329 249 7PM 4 4 5 3PM 4PM 5PM 11 11 12 12 9 12 10 6PM 3 2 5 4 7PM 12 11 11 11 9 12 12 7PM 37-7808.00 8PM 9PM 10PM 11PM 12AM 298 1 190 " 141 1 102 N no data" 87 I' 58 42 h 33 184 97 88 1; - 72 62 7 35 ^ 28 19 61 p 45 r— 39 31 251 " 186 'u 140 ; 79 � no data 203 175 121 T 77 no data 1 8PM 9PM 10PM 11PM 12AM 5N 5 14 1 3 L 3 i 3 4 4 4= T 4 14 5 4 4 1 4 4 il 2 -,. -1 1 1 1 1 y 3 i 3 3 y 3 3 1 5 4 5- fi= 3 1, 3 it 2 2 1 1 1 no data rio data': no data no data]; no data 8PM 9PM 10PM 11PM 12AM 11 12 1 11 1 12 I 10 10 I 10 k 11 11 L 11 12 11 11 10 10I 11 11 11 1 11 L 11 9 9 10 10 10 12 10 12 11 11 11 1, 11 12 L s 12 11 11 it 8PM 9PM 10PM 11PM 12AM 4 0 4 4 - 4 1 T. 6 3 6 3 5 4 5 ' 5 . , 6 3_ a 3 3 4 5 5 1 5 II � 4 2 3 2 4 1 -5 4 1 0 "_ 2 3 4 6 5 3 4 1 � 2 2 3 54 5 3 3 i k 1 3 3 1 4 3 3 1� 4 4 4 ; 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 6 3 _ 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 4 4, 4 � 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 4 5 5 __ 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 I 5 6 6 0 0 A. 3 L 3 L� _ r _?_ APPENDIX B • • /.)--//,)10-6> December 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council December 12, 2006 SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION ON FIRST READING OF ENTERTAIMENT PERMIT ORDINANCE Recommendation: That the Council introduce the attached ordinance on first reading: Ordinance No. 06 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REQUIRING AN ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT FOR ALL LIVE ENTERTAINMENT BY ADDING CHAPTER 5.78 TO TITLE 5 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE Analysis The City Council directed the City Attorney to draft an ordinance requiring all businesses in Hermosa Beach that provide live entertainment to obtain an entertainment permit. The permit is a regulatory business license intended to regulate the operation of entertainment establishments. The ordinance requires that every business owner, operator, or manager providing or permitting live entertainment, as defined, must file an application with the City Manager describing the proposed entertainment, the nature of the business, and the background of those persons responsible for managing and supervising the establishment. The ordinance also requires entertainment promoters to obtain an entertainment permit prior to promoting events or conducting any business within the City. The promoter is required to file an entertainment permit application with the City Manager describing number of events proposed to be conducted, whether the events are recurring on a regular schedule, and the location or locations of proposed events. The City Manager will conduct a public hearing and approve the application if certain standards are met. The City Manager is also authorized to condition the operation of an entertainment establishment or event promotion in order to assure that it operates in a safe manner consistent with public health and safety. If the permit holder fails to operate the entertainment establishment pursuant to the permit requirements and any other code requirements, the ordinance sets out a procedure for suspension and revocation of the permit. A permit will be suspended if the City Manager determines that use of the permit is creating an immediate and significant threat to the public safety and welfare. However, the City Council must hold a public hearing to permanently revoke the permit. The entertainment permit is a regulatory business license and not a land use permit. This permit is required in addition to any Conditional Use Permit (CUP), or other land use approval, required to operate an entertainment establishment. An entertainment permit does not create a vested property right, does not run with the land, and must be renewed annually. In the event that an entertainment permit and a CUP contain conflicting conditions, the conditions on the later approved permit will prevail. 6a • • Entertainment permits must be renewed annually and a new permit is required whenever there is a change in ownership, change of business location, or change of the name of the entertainment establishment. Lastly, any person who is aggrieved by the City Manager's decision to issue, deny, or suspend a permit may appeal the decision to the City Council. The ordinance provides a six month grace period to comply with this new permit requirement and permits will be required by July 11, 2007. Fiscal Impact Collection of application fees will have a neutral fiscal impact. Enforcement costs may create a fiscal imp thefut ure. ► 4R. ' ell" Step City anager Attachments 1. Ordinance • • ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REQUIRING AN ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT FOR ALL LIVE ENTERTAINMENT BY ADDING. CHAPTER 5.78 TO TITLE 5 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 5.78 is added to Title 5 of the Hermosa Beach municipal Code to read as follows: Chapter 5.78 ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 5.78.010 Purpose and Intent. 5.78.020 Definitions. 5.78.030 Permit Requirement. 5.78.040 Exemption from Permit Requirement. 5.78.050 Application for Permit. 5.78.060 Issuance of Permit- Investigation and Hearing. 5.78.070 Standards for Approval of Permit. 5.78.080 Conditions. 5.78.090 Permit Transfers and Changes. 5.78.100 Expiration and Renewal of Permit. 5.78.110 Emergency Suspension. 5.78.120 Revocation. 5.78.130 Modification Requested by Permit Holder 5.78.140 Appeal. 5.78.010 Purpose and Intent. The City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach finds that operation of business establishments in the City providing live entertainment creates special circumstances pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct by patrons, underage drinking and similar such conditions as to warrant regulation through a business license. Therefore, it is the purpose of this chapter to regulate the operation of entertainment establishments and entertainment promoters to promote the public health, safety and welfare and to ensure that the operators of these establishments have the proper qualifications and operate their businesses in a safe and secure manner. The issuance of a regulatory business license for the operation of entertainment establishments in the City shall not establish or convey a vested right or a property right in the permitee or the property. • • 5.78.020 Definitions. "Admission Charge" means any charge for the right or privilege to enter any entertainment establishment including a minimum service charge, an event charge, a cover charge, a charge for the use of seats and tables, or any other similar charge. It also includes the purchase or presentation of a ticket or token directly or indirectly required as a condition of entrance. It does not include tips, gratuities, voluntary donations, or suggested donations for employees or for any person providing entertainment. "Entertainment" means any live performance, including but not limited to all forms of music, theatrical or comedic performance, song, dance, or vocal entertainment by a disc jockey or announcer, participated in by one or more employees, guests, customers, or any other person or persons. "Entertainment Establishment" means any business establishment or concern open to members of the public, with or without admission charge, in which entertainment is offered or performed,: except as exempted in Section 5.78.040. "Entertainment Promoter" means an individual or group of individuals, entity or organization that organizes, coordinates, schedules, advertises, solicits patrons, oversees or otherwise promotes entertainment in the facilities of another. 5.78.030 Permit Requirement. A. Unless exempt pursuant to section 5.78.040, it is unlawful for any person owning, operating, managing or in possession and control of a business establishment in the City and any entertainment promoter to provide or permit entertainment that is open to the public without an entertainment permit issued pursuant to this chapter. Prior to commencing operation of an entertainment establishment, the owner or operator shall obtain a permit in the manner provided for in this chapter and it shall be posted in a conspicuous public place on such premises at all times. Failure to post such permit shall be a violation of this Code and shall be grounds for revocation of such permit. Prior to operating or conducting business in the City, an entertainment promoter shall obtain a permit in the manner provided for in this chapter. B. Neither the obtaining of an entertainment permit nor compliance with the operating standards provided in this Code shall obviate the need for,or excuse any noncompliance with, the zoning code, building code, fire prevention code, or any other or additional permit or code requirement made applicable to the entertainment or entertainment establishment under any other provision of this Code or state or federal law. 5.78.040 Exemption from Permit Requirement. The provisions of this chapter shall not be deemed to require a permit for the following: A. The use of a radio or other electronic playback device in any establishment, except when utilized by an announcer or "disc jockey" who at any time provides any form of vocal entertainment for the purpose of gaining the attention and interest of, or diverting or amusing guests or patrons, including the announcing of song titles or artists' names; • • B. Entertainment consisting of ambient or incidental music provided for guests or patrons by one (1) non -amplified musician. If there is an admission charge required to observe or attend such entertainment, the music will not be considered ambient or incidental; C. Entertainment provided for invited guests at a private event such as a wedding reception, banquet or celebration where there is no admission charge; D. Entertainment conducted by or sponsored by any bona fide club, society, or association, organized or incorporated for benevolent, charitable, dramatic or literary purposes, having an established membership, and which holds meetings at regular intervals of not less than once per three-month period, when proceeds, if any, arising from such entertainment are used for the purpose of such club, society, or association; E. Entertainment conducted solely on or at any premises or location which is owned or operated by, or leased by, to or from the City of Hermosa Beach, the State of California, the County of Los Angeles, the United States, or any agency or subdivision thereof; F. Parades; G. Street performers, such as musicians, singers, or mimes; H. Performances by the students at educational institutions as defined by the Education Code where such performances are part of an educational or instructional curriculum or program; I. Dance lessons, theatrical and performing art lessons and student recitals; J. Book readings, book signings, poetry recitations, and any other similar entertainment consisting of the spoken word; and K. The normal and customary fitness services provided by an athletic club or fitness center. 5.78.050 Application for Permit. A. Applications for entertainment permits shall be filed with the City Manager upon a written form provided by that office stating, as applicable: 1. The name, signature and permanent address of the applicant; 2. The name and permanent address of all persons having a financial interest in the operation of the entertainment, business, or premises where the entertainment is to be located; 3. A detailed description of the proposed entertainment, including type of entertainment, number of persons engaged in entertainment, and any further information about the entertainment or entertainers, as the City Manager may deem necessary; 4. The date, hours, and location where the entertainment is proposed to be conducted and the admission charge, if any, to be charged; 5. The name or names of the person or persons responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business and of any entertainment; 6. A statement of the nature and character of applicant's business, if any, to be carried on in conjunction with such entertainment, including whether or not alcohol is or will be served as part of such business; 7. Whether or not the applicant or any person or persons responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business have been within the previous five years, convicted of a crime, the nature of such offense, and the sentence received therefore including conditions of parole or probation, if any; • • 8. Whether or not the applicant has ever had any permit or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or provision of entertainment revoked, including the date thereof and name of the revoking agency; 9. The proposed security arrangement for control of patrons; 10. Written consent for the proposed entertainment on the premises from the owner of the property on which the entertainment is to be conducted; 11. Such other reasonable information as the City Manager may deem necessary; and 12. In the case of entertainment promoters, the number of events proposed to be conducted, whether the events are recurring on a regular schedule, and the location or locations of proposed events. B. Applications for entertainment permits shall be accompanied by a fee established by resolution of the City Council, which shall be no more than necessary to cover the costs of processing and investigating the application and acting on the permit. 5.78.060 Issuance of Permit- Investigation and Hearing. A. Upon receiving an application for an entertainment permit, the City Manager shall set the matter for a public hearing. The public hearing shall be conducted by the City Manager or his or her designee no more than forty-five (45) days from the date of receipt of the complete permit application. B. Notice of the time and place of a public hearing on an application for an entertainment permit shall be published by the city in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in this city and mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and to all property owners within three -hundred (300) feet of the proposed entertainment establishment. Notice of the public hearing must be given at least ten days prior to the hearing. The hearing may be continued from time to time as necessary to receive relevant evidence. C. Prior to the public hearing, the City Manager or his or her designee, shall conduct an investigation and may obtain reports from the chief of police and such other city departments as he or she deems necessary to determine if the proposed entertainment is in compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. D. The City Manager shall act on the application within ten days of the close of the public hearing. The City Manager shall approve and issue the permit if all the requirements of Section 5.78.070 have been satisfied. If the City Manager determines that the application does not satisfy the requirements of this Chapter, he or she shall deny the application. Notice of the City Manager's decision shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application, to every person in attendance at the public hearing who requests such notice from the hearing secretary and to all the property owners within three -hundred (300) feet of the applicant's business. • • 5.78.070 Standards for Approval of Permit. The City Manager shall approve and issue an entertainment permit if he or she finds: A. That issuing the permit and conducting entertainment at the proposed location, as conditioned, is consistent with federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations and any existing or required permit(s), the conditions imposed by such permits or Municipal Code requirements; B. Neither the applicant or any person or persons responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business has, within the past five years, been convicted of a felony or other crime of moral turptitude that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a proprietor of premises upon which the entertainment activities are conducted; C. Neither the applicant or any person or persons responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business has a history of committing, permitting or failing to prevent significant violations of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code or any license or permit, in connection with an entertainment establishment for which he or she is a responsible person; D. It does not appear, based on the information before the City Manager, that the applicant has provided false or misleading material information in the application; E. The premises within which the entertainment is located shall provide sufficient sound absorbing insulation so that noise generated inside the premises shall not be audible anywhere on adjacent property or public right-of-way or within any other building or separate unit within the same building; F. All indoor areas of the entertainment establishment in which patrons are permitted and entertainment is presented, shall be arranged in such a manner that the entire interior portion of the viewing area is open and visible from aisles and public areas of the place of entertainment and shall be open to view by management at all times. Visibility shall not be blocked or obscured whatsoever; and G. The entertainment establishment will have a manager on the premises at all times when entertainment is performed. 5.78.080 Conditions. In issuing the permit, the City Manager may impose conditions relating to the operation of the entertainment establishment. A. Conditions may relate to: 1. The days, hours and location of operation; 2. Restrictions designed to prevent minors from obtaining alcohol, such as separate entrances, exits, and restroom facilities on the premises; 3. Whether licensed security guards are required, and if so, how many; 4. The number and age of persons allowed on the premises; • • 5. Specific measures the permit holder must undertake to control conduct of the patrons so as to prevent or minimize disorderly conduct within the establishment; 6. Specific measures the permit holder must undertake to remove trash attributable to the establishment or its patrons on and around the establishment, the surrounding neighborhood and the public right-of-way; 7. Specific measures the permit holder must undertake to prevent the entertainment and its patrons from disturbing the peace and quiet of surrounding neighborhood; 8. Specific measures the permit holder must undertake to prevent its patrons from engaging in disorderly conduct in the surrounding neighborhood; 9. Whether the chief of police must receive advance notice of the date of a particular event if that event is not held as part of the regularly scheduled events of the business; 10. With respect to applications from business establishments, the use, engagement or employment of entertainment promoters on the premises of the establishment; or 11. Other matters related to public health, safety, and welfare. B. Conditions shall be based on specific, articulable facts reasonably related to insuring the public health, safety and welfare, including but not limited to the prevention of criminal activity, the conservation of limited city public safety resources, and the prevention of public nuisance activity that detracts from the peace and quiet of residential neighborhoods. C. Conditions shall be listed on, or attached to, the permit. D. If the applicant has been issued a conditional use permit (CUP), nothing in this chapter or the zoning code shall be construed to limit the authority of the City Manager to place additional conditions upon the entertainment permit whether or not in conflict with the existing CUP conditions. In the event of a conflict, the most recently imposed conditions shall be deemed to prevail. E. The City Manager may require the applicant to demonstrate compliance with an existing CUP or code requirements prior to issuance of the permit or may issue the permit conditioned upon the applicant obtaining any other additional necessary permits, license or other city or state approval. 5.78.090 Permit Transfers and Changes. A. No entertainment permit shall be sold, transferred, or assigned by any permit holder, or by operation of law, to any other person, group, partnership, corporation or any other entity, and any such sale, transfer or assignment, attempted sale, transfer, or assignment shall be deemed to constitute a voluntary surrender of such permit, and such permit shall be thereafter null and void. A permit held by an individual in a corporation or partnership is subject to the same rules of transferability as contained above. Entertainment permits are valid only for the exact location(s) specified in the permit. B. A new permit is required whenever there is a transfer in ownership of an entertainment establishment. If there is no change in the nature or scope of business or in the business location and if the previous owner has a valid entertainment permit at the time of transfer, the new permit shall be issued upon filing of a complete application, payment of the required fee and the City Manager's determination that the standards for approval set • • forth in 5.78.070 have been met. The following transactions shall be considered transfers in ownership: 1. The addition or withdrawal of a new partner or partners; 2. The transfer of a business from a corporation to an individual, or vice versa, unless the corporation and the individual is the same person; 3. The transfer of a majority share of stock in a corporation from one shareholder to another; or 4. The transfer of a business from an individual , partnership, corporation, cooperative, service organization, or other association to any other such individual, partnership, corporation, cooperative, service organization, or other association. C. A new entertainment permit is required whenever there is a change of name of an entertainment establishment. If there is no transfer of ownership or change in the nature or scope of business or in the business location and if the permit holder operating under the previous name has a valid entertainment permit at the time of the change of name, the new permit shall be issued upon the filing of a complete application, payment of the required fee and the City Manager's determination that the standards for approval set forth in Section 5.78.070 have been met. 5.78.100 Expiration and Renewal of Permit. An entertainment permit shall expire one-year from the date of issuance, and may be renewed annually thereafter upon filing of a renewal application and payment of a renewal fee in an amount set by Council resolution. An application for renewal must be filed at least thirty days prior to expiration of the current entertainment permit. Upon a permit holder's request for renewal, the City Manager may review the current activities upon and adjacent to the entertainment establishment and may impose any additional conditions that he or she reasonably deems necessary to safeguard the public safety, health and welfare; or he or she may refuse to renew the permit if the findings required for permit approval in Section 5.78.070 can no longer be made. 5.78.110 Emergency Suspension. An entertainment permit may be suspended immediately if the City Manager determines that there is an immediate and significant threat to public safety and welfare arising out of the use of the entertainment permit. The permit holder shall be provided by personal service and first class mail with notice of the suspension setting forth the grounds giving rise to the suspension and ordering that the entertainment operation cease and desist during the suspension. After such notice is given, the permit holder shall have ten (10) days within which to correct the conditions giving rise to the suspension and to provide the City Manager with proof of the corrective action taken. During this period, the permit holder shall discontinue all entertainment on the premises. Upon timely correction of a condition giving rise to a suspension, the permit may be reinstated by the City Manager. Failure or refusal of the permit holder timely to correct the condition shall result in institution of revocation proceedings as set forth in Section 5.78.120. Should the permit holder fail or refuse to correct the condition within the ten (10) day period, the suspension shall remain in effect until the conclusion of the revocation proceeding. • • 5.78.120 Revocation. A. An entertainment permit may be modified or revoked by the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, for any of the following reasons: 1. The entertainment has been conducted in a manner contrary to the findings for the issuance of a permit set forth in Section 5.78.070; 2. The permit holder has failed to comply with one or more conditions of the permit; 3. The entertainment has created sound levels that violate the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code; 4. The permit holder or his or her employees, agents, or representatives have violated or are violating federal, state or local laws, rules or regulations in connection with the entertainment; 5. The entertainment has been conducted in an illegal or disorderly manner or has been conducted in such a manner as to constitute an unreasonable burden on the reasonable use and enjoyment of neighboring properties; 6. The applicant has knowingly made a false statement of material fact or has knowingly omitted a material fact in the application; 7. The entertainment has created or is creating a nuisance; 8. The permit holder has failed to display the permit on the premises where the entertainment is conducted pursuant to Section 5.78.030; or 9. The permit holder or any other responsible person has violated any provision of this Chapter. B. Notice of a hearing before the City Council to consider revocation or modification of the permit shall be as provided in this paragraph. Notice of the time and place of a public hearing on revocation or modification of an entertainment permit shall be published by the city in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in this city and mailed to the permit holder at the address shown on the permit application and to all property owners within three -hundred (300) feet of the applicant's business. Notice must be given at least ten (10) days before the hearing. C. After consideration of the evidence, the Council may revoke the permit, suspend the permit for a time certain, modify the permit, or reinstate the permit. The City Council shall take final action by resolution and its action shall be final. 5.78.130 Modification Requested by Permit Holder. ' If the City Manager finds a modification requested by the permit holder is consistent with the provisions of this Code and will not constitute a material modification to the permit, the City Manager may modify the permit. If the requested modification will result in a material modification to the permit, the City Manager shall hold a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 5.78.060. • S 5.78.120 Appeal. A. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the City Manager, in issuing, denying, or suspending a permit or imposing conditions on the permit, may appeal the decision to the City Council. The appeal shall be made by filing a written notice thereof with the city clerk not later than ten (10) calendar days after notice of the decision of the City Manager is mailed to the applicant or permit holder. B. The Council shall hold a public hearing on the appeal within forty-five (45) days of filing the appeal and its decision thereon shall be final. In the case of an appeal by a person other than the applicant or permit holder, the permit holder may continue to conduct entertainment during the pendency of any appeal. C. Notice of the public hearing on the appeal shall be published by the city in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in this city and mailed to the permit holder at the address shown on the application, to the appellant and to all property owners within three -hundred (300) feet of the entertainment establishment. Notice of the public hearing must be given at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. The City Council shall announce its decision within a reasonable time, but not to exceed thirty (30) days, following the close of the public hearing, unless good cause is shown for the extension of time and the applicant or opponent or both are notified of this extension and the reasons therefor. The City Council's final action shall be taken by resolution and notice thereof shall be given by mail to the applicant/permit holder or appellant, or to both if they be different parties Section 2. All establishments in the City offering or providing live entertainment and all entertainment promoters conducting business in the City shall be in possession of a permit pursuant to Chapter 5.78 of the Municipal Code by July 11, 2007 or shall thereafter cease and desist from providing and offering live entertainment. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of December, 2006. Mayor Attest: City Clerk • • December 5, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of December 12, 2006 DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES r Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file this report and direct the City Manager to execute the agreement. Background: The City has provided dispute resolution services to our residents and businesses, through private contracts for over 15 years. For several years, the service has been provided by South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution and prior to 2000 the service was provided by Dispute Resolution Services which was part of the LA County Bar Program. This service is also provided in other South Bay cities including Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach and Torrance. The service is generally regarded has having a positive impact for the community as a number of residential and landlord tenant disputes are handled on an informal basis. Both the Police Department and the Community Development Department refer people to the service on a regular basis and view it has being a valuable community service. The City spends around $8,000 per year on the service. During the past year, 18 cases were handled that included full mediation intervention. A number of others were handled over the telephone during the intake process. Most of these are directly referred to others that could provide direct service or the issue was not considered ready for mediation. This approach is important as a large number of the issues that we get calls about can be handled without going through the full mediation process. A common example is a rent increase made by a landlord. We get a number of calls and when we talk to the person calling and they explain that they received a notice and do not have a lease we explain that the city does not have rent control and the increase process appears to have been followed. The City Council, at its meeting of June 13, 2006, directed that staff seek proposals to perform these services. A request for proposals was prepared and distributed to individuals and firms that might be interested in providing this service to the city. A total of five (5) proposals were received. All of the proposals were reviewed and all of the firms were invited to an interview with staff. The interview panel included the Community Development Director, Police Chief and me. Staff carefully reviewed each of the proposals and the results of the interview process - comparing the approach suggested by each of the firms, the cost, and how their 7a • • approach would meet the needs of the community. As a result of this process, staff is recommending that the City renew its contract with South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. This recommendation is based on staff's evaluation that they can provide this service in a most efficient and cost effective way. The intake process that is used by South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution, although often not mediation, does provide a valuable service helping the resident get the assistance that they might need. The other firms submitting proposals generally would pick up the process following the intake process once it was decided that mediation would be beneficial for the parties involved. A change to this approach would put a load on staff to perform this service before sending the case to the contract dispute resolution service. The availability of those proposing providing this service also was of concern. The actual case load probably could be handled by any of the firms submitting proposals and depending on the amount of time spent probably would cost more than is now spent on the program. In addition, the firm conducting the mediation would determine the time spent on mediation efforts (billed hourly) out of the control of the city, whereas the recommended provider uses a flat fee. Staff is also recommending that we include a feedback loop in a new contract that would use a questionnaire that would be sent to parties participating the dispute resolution process and returned directly to the City. This would provide an ongoing evaluation of the program. Res ectfully sub , tted, Stephen R. Burrell City Manager • SOUTH BAY CENTER DISPUTE RESOLUTION RD SEP 2 52006 ECEIVE Per............ LANCE WIDMAN Executive Director 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach Calif. 90254 (310) 376-7007 (310) 798-0857 FAX Mr. Stephen Burrell, City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Dear Steve, September 23, 2006 Enclosed is the Center's response to the City's Request for Proposal concerning the provision of dispute resolution services for the City of Hermosa Beach_ I have been involved in the delivery of such services in our South Bay community for about twenty years, working most of that time with the Los Angeles County Bar Association — Dispute Resolution Services, and now as Executive Director of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution The Center's focus is the South Bay where I have lived in Hermosa Beach for over thirty years, serving as a Member of the Hermosa Beach City School Board for the past five years and teaching at El Camino College for thirty five years. I have been actively involved in our community over the years as Mayor and City Council. Member for the City of Hermosa Beach for eight years, and through my participation in the Hermosa Beach Education Foundation,Sister City Association, Chamber of Commerce, Rotary and fundraising for 1736 House, among others. The Center currently has contractual relationships with the Cities of Torrance, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach. As you may know, the basic format of those arrangements includes a quarterly Operations Fee to cover the costs associated with information and referrals, City staff meetings, trainings and community outreach, and a Case File Fee where the. Center works with the parties involved in a dispute to try to resolve their differences. There is no charge to the parties when referred to the Center by City staff or website. The specifics of the contract are unique and negotiable between the Center and each City. The Center's current contract for services with the City of Hermosa Beach is $8,000. I believe the existing arrangement of an Operations Fee of $800 per quarter and a Case File Fee of $150 per opened case has worked well and I am proposing to maintain it. Since late 2001, 143 cases have been opened with 3455 contacts with the parties involved, 1305 information and referrals have been made and a total of 1865 persons have been served. I have always viewed the importance of the Center's services as involving more than just convening mediation meetings and helping the parties to resolve their differences. A • • great deal of my time is also spent working with City staff to help make current policies and procedures more workable, providing community workshops (landlord/tenant relations) and doing trainings for City staff in conflict resolution Viewing the Center's services as part of a community-based problem solving approach, I regularly attend Police Department briefings and the Center has sponsored Information Exchange Workshops involving Code Enforcement/Nuisance Abatement and Animal Control/Community Services staffs from the Center's contracting cities. The Center's relationship with Hermosa Beach is more than just a contract. It is my commitment to our community. I look forward to continuing the very positive working relationship that has developed between the Center and the City of Hermosa Beach. Sincerely, Lance Widman, Executive Director LANCE G. WIDMAN 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach, California 90254 (310) 379-5054 (II) (310) 660-3746 (ECC) (310) 376-7007 (SBCDR) RESUME OF QUALIFICATIONS PROFESSIONAL - El Camino College, Professor, Political Science, 1971 to present - Executive Director, South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution, 2000 to present - Program Coordinator, Dispute Resolution Services, Los Angeles County Bar Assn., Community Mediation Program, 1988 to 2000 - League of California Cities, Staff Assistant, 1969 to 1971 - Coro Foundation Fellow in Public Affairs, 1968 to 1969 - Hon. B. F. Sisk, Congressional Staff, 1967 PUBLIC SERVICE - Member, Hermosa Beach City School Board, 2001 to present - President, El Camino College Federation of Teachers,1988 to 1995 - Dispute Resolution Officer, El Camino College Federation of Teachers, 1995 to 2003 - Hearing Officer, Cities of Hermosa Beach (parking tickets), 1985 to 1990; Redondo Beach (housing appeals), 1.997 to present - City Council Member, City of Hermosa Beach, 1974 to 1982 - Mayor, City of Hermosa Beach, 1976 to 1977, 1.981 to 1982 EDUCATION/ - Neighborhood Justice Center, Santa Monica, Mediation TRAINING Training, Mediation Certification/1986 - California State University, Dominguez Hills, Paralegal Studies, Paralegal Certification/1982 - University of California, Berkeley, Public Administration, Masters Degree/1969 - Occidental College, Los Angeles, Urban Studies, Masters Degree/1969 - University of California, Berkeley, Political Science, Bachelors Degree/1967 The South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution Program of Services The following services will be provided by the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution to the City of Hermosa Beach: Resolution Services: The Center is available to serve persons who may be experiencing conflict in their personal or professional lives. This includes landlords and tenants neighbors, businesses and consumers, employers and employees, as well as family members, roommates and friends. The Center's staff will assess the problem and initially help the parties to resolve the matter through phone conciliation. If the dispute is appropriate for mediation and the parties are willing to participate, a mediation will be scheduled. At the mediation an experienced mediator will assist the parties to arrive at mutually satisfactory resolution of their conflict. This is usually done the or of a a verbal or written settlement agreement. If the parties involved in a dispute are referred to the Center by any member of the City's stag City Newsletter or Website, and a case file is opened for further action by the Center's staff, there will be no charge to the parties for the Center's services. However, parties who are referred to the Center by sources other than the City will be charged an appropriate sliding scale fee when a case file is opened for further action. Information and Referral: When inquiries are received by the Center from people who need basic information, legal assistance'or whose situation, after review by the Center's staff is not appropriate for the Center's services, the requested information will be provided and/or referrals will be made to appropriate community resources. This may include City departments, other public agencies or social service organizations. Community moss Outreach: The Center will provide outreach activities within the City of HerBeach. This will include networking with other social service with community groups about the agencies, asMeeting well as offering �A� resolution services oared by the Center, as ung presentations and trainings on conflict resolution for City staff. residents and community groups. Monitoring and Evaluation: The City will monitor and evaluate the performance of the Center's services and activities and will have access to records and other documents related to the Center's performance except as they may be protected by the California Evidence Code. During such a review the be confidentiality of persons utilizing the Center's services shall respected. `These evaluation reviews will focus on the effectiveness of the Center's program, the impact of its services on the comms , and the extent to which the Center's services address the concerns and priorities oftheCity. Contact Person: Lance Willman, Executive Director, South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution, 1015 4th Street, Hermosa Beach, 90254_ (310) 376-7007 • George Schmeltzer 275 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 September 10, 2006 Civic Center 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council: I am writing in support of Mr. Lance Widman and the South Bay Center Dispute Resolution Services' application to provide their services to the City of Hermosa Beach. I'm happy to have known Lance socially and professionally for more than 30 years. I've served with him on the boards of many community organizations including 1736 House, the South Bay Free Clinic, and the Hermosa Beach Friends of the Arts. He has a well- earned reputation for intelligence, enthusiasm, dedication and hard work. I also had the honor of serving with him on the Hermosa Beach City Council from 1976 — 1982 where he distinguished himself as a man of integrity and an able leader who worked tirelessly to improve the quality of life in this community. As a member of the City Council, Lance was instrumental in developing the city's first • ombudsmen program which was considered `revolutionary' at the time. Not only did it provide citizens with a constructive and fair process for resolving disputes it also freed city staff from having to deal with contentious issues on a daily basis and it allowed them to spend more time on their primary duties. Lance's South Bay Center — Dispute Resolution Services has built an enviable reputation in Hermosa Beach and in the cities of Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach and Torrance. Friends and neighbors who have used the Center's services are unanimous in their praise. "Problem solved," is how one friend put it to me, "and it didn't cost me an arm and a leg." I understand that the Center has a 70% success rate in resolving disputes. But for the Center I'm sure that many of these disputes would have ended in the legal system or on a city council agenda. I urge you to give the South Bay Center's application careful study. If you do I am confident you will select them to continue to provide dispute resolution services in Hermosa Beach. espectfully, U George J. hme tzer V OFFICE OF JEROLD A. GODDARD CITY ATTORNEY CO DOIZEDQ COkzammzema& 415 DIAMOND STREET POST OFFICE BOX 270 REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90277-0270 July 20, 2006 South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution 1015 4th Street, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Letter of Recommendation for South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: TELEPHONE (310) 318-0655 FAX: (310) 372-388 It is my pleasure to write this letter of recommendation for Mr. Lance Widman of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. I am the retired City Attorney of Redondo Beach, serving from 1993 - 2005. During that period I was regularly involved with Mr. Widman, first through the Los Angeles County Bar Association's Dispute Resolution program and beginning in 2000 through the South Bay Center program. I considered Mr. Widman'.s mediation services an asset to Redondo Beach. Having dispute resolution available for referrals by various city departments has been extremely successful. A key ingredient in assisting residents is the skill and professionalism of the mediator. Mr. Widman over an eighteen year period has established his reputation in the South Bay as a fair and neutral person. My wife and I live in Redondo Beach an regularly come in contact with neighbors and residents who have used the program. The overwhelming majority of participants obtain successful resolution in their case. Even those who have not completely solved their complaint still have had positive comments about Mr. Widman. I have known Lance for nearly thirty years. I respect his mediation skills, his service and contributions in local government, and his teaching at El Camino College. Redondo Beach has been well served by the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution and I can strongly recommend this program to any community. Sincerely, erold A. Goddard Retired City Attorney S. ROGER ROMBROt MELINDA A. MANLEY KIMBERLY A. OUGHTON to PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION RO MBR® & ASSOCIATES 3405 N. SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD SUITE 200 MANHATTAN BEACH. CALIFORNIA 90266-3628 July 31, 2006 To whom it may Concern Re: South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution Dear Sirs: TELEPHONE (310) 545-1900 FACSIMILE (310) 802-8849 EMAI LI rogetrombro@rombrolaw.com WEBSITE: WWW.rombrolaw.com This is written in support of the application of South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution whom I am informed is reapplying for a contract with the City of Hermosa Beach to continue providing services resolving disputes. I am writing `as a resident of Hermosa Beach, a consumer of dispute resolution services, my personal experience as a trained mediator in dispute resolution through the Los Angeles County Bar Association and my knowledge of the effectiveness of this group, and particularly, Lance Widman over the last 15 years: I first experienced Mr. Widman's effectiveness as one able to resolve disputes when I was referred to Mr. Widman by the Los Angeles County Bar Association. I was seeking resolution of a dispute involving my former church and one of its former pastors. Specifically, a dispute arose between a former pastor over an employment issue and the Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd in Torrance. In a process that lasted approximately three-quarters of a day, Mr. Widman and the two individuals with whom he associated for the purpose of resolving this dispute, successfully obtained a resolution which was accepted as fair and final. Following Mr. Widman's efforts, the former pastor was able to move on with his life, and the church was able to continue in its growth. Both sides were able to avoid a potentially discordant and potentially harmful course of litigation through the judicial process. Having watched the success of Mr.. Widman, I became an ardent supporter of the mediation process. After relocating my residence to Hermosa Beach, and my office to Manhattan Beach, I had occasion to reacquaint myself with Mr. Widman, and continue to observe his success in diverting individuals and businesses from what would otherwise be certain litigation. Mediation is an extremely difficult process, and invites failure by its very nature. Mr. Widman and the mediators with whom he is associated with South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution deserve the respect and gratitude of the community. \\Rontrodc I\Data\Roger's personal docs\Letters - per onaI\southBayDisputeResolutian.07.25.06.wpd Re: South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution July 31, 2006 Page 2 Please feel free to contact me if 1 may be of any further service in providing information to you with regard to this matter. SRR:hdl cc: Lance Widman \\Rombrodcl\Data\Roge?s personal docs\Letters - personal\SouthBayDisputeResolution.07.25.06.wpd • City of Manhattan Beach Community Development Phone: (310) 802-5500 FAX: (310) 802-5501 TDD: (310) 546-3501 September 6, 2006 South Bay Center Dispute Resolution 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Subject: South Bay Center Dispute Resolution Service To Whom It May Concern: As Director of the City of Manhattan Beach Community Development Department, I have worked with Lance Willman and the South Bay Center Dispute Resolution (SBCDR) for over ten years. The service that Mr. Widman provides to our city has been professional, effective, and invaluable. His agency has saved city staff time and energy as the SBCDR provides resources and successful means to resolve civil disputes. He has worked closely with my code enforcement staff and our new residential construction officer program. Mr. Widman has personally attended several .construction community meetings to present his services to and meet with local builders. Additionally, Mr. Widman and his agency participated in lengthy neighborhood and local parish meetings, which resulted in guidelines for future construction or modification that may affect surrounding residents. He has consistently been able to resolve a majority of disputes avoiding costly litigation. Please feel free to call me at 310.802-5503 if you have any questions regarding the Community Development Department's relationship with the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. Sincerely, Ri.chars Thoitipson Director of Community Development Department City of Manhattan Beach City Hall Address: 1400 Highland Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Visit the City of Manhattan Beach web site at http://www.citymb.info I COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES OFFICE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMPLIANCE DENNIS A. TAFOYA Director September 18, 2006 City' of. Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 To Whom It May Concern: Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street, Room 780 Los Angeles, California 90012 (213) 974-10801 FAX (213) 626-7034 TTY (213) 974-0911 Website: http:I/oaac.co.la.ca.us MEMBERS OF THE BOARD GLORIA MOLINA YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE ZEV YAROSIAVSKY DON KNABE • MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH I am writing in support of the City of Hermosa Beach renewing its dispute resolution services contract with Mr. Lance Widman, Executive Director of the South Bay Resolution Center (Center). Mr. Widman is a colleague of mine whom I have had the pleasure of supervising during our joint tenure at the Los Angeles County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Center (DRS), and with whom I now work as a member of his board for the Center. Alternative dispute management/resolution is fast becoming the preferred method of responding to conflicts in our municipalities and on school campuses. Reasons for this growing trend include reduced occurrences of litigation, improved human relations, and settlement agreements that last. My work with Lance over the years has supported these outcomes in a variety of conflict situations (e.g., neighbor -neighbor, landlord -tenant, business -consumer, student -student). He is a highly skilled mediator and administrator. While working for DRS Mr. Widman single-handedly managed our South Bay office and achieved. exceptional resolution rates for our clients. He is extremely ethical and holds himself to high professional standards. I urge the city of Hermosa Beach to continue its long-established and positive working relationship with Mr. Widman and the South Bay Resolution Center. The renewal. of such a relationship would no doubt provide continuity of quality dispute management/resolution options for its citizenry. It would also lend to other efforts and collaborations that. the City has embarked upon to improve and maintain a civil society. If I can be of further assistance I can be reached at my office at (626) 943-5612. Respectfully, Donna Parker Deputy Compliance Officer Equal Employment Opportunity County Of Los Angeles August 2, 2006 Mr. James M. Acquarelli 2782 Wheatfield Circle Simi Valley, CA 93063 To whom it may concern: I am a sworn police officer for a major South Bay police department, in the southern California area, of Los Angeles County (twenty-seven years tenure). Throughout my career, and presently, I regularly utilize the services of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution to assist me with the numerous situations I respond to in my profession. The Executive Director, Lance Widman, is an experienced conflict resolution expert, and an outstanding individual (conscientious, knowledgeable and organized). The Center provides a variety of alternative dispute resolution services (conciliation, mediation, negotiation and group facilitation), serving the twelve neighboring South Bay cities. Over the years, I referred numerous cases to the Center. The Center's innovative conflict resolution techniques prevented and settled hundreds of disputes. By resolving these situations, the Center afforded the parties opportunities to avoid litigations and improve capacities to arrive at mutually acceptable resolutions. The staffs experiences in resolving complex interpersonal, organizational and policy disputes, ranging from landlord/tenant to neighbor to domestic, and much more, resulted in "freeing up" countless law enforcement hours (response, resource and investigation). Part of my California State University graduate program studies encompassed working at a dispute resolution center for one semester (internship). I worked for the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution during the spring of 2003. I experienced first hand just how valuable the Center's work could be. During that semester, over 90% of the disputes handled by the staff were resolved at a fraction of the cost of hiring an attorney. The Center offered client convenience, confidentiality, and cost effectiveness. The Center's services empowered the parties to create their own solutions, thus emphasizing ownership and accountability. In one situation, the Center's staff handled a multi-party/ multi -issue between a church and neighbors regarding construction and lighting. What would have taken months in litigation to resolve, this complex and regional concern, involving many people and public agencies, became a mutual agreement between the parties, because the Center tailored the process to meet their needs. The staff guided the parties toward a superior alternative to a legal process that sometimes demonstrates inflexibility. I cannot say enough about Executive Director Lance Widman and his staff. They are superb individuals — interested, caring, positive and sensitive professionals. Their successes predicate themselves on their uncanny abilities and skills to listen reflectively. I continually hear raving revues from the other cities on how valuable the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution is in solving a wide variety of disputes, while assisting law enforcement so their efforts may be channeled to other areas. Please contact me at (805) 527-7620 (residence), or (310) 379-2477 x12391# (employment), to answer any questions or provide further details about this marvelous program. Thank you very much. Respectfully, .1414-z2) qcraeo James M. Acquarelli • •� Gentlemen: Please see the following recap of my recent experience with South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. My case involved a tree trimming dispute and eventually included three neighbors. I contacted the Center at the request of a Hermosa Beach police officer early this year. Lance Widman, Executive Director returned my call within 24 hours. I gave Lance the circumstances and my impressions of the dispute and spoke with him at length regarding his services and potential outcomes. Lance's experience with similar disputes gave him a wealth of knowledge which he was very willing to share. I understand he provided the same help to the other neighbors participating in this dispute as well. Lance made a number of calls to arrange a meeting time that was acceptable for all the neighbors. He provided a mediator who was experienced, knowledgeable and professional. The mediator provided ground rules for the meeting, worked diligently to record the various requests of the neighbors involved and worked to a conclusion in one meeting. The entire meeting lasted less than two hours. While I was not entirely satisfied with the outcome, I believe that the neighbors involved would not have reached any acceptable conclusion without the services provided by Lance and his group. I feel Lance and South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution provide a valuable resource for Hermosa Beach. I highly recommend Lance and would not hesitate to call him again. Based on my experience, the Center is a much more efficient and effective means of resolving disputes than using the City's General Service's personnel and police officers. Michael Markley 2421 Silverstrand Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 310 376 3393 w MAL CONTR01 2200 Jefferson Street Torrance, CA 90501 September 8, 2006 To Whom It May Concern This letter is in reference to the services provided to Torrance Police Animal Control from the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. From January 2004 to the present, 51 animal related cases were forwarded through Dispute Resolution. Over 80% of those cases were resolved by using mediation and many of the issues involved minor disputes between neighbors. The Dispute Resolution process has enabled the Animal Control staff to devote more time and energy towards issues of higher priority. This process also provides for a rapid resolution of problems in very professional manner, while documenting the cases for future reference. A recent workshop hosted by the Center for Dispute Resolution provided a forum for Animal Control members from surrounding communities to work together on common problems. All attendees agreed that having this tool to resolve complaints on animal control matters was very valuable. Shayne Br! Animal Control Supervisor City of Torrance • To Whom It May Concern: July 17, 2006 This letter is written to recommend the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution (SBCDR) under the direction of Lance Widman, for selection in the REP process currently proceeding in the City of Hermosa Beach. I have been a volunteer mediator for this organization for over 12 years and thus can provide a unique and well qualified analysis and recommendation to those in position to make the DRS selection in Hermosa Beach. During my time with the organization I have conducted and/or participated in close to 100 mediations. I was initially trained in 1990 by the LA County Bar Dispute Resolution Service which served the entire LA County. Lance was one of the trainers at this time. And being a resident of Hermosa Beach since 1960 (46 years), it was a natural follow-on for me to become involved in the SBCDR. I am one of many volunteer mediators that Lance can depend on for this service in the South Bay, but in particular, Hermosa Beach. I have found that Lance has an extremely broad and deep understanding of the mediation process and has a unique talent for recognizing how to field and treat each mediation request from the first telephone request by a disputant to the final post -mediation follow-up. I personally get great personal benefit by contributing to the community (Hermosa and the greater S. Bay) as I see very positive results from our clients (the disputants) who enter the mediation process in disarray and very often leave in greater faith in the resolutions foraged by our SBCDS and an absence (or abatement) of the problems that brought them in. I would not continue in a volunteer capacity if this were not so. And... this does not happen automatically; it requires good mediators, good administration execution and a disciplined adherence to the current best practices for the mediation process. Of course a factor in the current success of the SBCDR is the incumbent management process that has built on a long history of successes in Hermosa Beach and the greater South Bay. A key aspect for what makes the SBCDRS work is the skilled competent administration of the SBCDS, conducted by Lance Widman. I honestly can't imagine how one person manages the disputants, the mediators, and the follow-thru for the volume of mediation requests that come thru the system. I will tell you that the most value criteria (as a mediator) that I see in Lance personally is his ability to pick the right mediators for the particular clients and his ability to ensure that we mediators are not burdened by the paper and bureaucracy involved with mediations; this lets us ply our skills as mediators with minimal bureaucratic side issues. • • In sum, please select the SDCDR based on the history of its successes over the last several years, the competent management of the organization, and the quantity and quality of its large staff of mediators. I am sure you will find very similar recommendations and comments from my many fellow mediators if they provide comments to you as I have. I would be happy to elaborate on any of the foregoing discussion and am available to answer any clarifying questions from the above Sincerely, eRiL Ge�orge Brown (Ph: 310-379-6306) Robert V. Wadden Jr. City Attorney 1400 Highland Avenue Telephone (310) 802-5061 To Whom It May Concern: Manhattan Beach, CA 90266-4795 FAX (310) 802-5251 TDD (310) 546-3501 September 12, 2006 The City of Manhattan Beach has been fortunate to work together with Lance Widman and the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution for many years. During this time, the City has referred a broad range of civil conflicts ranging from barking dogs, to fence disputes, to parking and loud neighbors. The Center's knowledgeable staff has successfully mediated these disputes in a timely and professional manner. It has been our experience that once a matter has been referred to the Center, its staff remains in close communication with the City and all participants. The skill of the Center's staff is evidenced by the fact that most of the cases referred are resolved quickly and amicably with the file being closed and no further action being taken by the City. These cases might well have escalated into criminal prosecution were it not for Lance's adept handling and seasoned and measured mediation skills. Many of the participants have thanked our office for providing such a valuable resource to the community. We are grateful to have Lance's services available. His expertise is well known and we a aware that his skills make all our lives easier. Sincerely, Robert V. +adden, Jr. City Attorney RVW/wsm Fire Department Address: 400 15th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 FAX (310) 802-5201 Police Department Address: 420 15th Street, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 FAX (310) 802-5107 Public Works Department Address: 3621 Bell Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 FAX (310) 546-1752 http://www.ci.manhattan-beach.ca.us • • Terrill Hill Burnett 703 Pier Avenue #B-240, Hermosa Beach CA 90254 Voice & Pax 310.318.3304 Email thburnett@gmail.com August 1, 2006 Re: South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution Dear Sir or Madam, I understand that you will be evaluating the services provided by the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution in the next few months. I've been involved with the Center in a range of capacities: as a Board member, volunteer mediator and resident of Hermosa Beach. In each case my experience has been extremely positive. I hope that you will renew the Center's contract and increase its funding for the coming year. Serving on the Board of Directors for the Center since 2002, I've noted its sound management and keen commitment to meeting community needs. I've been especially impressed by the Center's ability to keep administrative costs to a minimum and run as lean as possible by using volunteer staff and mediators. The Center fills an important role in the community; in dealing with neighbor and business conflicts and disputes, it relieves the load on police and City staff so that they can focus on their primary duties. The Center has an outstanding rate of success in resolving disputes and in defusing conflicts before they become more serious. I've served as a volunteer mediator in the South Bay since 1992, including several mediations a year for the Center. I find the quality and training of the Center's mediators to be exceptionally high, many of them trained by the Director, Lance Widman. For 20 years, Lance has been a well-known and well-respected educator in Los Angeles in both dispute resolution theory and practice. He provides important training in Dispute Resolution to the local schools and to the police departments in the South Bay. Moreover, numerous officers who have had formal instruction as mediators have done their hands-on internships with the Center. There are in fact very few opportunities for mediators to get practical experience in actual live mediation, especially supervised by such an experienced individual. Continuity is also a consideration. The Center's services are well-known throughout the South Bay and many residents rely on it as a trusted resource. It would be a serious loss to the community if the Center's contract were not renewed and expanded. Please feel free to call me if I can offer any additional information about the Center and its important role in our South Bay community. Sincerely, T. H. Burnett Police Department W. Joseph Leonardi Chief of Police To whom it may concern: 401 Diamond Street,P.O. Box 639 Redondo Beach, California 90277-0639 www.redondo.org August 16, 2006 tel 310 379-2477 fax 310 372-0167 redondo BEACH I have worked with Mr. Widman on several different cases throughout the City of Redondo Beach involving both residents and businesses. Several of the calls for service that get referred to me deal with non -criminal situations. The majority of them deal with Civil ("quality of life") issues. With Mr. Widman and the services provided by Dispute Resolution, I am able to work with Lance to help resolve these issues; while giving me time to concentrate on other matters involving the Police Department and the community. Mr. Widman is able to take the time to work closely with the parties involved in thedispute, and in most cases, develop a solution that all parties can agree upon. Otherwise, these situations end up going to civil court costing all parties considerable amounts of money, effort and time. Ibelieve that these services provided by Mr. Widman and his staff save the City of Redondo Beach. the cost of utilizing City employees in dealing with these issues. We have worked closely over the years and have been able to close many cases, which otherwise would never have concluded or would end up with someone possibly being injured. Mr. Widman and his staff also vrork with Animal Control and Code Enforcement. I spoke briefly with Municipal Enforcement Supervisor Pattie Ziello who has had the same positive results while working with Mr. Widman. I believe that Mr. Widman's efforts, along with his staff significantly reduce the amount of "aon-emergency" calls that our patrol, officers would otherwise have to respond to. Thus, freeing them up to focus on issues related to police patrol and response to emergency calls for service. One very important fact is that Mr. Widman and his staff provide a forum bringing members of the community together to solve these issues themselves. Sincerely, ()Slicer Michael Di Community Services Unit Redondo Beach Police Dept. (110) 379-2477 x2493 • City of Manhattan Beach Human Resources Phone: (310) 802-5250 FAX: (310) 802-5251 TDD: (310) 546-3501 July 17, 2006 Mr. Lance Widman South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: Letter of Reference Deax Sir/Madame, The City of Manhattan Beach is pleased to recommend the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution (The Center) to perform mediation services for your organization. The Center has been contracting with our City since 2000 and continues to excel in resolving problems that deal with landlord/tenant, neighbor/neighbor, business/consumer and employer/employee issues. Their ability to successfully mediate disputes has saved the City countless dollars and staffing hours. Further, the Center staff has provided excellent in house training for police and code enforcement officers focusing on active listening skills and defusing difficult situations with irate customers. The Center has resolved over 200 disputes referred by the Police Department, City Attorney, Animal Control and Code Enforcement among others, under the City's contract with the Center, at no cost to the parties, with a success rate exceeding 70%. Further, several hundred residents per year who have sought information, legal assistance and referrals to other community based organizations have also benefited from the Center's services. Please feel free to contact me if I can provide greater detail. S cerely, ward Fis Risk Mana City Hall Address: 1400 Highland Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Visit the City of Manhattan Beach web site at http://www.citymb.info • • July 30, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: Recently, I have had occasion to call upon the services.of Lance Widman and the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. I found Mr. Widman to be knowledgeable, prompt in responding to requests, and above all, candid and forthright in his dealings with me. Mr. Widman was able to initiate a dialog with a property owner who had refused to take my calls over a 90 -day period. Lance's follow-up was thorough and efficient. He even went so far as to recommend other agencies that -might assist me with this problem. Mr. Widman's service was invaluable. The fact that our city provides such resources to its residents is yet another reason that makes Hermosa Beach such a great place to live. Sincerely, Ge • Kirsch Hermosa Beach • Z1-441.4 redondo BE A C 11 Recreation and Community Services Department Housing Authority July 24, 2006 320 Knob Hill, Room 2 Redondo Beach, California 90277 www.redondo.org To Whom It May Concern, tel 310 318-0635 fax 310 543-1730 I would like to take this opportunity to tell you about the excellent working relationship my staff and I have with Lance Widman and about the terrific service he has always provided to our Housing Division. I have known Lance professionally for many years. Each year, for as long back as I can recall, Lance has agreed to be a featured speaker at our city's annual landlord/tenant fair housing workshop. Lance's presentations are always informative, interesting, relevant, engaging, and delivered with much enthusiasm. The attendees, as well as staff, really seem to enjoy and learn a lot from Lance. Lance also serves as the Hearing Officer for our Section 8 Rent Assistance Program. The position requires Lance to be familiar with the guidelines of the program and to decide whether or not to uphold our staff decisions to terminate tenants who we believe seriously violated program rules. The Hearing Officer's decision is final; therefore it is extremely important that Lance carefully examine and consider each case on its own merits. I can say without hesitation that he has always done that. And even during the most challenging of hearings, Lance has always managed to keep the proceedings under control. He listens and asks questions impartially, making sure everyone has an opportunity to discuss all relevant facts and to respond to all allegations, concerns and questions. Mostly, Lance has ultimately ruled in favor of the Housing Authority, yet it is to Lance's credit that we have never had a tenant complain about the hearing process itself. Finally, our staff also refers tenants who have disputes with their neighbors or landlords to the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution. In some cases, I know that Lance has taken much of his own time to assist tenants who were especially • • in need. For instance, not too long ago there was an elderly woman facing eviction from one of Redondo Beach's senior housing complexes, and Lance spent many hours helping her. In conclusion, the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution is a valuable resource to the office and our community. We hope to continue the positive working relationship we have with Lance and the Center for many years to come. Wendy Wachenbach Housing anager • I Jack Ballas Attorney -At -Law 821 Chautauqua Blvd. Pacific Palisades, California 90272 Phone 310-454-4892 Fax 310-454-8404 E-mail jba11as4@earthlink.net August 23, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: I am a Member of the Board of Directors of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution (SBCDR). It is my understanding that you are considering retaining the SBCDR to provide arbitration and mediation services to your community. Not only is this an important social decision for your community but it is an important economic one as well. As a former Prosecutor and City Attorney for a large South Bay city, I can say from personal experience that had my office had the services of SBCDR available to us, it would have made life in the big city" easier for all parties. While my office had to make due with existing resources, we could certainly have benefited from having an outside source for resolving neighborhood complaints. These complaints, which included a myriad of problems from barking dogs to property line disputes to noisy parties had a way of getting out of control if they were not dealt with quickly and effectively. The diversion of City staff to deal with these issues meant that some other City function, be it prosecution or police would have to suffer. Resolving disputes between citizens or citizens and agencies by utilizing the services of SBCDR will enable all parties to have a voice and a fair hearing in matters that concern them. The satisfactory resolution of such issues reduces the build up of animosity and tensions within a City while at the same time reducing the costs to bring these matters to a conclusion. Over the years, the SBCDR has been instrumental in accomplishing these tasks for a number of Cities in the South Bay. The local and regional experience of its mediators and the accumulated wisdom of its hands-on Director, Lance Widman, present a package that can provide significant benefit to a cash- strapped agency and allow it to more wisely deploy its economic resources. I strongly urge you to contract with the SBCDR. Thank you. To Whom It May Concern: My name is Chris Roosen and I am a Police Officer with the City of Torrance. I'm writing this letter to express my personal view on how important the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution is to a Police Officer and any citizen who is looking for education, guidance and direction in resolving conflict. As a Police Officer, we are tasked on a daily basis to resolve conflict from within the community. This can range from "Business Disputes" to the most common, "Neighbor Disputes." When a Police Officer responds to a dispute he is tasked to resolve the situation in a timely manner so he can be available for the next call. Although a majority of the disputes are resolved, not all disputes can be resolved completely. In situations where disputes can not be immediately resolved, the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution provides officers and citizens an excellent and vital resource for conflict resolution. As a South Bay Dispute Resolution counselor, I have recognized the benefits the Center provides. Having a dispute resolution Center available can decrease a Police Departments call for service and it provides guidance and direction to all involved parties on how to properly resolve disputes. The South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution is a well established association that provides a high level of service and creative conflict resolution techniques. The Center would be a true asset to any city and an excellent tool for its citizens and their Police Department. Respectively Submitted Sergeant Chris Roosen September 11, 2006 Attention: Peter Tucker Sam Edgerton Michael Keegan J.R. Reviczky Patrick Bobko City of Hermosa Beach, CA 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 I am writing you today to express my desire to have the City of Hermosa Beach continue contracting for the Services of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution operated by Lance Widman. I believe that this city -provided service is a great example of something that we do right in the city and that we should continue on with the proven expertise of Lance Widman. I first became aware of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution through the 1113 Police Department in connection with a dispute I had with my neighbor. I had first-hand experience with the services of Mr. Widman in August of 2003. I used his service to help mitigate this neighbor dispute. I found Mr. Widman to be professional every step of the way. Since I had met Mr. Widman previously (I did not know about this service at that time), I thought he might have a bias and see things "more my way." My experience was quite the opposite, Mr. Widman was completely neutral. This personal experience showed me that Mr. Widman was a true professional in this field. In this case the problem was resolved. I believe that it is in the city's best interest to have dispute resolution contract services and to continue to have this program available. I believe that this service will save our city police time and that it is a great asset to the city. Finally I believe that it is in the city's best interest to continue contracting with the services of the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution Center because Lance Widman has a proven record of providing excellent service to our city and as a resident of the city he has tirelessly strived to make it better. I can't imagine a better person to provide this service. Sincerely, Kent J. Allen 1523 Golden Ave Hermosa Beach, Ca 90254 310-937-1011 Planning Department Code Enforcement July 31, 2006 415 Diamond Street, P.O. Box 270 Redondo Beach, California 90277-0270 www.redondo.org TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: tel 310 372-1171 Ext. 2454 North tel 310 372-1171 Ext. 2448 South fax 310 372-8021 redondo BE ACH I would like to offer this letter of support for South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution (SBCDR), and particularly the Director, Lance Widman. The service that SBCDR provides has become a valuable resource to my staff and me. We frequently refer citizens to SBCDR, mostly for those types of cases in which there is not a violation of the Municipal Code, but the issues are such that much consternation is caused between the parties. In an overwhelming majority of the time, SBCDR is able to get a resolution to the problem saving the City time and resources in these matters. The citizens are equally pleased because their neighborhood issues are resolved without enduring the angst of going to court, testifying, etc. I previously managed the parking enforcement and animal control functions in the City. The City enjoyed a very productive working relationship with SBCDR, especially in the area of barking dog complaints. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me at (310) 318-0637. Yours truly, Mike Magdalena Municipal Enforcement Manager • PHILIP TAMOUSH Arbitrator-Mediator-Factfilnder Post Office Box 1128 Torrance, California 90505-0128 (800) 747-9245 (Voice) (800) 903-4266 (Fax) (www.finaldisputeresolution.com philip@tamoush.com) (Principal Office & Mailing Address) San Francisco/East Bay 385 Grand Avenue, Suite 201 Oakland, California 94610.4816 August 20, 2006 Lance Widman, Executive Director South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution 1015 4`h St. Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: Endorsement of South Bay Center Program Dear Lance, This is to express my complete support and endorsement of your program. As a member of the Board of the South Bay Dispute Resolution Center, I have been extremely impressed with the tremendous acceptance by virtually every South Bay local government of the work of the Center. In my over 30 years as an active Arbitrator and Mediator, I have not encountered a community-based program which is more effective than yours. You have been serving the critical conflict resolution needs of many South Bay cities with complete success and acceptance. I believe every city should have a program like yours. The South Bay Center is certainly worthy of consideration by any city. Mediation of local disputes is one of the most important elements of our current society. Civil discussion and settlement of differences is what it is all about. Your Center has been in the forefront in Southern California in effecting the peaceful resolution of impasses between neighbors, local governments and the public, and business owners and customers. Local governments have been well -served by your programs. I Iook forward eagerly to continuing our relationship. As a Mediator and Arbitrator myself, I know the importance of 'due process' mechanisms. I do hope that local governments everywhere will continue to support your Center as the best example of what good, professional expertise is all about. Sincerely, Philp Tamoush CITY OF TORRANCE ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JEFFERY W. GIBSON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR August 8, 2000 To Whom it May Concern: The City of Torrance Environmental Division has made use of the services of Lance Widman and the Dispute Resolution Center on numerous occasions throughout the years. We have found him to be a very valuable resource in helping to resolve some of our more difficult neighborhood issues. He keeps us involved throughout the process, so that we know what is going on every step of the way, and are aware of the final disposition. One of the most recent mediations Mr. Widman undertook for us involved neighbors with issues regarding a fence, property lines, slopes and usage of the sloped area. Although it took some doing, he was able to help the parties come to a resolution that was satisfactory to both, and avoid the issue spilling over into the Planning Commission. Mr. Widman has made presentations to our staff on several occasions, helping us to understand the services he offers and sharing his insight into the code enforcement process, as well as facilitating meetings with other local code enforcement departments to share information. We highly recommend the services of Lance Widman and the Dispute Resolution Center. Sincerely, Linda Cessna Deputy Community Development Director 1011 TnrranrP. Rt -1,I, , rrl • Tnrro.,,' f .1:F : ()AGA') - r___L ___ '11 n,., n en.,.. . . Law Offices of Steven E.Wohn 5155 West Rosecrans Avenue Suite 211 Los Angeles, California 90250 Telephone: (310) 316-0983 Facsimile: (310) 379-9839 Cell Phone: (310) 795-1403 Email: stevewohnlawQmsn.com August 5, 2006 Mayor City of Hermosa Beach 1015 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: South Bay Dispute Center Dispute Resolution/RFP Dear Mayor and City Council: It has come to my attention that South Bay Center Dispute Resolution ("SBCDR") is submitting a bid for contract extension for mediation services in your fine community. I have had the distinct pleasure of working with the Center and in particular its director Lance Widman on many occasions in recent years. I would like to offer an opinion for the Council to consider in the process of your review of the outstanding proposal. It is apparent the Center offers a unique and valuable service to the local community in many ways. In a world centering on congestion,the promotion of personal issues and adjudication of property rights the mediation services offered by Mr. Widman and his staff fill a vital role in helping citizens obtain immediate, informed and reasonably -priced resolution services. Mr. Widman's abilities,in particular emphasize both the intellectual and practical aspects of his personal character which are essential elements in gaining the respect and attention needed to make a meaningful contribution to any mediation or quasi -legal situation. i have observed the Center utilizes top flight personnel under its umbrella of mediation services and as a lawyer of twenty three years good standing in this State can only say there are many things Mr. and Widman and his staff can provide that the legal community cannot effectively provide. I would expect that these services, when approved under the proposed contract will provide an incredibly useful tool for both administrative agencies and law enforcement within the City to use for issue -resolution purposes. The net effect is to lighten the public workload and providing a meaningful alternative to citizens markedly reducing public complaints and the ensuing legal friction. I would be more than happy to answer any questions or offer this endorsement in person for [feel very strongly about the positive nature of having an option such as SBCDR at your disposal. I would also observe that any participants or attorneys I have met in the course of mediation matters have nothing but complimentary words for the fashion in which the Center has handled matters with which 1 am familiar. . Page Two August 5, 2006 SBCDR/RFP Please contact me as needed. Please let me now if I can assist in any way. cere, 0640\ -- Steven E. Wohn • City of Manhattan Beach Community Development Phone: (310) 802-5500 FAX: (310) 802-5501 TDD: (310) 546-3501 July 21, 2006 South Bay Center Dispute Resolution 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Subject: Commendable Performance by Lance Widman of South Bay Center Dispute Resolution To Whom It May Concern: I have worked with Lance Widman for over ten years. His work performance as Executive Director for the South Bay Center Dispute Resolution and for the former Dispute Resolution Service has always been professional and effective. As Building Official for the City of Manhattan Beach, I have called upon Lance Widman to assist with at least one to two cases per month. Because the City of Manhattan Beach has no resource to resolve private neighbor property damage disputes or rental disagreements between the tenant and landlord, Mr. Widman's services have been invaluable not only for this city hall, but more importantly for the residents and customers of city hall. He has been consistently able to resolve a majority of these disputes outside the costly court and litigation arena. Sincerely, Can'ol Jacobson; C.B.O., Building Official City of Manhattan Beach 31 Q.802-5525 City Hall Address: 1400 Highland Avenue, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Visit the City of Manhattan Beach web site at http://www.citymb.info • • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN LANCE WIDMAN AND HIS STAFF OF SEASONED MEDIATORS IS A SERVICE INDISPENSABLE TO OUR COMMUNITY, ITS CITIZENS AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS, THESE SERVICES SAVE US THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, AS WELL AS MUCH,MUCH, TIME AND EFFORD BY CREATING PEACE AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNICATION AMONG CITIZENS INVOLVED IN BITTER CONFLICT,THERE BY FREEING POLICE AND OTHER SERVICES TO PROTECT AND ITIZENS. THANK YOU. MIK H * EI 2 - *so ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT * the old fence along your property line that needs to be repaired or replaced? * the return of your security deposit or rental unit repairs/maintenance? * the quality of service received from a local business? *�e new construction that started on ur neighbor's property? * the hostile climate that has developed with your roommate(s)? * use of the common areas or guest and assigned parking issues? * workplace conflicts with a coworker or supervisor? * on-going noise. disputes with your neighbor(s) and/or their pets? Attling a dispute with your landlord, neighbor, friend, tenant or consumer without going to Small Claims Court? "The Courts of this country should not be the place where the resolution of disputes begins. They should be the places where disputes end oiler alternative methods of resolving disputes have been considered and tried " Justice Sandra Day O'Connor United States Supreme Court SOUTH BAY CENTER DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1015 4TH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA (310). 3'76_1007 THE SOUTH BAY CENTER is an association of experienced profess- ionals in conflict resolution. Our expertise is available to assist people who may be experiencing conflict in their personal or professional lives. We use established and creative conflict resolution techniques to prevent, manage, settle and resolve dis- putes. Thus, the parties can hopefully avoid litigation and improve their capacity to arrive at mutually satisfactory resolu- tions to a wide variety of situations. SOUTH BAY PARTNERS IN DISPUTE RESOLUTION: Redondo Beach* Manhattan Beach* Hermosa Beach* Palos Verdes Estates Rancho Palos Verdes Lawndale * contracting agencies Torrance* El Segundo Hawthorne Lomita Gardena Inglewood U CAN SUPPORT SOUTH iffY DISPUTE RESOLUTION: * Use the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution program * Tell your friends and neighbors about the South Bay Center's program * Support community policing in our cities DISPUTE RESOLUTION The Center provides a wide variety of alternative dispute resolution services, including conciliation, mediation and group facilitation. These services are * CONFIDENTIAL: An agreement among the parties that all discuss- ions and information divulged are confidential ensures candidand open communication. * CONVENIENT: Meetings are scheduled at a time and location most convenient for the parties, and most disputes are resolved in one session. * INEXPENSIVE: For parties who have been referred by a staff member of a contracting city, there is no charge for Center services. Otherwise, there is a sliding scale case processing fee (0 to S100). * COST EFFECTIVE: More than 90% of the disputes handled by the Center's staff have been resolved, at a fraction of the cost of hiring attorneys and courtroom litigation. * TAILORED TO MEET NEEDS: The Center's services are designed to empower the parties to create their own solutions that meet their individual and mutual needs, as a superior alternative to the inflex- ible legal process. TYPES OF DISPUTES The Center's professional staff have decades of experience resolving complex interpersonal, organizational and public policy disputes. These include: * NEIGHBORS: property lines, yard maintenance, pets, parking, noise * LANDLORDS/TENANTS: security deposits, repairs, evictions, privacy * BUSINESS/CONSUMER: refunds, repairs, deposits, warranties * DOMESTIC: roommates, domestic partners, family members, friends * HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS: repairs, CCR's, board/owner issues * WORKPLACE: employee/employer,.: employee/employee, dismissal, wages ., * MULTI-PARTY/MULTI-ISSUE: complex and/or regional issues that involve many people/public agencies "Discourage litigation. Persuade your neigh- bor to compromise whenever you can_ Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser — in fees, expenses and waste of time." Abraham Lndcelu • • Lloyd's Certificate This Insurance is effected with certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London (not incorporated). This Certificate is issued in accordance with the limited authorization granted to the. Correspondent by certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London whose names and the proportions underwritten by them can be ascertained from the office of said Correspondent (such Underwriters being hereinafter called "Underwriters") and in consideration of the premium specified herein, Underwriters do hereby bind themselves each for his own part, and not one for another, their heirs, executors and administrators. . The Assured is requested to read this Certificate, and if not correct, return it immediately to the Correspondent for appropriate alteration. The Correspondent issuing this Certificate. is: COMPLETE 1 EQUITY J MARKETS INC. dba Complete Equity Markets Insurance Agency, Inc. 1098 South Milwaukee Avenue Wheeling, Illinois 60090-6398 (800) 323-6234 * (847) 541-0900 •CEM SLC -3 USA END.# 850908 PREVIOUS# 850413 AUTH.# CP0607770 DECLARATIONS ARBITRATORS AND MEDIATORS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE issued to the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SALARIED PROFESSIONALS PURCHASING GROUP and SPECIFIED MEMBERS OF THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MEDIATORS ASSOCIATION EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE effected with certain UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON PARTICIPATION HEREON: 100% SOUTH BAY CENTER. FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach CA 90254 LIMITS OF LIABILITY: Each claim: Aggregate: Deductible Retroactive Date: $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000.00 each claim NONE PREMIUM (Including endorsements): Purchasing Group Tax for CA @ 3% TOTAL LLOYD'S PREMIUM (Including Taxes): $1,755.00 $52.65 $1,807.65 PERIOD OF INSURANCE: From October 4, 200612:01 a.m. to October 4, 200712:01 a.m. Special Conditions: #1 -Several Liability Notice LSW 1001 #2 -Small Additional and Return Premiums Clause NMA 1168 #3 -Nuclear Incident Exclusion Clause NMA 1256 #4 -Management Errors & Omissions #5 - Training Services #6 - Additional Insured AIF 2643 (four) #7 - 30 Day Notice of Cancellation AIF 2119 (four) In consideration of 'the additional premium paid and in reliance upon the statements in the application attached hereto, the above specified member is an Assured under the Certificate of Insurance issue to the National Association of Salaried Professionals Purchasing Group by Underwriters at, Lloyd's, London for the period of insurance and limits of liability specified above. All other terms, conditions, and exclusions of the Certificate are unchanged. This certifies that the attached Certificate is a true copy of the original document issued. Ail other terms, conditions, limits and exclusions remain unchanged. Attached to and forming part of Certificate No.: 850908 Daied: September 1, 2006 PL76"310013715 UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON CompleteEquity Markets, Inc. dba Complete Equity Markets Insurance Agency, Inc. (CASL#0D44077) By AMENDATORY ENDORSEMENT 50908 ASSURED: SOUTH BAY CENTER FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION EFFECTIVE: October 4, 2006 to October 4, 2007 ADDITIL PREMIUM: Included AMENDATORY ENDORSEMENT ADDITIONAL INSURED In consideration of the Assured's payment of the premium set forth on the Declarations, it is hereby Understood and agreed that under Certificate No.: 850908 the following: City of Torrance City of Redondo Beach City of Manhattan Beach City of Hermosa Beach is/are added to coverage under Certificate No. 850908 as an additional insured(s), but only as respects the operations of the.Named Assured and subject to the terms, conditions, limits, and exclusions of the policy of insurance. All other terms, conditions, limits and exclusions remain unchanged. Attached to and forming part of Certificate No.: 850908 Dated: September 1, 2006 AIF 2643 (12/04) Lib" 121 Endorsement #6 UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON Complete E uity Markets, Inc. dba Complete uity Markets Insurance Agency, Inc. (CASL#0D44077 By z -P AMENDATORY ENDORSEMENT NO.: 850908 ASSURED: SOUTH BAR FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION EFFECTIVE: October 4,2006 to October 4, 2007 ADDITIONAL PREMIUM: Included • 30 DAY NOTICE OF CANCELLATION ENDORSEMENT In consideration of the additional premium paid as shown on the Declarations, it is hereby understood and agreed that if Underwriters cancel this insurance for any reason other than non-payment of premium, Underwriters shall provide a 30 -day written notice of cancellation to the following: Ms. Mary Giordano City of Torrance 3031 Torrance Boulevard Torrance CA 90503 Mr. Michael Webb City of Redondo Beach 415 Diamond Street Redondo Beach CA 90277 Mr. Howard Fishman City of Manhattan Beach 1400 Highland Avenue Manhattan Beach CA 90266 Mr. Steve Burrell City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach CA 90254 All other terms, conditions, limits and exclusions remain unchanged. Attached to and forming part of Certificate No.: 850908 Dated: September 1, 2006 AIF 2119 Lib"23 revised 7/04 8/04 Endorsement #7 UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON Complete E uity Markets, Inc. dba Complete uity Markets Insurance Agency, Inc. (CASL#004407 By `'.. • • AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into on January 1, 2007, by and between the City of Hermosa Beach, a municipal corporation ("City"), and the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution ("Center"). RECITALS A. City desires to engage professional community-based dispute resolution services for the benefit of City residents and businesses. B. Center represents that it possesses the qualifications, experience and expertise to provide such services. NOW, THEREFORE, in view of the foregoing and the covenants contained herein, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. Services: Center will provide services to City as set forth in the Program of Services attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by reference. Any services proposed or requested in addition to those included herein must be agreed to in writing by the parties. All services provided by Center shall be performed to the highest quality professional standards of diligence and skill, and in compliance with all applicable laws of City, state and federal governments. • • 2. Compensation: City agrees to pay Center, as full compensation for the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement, the amount set forth in the Fee Schedule attached hereto as "Exhibit B" and incorporated herein by reference. In no event shall compensation hereunder exceed $8,000 per fiscal year absent a written amendment to this Agreement. Center shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for expenses except by prior written authorization of City. City agrees to pay Center quarterly for services performed under this Agreement within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from Center in a format approved by the City Manager. Center shall accompany each invoice for payment with a written report containing the following information: Cases opened, name of clients, nature of dispute, referral source, disposition of dispute, information and referrals, as well as outreach activities including meetings with City staff, community groups and agencies. 3. Term: The terms of this Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2007, and extend to June 30, 2007. This Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement in writing by City and Center. 4. Status of Center as an Independent Contractor: Center is an independent contractor in all respects in the performance of this Agreement and shall not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. City shall not assume any liability. for payment of any salaries, wages or compensation, including for injury or sickness, to any Center personnel or subcontractor(s) performing services under this Agreement, and such personnel or subcontractor(s) shall have no right to any City service, status or benefit under this Agreement. 5. Liability: Center agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives from and against all claims, liabilities, damages, causes of action or judgments (including reasonable attorney fees and costs of suit) arising from Center's negligent actions or omissions during its performance of services under this Agreement. The Center further agrees at its expense to procure and maintain in effect during the term of this Agreement a policy of comprehensive commercial liability insurance from a carrier approved by City with limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $1,000,000 aggregate protective and contractual, and $1,000,000 aggregate products, which policy shall name City and its officers, employees and agents as • • additional insureds and not be subject to cancellation absent thirty days advance notice to City. 6. Subcontracts: Any subcontracts entered into by Center for services to be rendered under this Agreement shall be for Center's benefit alone and, as such, shall be its responsibility with no liability resting on City. 7. Default: In the event that Center is in default under the terms of this Agreement, it is expressly agreed that City, after providing a reasonable opportunity to cure the default, shall have no obligation or duty to continue. compensating Center for any work performed after the date of the default. 8. Mediation of Disputes: The parties agree that in the event a dispute arises in the performance of this Agreement, prior to commencing litigation the parties shall agree to mediate their dispute. The parties shall mutually agree upon the selection of the mediator of any and all disputed claims. 9. Reimbursement: Each party agrees that in the event of a court determination that a party is in material default in the performance of this Agreement, the defaulting party will reimburse the non -defaulting party for all expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) incurred • • by such non -defaulting party in connection with enforcement of its rights under this Agreement. 10.Conflict of Interest: Center shall avoid activities that may result in a conflict of interest in fact or the appearance of a conflict of interest relating to its performance under this Agreement. 11.Notices: Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of the United States Postal Service addressed as follows: City: Stephen Burrell, City Manager City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, Calif. 90254 Center: Lance Widman, Executive Director South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution 1015 4th Street Hermosa Beach, Calif 90254 The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or as of the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service. 12.Amendments: This Agreement may be amended so long as such amendment is agreed upon in writing by City and Center. 13.Termination: Either City or Center may terminate this Agreement without cause so long as written notice of intent to terminate is given by the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the termination date. Upon receipt of a termination notice by City, Center shall promptly discontinue all services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise), and shall promptly deliver to City all data, reports, summaries and such other information and materials as may have been accumulated by Center in the performance of this Agreement, whether completed or in progress. Center shall be entitled to reasonable compensation for the services it performed up to the date of termination. 14.Entire Agreement: This document constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and there are no other agreements, expressed or implied, except as provided in this Agreement IN WITNESS WHEREOF, that City has by action of its City Council authorized this Agreement to be executed for and on behalf of the City of Hermosa Beach by the City Manager and that Center has caused same to be executed by its Executive Director. • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By Date Stephen Burrell, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk SOUTH BAY CENTER FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION By Date Lance Widman, Executive Director The South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution Program of Services Exhibit A The following services will be provided by the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution to the City of Hermosa Beach: Resolution Services: The Center is available to serve persons who may be experiencing conflict in their personal or professional lives. This includes landlords and tenants, neighbors, businesses and consumers, employers and employees, as well as family members, roommates and friends. The Center's staff will assess the problem and initially help the parties to resolve the matter through phone conciliation. If the dispute is appropriate for mediation and the parties are willing to participate, a mediation will be scheduled. At the mediation an experienced mediator will assist the parties to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution of their conflict. This is usually done in the form of a verbal or written settlement agreement. If the parties involved in a dispute are referred to the Center by any member of the City's staff, City Newsletter or Website, and a case file is opened for further action by the Center's staff, there will be no charge to the parties for the Center's services. However, parties who are referred to the Center by sources other than the City will be charged an appropriate sliding scale fee when a case file is opened for further action. Information and Referral: When inquiries are received by the Center from people who need basic information, legal assistance'or whose situation, after review by the Center's staff, is not appropriate for the Center's services, the requested information will be provided and/or referrals will be made to appropriate community resources. This may include City departments, other public agencies or social service organizations. Community Outreach: The Center will provide outreach activities within the City of Hermosa Beach. This will include networking with other social service agencies, meeting with community groups about the dispute resolution services offered by the Center, as well as offering presentations and trainings on conflict resolution for City staff,- residents and community groups. Monitoring and Evaluation: The City will monitor and evaluate the performance of the Center's services and activities and will have access to records and other documents related to the Center's performance except as they may be protected by the California Evidence Code. During such a review the confidentiality of persons utilizing the Center's services shall be respected. These evaluation reviews will focus on the effectiveness of the Center's program, the impact of its services on the community, and the extent to which the Center's services address the concerns and priorities of the City. Contact Person: Lance Widman, Executive Director, South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution, 1015 4th Street, Hermosa Beach, 90254. (310) 376-7007 FEE SCHEDULE EXHIBIT B QUARTERLY OPERATIONS FEE: $800 $3,200 CASE FILE FEE: $150 $4,800 (maximum 32 cases) TOTAL: (NOT TO EXCEED) $8,000 TT b e of Contents About SAA 1 Resumes 2 Case Studies 3 REVS Utl; Q 4 2.006 COmmu.11TY DEV. DEPT SAA CID Who We Are. Shlemmer + Algoze + Associates is an Interior Design and Architecture firm dedicated to creating better working environments for business. With on experienced staff of more than 65 professionals working from two regional offices, Shlemmer + Algoze + Associates is one of the largest regional firms in Southern California. SAA provides both Landlord Design Services for building owners and developers and Corporate Design Services for both private and public companies. Our unique consulting and design process is separated into three distinct phases: discover, design and deliver. This methodology was created in response to our client's growing need for proactive guidance throughout the design and construction process. It is our thorough process and experienced people that set us apart from our competition. Good design starts with a good ear. By listening we discover what you need for your business environment. The discovery process ensures that the design strategy reflects your vision. During this phase you con expect a thorough analysis of your budget, corporate image and culture, organizational and communication structure, future operating structure overall operating philosophy. Included in this phase is an understanding of existing Facility issues and problems. The information gathered during this comprehensive phase is the foundation for on effective solution. design Meaningful change starts here. Through design we implement the solution. Your business needs ore now transformed into alternative design strategies. These strategies ore measured according to quality, budget and schedule requirements. The measurement ensures delivery of the best solution for your business. Our experience makes it happen. When we deliver, we produce results. Through collaboration we've chosen the best solution. Now it's time to make it happen. This delivery process includes the drawings, specifications, contractor selections, onsite prosect management and administration. But the work doesn't stop there. Our commitment to deliver continues post the °punch list" and your move in. As your business evolves, we \•vill be there to ensure that your design strategy evolves as well. SERVICES. Prelease Consulting Programming Building Evaluation and Test Fits Space Planning Design Development Interior Design Furniture Specification and Design Construction Documents City Permit Procurement Construction Administration CONTACT. Rick Shlemmer, CID 3300 Irvine Ave., Suite 130 Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.724.8958 rshlemmer@soaia.com Nelson Algoze, AIA 6083 Bristol Parkway Culver City, CA 90230 310.553.3252 nolgaze@saaia.com To discover your potential visit our website www.saaia.com S AA SHLEMMER+ALGAZH-ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Shook Development / Hermosa Pavillion Keller Williams Realty Seaside Office Suites Kid's Kaberet Proposed Retail Development Retail & Hospitality 24hr Fitness C.J. Segerstrom & Sons California Pizza Kitchen Equinox Fitness Farmers Market Hustler Casino Hyatt Corporation Marriott International Real Estate/Property Mgmt Alden Equities Group American Realty Advisors American Spectrum Realty, Inc. Amir Development Arden Realty, Inc. The Bendetti Company Bentley Forbes Group Birtcher Anderson Realty C Lease CB Richard Ellis Charles Dunn Company CIM Group Continental Development Crown Realty & Development CT Realty Cushman & Wakefield Davis Partners Douglas Emmett Grubb & Ellis The Irvine Company John Laing Homes Jones Lang LaSalle K. Hovnanian Homes KB Homes Keller Williams Realty Selected Client List Kilroy Realty Corporation Koll Development Company Legacy Partners McCarthy Cook & Co. Madison Marquette Maguire Partners The Mills Corporation Newhall Land & Farming Company Opus West Construction Corporation Overton, Moore & Associates PM Realty Group Prentiss Properties RREEF Rubin Pachulski Properties Shook Development Silagi Development & Management Sotheby's International Realty SSR Development Partners Thomas Properties Group, Inc. Tishman Speyer Properties Trammell Crow Company Transwestern Properties Travers Realty Trizec Properties USAA Real Estate Company Watt Management Company Western Pacific Housing Public/Govt./Institutional American Career College City of El Segundo City of Long Beach County of Los Angeles Crystal Stairs, Inc. Decron Properties Dept. of Children and Family Services Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.) Long Beach Public Library L.A. Convention & Visitors Bureau Los Angeles County Health Department Los Angeles Unified School District Mount St. Mary's Medical Laboratories U. S. Bank U. 5. Customs U. 5. Department of Agriculture U. S. Department of Commerce U. S. Department of Defense U. S. Real Estate & Facilities Department UCLA Medical Centers Univ. of Los Angeles Dept. of Real Estate Univ. of Los Angeles Medical Group University of Phoenix University of Southern California Corporate Office American Golf Corporation Ayn Rand Institute Buck Consultants Carsdirect.com Ceridian Crystal Stairs Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. Farmer's Insurance Frederick's of Hollywood Fritz Trucking Giant Golf Keane Inc. L.E.K. Consulting Group Lasco Bathware Maritz Miliken Company Pacific Life Polar Tankers, Inc. Red Sea Insurance Group Robert Half International, Inc. SAFECO Financial Institution Solutions Sanrio Seiko Instruments USA Shabby Chic State Compensation Insurance Fund State Farm Insurance Companies Teleflora Winston Tires Headquarters SAA Banks/Financial Institutions Aames Home Loan Accredited Home Lenders American Express Ameriquest Mortgage Bank of the West Bear Sterns Charles Schwab & Company Chicago Title Company Comerica Commonwealth Investment Partners Countrywide Mortgage Ditech Mortgage Farmers & Merchants Bank Ford Motor Credit G.E. Capital GMAC Greenlight Financial Fidelity National Title First American Title Hawthorne Savings Icon Financial Kennedy Wilson International Kinecta Federal Credit Union Manulife Financial Meritlending.com Merril Lynch Mitsui USA Morgan Stanley National Mortgage Lending Northern Trust Bank Northwestern Mutual OCTFCU Private Bank of California Prudential Securities Quantec Securities Smith Barney Teachers Federal Credit Union United Home Loans United National Bank Vineyard Bank Voit Companies Washington Mutual, Inc. Weyerhaeuser Financial Investments Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Western International Securities Windward Capital Entertainment/Media/PR AEG Live Amies Communications Atmosphere Entertainment Conde Nast DePasse Entertainment Daily Pilot Newspaper Dreamworks E! Networks Foote, Cone & Belding Worldwide Home Box Office (HBO) Image Entertainment JWT Public Relations LA Magazine Mantra Entertainment Rysher Entertainment Trotta & Associates Upper Deck Entertainment Law Firms Baker, Keener & Nahra Barbanel, Treuer & Dantzel Buchalter, Nemar & Fields Cohen & Lord Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP Hooper Lundy & Bookman Irell & Manella Landsman, Frank & Bloch Leopold, Petrich & Smith Lerach Coughlin Masuda, Funai, Efert & Mitchell Morrison & Foerster Myers & McConnell Nanas & Stern Nelson, Guggenheim, Felker & Levine Stubbs Alderton & Markiles The Law Offices of Victor George Selected Client List Continued Accounting Firms Bernstein, Whitman, Fox & Company Borton, Petrini & Conron Ernst & Young H & R Block HBLA Holthouse, Carlin & Van Trigt Johnson Derenzis & Mormino Moss Adams RSM McGladrey, Inc. Squar, Milner, Reehl & Williamson Winningham Becker & Company Information Technology Affinity Internet Agilent AT &T Broadband BT Infonet Candle Corporation Computer Associates International DevelopMentor FrontBridge Technologies, Inc. QuickStart Technologies Rainbow Technologies, Inc. Siebel Systems Sun Microsystems Symantec Technology Avnet Comchoice Corporation GE Plastics Hitachi Cable IBM (formerly Candle Corporation) Infonet Karl Storz Kingston Technology, Inc. Newport Corporation Ricoh Business Systems Samsung SIRF Technology, Inc. Symantec TDK Semiconductor SAA I I I I ■ I 1 I I I ■ I Nelson Algaze, AIA, CID Principal Role and Responsibilities As Principal of projects, Nelson consults with selected clients to develop and evaluate real estate, facility development and design strategies. Nelson also leads project teams to implement corporate relocations. His 28 years of design and business experience with varying client types give him a unique knowledge base and ability to provide business solutions based on our clients' needs. In addition to a strong business background, Nelson's experience as an architect and an interior designer has given him the opportunity to personally design and create a portfolio of corporate environments that have been described as innovative and timeless. His design solutions reflect his personal quest of form following function, without losing one's sense of humor. In addition, Nelson oversees all functional operational requirements of SAA's Los Angeles office, which include providing resources for Project Managers, Designers, Job Captains and CADD Specialists. Education & Registration • Master of Arts in Environmental Design, California State University at Los Angeles • Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, California State University at Los Angeles • Licensed Architect, State of California (Registration Number C21090) Certifications & Affiliations • Certified Interior Designer, State of California (Certification Number 2933) • I.C.B.O Accessibility Inspector / Plans Examiner • Oral Exam Commissioner, California Board of Architectural Reviewers • International Facilities Management Association • BOMA International • Lambda Alpha International • Instructor, CCLID, Licensing Program for Interior Designers • Service Worker, Office of Emergency Service, State of California • Instructor, UCLA Extension Architecture & Interior Design Department Selected Client List Continental Development Corporation Trammell Crow Company Hyatt Corporation Tishman Speyer Equinox Arden Realty, Inc. Hawthorne School District Overton Moore TG Properties Douglas Emmet & Co. American Realty Advisors Equity Office McCarthy Cook Northrop Grumman Corporation Thomas Properties Group Trizec Hines Infonet SAA Raymond Irmer Project Manager Role and Responsibilities As Project Manager at SAA, Raymond manages the overall project and his team to ensure successful project completion. He works closely with his team to establish project goals, and to ensure that these goals are met, or exceeded, in an efficient and timely manner. Raymond interacts with clients, SAA staff, contractors, brokers, landlords, vendors, and specialty consultants. Raymond also oversees the programming, space planning, design development, construction document preparation, and construction administration activities for the project. He establishes building standard design criteria, provides field construc- tion supervision, value engineering, and supervises the selection and specification of the interior finishes and furniture. Education and Credentials • Bachelor of Arts. in Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology Selected Client List ABN / AMR() La Salle Bank Bozell, Inc. Bristol -Meyers Squibb Century Plaza Towers Chicago Public Building Commission Equinox Frederick's of Hollywood Hyatt Development Corporation JD Edwards Leo Burnett Lucent Technologies Marriott Hotel Midmark Diagnostic Group Next Software Oracle Corporation PM Realty SBE Entertainment Shook Development Stone Container Corporation Systems Software Associates Trammel Crow TEAC Aerospace Technologies SAA I ■ I I I I I I I • I I I I • I I I I I I Gary Bouchard Job Captain Role and Responsibilities As an Architectural Job Captain, Gary produces construction documents, supervises his team, and coordinates efforts with clients, contractors and with the city plan check departments for project approval. Gary provides complete architectural design services for projects by developing the project design criteria, establishing building code requirements, and preparing/negotiating contracts with consultants, and engineers. In addition, Gary is a com- petent designer capable of planning, programming and developing design schemes and construction details. Partial Client List Teac Aerospace Technologies Eclipse Development Hyatt Hotels Shook Development Keller Williams SAA Equinox Fitness Club Equinox operates upscale, full-service fitness clubs, with facilities in New York, Chicago, Florida and California.The Equinox brand has achieved national recognition for the quality, innovation and design of their facilities. Within the fitness industry, Equinox has one of the most recognizable brand platforms for geographic expansion and product diversification and extension. The Equinox Westwood Club is de- signed with an upscale, industrial feel. The entrance and reception area of the club evoke a boutique hotel lobby with concierge desk. The sweeping main staircase, a central design element in Equinox clubs, pro- vides members with warm-up cardio. Exposed, high ceilings throughout the space create an open feel and colored the use of Venetian plaster, ceramic tile flooring and glass tile accents give the space architectural interest. Rubber flooring is used extensively throughout the exercise areas, with wood flooring in the studio areas. The 40,000 SF facility features a meza- ninne lever lap pool, full-service spa, juice bar, and Kids'Club. The construc- tion schedule for this project was 12 months, including the construction of the lap pool. Location: Westwood, CA Size: 40,000 SF Cost: $6.9 Million / $182 per SF Pool Cost: $1.2 Million / $600 per SF Completion: Club - Nov. 2005 Pool - Mar. 2006 Contractor: InnerSpace Constructors Pool: AqA Pool Management Services Provided: Executive Architect Structural Engineering MEP Engineering SAA Equinox Fitness Club Continued SAA Cohen and Lord is a law firm special- izing in business law and construction litigation.The partners chose a central and upscale Century Park East address for their new corporate offices, where they now occupy the entire top 26th floor. SAA provided full interior design services for their relocation. The firm owns an exceptional collec- tion of contemporary fine art, includ- ing original works by Salvador Dali and other renowned artists. They asked for an efficient, elegant space suitable to a high-end law firm, with design and finishes that showcase these striking artworks. The resulting design is light -filled, con- temporary, and elegant. A monochro- matic color pallet, accented by stainless steel, granite and cherry wood, allows the art collection to be the "star" of the space. A geometric block pattern motif was used in both the corridor carpets and in custom designed, frosted side- lights. The sidelights, used outside of perimeter offices and conference rooms, allow maximum light to pass through to the interior sections of the office. High- end indirect/direct lighting was used throughout to create a warm glow and an energetic work environment. The two partners at the firm have differ- ent design styles for their individual, 350 SF corner offices. The first has tradi- tional finishes and custom wood furni- ture. The second office has a contempo- rary look with custom Halcon furniture, selected in subtle green fabrics to pick up the dramatic greens of the Los Ange- les Country Club visible from the office. Both offices have solid wood flooring and private restrooms with custom finishes. High density file cabinets were required in a legal file room, and in the law library, which were structurally reinforced. The project also includes a board room with full AV capabilities, a conference room, and a large lunchroom and kitchen. Cohen & Lord Location: Los Angeles, CA Size: 14,000 SF Cost: $75 per SF Completion: October 2005 Contractor: PLE Builders Services Provided: Programming Space Planning Interior Design Furniture Selection Budget Pricing Structural Evaluation Construction Drawings Construction Administration SAA Cohen & Lord IIII III III III III III III II MI IN Ill III IN IIII MI Ill II III IN SAA SHLEMMERIALGAZE-}ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOB ANI>8E6 - PEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City, California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 F X3101 553-9449 3300 Irvine Avenue Suite 130 Newport Beach, California 92660 T [949] 724-8958 F [949] 724-1981 29229 Canwood Street Suite 105 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 ilk ,Owe SM.H & a Sift rild91Cgliaita 3186 Nag Moue *Ida Beau CA 920 Pees 714.5101633 Fat 714.516952.3 8555 Salmi ptw 5m 7ege. CA 9211 Raw 866570186 Fm 866SW4 GLUMAC 16135 Von Kennan Ave., 501132`10 Irvine, CA 92606-4865 T. 949,833.8190 F. 949833.0252 www.9lumaccom • A .. PROJECT a S2 . =otf2 U Q O W Ueft ma LL W 0 Utcc < D W CI. vO= 0 T (1511 SF+44$4 SF) ISSLIE DATES A A A A No. 08/14/06 ISSUE FOR PIAN CHECK Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUI Al dative, su.uuwr. ,; co Arlo, lc 1. eS tt .nti•nmeln N • pmf er Itt n AA am . wa t r HMAA WINE RETAIL RESTAURANT DINING RESTAURANT BAR RESTAURANT BACK -OF -HOUSE SHEET TITLE STREET LEVEL AREA ANALYSIS SHEET NO: A-0.5 1 E 5'-0" POS EXISTING COURTYARD 105 0 0 MAIN DINING #2 102 reo I4) w J g3'-8" / ,a,, AISLE MAIN 101 I I Y co M WINE RETAIL 108 c 00 I M Q o c PANTRY 109 3'-8" r AISLE /////////////////////////// COOKLINE 110 0 �O • J I 'NOS ESS\ DECORATIVE FALSENTREES 100 ////////////// T//////////////////// BREAD TABLE I PREP AREA 111 ,y1/////7//7/77///////////7/_7/i//7//////7/i/////////i/ • / //////////?//////////////////////// MAIN SERVICE STN. 112 SCULLERY 113 // ////////////////////////////////////////////////////// N11 1 /1/ / / M DINING #3 P4 114A FIREPLACE O ////////////, ///////////////////7 1 r PRIVP}—E DINING 1 114 IPREP KITCHEN 117 FREEZER 119 COOLER 118 \EXE STING BBY Seating Count DINING AREA TABLES 1 SEATS SHLEMMERFALGAZEIASSOC IATES 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] 7241981 29229 Canwood Street Stole 105 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 di R.W. SFood Service MITH & 6aCO 3186 Army Arne Costo Mee CA 92626 Phone: 714.540.6633 For 714.540.9523 8555 Miroloni Draw Son Diego, CA 92126 Phone 858530.1800 Foe 858530.0224 GLUMAC 16735 Von Karma., Ave.. Suite 250 Irvine. CA 926064065 T 9496338190 E 849.033.0252 wwv gaumacam r • engineers for a sustainable futures PROJECT 0N"U =od2 U wow U co < T rn vco0 H cc 0-u= 0 co J ISSUE DATES No. 09/16/06 Date PUN CHECK RESUBMITTAL Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All D[uei sus. Sppecr¢a ions and copies th€o,ull furnished by SOA Interiors and s all n s property. o to be one only with respect to remain Federal low pmhAmsthe reproducti n. display, ml . or other disposition of this document without the mpren written consent of Shlemmeri#go[ei.en iota Interiors & Architecture. DATE: 052606 DRAWN: LS/AC PROJECT NO.: INTERIOR SEATING: MAIN DINING SCALE: 1/4•=1'-0" STOOL _ _ — 11 DEUCES _ _ 5 10 THREES _ _ 2 6 FOURS _ _ 37 148 SIXES 4 24 EIGHT __ — _ 1 8 SUB TOTAL — — 49 207 INTERIOR SEATING: PRIVATE DINING FOURTEEN _ _ 1 14 SUB TOTAL — — 50 221 WAITING AREA TABLES SEATS DEUCES, EXTERIOR _ _ — 16 DEUCES, INTERIOR _ _ — 6 1 TOTAL SEATING 50 243 SHLEMMERFALGAZEIASSOC IATES 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] 7241981 29229 Canwood Street Stole 105 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 di R.W. SFood Service MITH & 6aCO 3186 Army Arne Costo Mee CA 92626 Phone: 714.540.6633 For 714.540.9523 8555 Miroloni Draw Son Diego, CA 92126 Phone 858530.1800 Foe 858530.0224 GLUMAC 16735 Von Karma., Ave.. Suite 250 Irvine. CA 926064065 T 9496338190 E 849.033.0252 wwv gaumacam r • engineers for a sustainable futures PROJECT 0N"U =od2 U wow U co < T rn vco0 H cc 0-u= 0 co J ISSUE DATES No. 09/16/06 Date PUN CHECK RESUBMITTAL Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All D[uei sus. Sppecr¢a ions and copies th€o,ull furnished by SOA Interiors and s all n s property. o to be one only with respect to remain Federal low pmhAmsthe reproducti n. display, ml . or other disposition of this document without the mpren written consent of Shlemmeri#go[ei.en iota Interiors & Architecture. DATE: 052606 DRAWN: LS/AC PROJECT NO.: SCALE: 1/4•=1'-0" SHEET TITLE SEATING PLAN SHEET NO: 42.1 /T / i -PANTRY 109 ,/- / T / / /7777 / / T — / --- 7 / / 7 / - - 7 7/ / / T / / / l/ /— / / 7 _. / / T 7 / / / / /- / / / ___ 77 / / % / / / / / / --7 / // / / T __ / /- / / / / / T / / /_ - / , //- 3.9 -/ / / / EXISTING COURTYARD 105 7 T /- t / V / / / / -1 _ i_ - 7 / l / / - / _ _ _/ r ' l / / j lie/ / 2 /ll//////////////////////////////////// 7 H SCULLERY 1113 PREP KITCHEN 1171 L fl w COOKLINE -- 114 17 / / _Z /. / / / 7 7- / / / /- / - 7 - + -/ / / / / r / -1 / / / / / / / / / / , I h%— y j 11_ t� J �r PREP _ r _ AREA i I - +IIi�- �' /7/ / [11!11 ////////// / Er IH H- --- l / I / 7 / / T / Iar). \/ / / / 41 / / / ------------ -- _Z - 1 r 7 / WINE RETAIL 108 / V r Finish Floor Plan Notes 1 II / 7 / L /////////////////////////// / / / / / / 1-r MAIN SERVICE STN: 1 ] �..... // / / -4 iI art IFS PRIVATE DINING, / / ars EXISTING LOBBY CO EXISTING FLOOR FINISH TO REMAIN CO MOSAIC TILE LOGO IN FLOOR 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 (°) CONCRETE CURB PER KITCHEN DRAWINGS EPDXY FLOOR AND COVE BASE OVER WATERPROOF MEMBRANE O GRANITE THRESHOLD ® STONE HEARTH PER SPECIFICATIONS ® 1 6X1 6 SLATE TILE CLEAR MATTE SEALER ® CONC CURB, SEE FS DRAWINGS (T) FLOOR TROUGH DEPRESSION, SEE FS DRAWINGS CD GALVANIZED CURB, SEE FS DRAWINGS ® G.C. TO PREP EXISTING CONCRETE FOR NEW STAIN FINISH AND CLEAR SEALER " SCORE LINES WITH EPDXY- TYP. L_ #3 777 4Z.4, iL rt 1 4 FREEZER 119 COOLER 118 r 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 29229 Canwood Street Suite 105 Agoura Hills CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 ak R.W. SMTH & CO Food Service Design Consultants 3186 Pintay Avenue Cato Mem, CA 92626 Phone: 714540.6633 Fax: 714.5409523 8555 Mlmlani Drs Sm Diego, CA 92126 Rive: 858.530,1800 Far 858.5300224 CLUMAC 16735 Vol Korman Ave.. Suite 250 Irvine, CA 926,064965 T. 949.023.8100 F. 949.833 0252 xww.giumxc mm engineers for a sustainablefulure` PROJECT N. 06 2 oU w tri C13 CO w 0 H CC CC co ISSUE DATES A AN 09/18/06 PLAN CHECK RESUBMOTAL No. Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All omwings. Spneci icer ions and copies thereon furnished by IAA Interiors all remain les properly. They ore to ro rtroo used only with ms coo to this pmiosL Federal s do pmnnt w the ho m, express n.written disten con ntl . or othercomer disposition of this document &o without the eaprm .ovist conxnl f SAlemmnTNgaxel'fmvcioly Interiors & Nchiittlurt. DATE: 052606 DRAWN: LS/AC PROJECT NO.: SCALE 1/4'=1r-0' SHEET TITLE FLOOR FINISH PLAN SHEET NO: 43.1 O L4 L4 L4 tt// 01C_ rC OF GLASS WINDOW NMI / A, /_/nnnre/////Y///B/l�/O// -• -- _: -. NW �� = 1 _ iNi �I -- L - =MI ��I (_ 1 -I 1 le I Te. 3 aaI la NE L 1 I •I=1 - �� - =r 3 -- I. i` I 31 ...1 _1 _ I_ t - 1 '2i If .' L1 • --1 am. -""+13'-4" im - VI ' �' I --I 1- 1 - =moi �mi I t - ...;.. a �.I 1 T Tla mai mm m I dam mi m mai nr m. ano m la O mm mm mi pm la an im a mi flI a I L L4 - C _ Ne`: L11 //////////4 I LOBBY TYP L J__ N.I.C. L NOTE: INTERIOR WALL AND CEILING FINISHES FOR ASSEMBLY AREAS SHALL NOT EXCEED AN END POINT FLAME SPREAD RATING OF 76-200 CLASS C. ANY DECORATIONS II' USED SHALL BE NON-COMBUSTIBLE OR FLAME PROOFED IN AN APPROVED MANNER. Ceiling Plan Notes GYP. BD. CEILING/ SOFFIT WITH FINISH 1A WALL COVERING APPLIED OVER GYP BD CEILING AND SOFFIT FACE C2 ) HOOD BY KEC. G.C. TO PROVIDE FIRE RATED SHAFT PER CODE SEE FS— DRAWINGS, MECHANICAL DRAWINGS AND DETAILS. 2X4 T—BAR CEILING USG # 3270 STRIPPLE WHITE SMOOTH WASHABLE SURFACE. SEE - COOLER/ FREEZER & BEER CEILING & LIGHTING BY KEC. m CO DECORATIVE BOXED BEAMS ) DECORATIVE ARCHES W/ BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER GOTHIC ARCH CEILING GROINVAULT CEILING WITH BRICK VENEER FINISH J 1 X 6 T&G RESAWN CEDAR PLANK CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP.BD. PROVIDE CLEAR MATTE FIN. SEALER. COPPER MESH CEILING W/WOOD CORNER MOULDING. WOOD SLAT CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP,BD. BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER DUROCK FINISH SOFFIT. <BR> DECORATIVE COPPER FASCIA W/INDIRECT COVE LIGHTING. CIO 2X2 T -BAR CEILING 15 GYP BD SOFFIT, PLASTER FINISH EXISTING A/C UNIT ABOVE 0 10'-3"t A.F.F. WOOD CORNER MOULDING 18 FOAM CROWN MOULDING 0 FOAM PLANT ON MOULDING 20 FOAM MEDALLION Decorative Lighting Legend PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C. L1 *L2 �L4 'L5 •L9 LOUNGE AREA WALL SCONCE - 50W SUSPENDED PENDANT LIGHT OVER CENTER OF BOOTH TABLES TO BE +5'-6" A.F.F. TO BOTTOM OF FIXTURE - 75W MAIN DINING DECORATIVE CHANDELIER - 100W EACH SECTIO EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE - 12W RETAIL WALL SCONCE - 50W SERVICE STATION PENDANT LIGHT- 25W LOUNGE CHANDELIER- 120120W REAR WINE PRIVATE DINING - 120 V CUSTOM LOUNGE TABLE LAMP- BY OWNER L13 LOUNGE/ MAIN DINING AND PRIVATE DINING CHANDELIER: 80W RETAIL CHANDELIER: 200W WINE CHANDELIER: 80W DECORATIVE BOOTH DECK LIGHT BY OWNER INSTALLED BY MILLWORK CONTR. SEE AD2.1 SEATING PLAN FOR LOCATION. 25W 14L14 EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE - 35W 1415 CEILING WALL SCONCE AT SOFFIT PRIVATE WINE CHANDELIER: 80W PRIVATE WINE WALL SCONCE OFFSET NEON LIGHT BY G.C. General Lighting Legend PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. 01 LOW VOLTAGE DOWNLIGHT; MR16- 35WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. 1A SAME AS DOWNLIGHT #1. INSTALL ABOVE CENTERED TREATMENT AT BAR LOUNGE AREA 25W COMPACT FLORECENT- 26WATT - LIGHTOLIER 3500 KELVIN - COLOR: BLACK FINISH - 4" DIA. 01B 01C LOW VOLTAGE DOWNLIGHT; MR16- 50WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. 86 CRI - INDEX MED. FLOOD 01D 02 e3 MR16- 35WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. RECESSED DOWNLIGHT JUNO TC912-24B - 3000 KELVIN PAR -30 50WATT WITH LENSES AND SHATTER PROOF BULB -6" DIA WALL WASH: INTENSE IVA497 W/ RECESSED ADJ. TRIM W/ MR16 35W MFL - BLACK FINISH Y LIGHTING BY KEC. IN COOLER.- SEE K DRAWINGS e ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGN WITH BATTERY BACK-UP. EXTERIOR EXIT SIGNS SHALL BE WET LABEL 1J RECESSED GROUND LIGHT - 5OWT SEE- SEATING PLAN A2.1 FOR LOCATION EOM 4 La 2X4 MOUNTED/ RECESSED FLUORESCENT LIGHT LITHONIA 2GT 240 Al2.40 WATTS BULBS WITH HINGED/ FRAMED ACRYLIC DIFFURSER. BAR RECESSED DOWNLIGHT - 20W DIRECTIONAL SPOT LIGHT-20WT MR -16 SAA SHLEMMERI-ALGAZE'ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOS ANGELES - NEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City, California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 1' [310] 553-9449 3300 Irvine Avenue Suite 130 Newport ' -arh, California 92660 'P [949] 724-8958 P (949] 724-1981 29229 Canwood Street Suite 105 Agoura Hills. CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 „R.w. SMITH & Co Food Serie Design Consultants 3186 Airray Aenu, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: 714.540.6633 For: 714.510.9523 0555 Mirnlmli Drive Son Diego, CA 92125 Phone: 058.530.1800 Far 853530.0224 GLUMAC 16735 Von Kerman Ave Sults FA Irvine CA 92606-4965 T 9491333.0160 F. 949833.0252 wwwglumanmm r engineers for a sustainable futures og PROJECT >- Q 03 2 I— OD Q 0 0 U Ei ct I 0 ,0 W T u7 od 0 r` T to CD T Op w 5 oo Q 0 ±- 0 Q Mw / Q//� 0) O cC w ISSUE DATES A No. 09/18/06 PLAN CHECK RESUBMRTAL Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All orawi gs. Sppemrma ions and copies thereof -furnished by SAA Interiors are nd s all remain its property. They are to to be useonwith res eat to this project Federal low prohibits the reproducti r. display. sol ,or other disposition of this document without the expo written consent I ITkmmerMlgmebMaiotea Inlnbrt k Mhitecture. DATE DRAWN: 052606 PROJECT NO.: LS/AC SCALE: 1/4"=11-0" SHEET TITLE L_° �� L_ +10'-6" 01 01 2 10 10 S + r 0-11'-6" 01 01 te t::%t% Ittiia %09Bp S VIh 1..., il 10 10 -l11 7CI - 1 I LOBBY TYP L J__ N.I.C. L NOTE: INTERIOR WALL AND CEILING FINISHES FOR ASSEMBLY AREAS SHALL NOT EXCEED AN END POINT FLAME SPREAD RATING OF 76-200 CLASS C. ANY DECORATIONS II' USED SHALL BE NON-COMBUSTIBLE OR FLAME PROOFED IN AN APPROVED MANNER. Ceiling Plan Notes GYP. BD. CEILING/ SOFFIT WITH FINISH 1A WALL COVERING APPLIED OVER GYP BD CEILING AND SOFFIT FACE C2 ) HOOD BY KEC. G.C. TO PROVIDE FIRE RATED SHAFT PER CODE SEE FS— DRAWINGS, MECHANICAL DRAWINGS AND DETAILS. 2X4 T—BAR CEILING USG # 3270 STRIPPLE WHITE SMOOTH WASHABLE SURFACE. SEE - COOLER/ FREEZER & BEER CEILING & LIGHTING BY KEC. m CO DECORATIVE BOXED BEAMS ) DECORATIVE ARCHES W/ BRICK VENEER BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER GOTHIC ARCH CEILING GROINVAULT CEILING WITH BRICK VENEER FINISH J 1 X 6 T&G RESAWN CEDAR PLANK CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP.BD. PROVIDE CLEAR MATTE FIN. SEALER. COPPER MESH CEILING W/WOOD CORNER MOULDING. WOOD SLAT CEILING OVER 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP,BD. BRICK VENEER FINISH OVER DUROCK FINISH SOFFIT. <BR> DECORATIVE COPPER FASCIA W/INDIRECT COVE LIGHTING. CIO 2X2 T -BAR CEILING 15 GYP BD SOFFIT, PLASTER FINISH EXISTING A/C UNIT ABOVE 0 10'-3"t A.F.F. WOOD CORNER MOULDING 18 FOAM CROWN MOULDING 0 FOAM PLANT ON MOULDING 20 FOAM MEDALLION Decorative Lighting Legend PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C. L1 *L2 �L4 'L5 •L9 LOUNGE AREA WALL SCONCE - 50W SUSPENDED PENDANT LIGHT OVER CENTER OF BOOTH TABLES TO BE +5'-6" A.F.F. TO BOTTOM OF FIXTURE - 75W MAIN DINING DECORATIVE CHANDELIER - 100W EACH SECTIO EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE - 12W RETAIL WALL SCONCE - 50W SERVICE STATION PENDANT LIGHT- 25W LOUNGE CHANDELIER- 120120W REAR WINE PRIVATE DINING - 120 V CUSTOM LOUNGE TABLE LAMP- BY OWNER L13 LOUNGE/ MAIN DINING AND PRIVATE DINING CHANDELIER: 80W RETAIL CHANDELIER: 200W WINE CHANDELIER: 80W DECORATIVE BOOTH DECK LIGHT BY OWNER INSTALLED BY MILLWORK CONTR. SEE AD2.1 SEATING PLAN FOR LOCATION. 25W 14L14 EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE - 35W 1415 CEILING WALL SCONCE AT SOFFIT PRIVATE WINE CHANDELIER: 80W PRIVATE WINE WALL SCONCE OFFSET NEON LIGHT BY G.C. General Lighting Legend PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY G.C. 01 LOW VOLTAGE DOWNLIGHT; MR16- 35WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. 1A SAME AS DOWNLIGHT #1. INSTALL ABOVE CENTERED TREATMENT AT BAR LOUNGE AREA 25W COMPACT FLORECENT- 26WATT - LIGHTOLIER 3500 KELVIN - COLOR: BLACK FINISH - 4" DIA. 01B 01C LOW VOLTAGE DOWNLIGHT; MR16- 50WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. 86 CRI - INDEX MED. FLOOD 01D 02 e3 MR16- 35WATT COLOR: BLACK FINISH. RECESSED DOWNLIGHT JUNO TC912-24B - 3000 KELVIN PAR -30 50WATT WITH LENSES AND SHATTER PROOF BULB -6" DIA WALL WASH: INTENSE IVA497 W/ RECESSED ADJ. TRIM W/ MR16 35W MFL - BLACK FINISH Y LIGHTING BY KEC. IN COOLER.- SEE K DRAWINGS e ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGN WITH BATTERY BACK-UP. EXTERIOR EXIT SIGNS SHALL BE WET LABEL 1J RECESSED GROUND LIGHT - 5OWT SEE- SEATING PLAN A2.1 FOR LOCATION EOM 4 La 2X4 MOUNTED/ RECESSED FLUORESCENT LIGHT LITHONIA 2GT 240 Al2.40 WATTS BULBS WITH HINGED/ FRAMED ACRYLIC DIFFURSER. BAR RECESSED DOWNLIGHT - 20W DIRECTIONAL SPOT LIGHT-20WT MR -16 SAA SHLEMMERI-ALGAZE'ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOS ANGELES - NEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City, California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 1' [310] 553-9449 3300 Irvine Avenue Suite 130 Newport ' -arh, California 92660 'P [949] 724-8958 P (949] 724-1981 29229 Canwood Street Suite 105 Agoura Hills. CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 „R.w. SMITH & Co Food Serie Design Consultants 3186 Airray Aenu, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: 714.540.6633 For: 714.510.9523 0555 Mirnlmli Drive Son Diego, CA 92125 Phone: 058.530.1800 Far 853530.0224 GLUMAC 16735 Von Kerman Ave Sults FA Irvine CA 92606-4965 T 9491333.0160 F. 949833.0252 wwwglumanmm r engineers for a sustainable futures og PROJECT >- Q 03 2 I— OD Q 0 0 U Ei ct I 0 ,0 W T u7 od 0 r` T to CD T Op w 5 oo Q 0 ±- 0 Q Mw / Q//� 0) O cC w ISSUE DATES A No. 09/18/06 PLAN CHECK RESUBMRTAL Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All orawi gs. Sppemrma ions and copies thereof -furnished by SAA Interiors are nd s all remain its property. They are to to be useonwith res eat to this project Federal low prohibits the reproducti r. display. sol ,or other disposition of this document without the expo written consent I ITkmmerMlgmebMaiotea Inlnbrt k Mhitecture. DATE DRAWN: 052606 PROJECT NO.: LS/AC SCALE: 1/4"=11-0" SHEET TITLE CEILING PLAN SHEET NO: 44.1 10 0 01 \ \ 0 OPEN TO SERVICE STATION (28) ( ) REVOLVII/IG DOOR ENTRY #100 A roir MAIN ENTRANCE Scale: 1/4" = I'—O" 20 20 29 20 11 f TYP 0 TYP O tO 0 01 WILINAPHINI OPEN TO DINING CO F - 0 0 III Ir,g,�,lo�lr I lir ,�c� o w 4141 l,l lin lccummTITITITartITIII I 11111111"„ i1 if -.1J6 , O. 1 BAR AREA OPEN TO DINING w 3 MAIN DINING #2/ BAR/ DINING #1 Scale:I/4" = 11-0" to 0 0 0. TYP TYP la II _ ll 0 SERVICE STATION TYP 5 MAIN DINING #2/ PANTRY/ COOKLINE ro Scale. 1/4" = I'-0" - i I N, X i N X x 1 I \ I i �r Y OPEN TO PREP AREA (34) 1' ¥ 7 COOKLINE •.11" ■ ■ . i ■ . Than • • 0 OPEN TO MAIN SERVICE -- STATION ■- 28 ■C • •EI t! • •• --1. • • • ■ ■ Scale: 1/4" = I'-0" • _ TYP SERVICE STATION EXIT MAIN DINING #1 / SERVICE STATION Scale: 1/4" = I'-0" 17 TYP /— II- / /II ' /11 4 BAR/ LOUNGE 0 0 0 0 REVOLVI G DOOR ---- -- all ----1.--. ----NEM MI : rni M• INN --• --1 •--• NEM MN NEM NMI AMM..--. MINI ran ra, .-• --1.-- '---M--• MINI MI '-----. nn n. -- --�--• .---1 ■--1 wwin 40 40 O Scale:1/4" = 1'-0" 01 g MAIN ENTRY TO WINE RETAIL #123 OPEN TO BAR/ LOUNG Scale:1/4" = I'-0" FIREPLACE �I fr \ II \ I \'' MAIN DINING # 0 � 11 11 1 111 1 1 OPEN TO BAR/LOUNGE Scale:I/4" = 11-0" 39 0 0 O. v 1 1 1 1 1111 111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11111 11111 1111 1 1111 1111111 X1111111 11 111 1 11111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1! 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 11[ . 11 11 III 1�1 111 til 11 111 TILL 11'11 P e _L g WINE RETAIL #123 Scale. 1/4" = 1'-0" Interior Elevation Notes 1� EXISTING STOREFRONT TO REMAIN . G.C. TO PROVIDE FAUX FINISH TEXTURE OVER EXISTING ALUMINUM MULLION— TYP. 0 CUSTOM WOOD/GLASS ENTRY DOORS PER DOOR SCHEDULE © MAHOGANY TRIM A 6" WOOD BASE co GYP BD WALL, PAINTED DECORATIVE WINE DISPLAY BY MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. REVOLVING DOOR WOOD PANELED WALL— EPDXY BASE COVED WOOD PILASTER AROUND DOOR FRAME. DECORATIVE POST/BEAM. SEE ® SERVICE STATION. SEE - 13 LOW WALL BY MILLWORK CONTRACTOR. SEE— ISOKERN GAS FIREPLACE (15) DECORATIVE GLASS PANEL 16) ONYX SLAB PANEL OVER GYP. BD. (3 SIDES). 0 DRAPERY BY OWNER. 1X4 WOOD TRIM DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER. G.C. TO INSTALL 13DECORATIVE WOOD TRIM BACK LIT ONYX PANEL. GT) (22) 28 GYP. BD. CEILING GYP. BD. SOFFIT 344" PEWTER OPEN TUBE WATER TREATMENT WOOD PANELED PILASTER / BACKBAR DECORATIVE SOFFIT MOUNTED BRACKET LIGHTS WOOD END BOOTH WALL ALUMINUM/GLASS WINDOW W/ WINE DISPLAY MOSAIC TILE ON WALL 29 BOOTH/SETTEE BY BOTH CONTRACTOR iii 6" TILE BASE 31 EXISTING STOREFRONT DOOR/TRANSOM GO DECORATIVE BOLTS — PEWTER FINISH ® DECORATIVE WALL SCONCE BY OWNER, G.C. TO INSTALL 34 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT BY KEC 35 SS HOOD BY KEC GAS BURNING FIREPLACE 37 PEWTER FINISH HEARTH COOKLINE COUNTER DIE WALL 38 BRICK VENEER ON WALL 6" TILE BASE 41VENETIAN PLASTER WALL FINISH 42 STONE VENEER FIREPLACE ANTIQUE WOOD MANTLE WINE DISPLAY CABINET CHEESE SHOP CABINETRY MOSAIC TILE SPLASH 47 MOSAIC TILE SORROUND 4014) SLATE HEARTH SLATE HEARTH 50 BRICK VENEER FIREPLACE ® MOSAIC TILE INLAY 52 BRICK VENEER ARCH CEILING OVER GYP. BD. ® RETRACTABLE DRAPERY BY OWNER. ® BRICK VENEER PILASTERS. 56 DECORATIVE CHANDELIER BY OWNER. G.C. TO PROVIDE POWER & INSTALLATION. fl WINE DISPLAY TABLE BY OWNER. Xref P:\ 1 PROD\StillWater Bistro\Hermosa\title—text.dwa SAA SHLEMM ER+ALGAZE -ASSOCIATES interiors and architecture LOS ANGELES- NEWPORT BEACH 6041 Bristol Parkway Culver City, California 90230 T [310] 553-3252 P [310] 553-9449 3300 Lrvinc Avenue Suite 130 Ncwpur Beach, California 92660 T [9491724-8958 7 [9491724-1981 29229 Canwood Street Suite 105 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 P818.707.1908 F 818.707.1936 th R.W. SMITH Food Stateo& CO 3186 Abay Avenue 8555 Mimloni Drive Costa Meso, CA 92625 Son Diego, CA 92126 Phone: 714.540.6533 Phone: 858.539.1809 Fax 714540.9523 Fax: 858530.0224 GLUMAC 18135 Vern Kerman Ave., Salle 250 Imre, CA 928084965 vmvtglemec.mn r , engineers for a sustainable f uturew PROJECT PROJ\StIIIWater Bistro \Hermosa plcs\stillwaterlogo_webl jpg (sti0 _od_ U Q 0 W O 10 m 0 CO Q CO 11 T 0) LI W O H cc Q W d c O CO ISS❑E OATES g1 No. 09/18/08 PLAN CHECK RESUBMITTAL Date Description OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS Au Drawl 9osr Specifiers ions rind copiesthereof furnished by SAA Interior and shall i moln it's property. They ore to to be v0 m m: est to 0@ project Federal low prohibits us the oIX s1 n,on%' sol . shlemme,+u disposition t this document without n gpoiton of t Inferiors 6 nt wicWut DATE: 052606 DRAWN: LS/AC PROJECT NO.: SCALE: 1/4"=1•-0- SHEET TITLE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET NO: 46.1